Brett Kimberlin Will Have to Answer Questions Under Penalty of Perjury

Posted on | August 10, 2012 | 16 Comments

As a definition of “more fun than a barrel of monkeys,” I think that will do, don’t you? Aaron Walker’s attorney Dan Backer has served interrogatories in Walker’s lawsuit against Kimberlin, Neal Rauhauser and Ron Brynaert:

Kimberlin has been served with discovery and has twenty-one days in which to comply.
And we won’t be revealing what we served on him just yet, but I have seen it. I chuckled at the sight of it. He’s going to hate every minute of this. He has plainly screwed with the wrong people.

Did I mention that Kimberlin is a convicted perjurer and so profoundly dishonest he can’t tell the truth to save his life? Did I mention that Walker is suing Kimberlin in Virginia, where the courts are unlikely to be sympathetic to a convicted terrorist like Kimberlin? Did I mention that both Rauhauser and Brynaert have failed to respond to Walker’s suit, so that Walker’s attorney is now moving for default judgments against them? There are just the Neutral Objective Facts, and it is also a Neutral Objective Fact that you can click here to contribute to help the Blogger Defense Team support Walker’s case against Kimberlin.

Comments

16 Responses to “Brett Kimberlin Will Have to Answer Questions Under Penalty of Perjury”

smitty
August 10th, 2012 @ 11:45 am

@rsmccain Does Virginia get more respect from a cretin than your old state?
Pablo
August 10th, 2012 @ 11:45 am

Orville Redenbacher, call your office.
Joe_Detweiler
August 10th, 2012 @ 11:57 am

I asked this question at Mr Walker’s site, but he didn’t let it through.

What if Mr Rauhauser and/or Mr Brynaert knows that the discovery process would hurt them more than a default judgement? Say, if I’m being sued for $1000 and I know that going through discovery would reveal “something” that would allow me to be sued for $100,000, then it seems like failing to respond is the smart way to go.

I’m just wondering if Mr Walker will still have some sort of access to discovery if he asks for a default judgement.
JeffS
August 10th, 2012 @ 12:36 pm

That sounds like a detail of Walker’s strategy, and I doubt that he’ll answer it. And for good reason, since there’s no doubt that BK and NR reads all of these blogs.
ThomasD
August 10th, 2012 @ 12:59 pm

At this point it is safe to assume that all of the named parties are -at minimum- being advised by counsel. And yes, smart counsel would suggest that the client weigh all options, including accepting summary judgement as the lowest cost option. Lawyers do that almost reflexively.

What makes this somewhat interesting is that Kimberlin reportedly has at least responded, although “improperly.” But that is legally equivalent to a non-response so barring any further moves this will also proceed to a request for summary judgement.

All of which is merely prelude.
Quartermaster
August 10th, 2012 @ 1:01 pm

Yes! This is a serious “Pass The Popcorn” alert!
SDN
August 10th, 2012 @ 1:49 pm

IANAL, but my guess is that discovery on each of them is part and parcel of the case against each of the others. Both Rauhauser and Brynaert are closely connected to Mr Kimberlin, so the default judgement won’t get them completely out from under discovery related to the case against Kimberlin, since they are material witnesses / co-conspirators.
Adjoran
August 10th, 2012 @ 2:34 pm

Technically, I think Rauhauser and Brynaert just ducked service of notice, which doesn’t mean you get a default judgement in the case. Usually it just means the plaintiff will be allowed to serve notice via a newspaper ad in the defendant’s last known address zone and the zone in which the case was filed. Then a normal process is followed.

If they then fail to appear and respond to further notices, a default judgement may be entered in the case.

They must be real deadbeats to avoid service if a competent process server was used. If you have a job, the server can always catch you going to or leaving it, for instance.
Red
August 10th, 2012 @ 3:30 pm

“allegedly” 😉
Red
August 10th, 2012 @ 3:32 pm

Boy I’d hate to be a process server. That’s got to be about as bad as being a repo man.
Pushing Back More Than Twice As Hard | hogewash
August 10th, 2012 @ 9:03 pm

[…] 2—Stacy McCain feels that the idea of Brett Kimberlin having to answer questions under penalty of perjury is a […]
Expanding Lies | hogewash
August 10th, 2012 @ 9:16 pm

[…] A Democrat Super PAC is running an ad that show Rep. Allen West hitting white women. Video here. The ad also accuses him of not only keeping taxes low on high income earners but also of raising […]
Blogger’s Defense Team Filed Suit Against Brett Kimberlin and Friends | The Lonely Conservative
August 10th, 2012 @ 10:16 pm

[…] joy. On the outside, I’m still not feeling fantastic, so I’ll just leave it at that.Via The Other McCain and Da TechGuygoogle_ad_client = "ca-pub-1395656889568144"; /* 300×250, created 8/11/08 */ […]
Adjoran
August 11th, 2012 @ 12:25 am

Not as bad these days with digital video on phones. If you have a partner on the transaction, usually you can serve the target before he knows what happened and have it recorded. The biggest problem is finding them – especially the likes of Rauhauser, who eschews fixed addresses or employment.

In most states, once you confirm the identity and hand them the paper, they’ve been served even if they won’t take it in their hand.
Brett Kimberlin Served with Discovery | Roderic Deane
August 11th, 2012 @ 2:41 pm

[…] Stacy McCain notes: Did I mention that Kimberlin is a convicted perjurer and so profoundly dishonest he can’t tell […]
Neal Rauhauser Again? Yet Another Conspiracy Theory Smear Emerges : The Other McCain
August 19th, 2012 @ 9:54 pm

[…] so as to discredit witnesses who might possibly provide testimony implicating Rauhauser in the lawsuit that Aaron Walker has filed in Virginia: “All of these people are crazy!” This is yet another twisted permuation of […]