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:
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.