Brett Kimberlin could have been sentenced to 230 years in federal prison
“Kimberlin seemed to be the only one with a possible motive — to distract police attention from the Scyphers murder and delay or halt their quiet investigation of him.”
– R. Joseph Gelarden, Indianapolis Star, “Kimberlin case a maze of murder, deceit,” Oct. 18, 1981
“I have filed over a hundred lawsuits and another one will be no sweat for me. On the other hand, it will cost you a lot of time and money . . .”
— Brett Kimberlin, Oct. 11., 2010, e-mail to Patrick Frey
The World’s Worst Pro Se Litigant™ continues to pursue his $1 million Maryland lawsuit, Kimberlin v. Walker, et al., as well as his federal RICO lawsuit, which has been dubbed Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al., as if either of these nonsensical pieces of amateur litigation has the proverbial snowball’s chance in hell of success.
Unfortunately, the frivolous litigation that a perjuring bomber files against innocent people must nonetheless be taken seriously by the defendants, and therefore motions must be filed and so forth. Even if I were not among the innocent defendants in these cases, they would still be amusingly newsworthy, i.e., the notorious criminal who says he has been defamed by a vast conspiracy of law-abiding citizens. In response to my attorney’s motion to dismiss the Maryland suit, filed last month, Brett Kimberlin filed a motion that included this:
Regular readers know that I moved out of Maryland in mid-2012 to avoid harassment by Brett Kimberlin and his associates. Now, in order to assert that I am subject to the jurisdiction of Maryland courts, Kimberlin asserts (in his own words) a “conspiracy theory” claiming that John Hoge is my “agent” whose actions may be “attributed” to me “in furtherance of a conspiracy.” In other words, Brett Kimberlin alleges I am responsible for Hoge’s actions — that Hoge has acted as my “agent” in Maryland — and Kimberlin claims he can “demonstrate” this as a matter of fact.
You may ask: What is this 2006 Mackey v. Compass Marketing case that Kimberlin cites? It involved two corporate executives who were accused by a plaintiff of conspiring to reduce the commission rate they paid to a broker who lived in Maryland.
That case had nothing to do with defamation, harassment and the other “tortious actions” that Kimberlin alleges against the defendants in this suit and, I would argue, this difference is quite important, because what I have actually done (as opposed to what the convicted perjurer Brett Kimberlin falsely alleges I have done) is to report about and comment on various newsworthy events, a sort of business quite unlike the paying of commissions to brokers. In fact, my reporting and commentary were (and are) matters directly related to the exercise of freedom of speech and freedom of the press under the First Amendment. Readers should forgive me for suspecting that Kimberlin will be required to clear quite a high threshold of proof to claim that my communications with John Hoge constitute a conspiracy, rather than the ordinary business of a journalist citing sources for accounts of events.
Well, I am not a lawyer and it would perhaps be imprudent to discuss any further my own view of this particular matter. Maybe later I’ll share more amusing excerpts from Brett Kimberlin’s conspiracy theory case, but of more immediate interest:
- Aaron Walker has published his motion to dismiss Kimberlin’s federal RICO lawsuit, and has also published his lengthy supplemental memorandum to that motion;
and
- John Hoge notes that, even before Walker published the memorandum, that filing was already being discussed by certain persons on the Internet as if they had direct familiarity with the document.
It is perhaps merely a coincidence that Bill Schmalfeldt seems to be privy to every detail of Brett Kimberlin’s legal proceedings, but if one were prone to constructing conspiracy theories, one might allege that Schmalfeldt and others are Kimberlin’s agents.
Brett Kimberlin’s pro se litigation is outrageous because, if he had sought the counsel of any competent attorney, that attorney would have been obliged to tell him that his conspiracy theory is nuts and that he has zero chance of prevailing in court, and therefore no such lawsuit ever would have been filed. However, because no court has yet imposed sanctions on Kimberlin, the dishonest felon continues to persist in this pattern of “lawfare” harassment.
Exit Question 1: If it is defamation and harassment for the defendants to have expressed suspicion that certain people are acting on behalf of Brett Kimberlin, how are Kimberlin’s own false conspiracy allegations (e.g., that Hoge is my “agent”) not also defamation and harassment?
Exit Question 2: If your answer to the previous question is that Kimberlin’s allegations are privileged because they were made as part of a civil lawsuit, doesn’t this tend to incentivize such litigation, so that the safest way to smear a person’s reputation is to file a frivolous lawsuit crammed full of malicious accusations that would be libelous if they were published as journalism?
Exit Question 3: When are courts going to take notice of Brett Kimberlin’s own boast that he files lawsuits merely for the purpose of harassing people against whom he has a grudge?
BOMBER SUES BLOGGERS
