Posted on | February 4, 2014 | 26 Comments
The title quote is from John Hoge’s Reply to Plaintiff’s Oppositions in the federal RICO lawsuit Kimberlin v. the Universe, et al. Hoge is proceeding pro se — acting as his own lawyer against Brett Kimberlin, who is doing the same — and it’s interesting to contrast Kimberlin’s accusations with Hoge’s defenses, knowing that the burden of proof is on the plaintiff. Hoge today posted Kimberlin’s opposition, which begins with this exercise in verbose gesturing:
Nary a day goes by without Defendant Hoge falsely accusing Plaintiff of some sort of crime or malfeasance, if not in a court filing then on his blog. This harassment has been ongoing for the past two years, and it goes to the heart of Plaintiff’s Complaint, that this pattern of defamatory intimidation and constant “threats of doom” are being done to retaliate and chill Plaintiff’s right to redress.
This is just nonsense. What, pray tell, is “defamatory intimdiation,” and how is Hoge — a defendant in two separate lawsuits filed by Kimberlin — acting to “retaliate,” simply by arguing his case?
Kimberlin seems upset that the defendant is defending himself!
Kimberlin has been neither defamed nor harassed by Hoge, but the Plaintiff evidently hopes that repeating these allegations will impose his beliefs on a federal judge. It’s the Jedi Mind Trick Theory of Law, and amusing to watch, knowing that Kimberlin’s RICO complaint is a gigantic wad of legally flawed fact-deficient gibberish.
So Hoge has replied to Kimberlin’s opposition, and I’m sure he’ll want to discuss that on his own blog — to retaliate by defamatory intimidation and chill! — but I hope my co-defendant doesn’t mind if I quote a few of his pro se sentences:
Plaintiff has attempted to remedy the deficiencies in his Amended Complaint by alleging new “facts” and new bases for his claims . . . but that should be done in an Amended Complaint. If Plaintiff wishes to amend his Complaint a second time, he should seek the Court’s leave to do so. In the meantime, the Court should disregard Plaintiff’s new allegations until they are properly presented in a new Amended Complaint. . . . Defendant Hoge opposes allowing a second Amended Complaint. The various Defendants’ Motions and Replies have pointed out facts not alleged and legal points improperly raised. Plaintiff’s ongoing demonstrations of bad faith strongly suggest the likelihood of his using another Amended Complaint as an opportunity to fill in those blanks with false information. The Court should dismiss the instant suit with prejudice in favor of all Defendants.
What Hoge is saying is that Kimberlin — whose complaint is a carnival of errors — should not be permitted to benefit from the defendants having pointed out the holes in his complaint.
The complaint is fatally flawed and Kimberlin, having compounded his errors through his “ongoing demonstrations of bad faith,” deserves to lose. But I suppose it’s “harassment” to say this.
UPDATE: Mirabile dictu! Hoge has now posted the entirety of his Reply to Plaintiff’s Oppositions, so you can read it all there.