Posted on | December 24, 2013 | 15 Comments
If the post that went up Monday evening at Breitbart Unmasked (No, I won’t link to it.) is any indication, TDPK truly misunderstands the memorandum Aaron Walker filed in the Maryland Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. case. And he misunderstands its significance.
Having previously addressed Walker’s filing, I will excerpt, but not link, Xenophon’s typically boastful output:
A federal judge dismissed Walker’s federal lawsuit against Kimberlin, Neal Rauhauser, and Ron Brynaert with prejudice over a year ago, but the vexatious Mr. Walker has learned no lessons from that blistering rejection of his paranoid style.
Instead, he tries to re-litigate all his failures once again in a grand unified conspiracy theory.
This has been recycled endlessly by Team Kimberlin: Walker’s lawsuits against Kimberlin were dismissed and therefore . . .?
If Walker failed to prove his claims against Kimberlin, this is because the plaintiff has the burden of proof in a civil suit. But as Kimberlin is now the plaintiff, and Walker among the defendants, the advantages of the defense have been transferred to Kimberlin’s antagonists. Xenophon evidently doesn’t recognize the significance of this, assuming that because Walker lost as a plaintiff, Walker will also lose as a defendant. Further demonstrating a deficiency of understanding, Xenophon continues:
Mr. Walker and his four co-defendants are being represented in the state defamation case by two attorneys, Marc Del Bianco and Francis Ostronic, neither of whom were party to Mr. Walker’s filing. Both of them will be asked to account for it anyway. Walker has tried to exercise leadership by claiming to represent everyone’s interests, including Kimberlin Unmasked. Walker’s filing leaves competent counsel with a dilemma: they can either move to have Walker’s novella-length screed stricken, and apologize to the court, or they can walk away from the case while there is still time to reach cover.
Either way, they should politely tell their client that he has done them no favors and ask him to please shut up.
Even if we stipulate Xenophon’s (and Kimberlin’s) claim that Walker’s filing was improper, why should my attorney be required to apologize on my behalf for what my co-defendant Walker has done without my knowledge, permission or authorization? But such are the implausible assumptions that Team Kimberlin rely on, and Xenophon piles up these assumptions in profusion:
According to our sources Mr. Kimberlin has found a very competent attorney to handle the work of dismantling Mr. Walker on a witness stand.
Uh, “dismantling Mr. Walker on a witness stand”? This requires the assumption that one or the other of Kimberlin’s lawsuits will eventually make it to trial when, in fact, there have been only two procedural hearings to date, and the next hearing in the Maryland case — where the various preliminary motions will be heard — is not until Jan. 13.
Many of the defendants in the federal suit (myself among them) have not yet been served, and we are therefore very early in the game, which is ultimately unlikely to result in a trial, because Brett Kimberlin is completely full of crap. Legal scholars can ponder what “completely full of crap” means, but permit me to express doubt that any “very competent attorney” is likely to agree to represent Brett Kimberlin.