TeaTeam Kimberlin The TKPOTD for eight years ago today provided a summary of why Brett Kimberlin would lose the federal claims in the RICO Madness LOLsuit and why he would lose the state claims he tried to keep alive in his RICO Retread LOLsuit.

* * * * *

The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin wrote in one of his filings that Ace of Spades lawyer was being “hyper technical” by insisting that Kimberlin was suing the entity actually called out in his Kimberlin v. The Universe,et al. RICO Madness complaint rather than a third party. In his omnibus opposition to the motions to dismiss the RICO Madness he claims that we defendants are relying on technicalities rather than facts.This is ripe for fisking.

<fisking>

Because there is no truth to their defamatory statements …

The reason TDPK lost his state Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. lawsuit was because he couldn’t show that anything we said and wrote about him was false. The doctrine of res judicata prohibits him from retrying those issues related to defamation. He can now longer use any of the evidence that he raised in that trial against Aaron Walker, Stacy McCain, Ali Akbar, or me. Not only that, but he can’t use any of evidence that was available to him at the time that he could have raised but failed to do so.

… they instead ask the Court to dismiss the case for many technical reasons, …

“Technical reasons” means points of law.

… such as, 1) the three year statute of limitations should not apply to the false light claim, …

Yep. It should. The Smith v. Esquire decision that says so is a binding precedent in the District of Maryland. Kimberlin has misrepresented the Allen v. Bethlehem Steel case as being a ruling of the Maryland Court of Appeals which would be a binding interpretation of state law. In fact, it is a decision from a lower court and isn’t binding on the U. S. District Court. Also, TDPK has provided a false citation to the case.

… 2)  defamation and false light cannot apply to Plaintiff because he is a public figure and 3) defamation proof, …

I don’t recall any of the defendant arguing that a public figure can’t sue for defamation or false light, but several of us have pointed out that Brett Kimberlin’s reputation was so bad before we ever wrote or said one word about him that it was impossible to take it any lower. Brett Kimberlin is a convicted serial bomber like Ted Kaczynski (the Unabomber), and convicted serial bombers are notorious public figures with bad reputations.

… 4) the Defendants did not engage in a RICO Enterprise, …

As a matter of fact, we didn’t, and simply say that we did without saying who did what to whom on which day is not a well-plead allegation as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8.

… 5) the First Amendment allows fair comment …

Yes, it does.

… 6) Defendant Frey did not act under color of law, …

Well, he didn’t, and the U. S. District Court for the District of Southern California ruled that he didn’t in the very similar Naffe v. Frey case. Given that the facts of that case are so similar to the half-baked allegations in the RICO Madness, given that TDPK has not explained why that court got anything wrong, and given the rulings in similar cases by the Fourth Circuit (the next higher federal court to the District of Maryland), Kimberlin doesn’t have much of a case here.

… and 7) the SAC violates the Maryland Anti-SLAPP statute.

SAC stands for “second amended complaint,” and, yes, it does. It has the effect of chilling discussion of a topic of public interest.

Each of these and other arguments is without merit and belied by the facts and law.

Uh, huh.</fisking>

#SMH

* * * * *

And his follow on cases, RICO Remnant; RICO 2: Electric Boogaloo; RICO 3; and Kimberlin v. McConnell, et al. were even more shoddily crafted—and losers every one.