This was an update to my post about the hoax call that sent police to Erick Erickson’s house — but I think it deserves its own post.
I was on a podcast with Lee Stranahan last night about Kimberlin and the swattings. You can hear it here.
A person claiming to be my swatter called in twice to the show: once at 50:18 and again at about 65 minutes in. I was on the show and the person claiming to be the swatter addressed me directly, twice. He called me “buddy,” mocked me for having been swatted, laughed at me repeatedly, and mocked Michelle Malkin for the situation where her cousin is missing. He asked me what it was like to be swatted, and absurdly claimed that he was present that night, watching me led out in handcuffs.
It was like some awful B movie you see on the USA Network late at night.
Joe Brooks put up the two calls from last night, together with the New Jersey swatting call, my swatting call, and Ron Brynaert’s voice. Here is the audio, beginning with last night’s calls. The audio from last night is from 0:00 to 1:25. The New Jersey swatting call is from 1:25 to 4:32. My swatting call is from 4:32 to 5:05. Brynaert’s voice starts at 5:05.
The voice of the caller to Lee’s show sounds quite a bit like the voice from the New Jersey swatting call. It also sounds somewhat like the voice at the beginning of the swatting call that sent police to my house.
It seems logical that, if last night’s call was the swatter, it was the swatter speaking in a disguised voice. Why would someone call in to a radio show, speaking in their own normal recognizable voice, and confess to being the swatter? Wouldn’t they be worried that someone would hear it and turn them in? Especially with the story threatening to turn national after what happened to Erickson?
Logically, last night’s caller had to be speaking in a disguised voice.
Why do that? And why do it now?
I will also point out that it is my opinion and the opinion of the forensic audio expert, Kent Gibson, that the caller on my swatting call sounds like he is disguising his voice at the beginning of my call — but not necessarily at the end. As Gibson explains:
The Frey Swat call exhibits a change in vocal quality partway through the call. It is likely the speaker was trying to disguise his voice at the beginning of the call.
That is a fact that people should keep in mind as they analyze this. When you are comparing the voice to Brynaert’s, you shouldn’t compare the part where the swatter is trying to disguise his voice. The end of the audio clip above has what sounds more like the genuine voice of the swatter at 4:56. That’s the part where the caller seems to get rattled by the dispatcher’s questions — and where it seems likely that you are hearing the true voice of the swatter. Brooks combines that with the voice of Ron Brynaert at 5:05.
So if you want the best possible comparison, start the clip at 4:56 and let it play to the end.
Also remember that the same audio expert has already opined that Brynaert is the probable voice of both my swatting call and the New Jersey swatting call. For more details, read my original post on the harassment other Kimberlin critics and I have suffered at the hands of Brynaert, Neal Rauhauser, and Brett Kimberlin.
Two questions come to mind as you review these supremely creepy audio clips:
First: why did the caller make that call now? What does he have to gain?
And second: why did Erick Erickson get swatted last night?
UPDATE: The address in Joe Brooks’s clip is not mine or Mike Stack’s. It’s the address that the swatter believed was Mike Stack’s address.
It is also the address Neal Rauhauser believed was Mike Stack’s. Several months ago, Rauhauser uploaded a cease and desist letter to Stack, addressed to Stack at 30 Mallard Court, Three Bridges, New Jersey.
Above: two screenshots from the beginning and end of a letter from Neal Rauhauser to Mike Stack
That is the (incorrect) address given by the New Jersey swatter to police.