Team Kimberlin Post of the Day


I first published this bit of Brett Kimberlin’s testimony under oath during the Walker v. Kimberlin, et al. trial in the TKPOTD two years ago today.

* * * * *

This was part of Aaron Walker’s cross examination of The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin during the Walker v. Kimberlin, et al. trial.

MR. WALKER: Now, remind me, if you will, what you do for your charities.
MR. KIMBERLIN: I run a non-profit Justice Through Music, and we work with, ah, famous bands and artist to get young people involved with civic participation. We, ah, we also work with, ah, dissidents around the workd to get them, um, their message out to the general public. We work with, um, a lot of voting registration groups. We, um, registered literally hundreds of thousands of young people to vote over the years. Um, we have been very much involved, um, with making sure that voting machines are, are not hackable and that their, um, they provide and accurate reading. We were very involved with making sure that, ah, Maryland, ah, got away from the electronic voting machines and changed over to the paper ballots, ah, that I believe they used this year for the first time in, um, Maryland. And, um, we have, ah, we have a lot of [unintelligible] campaigns. For example, we had a campaign called “Iran“, um, “Iran Now”, um, during the Green Revolutionin, in Iran. Ah, We’re doing a lot of, of, because my wife’s from Ukraine, we’re doing a lot of, ah, work with Ukraine. Right now, I’m working with, ah, Congressmembers, um, on legislation to protect the vote. I’m working with the Department of Justice right now to, ah, to protect, ah, this coming election. There’s a lot of information about hacking by Russian, and our team that works for me are, are specialists in hacking and, ah, electronic cyberhacking and things like that. So we are probably one of the foremost groups in, in the country on that.

Hmmmm.

* * * * *

Now, the Gentle Reader may want to take The Dread Deadbeat Pro-Se Kimberlin’s claims about working with the DoJ with a grain of salt. He’s been know to lie. OTOH, he offered that testimony in October, 2016, just before he filed his Kimberlin v. Breitbart, et al. RICO 3 LOLsuit and just before the election he probably expected Hillary Clinton to win.

What would be the significance of Brett Kimberlin’s telling the truth about working with the DoJ to “protect” the 2016 elections?

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day


The appeal of the Walker v. Maryland, et al. lawsuit is before the Maryland Court of Special Appeals. I have not done much reporting on the course of that appeal because I have been working with Aaron Walker as his paralegal. I know too much about the case, and I did not want to divulge too much to the adverse parties with a slip of the keyboard. There will be no more briefing on the case after today, so I’m going to begin reporting what I know.

The appellees in the case are the State of Maryland and Brett and Tetyana Kimberlin. Originally, Aaron sued the State seeking to have the laws that he had been falsely charged under declared unconstitutional. The Kimberlins were added as defendants in devolved into a malicious prosecution claim. When Judge Mason found the laws constitutional and dismissed the case against the State, he ordered the case severed into two separate cases so that the claim against the Kimberlins could continue, but the Clerk of the Circuit Court has refused to obey that order. Thus, what should have been two separate appeals is one.

Today, we’ll take a look at the underlying facts of the case. Tomorrow and the next day, we’ll take a look at the cases against the two sets of appellees.

In July, 2013, Brett and Tetyana Kimberlin were estranged from each other. After Brett (I will refer to the Kimberlins by their first names for simplicity) sought a protective order against his wife and filed a bogus petition for an involuntary psych evaluation of her, Aaron Walker offered her pro bono legal assistance and, working with me, arranged for her to have representation by a Maryland lawyer. In an apparent attempt at revenge for Aaron’s helping Tetyana, Brett filed a false Application for Statement of Charges which resulted in Aaron being charged with harassment under Maryland Criminal Law § 3-803. The basis of the charge was that Aaron had written about Brett on Twitter and his blog. The charge was dropped.

As the Gentle Reader who has followed this blog for a while knows, Brett continued his lawfare against Aaron and others, including me. In March, 2015, he filed a bogus peace order petition against me which was denied by both the District and Circuit Courts. The basis of his petition was that I had allegedly harassed Tetyana’s elder daughter by writing about Brett on this blog. Rather than appeal that petition further, he drafted and Tetyana filed false Applications for Statement of Charges against Aaron and me which resulted in our being charged with online harassment of a minor under Maryland Criminal Law § 3-805(b)(2). Those charges were dropped.

Aaron sued the State of Maryland, claiming that the State was acting as Brett’s catspaw in the suppression of his First Amendment rights and that the laws being used were unconstitutional. The Circuit Court ruled that Aaron did not have standing his suit as it was originally drafted, but allowed him to amend his complaint. The Kimberlins were added as defendants. As noted above, Judge Mason found the laws constitutional and dismissed the case against the State. The case went to trial against the Kimberlins, and the Court found that they had probable cause to file their complaints. Aaron is appealing the finding that §§ 3-803 and 3-805 are constitutional and certain procedural errors during the trial.

Tomorrow, we’ll take a look at Aaron’s constitutional challenge to Maryland’s harassment statutes and how they can have the effect of chilling free speech on the Internet.

UPDATE—2018 JAN 03 05:03:33 UTC tag/walker-v-kimberlin-et-al
2018 JAN 03 05:03:48 UTC tag/graces-law
2018 JAN 03 05:13:39 UTC tag/tetyana-kimberlin

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day


In the false Applications for Statement of Charges that The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin filed against Aaron Walker and me in 2013, he stated that Tetyana Kimberlin has “a long history of mental illness,” and it appears from the transcript of one of the bench conferences during the the 2014 Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. trial that he intended to have Tetyana’s daughter testify to her mother’s alleged mental problems.

THE COURT: … but you’ve got to understand something, you are the party in this case, not your daughter. She’s not a party here.

MR. KIMBERLIN: I understand, but I need to put on, I need tho put this information on and I ask you to let me put this information on. She was listed as a witness.

THE COURT: The problem is what did she witness?

MR. KIMBERLIN: Well she witnessed the bipolar and present activity of my wife.

THE COURT: A 15-year old is not competent to testify about any bipolar —

MR. KIMBERLIN: Well she can testify —

THE COURT: That’s subject to an expert witness.

Kimberlin v. Walker, et al., Case No. 380966V, Transcript (Md. Cir.Ct Mont. Co. Aug. 12, 2104) at 48.

Of course, he wasn’t able to get away with that sort of claim when he and his wife were codefendants in the Walker v. Kimberlin, et al. trial.

MR. KIMBERLIN: Oh, the July 30th charges against you? I don’t believe that made any false statements. You know, in retrospect, I regret using the term mental illness. I’m not a doctor.

MR. WALKER: With regards to who, sir?

MR. KIMBERLIN: I’m not a doctor.

MR. WALKER: With regards to who? Who were you calling mentally ill?

MR. KIMBERLIN: My wife.

Walker v. Kimberlin, et al., Case No. 398855V, Transcript (Md. Cir.Ct. Mont. Co. Oct. 13, 2016) at 78.

[redacted]

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day


I’ve been going through the evidence that Brett Kimberlin introduced in his defense during the Walker v. Kimberlin, et al. lawsuit. (Tetyana Kimberlin did not introduce any evidence during that trial.) The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin has mentioned a “hundred page” report “requested by the Montgomery State’s Attorney’s Office in several of the papers he’s filed in the Hoge v. Kimberlin, et al. lawsuit. I turns out that he introduced a copy in Aaron Walker’s case.

I’m not going to post the whole thing. First, there are things in it that would invade the privacy of one or more third parties. Second, it would be a colossal waste of bandwidth.

I did find that the Kimberlins raised one important question on page 10 of their report—

What More Does This [States’s Attorney’s] Office Need To Prosecute Hoge and Walker?

Reading their report, it’s pretty obvious what was missing, evidence showing that there was probable cause that a crime was committed. That’s the same thing that was missing from their Applications for Statement of Charges.

Meanwhile, we’re at T-minus 12 days and counting.

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day


Here’s one more example of The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin’s ineptitude in the courtroom. During the District Court hearing for the peace order petition he filed against me in 2015, he tried to use tweets sent by someone else with my name attached to them as evidence that I had commented on a post about Tetyana Kimberlin’s elder daughter. I didn’t authenticate the tweets during the District Court trial, and he tried to recycle them during the Walker v. Kimberlin, et al. trial last year.

MR. KIMBERLIN: I’m going to show you Exhibit 31.

MR. HOGE: Oh, yeah, these are the forged comments that you tried to introduce in the peace order hearing back in March of 2015.

MR. KIMBERLIN: Do you recognize that one?

MR. HOGE:  I–

THE COURT: He just said that they’re forged, so he can’t authenticate them.

MR. HOGE: I cannot authenticate it; they’re forged.

THE COURT: Give them to the clerk, please, they’ve been marked.

Failing failures gotta fail.

T-minus 6 days and counting.

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day


Yesterday, I gave the Gentle Reader an example of The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin’s courtroom incompetence that showed his routine failure to be able to tie the imagined causes to fantasized effects. Today, will look a one of the kinds of problems he has getting documents admitted into evidence.

This exchange occurred during the Walker v. Kimberlin, et al. trial last October when TDPK tried to introduce a blog post by Aaron Walker into evidence:

MR. KIMBERLIN: May 20th — this is Exhibit 49 — May 20th, 2012, Brett Kimberlin news roundup, documenting the Streisand effect. I’d like to explain the Streisand effect.

MR. WALKER: Objection. Is he an expert witness on this?

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. KIMBERLIN: Okay.

Now, if anyone can be an expert on the Streisand Effect, Brett Kimberlin should be qualified, but by bring it up in the way he did, he painted himself into a corner. By showing that Aaron was writing about the Streisand Effect blowback that TDPK was experience as a result of his attempts to use the courts to censor information on the Internet, Kimberlin was opening himself up for a line of cross examination which might have been quite fruitful. He was lucky that the court sustained Aaron’s objection and that he didn’t try to argue to get the post in.

OTOH, it was probably good for Aaron to object as a way of keeping one of Kimberlin’s distraction out of the sight of the jury.

T-minus 11 days and counting.

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day


I’ve been reviewing the transcripts of various trials and hearings involving The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin. One of the main weaknesses in his cases is his apparent inability to construct logical arguments showing a cause-and-effect relationship between the damages he claims to have suffered and imagined actions of the adverse parties in the cases.

This exchange from TDPK’s testimony during the Walker v. Kimberlin, et al. trial last year is a good example of the sort of unsubstantiated claims he makes. Kimberlin had been trying to tell the jury about how Aaron Walker had placed the Kimberlin family under siege, and Judge Mason as been sustaining objection after objection because no factual basis is being offered for TDPK’s testimony. (Note: Aaron Walker was not one of the founders of the National Bloggers Club, and it was founded and operating before Kimberlin began attacking bloggers such as Aaron Walker.)

THE COURT: Again, Mr. Kimberlin, until you link it to Mr. Walker, I sustain the objection. So, you can tell us about anything that Mr. Walker did, or something that somebody else has acknowledged that they did in concert with Mr. Walker. That is, Mr. Hoge’s the only person we heard from, so Mr. Hoge acknowledged.

MR. KIMBERLIN: All right. Mr. Walker is a founding or a member of a group called the National Bloggers’ Club. The National Blogger’s Club is a group of conservative bloggers. It was formed to target me.

MR. WALKER: Does he have —

MR. KIMBERLIN: Mr. Walker has already —

THE COURT: Wait one sec.

MR. WALKER: What is the foundation?

MR. KIMBERLIN: — testified about this —

THE COURT: Wait one second.

MR. WALKER: What is the foundation?

THE COURT: Wait one second.

MR. WALKER: What is the foundation for that claim?

THE COURT: Okay. So, you’re saying that Mr. Walker formed National Blogger’s Club?

MR. KIMBERLIN: Mr., Mr. Walker has already testified on —

THE COURT: I’m sorry. Did he testify here in court?

MR. KIMBERLIN: — in court today, you know, that he received at least $5,000, I believe he said, or —

MR. WALKER: No.

MR. KIMBERLIN: — thousands of dollars.

THE COURT: $2,000, I believe he said.

MR. KIMBERLIN: Whatever.

MR. WALKER: No, not on that.

MR. KIMBERLIN: From the National Blogger’s Club, and that he has a donate button on his front page —

THE COURT: Correct.

MR. KIMBERLIN: — that donates to the National Blogger’s Club.

THE COURT: Correct.

MR. KIMBERLIN: So–

THE COURT: Okay. But if that’s the foundation, I sustain the objection.

TDPK is correct about one thing. All of the cases involving him deal with false narratives. But he’s wrong about who created them.