Yesterday’s TKPOTD contained the Government’s opposition memorandum to Brett Kimberlin’s motion to vacate some of this Speedway Bombing convictions. Among the crackpot legal theories that Kimberlin asserted was the idea that he was entitled to DNA analysis of hair samples that were used in one of his trials four decades ago. However, it was Kimberlin who introduced the evidence, and he’s not entitled to a do-over for his own mistakes.
The TKPOTD from three yeas ago today dealt with another bit of evidence that The Dread Deadbeat Pro-Se Kimberlin introduced in the Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. LOLsuit that he probably wishes he’d left out.
* * * * *
For the last couple of days, I’ve been posting examples of The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin’s incompetence structuring his arguments in court. TDPK was foolish enough to call Stacy McCain as a plaintiff’s witness in the Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. LOLsuit. During his direct examination of Stacy, TDPK tried to introduce evidence from the Southern Poverty Law Center. That resulted in the following exchange among Judge Johnson, Patrick Ostronic (the lawyer representing Aaron Walker, Stacy, and me), and Kimberlin—
THE COURT: So what does the Southern Poverty Law Center have to do with this case? I’m not asking you about Mr. McCain, I’m asking you about why are you asking him about the Southern Poverty Law Center?
MR. KIMBERLIN: I’m asking him the Southern Poverty Law Center is the leading, one of the leading civil rights organizations in the —
THE COURT: I understand all of that but what does it have to do with this case?
MR. KIMBERLIN: Because —
THE COURT: And the claim that you are making against these gentlemen?
MR. KIMBERLIN: Because Southern Poverty Law Center regularly outs racists –
MR. OSTRONIC: Objection.
THE COURT: So what if they do. What does that have to do with this case? This case isn’t about racists or racism.
MR. KIMBERLIN: It’s about hate. It’s about hate. These people hate me and they do anything to destroy me.
THE COURT: Well but why are you asking this witness about the Southern Poverty Law Center? First of all he couldn’t testify as to anything they said or did because it wouldn’t be an exception to any hearsay rule. So you would never be able to get that in evidence anyway.
MR. KIMBERLIN: All right.
THE COURT: Your objection’s sustained.
The Rules of Evidence are not about virtue signaling.
* * * * *
Facts and Law trump Feelings in a courtroom.