Posted on | June 20, 2014 | 22 Comments
It’s been weeks since I’ve paid any attention to Brett Kimberlin’s ridiculous federal lawsuit, the one that my co-defendant John Hoge has described as Kimberlin v. the Universe, et al. The reason for this long silence is that there just hasn’t been any real news in the case. Judge Grimm issued a letter order that put a lid on the extraordinary number of filings made in the case, and the defendants are basically now waiting to learn (a) if Kimberlin’s motion to amend his complaint will be accepted or (b) whether the various motions to dismiss and objections to the amended complaint have sufficed to show that (c) the amended motion is futile and (d) the entire lawsuit should be dismissed. Meanwhile, the case has been handed over to a new judge, George J. Hazel, who has this week received two letters from the Perjuring Pro Se Pipsqueak.
The first letter asks for more time to effect service on several defendants, including Ali Akbar and Breitbart.com, despite the fact that Kimberlin was already granted an additional 60 days on April 28. Now, having failed to effect service for more than six weeks — and with just days remaining until the June 28 deadline — Kimberlin wants to move the goal posts, asking that the court ignore his failure. Instead, Kimberlin wants the court first to rule on his motion to amend and then extend the deadline 60 days past that ruling.
Some of my fellow defendants (or their lawyers) are sure to point out what’s wrong with this: If the court denies the motion to amend — as I hope and expect they will — the suit would then be ripe for dismissal, except for the fact that not all the defendants have been served, some eight months after Kimberlin first filed his complaint. That would be extended to at least 10 months if Kimberlin were granted the delay he now seeks. Those defendants who have already responded to Kimberlin’s suit (including those who have spent money to hire lawyers) can very well argue that such a delay would be unfair to them, leaving them in limbo because of Kimberlin’s failures.
Of course, if the court should grant Kimberlin’s motion to amend, this would re-start the clock for everybody — but I honestly don’t think that’s going to happen, because the arguments made in opposition to the amendment were very strong. Kimberlin’s original suit is so badly flawed, as a matter of law, that it’s a slam-dunk for dismissal, and his proposed amended complaint did not substantially improve the suit, while adding numerous new errors in the process. When these problems were pointed out by the defendants in their opposition motions, Kimberlin’s response was just a lot of arm-waving and a repetition of his claims that the defendants are Very Bad People Who Do Very Bad Things.
Kimberlin’s second letter to Judge Hazel is simply absurd: He invokes the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ ruling rejecting the defendant’s appeal in the case of United States v. Osinger. The irrelevance of this to Kimberlin’s case is obvious to anyone.
Osinger was prosecuted for cyberstalking under 18 U.S.C. § 2261A. Among the things he did was create a phony Facebook page for his ex-girlfriend and post grossly inappropriate photos. He sent emails to her boss, co-workers and family members about it. And not to be subtle, he sent her about 40 texts over two days to let her know how he was going to destroy her life.
This was a crime, not a civil tort. Neither I nor any of the 20 other defendants in Kimberlin’s suit have violated 18 U.S.C. § 2261A. None of us have been arrested or indicted for violating 18 U.S.C. § 2261A or any other federal criminal statute, and no one is investigating us for such a crime. In writing to Judge Hazel, however, Kimberlin says he alleges that the defendants in his suit have “engaged in . . . criminal conduct that is not protected by the First Amendment.”
And the point is . . . what?
Anybody can allege anything, but the federal government has not appointed Brett Kimberlin to prosecute criminals, and his claims that he has been a victim of felonies by the defendants reminds me of nothing so much as it does an old episode of The Andy Griffith Show in which Gomer Pyle runs around shouting “citizens arrest.”
The law doesn’t work that way. If Brett Kimberlin has been the victim of felonies perpetrated by the defendants — who include Erick Erickson, Michelle Malkin and Glenn Beck, among others — where are the indictments? Why isn’t the FBI slapping the cuffs on these alleged Very Bad People Who Do Very Bad Things?
Answer: Because Brett Kimberlin is full of crap.
Is it a federal crime to call somebody “full of crap”? I’m not a lawyer, so I don’t know. Maybe you should hit my tip jar, just in case.