The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

The World’s Worst Pro Se Litigant™ Says ‘Defendant Walker Has Gone Rogue’

Posted on | December 24, 2013 | 18 Comments

An interesting aspect of being accused by Brett Kimberlin of being part of two distinct conspiracies — one described in his Maryland suit Kimberlin v. Walker, et al., and the other described in the federal RICO suit John Hoge has dubbed Kimberlin v. the Universe, et al. — is that my alleged co-conspirators have done things without my knowledge or permission, and yet I’m somehow responsible for their actions.

Kimberlin just filed motions expressing his anger that my co-defendant Aaron Walker filed a motion on behalf of co-defendant Kimberlin Unmasked, including this claim:

“Defendant Walker has gone rogue and filed his pleading because of his grandiose and misplaced belief that he is a ‘legal scholar’ who is not bound by the rules. He believes that the lawyers in the case are not blessed with his skills or knowledge so he must file pleadings to educate them and the Court on the facts and laws as only known by him.”

This is rich amusement, indeed. Given the wild hare-brained recklessness of Kimberlin’s own pro se litigation — any competent attorney would have advised him against filing these lawsuits — who is Kimberlin to argue that Aaron Walker, a Yale-educated attorney, is acting on a “grandiose and misplaced belief”?

While I am not qualified to judge the legality or wisdom of Walker’s filings, it seems that Kimberlin is upset that Walker has done something unexpected and unusual, outside the rules of the game as Kimberlin understood them. Given his own demonstrable contempt for law — as evidenced by the crimes for which he served 17 years in federal prison — it’s quite ironic that Kimberlin expects his antagonists to scrupulously adhere to the rules. Is it not possible that Walker understands the rules better than Kimberlin? Could it be that Walker’s filings, while unexpected and unusual, were nonetheless entirely legal?

We’ll have to wait and let the court sort this out, but my own guess is that Kimberlin’s motion is just a continuation of his long-term efforts to damage Walker’s reputation as a lawyer, and will likely fail.

Meanwhile, my co-defendant Kimberlin Unmasked calls attention to this recent outburst by Kimberlin associate Neal Rauhauser:

This is further rich amusement: In September and October, Rauhauser and his friends were thumping their chests and proclaiming that Kimberlin’s lawsuits were legal tours de force, that the defendants were all guilty and should be terrified at the looming prospect of Kimberlin’s courtroom triumph. Yet now it’s December, the defendants have begun filing motions in the case, and suddenly Neal Rauhauser is on Twitter seeking pro bono legal assistance for the pro se plaintiff, Brett Kimberlin.

As for Rauhauser’s claim that Kimberlin was the victim of a “faked rape charge from some cranks,” the charge in question was filed July 28 by Kimberlin’s estranged wife:

“Brett Kimberlin met me when I was 14 years old. I was
living in Ukraine. Brett Kimberlin courted me and
enticed me to come to Maryland so I could be his
sex partner and bride. I arrived in Maryland
September, 1996, when I was fifteen years old.
Brett Kimberlin had sex with me every single day
between the day I arrived and the day I
turned sixteen, on Nov. 16, 1996.”

This charge — 16 is the legal age of consent in Maryland — was subsequently dismissed, but as it was based on a sworn statement by Mrs. Kimberlin, it would seem that Rauhauser is accusing her of being a “crank.” Nor have Rauhauser or any other Kimberlin fanboys addressed the substance of the accusations that Mrs. Kimberlin made in her July 7 motion for a protective order against her estranged husband:

T. Kimberlin v. B. Kimberlin Petition for Protective Order 7.9.13 (OCR)

Those claims of her husband’s “threatening” and “abusive” behavior were made by Mrs. Kimberlin before I even knew that she had been estranged from Brett Kimberlin and, while the court denied the protective order she sought, her accusations against her husband (a public figure) were nevertheless newsworthy. These charges were highly relevant in light of Brett Kimberlin’s criminal history:

“Plaintiff is a public figure because he has had an authorized biography published about him detailing his exploits. Citizen K: The Deeply Weird American Journey of Brett Kimberlin (Singer, Mark, Knopf, New York, 1996) is an authorized biography of Plaintiff Kimberlin. In it the book insinuates that the Plaintiff had an inappropriate relationship with a ten year old girl, (id. at 78.), that he was suspected in having arranged a murder-for-hire of the girl’s grandmother (at 82, 83), and that the subsequent Speedway Bombings were an attempt to distract the murder investigation (at. 89).”

That’s what the Franklin Center said in filing its motion to dismiss Kimberlin’s federal RICO suit. Maybe Neal Rauhauser can explain why these facts should be ignored. Good luck with that.

 

BomberSuesBloggers.com




 


Bookmark and Share

Comments

  • Aaron “Worthing” Walker

    Correction: I am being accused of going “rouge.”

    But yes, his motions are legally ridiculous. And they have a bigger problem than their lack of legal foundation, but I won’t spoil the surprise.

    All in all, he is coming off the rails. I have said from the beginning that this suit is a sign of mental deterioration, and this is just further evidence of it. He has multiple motions to dismiss he needs to respond to, as well as his jazz in the state suit, and he wastes time with this.

  • robertstacymccain

    Kimberlin “wastes his time with this,” perhaps because the purpose of his litigation is something other than winning a judgment against the defendants. One might suspect that, instead, Kimberlin’s purpose in suing everybody is to provide himself an opportunity to create a public record of his accusations against the defendants. If one suspects this, one must wonder why Kimberlin did not anticipate that the defendants might also use their own filings for a similar purpose. But doing to Brett Kimberlin what Brett Kimberlin does to others is unfair, I guess.

  • Mm

    Another point: wasn’t Kimberlin the one who tried to represent Schmalfeldt at a court hearing with Hoge? Wasn’t that shut down because he’s not a lawyer? So who, exactly, was practicing law without a license?

  • http://wizbangblog.com/ Adjoran

    Until Kimberlin bravely alerted the world that you had “gone rouge,” we assumed you just had rosy cheeks.

    I’ve never seen or heard of judges so tolerant as those who’ve dealt with Kimberlin. Sometimes a pro se litigant will get a pass on some detail of filing, but repeatedly wasting everyone’s time deserves a strong slap-down of the sort these jurists seem hesitant to deliver to Kimberlin.

    Perhaps they don’t want to be nervous starting their cars every morning?

  • Pingback: Re: @X3n0ph0n and the Burden of Proof : The Other McCain

  • MattRoss

    “But doing to Brett Kimberlin what Brett Kimberlin does to others is unfair, I guess.”

    That sense of hypocritical entitlement seems to be a pandemic these days. Even the #FreeKate stalkers are up to their typical nonsense, claiming that others are doing to them what they are actively doing to others, I guess for athiests, stalking Christians on Christmas eve is no big thing.

    I know Kimberlin has filed numerous (over 100) lawsuits in his time. How many of them have made it to trial? Is it possible that he did this to harass, and never even get to court? And, if he actually has to handle this before a judge in open court, how long before he implodes?

  • WJJ Hoge

    The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin brags about filing “over a hundred lawsuits,” but doesn’t talk much about how many he has won. TDPK has come out ahead in court before, but rarely when he has represented himself.

    If his suit were righteous, he would have no trouble finding a lawyer who would handle the case on a fee contingent basis. The fact that he’s still pro se after the state case is almost four months old and the RICO madness is over two months old probably indicates that either he really thinks he can win on his own or no attorney is willing to represent him.

  • Anon Y. Mous

    I haven’t read all the stuff written by you and others regarding the whole Kimberlin situation, especially not all the legal filings, and my expertise on RICO is pretty much limited to what is found in Law & Order reruns, but I thought that the way that RICO worked was that the law held all the members of a conspiracy responsible for all the crimes of the conspiracy, even if every individual wasn’t involved or even knowledgeable about all the independent acts of the conspiracy. All’s the prosecutor has to prove is that each individual charged acted in a way to further the overall conspiracy.

  • richard mcenroe

    MD. Blue state. Blue state judge/judges. Just saying.

  • scrubjay

    Why was the wife’s protective order denied? He seems to be able get one against anyone who farts in his general direction.

  • Aaron “Worthing” Walker

    Actually it was rauhauser he was attempting to intervene for. but its a good point.

    Anyway, as a party to the case, i am allowed to express an opinion about any motion filed.

  • Aaron “Worthing” Walker

    Well, unlike Kimberlin, I do not fill motions with irrelevant inflamtory details.

    Brett Kimberlin’s personal conduct is relevant in two ways. First, I believe he is judgment proof. I mean he is complaining that Kimberlin Unmasked has suggested he wants to sleep with teenagers… after having written two songs about sleeping with teenagers.

    Second, what he has done since learning my identity is relevant when determining if he will have the opportunity to do this to another person.

    Also some of his personal conduct comes up when making the point he is a public figure.

    But outside of those three valid arguments, I don’t make personal attacks on him in that memorandum.

  • Aaron “Worthing” Waker

    Well, for one thing, harassment is not a cause for a protective order, unlike a peace order.

    Also the judge had a limited definition of abuse. Seducing a person as a teenager is literally covered by the statute, but the judge implied into it a statute of limitations, more or less. which given the discretion a judge has is reasonable.

    I don’t agree, but then again if i was a family law judge a lot of cases would go very differently…

  • SarahW

    Fairly typical reaction for a psychopath . That’s how they roll.

  • Pingback: Christmas with Kimberlin and Schmalfeldt | Batshit Crazy News

  • Pingback: Prevarication Du Jour | hogewash