Patterico's Pontifications

6/4/2012

Audio and Transcripts from the Hearing Where Aaron Walker Was Arrested for Blogging About a Public Figure

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 12:34 am

Last week, I told you that Aaron Walker was arrested for blogging about a public figure. I published a report of the events of the hearing, which was consistent with another report from David Hogberg of Investor’s Business Daily. In that post, I said:

This is a clear-cut case of a First Amendment violation — about as clear-cut as you’ll ever hear.

This post contains the audio from that hearing.

Listening to the audio, I am struck by how much more respect I have for Aaron’s performance, and how much less respect I have for the judge’s behavior, than I did based on the published reports.

At one point, Aaron cites the seminal U.S. Supreme Court case on inciting violent speech: Brandenburg v. Ohio, a case that absolutely supports Aaron’s position. Judge Vaughey responds: “Forget Bradenburg [sic]. Let’s go by Vaughey right now.”

Wow.

Yesterday, I published a Glenn Reynolds-style request to the “Army of Davids” — asking people to transcribe the most outrageous parts of the hearing.

In this post I will just highlight a few key passages that show a) how rude and dismissive the judge was; b) how dishonest Kimberlin was; and c) most important, that the judge disregarded Supreme Court precedent and found Aaron in violation of a peace order for his public statements about a public figure.

These excerpts also show that the judge issued an order preventing Aaron from blogging about Kimberlin for six months — a clearly unconstitutional prior restraint of speech.

I’ll get to the transcripts in a moment, but I want to say one thing first.

Now that it is clear that Aaron Walker was arrested for blogging about a public figure — and that a judge has imposed unconstitutional restraints on his speech rights — the next steps are clear:

  • Aaron Walker needs an immediate court order modifying the current peace order. There must be a clear judicial order stating that Aaron is allowed him to blog, tweet, and otherwise express himself publicly about public figure Brett Kimberlin. Every second that he is muzzled from speaking out is an intolerable crushing of his most sacred American right of free speech.
  • Aaron Walker needs legal help to obtain a reversal of this unconstitutional peace order, as well as to fight the possible criminal case against him for violating that peace order.
  • Aaron Walker needs a permanent injunction preventing Brett Kimberlin from seeking peace orders against Aaron based on his public speech about Kimberlin.

To accomplish these goals, we need the spotlight of Big Media on this tremendous injustice. Please spread the word, far and wide.

Here is the full audio:

And what follows are transcripts of excerpts from the hearing.

The first several excerpts show the judge’s contemptuous attitude towards Aaron, when Aaron is trying to make valid points or objections. For example, at 5:19 we hear the judge call Aaron “Sport” when Aaron tries to make an objection:

KIMBERLIN: He wrote a blog post that said that I framed him for this alleged assault.

THE COURT: Framed?

KIMBERLIN: That I framed him for this assault, and that I forged the documents from Suburban Hospital, and that I photoshopped pictures of my black eye.

THE COURT: Let me see, you have a copy of that there?

KIMBERLIN: Absolutely. Do you want the Suburban Hospital records?

WALKER: Objection, your honor. That is — that is — records that comes from before 30 days. He’s trying to prove the supposed assault.

THE COURT: Well, this is — now, wait a second. This is–

KIMBERLIN: –Well, I’m just saying, he said that I framed him for an assault. The assault, Judge–

WALKER: –Yes. I would like to object–

THE COURT: –Hey, hang on, Sport. Sit down.

In the second clip, Aaron tries to make a valid objection to Kimberlin’s characterization of statements by third parties, and the judge mocks Aaron, asking if he has any clients. The following clip starts at 9:22:

KIMBERLIN: Yes, here’s his post, “How Brett Kimberlin Tried to Frame Me for a Crime, and How You Can Help.” And he wrote this 30-page document that he put on his blog saying I framed him for an assault.

THE COURT: People honestly read this stuff?

KIMBERLIN: Huh. I–

WALKER: –I’m going to object to this [inaudible]–

THE COURT: –Just hold on, hold on, wait. You could have this thing going for three days. I intend to be finished here in 10 minutes. Go on. Now, people read this stuff, 54 pages. Don’t they have jobs?

KIMBERLIN: So — really.

THE COURT: What the heck’s going on out there in this world?

KIMBERLIN: So not — so on — last week, he got all these bloggers all over the country to create Let’s Blog about Brett Kimberlin Day, over 350 blogs blogged that I framed him. And that led to a number of, probably scores of death threats to me. They threatened my daughter, who is a preteen, my mother, they called on the phone and threatened SWAT teams–

WALKER: But, your honor, I would like to object here. He is characterizing the statements of third parties–

THE COURT [to Aaron]: –You got any clients?!

In this third excerpt, the judge again calls Aaron “sport” and threatens him with incarceration for making a valid objection. At 11:07:

KIMBERLIN: It could have been, except, of these thousands and thousands of tweets, he’s telling people to attack my funders …

THE COURT: Attack your what?

KIMBERLIN: My funders.

WALKER: Your Honor, I would object to the characterization. I would like him to show where I told anyone to attack his funders.

THE COURT: Hey, Sport–

KIMBERLIN: –Okay, it’s right here–

THE COURT [to Walker]: –Where’d you go to Law School?

WALKER: Yale Law School.

THE COURT: What’d they tell you about the Judge?

WALKER: Well, not to upset him, if that’s what you’re trying to get at.

THE COURT: Well, I’m not saying — I said you don’t interrupt when I’m [inaudible].

WALKER: My apologies, Sir.

THE COURT: Have yourself a seat.

WALKER: All right, Sir.

THE COURT: Keep it up, I got a spot for you in the Courthouse.

Kimberlin claimed in the hearing that he had received “scores” of death threats. That is not impossible, of course, but he was never forced to place any proof of that into evidence where it could be scrutinized later. Instead, the court chose to take the word of this convicted perjurer and pathological liar who has uttered one falsehood after another under oath during the past year.

Want to see just how dishonest Brett Kimberlin is? At 13:53 we have this:

WALKER: And you were known as the “Speedway Bomber,” were you not?

KIMBERLIN: I don’t know that.

WALKER: You don’t know that you were known as the Speedway Bomber? Do you not know that you — you never read this before in your life?

KIMBERLIN: I’ve read a lot of things.

He doesn’t know if he has been called the Speedway Bomber. If you believe that, you just might be a judge in Maryland.

The fifth excerpt has to do with Kimberlin’s claim that there is no longer a wrongful death judgment against him. Before you hear that excerpt, a little background is in order. Mark Singer addressed this in Citizen K, at page 348. After hiding money from the DeLongs and never paying them what he owed, Kimberlin believed he had found a loophole:

In October 1995, as the Supreme Court opened its new term, Kimberlin’s cert petititon was indeed denied. By then, however, he had received advice from an Indiana attorney that convinced him he had nothing to fear. “That judgment against me is worthless,” he told me. “I found out Indiana has a statute of limitations on any judgment ten years or older. If they don’t renew it within that period, it’s as if it never happened. And they’ve never bothered to renew it. So none of this matters anymore. I’m home free.”

Kimberlin has often tried to claim that the wrongful death judgment was the product of a corrupt judge who solicited a bribe from Kimberlin. But court decisions make it crystal clear that the judge’s bribery conviction “was not connected to Kimberlin’s case” and there has never been any evidence that the judge did anything improper in Kimberlin’s case — beyond Kimberlin’s opportunistic claims made after the judge’s corruption came to light.

That is what you need to know to understand the following clip, at 16:10, in which Kimberlin tries to bamboozle the judge about the wrongful death case:

WALKER: You had a judgment against you involving the death, it’s the suicide death of Carl DeLong, is that correct?

KIMBERLIN: Uh Judge, that, that, that judgment has been thrown out…

WALKER: I’m asking for a yes or no question…

KIMBERLIN: [Inaudible.]

THE COURT: It was reversed?

KIMBERLIN: It’s been, it’s been nullified. I don’t know what the word is in Indiana, but it’s been nullified.

WALKER: Well, it wasn’t nullified in 1998, when the Parole, when the Parole Commission revoked your parole, is that correct?

KIMBERLIN: The judge in that case solicited a bribe from my attorney and he was…

WALKER: In the Parole case?

KIMBERLIN: He was indicted and sent to jail for 18 years.

THE COURT: That’s very good. I think that’s wonderful.

KIMBERLIN: So that’s what happened in that case.

THE COURT: Well, what did that do to your case?

KIMBERLIN: Well, it resulted in that case .. it no longer …

THE COURT: How did it terminate? With a reversal of conviction?

KIMBERLIN: Considered satis … quote satisfied … I guess is what they called it.

THE COURT: Never heard of that in a criminal case.

KIMBERLIN: It’s not a criminal case, it’s a civil case.

THE COURT: The parole board …

KIMBERLIN: Oh.

THE COURT: The parole board thing?

KIMBERLIN: No, no, that was a civil case where I was found … the judge solicited a bribe and he went to jail, 18 years, extortion, bribery …

THE COURT: It’s got nothing to do with your case, though.

KIMBERLIN: No, no, but he solicited a bribe in my case.

THE COURT: That doesn’t mean the facts, the underlying facts of the case change. It means the judge solicited a bribe. Dirty judge. But it doesn’t change the facts of your case.

KIMBERLIN: The facts of that case are that the judgment is not valid. It’s not valid at this time. It’s not enforceable. It’s, it’s gone.

If so, only due to a technicality exploited by Kimberlin — not because of the judge’s unrelated bribery conviction. Kimberlin is just spinning here.

As Aaron noted, Kimberlin later violated his parole for failing to pay the judgment — something about which he lied about under oath in November 2011, by the way. But that’s another story for another post.

The next clip, at 36:56, shows the judge exhibiting extraordinary sympathy for poor Mr. Kimberlin:

WALKER: Mr. Kimberlin has said that I have filed 100 lawsuits, that it’d be no sweat to file, um, one more. He said that to my friend Patrick Frey.

THE COURT: Hey, but, how’s this going to end?

WALKER: I don’t know–

THE COURT: –Help me along. How do you see it ending?

WALKER: Well, I’m going to tell you [inaudible]–

THE COURT: –I make all my money by predicting the future, okay?

WALKER: Okay.

THE COURT: And that’s how I do it. See, I bet on something, and bang (ph), I make a lot of money.

WALKER: See, this is my–

THE COURT: –Yeah, that’s the way I do it.

WALKER: Ok, you might — you might [inaudible]–.

THE COURT: — How do you see this ending? You two guys put swords to each other’s throats? Hmm? How do you see it ending? You two guys going outside, drawing swords and shooting (ph) each other?

WALKER: No, I will never — I would never resort to violence.

THE COURT: So then, it’s going to — it’s going to be a non-violent ruination of an individual.

In the next clip, the judge accuses Aaron of “starting” the conflict with Kimberlin, and tells him that he can only speak about Kimberlin in public “within reason.” After a lengthy soliloquy about how busy he is in retirement, the judge gets around to telling Aaron to “forget” the seminal Brandenburg case. This is astounding because Brandenburg prohibits the government from proscribing allegedly inciteful speech unless it “is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.” Everyone learns this case in law school — and the standard set forth cannot possibly be met by Aaron’s posts.

In other words, the Supreme Court has ruled on this in a way that shows Aaron is right, and the judge says he doesn’t care.

Then the judge goes into another rambling speech — this time about how, in the old days, you’d settle scores against your enemies by getting some friends to “take them for a ride in the back of the truck.”

I’m not making any of this up.

The clip begins at 39:23:

THE COURT: You still haven’t answered my question. Where do you see this case going?

WALKER: I see–

THE COURT: –You’ve talked for 10 minutes and raised a lot of [inaudible] get excited about you, but I don’t know any other [inaudible] — I want to know, where do you see this thing going?

WALKER: I hope to raise enough of a consciousness to convince the state’s attorney to finally charge him. That’s where I hope it goes. That’s my goal.

THE COURT: And how are you going to do that?

WALKER: Well, I — I can bring some awareness. There’s now 400,000 posts on Google. You — you look up Google, you’ll find 400,000 hits for him, discussing him. And I believe probably at least 300,000 of them are not very pleasant toward him. These are people calling for him filing a charge. I mean –

THE COURT: –But who started this?

WALKER: Who started this? Mr. Kimberlin started this.

THE COURT: No. No. No. You started it.

WALKER: How did I start this?

THE COURT: You Googling all these people and getting them all excited and charge 10 or 11 [inaudible].

WALKER: Okay. In that sense your honor–

THE COURT: –The same way a politician gets elected. He doesn’t want to see everybody. He gets the whole thing going. See? See? See? That–

WALKER: –Well, I understand your honor, but–

THE COURT: –And you’re doing just the same thing, only you’re using [inaudible].

WALKER: But it is my right under the First Amendment to talk about what this man did to me. It is my right to tell the world what he did to me. That — Galloway v. State made it very specific on harassment–

THE COURT: –Within reason, my friend. Within reason.

WALKER: Within reason?

THE COURT: Within reason.

WALKER: I have had a crime committed against me. What is unreasonable about seeking justice?

THE COURT: You know, I shouldn’t say this, but I think you’ve got it twisted. The one who decides to prosecute the crimes is the government–

WALKER: –Of course–

THE COURT: –and only the government, and not you.

WALKER: Of course, Your Honor.

THE COURT: And you’re doing this, I think, under a guise — under this new banner of, “I’ve got the right to do.” You can’t. You can’t. Suppose you didn’t like a girl and you wanted to talk about her chastity. He feels the same way. He feels violated. And [inaudible] you have to look at the reasonableness between the two of you on the content. That’s why said, “Where’s this going?”

WALKER: But, Your Honor–

THE COURT: –This is going to you guys shooting — shooting each other, in my opinion.

WALKER: Well, Your Honor, that is absolutely–

THE COURT: –You plan to be peaceful (ph). I think — you know, I’m Irish, okay, and one of the things the Irish are best at in the world is boxing. And a real good Irish middleweight is a counterpuncher. He doesn’t throw the first punch, but, boy, he lets the second one go, and he’s got ya, see?

WALKER: Well, Your Honor–

THE COURT: –You’ve decided to battle, and he comes back. And see, you’re — you — you’re the kind of guy, you don’t want to get into this to settle this, mano y mano. You want to get all these friends who got nothing else to do with their time, in this judge’s opinion, because — my God, I’m a little bit older than you are, and I haven’t got enough time in the day to do all the things I want to do. And I thought by retirement, I would have less to do. I got more! Because everybody knows I’m free! So they all come to me. But you, you are starting a — a conflagration, for lack of a better word, and you’re just letting the thing go recklessly no matter where it goes. I mean, you get some — and I’m going to use word I (ph) — freak somewhere up Oklahoma, got nothing better to do with his time, so he does the nastiest things in the world he can do to this poor gentleman. What right has that guy got to do it?

WALKER: He has no right to do that, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Well, he’s — you incited him.

WALKER: But, your honor, I did not incite him within the Brandenburg standard though.

THE COURT: Forget Bradenburg [sic]. Let’s go by Vaughey right now, and common sense out in the world. But you know, where I grew up in Brooklyn, when that stuff was pulled, it was settled real quickly.

WALKER: I’m not sure what that means, your honor.

THE COURT: –Very quickly. And I’m not going to talk about those ways, but boy, it ended fast. I even can tell you, when I grew up in my community, you wanted to date an Italian girl, you had to get the Italian boy’s permission. But that was the old neighborhoods back in the city. And it was really fair. When someone did something up there to you, your sister, your girlfriend, you got some friends to take them for a ride in the back of the truck.

WALKER: Well, Your Honor, what–

THE COURT: –That ended it. You guys have got this new mechanical stuff out here, the electronic stuff, that you can just ruin somebody without doing anything. But you started it.

All emphasis is mine.

And now we lead into the final clip — perhaps the most outrageous one of all — in which the judge blatantly violates the Constitution by imposing an illegal prior restraint on Aaron’s speech. This is at 46:01:

THE COURT: So what I’m going to do is I am going to pass this Peace Order, and it’s going to remain in effect, sir, for six months. So this is May 15, [inaudible] June, July, August, September, October, November–

WALKER: –Your Honor, if I could say one thing here–

THE COURT: –No, you can’t. Now, you — that’s what you’ve got *** the Appeals Court’s over there.

WALKER: Okay, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. All right, sir, this Order shall remain in effect until 11-15 2012. During that period of time, you not — shall commit any act that causes in person (ph) fear and apprehension of bodily harm, any act that places the gentleman in fear and apprehension of grave bodily harm, any assault, rape, attempted rape, sex offense, false imprisonment, harassment, stalking, [inaudible] or malicious destruction of property. The Respondent shall not contact the person in person, by telephone, in writing or any other means, and any other means is putting it on a blog, a Tweet, a megaphone, a — smoke signals — what else is out there — sonar, radar, laser, nothing.

WALKER: So I’m not allowed to speak about him for 6 months? How about the First Amendment?

THE COURT: How many times have you been interrupting? And you shall not contact or harass him in any way. You shall not enter his residence, wherever he may be living. You shall remain away from his place of employment, wherever that may be, he may be employed.

Now, let me get to the — now, should this — should you violate this order, sir, you are subject to being prosecuted by the state’s attorney’s office as a criminal case, and if found guilty, the maximum penalty for the first violation is 90 days in jail and/or it’s a $500 fine, could be a $1,000 fine. Or worse than that, you could be in contempt of this court, where you could — I could do anything that I deem necessary to keep you away from — or e-mailing him or Twitting him or Googling him or Tooting him or smoking (ph) him, whatever phrase you use. I don’t know if [inaudible]. Thank you [inaudible].

KIMBERLIN: No, Judge, I want to thank you (ph)–.

THE COURT: No, No, No, just don’t — don’t say anything to me. Don’t say anything to me. I’m just a — I’m just a civil servant doing my job.

All hail the civil servant.

314 Responses to “Audio and Transcripts from the Hearing Where Aaron Walker Was Arrested for Blogging About a Public Figure”

  1. Brett Kimberlin feels violated! And so Aaron Walker must shut up, so that Brett Kimberlin can stop feeling violated.

    Patterico (feda6b)

  2. I am comforted to some degree by the Circuit Court judge who heard Aaron’s appeal from the first Peace Order — he commented about how people feel like they have a constitutional right to not be annoyed by others, and wondered aloud how that idea first got planted.

    He should call up Judge Vaughey and ask him that question.

    shipwreckedcrew (5dfa92)

  3. Was it Heinlein who said, (paraphrase) “In any sufficiently advanced society, civil servant translates as civil master.”?

    Have Blue (8743b5)

  4. I’m not a lawyer or anything, but it seems this judge basically flipped off the Supreme Court?? lol

    Connee (88ac0e)

  5. THE COURT: — How do you see this ending? You two guys put swords to each other’s throats? Hmm? How do you see it ending? You two guys going outside, drawing swords and shooting (ph) each other?

    WALKER: No, I will never — I would never resort to violence.

    THE COURT: So then, it’s going to — it’s going to be a non-violent ruination of an individual.

    The judge doesn’t even realize he’s talking to the man who’s being nonviolently (at least so far). Walker’s out of a job because of Kimberlin’s threats, and now he’s subject to an unconstitutional gag order. And the judge is worried about all the harm being done to Kimberlin.

    Yeah, and I noticed the mixed metaphor, too.

    “We’re going to draw our swords, then fire them at each other at 10 paces, and we’ll see who get’s shot!”

    Where did they dig up this judge?

    Steve (958caf)

  6. Who appointed this judge to the court? Was he (gag) elected by the people?

    liontooth (c33c1e)

  7. Oh. My. God. This is outrageous.

    DA Munroe (6ea644)

  8. Forget Bradenburg [sic]. Let’s go by Vaughey right now, and common sense out in the world.

    This judge is used to being the final authority. He is no more subject to being overruled than Judge Wapner is!

    Except that Judge Wapner tried to go by some sort of standard law, and he only could award or not award money (which was actually paid for by the producers of “The People’s Court”)

    He never arrogated to himself to issue injunctions regarding future conduct.

    (although in the pilot episode of Sliders, he was Commissar Wapner and sentenced people to long terms of imprisonment)

    Sammy Finkelman (a78b17)

  9. So how did Kimberlin get out of prison in 2001? Did he somehow manage to get parole again? And if so, why weren’t the same conditions imposed on him, and why isn’t someone taking all of this to the Federal Parole Board to get it revoked again? And if he’s not on parole, then how is he out? He seems to claim he got some super-secret “exoneration” that he can’t discuss, but surely there’s no such thing. Can there be a secret presidential pardon or commutation? And even if such a thing exists, how could he possibly have got one from W Bush?

    Milhouse (312124)

  10. This judge needs to be disbarred. He appears to not posess even a working knowledge of law.

    Substantial capital has to be raised and expensed in a hurry. This is a remarkable opportunity to make some compelling legal points.

    Rod Boyd (fa3dce)

  11. This judge should have a complaint filed against him with both the Maryland state court system and the state bar association for judicial misconduct. His total indifference to caselaw, unreasonable and uncalled-for hostility to Mr. Walker and his failure to render proper relief to Mr. Walker which recognized the obvious — that Kimberlin is a charlatan and agitator who regularly abuses judicial process and has filed scores of frivolous civil suits in order to harass his critics — is simply contemptible and, frankly, dismaying for those of us who like to believe that judges are generally people of integrity who possess sound legal acumen.

    Guy Jones (006707)

  12. I have often explained to my children that we are not ruled by a king, but by a constitution.

    I see now that that constitution is a living constitution, implemented not by free people governing themselves but by civil servants ruling in their name.

    How naive I have been.

    Amphipolis (d3e04f)

  13. “Forget Brandenburg”?????? Jesus, I’m not even a lawyer and I know this is obscene behavior on the part of the judge. Can you imagine him saying “Forget Miranda”?

    What a pompous, doddering old fool this clown is. Hey, does that last comment mean someone could make a case against me in Maryland?

    radar (257ad5)

  14. Judge Vaughey really seems to make Maryland Law the biggest ass in all of this

    Neo (d1c681)

  15. It seems pretty clear to me that the judge is senile. It is hard to imagine how he could act as he does otherwise. He is also so out of touch with modern society and technology that he has no business sitting on a case like this.

    Aaron cites constitutional precedent and the judge cites how he did things when he was growing up in some ass-backwards hellhole. Idiot!

    Voluble (6bfee6)

  16. Brandenberg, suggests inflammatory speech, have we gotten to a point, where the mere truth is inflammatory. Aaron’s one failing, was that the believed the law would be abided by, but as withNikolai Tolstoy and Rachel Ehrenfeld, to cite two examples, from Perfidious Albion, that is by no means true.

    narciso (494474)

  17. I detect a pattern that the judge interrupted Aaron far more than Aaron interrupted the judge.

    What’s worse is that the judge never allowed Aaron to present his defense.

    The judge wasn’t interested in hearing Aaron’s side. And he was rude to Aaron.

    Unfortunately, because I followed another case in Maryland, I am told that this is uncommon practice in Maryland. Unfettered, uncontrolled liberalism in Maryland is driving people away.

    One of the weaknesses in the legal system is that the common people cannot afford fair and speedy trials.

    lurker9876 (e62692)

  18. Would someone please remind me of Aaron Walker’s blog address so that I can read firsthand his comments about Kimberlin?

    Denver Todd (9c71c9)

  19. __________________________________________________

    Judge Vaughey responds: “Forget Bradenburg [sic]. Let’s go by Vaughey right now.”

    One of the forum regulars here was applying the word “idiot” last night to someone other than Cornelius Vaughey. That word actually is a perfect fit for the judge, along with “bloated ego” to describe a person who refers to himself in the third person.

    As for why anyone believes Vaughey deserves the benefit of the doubt in the way he dealt with Worthing (I still think of him based on his time blogging here) now seems more and more absurd as the full transcript of the hearing comes out.

    I’m close to betting the Million Dollar Lotto that Vaughey’s tone towards Walker dripped with both condescension and resentment because the judge’s liberal biases made him sympathize with Kimberlin the same way that various Hollywood leftists feel towards any number of contemptible ultra-liberal icons—eg, Fidel Castro more recently, Stalin and Mao in the past. But, of course, when one’s heart is in the right place, the ends justify the means, and a judge like Vaughey can be sickeningly irresponsible and foolish without having to say he’s sorry.

    we hear the judge call Aaron “Sport” when Aaron tries to make an objection

    the judge again calls Aaron “sport”

    The next clip, at 36:56, shows the judge exhibiting extraordinary sympathy for poor Mr. Kimberlin:

    Mark (cf1348)

  20. Outstanding post, Pat.

    I wonder if Kimberlin somehow timed this in order to get this particular judge. An awful judge.

    And Aaron really did do a good job, considering what he was up against. I read people saying that we should feel no sympathy for Aaron because they had been told he was showing contempt.

    Guess what, folks: Neal pretends to be one of us under a horde of sockpuppets, and then smears people. You will see many say that we should just drop this. Maybe because if we don’t, Obama will win reelection, or maybe because of smears against Aaron, Patrick, Liberty Chick, RSM or Stranahan. Don’t believe them.

    I also have to add, what if Aaron had been saying the stuff this judge said about throwing someone in the back of a truck? I don’t understand how Aaron’s peaceful blogging is wrong, but the judge’s attitude is OK. I think he simply didn’t understand the internet and was trying to force nostalgia, but his story sounds like he actually lionizes bullies.

    Kimberlin, Neal, and Ron use a variety of tactics. Together we see smearing, posing as your friend to betray you (something that is common and pretty stressful about this fiasco), we see swatting (if you accept that Ron is the voice of the swatter, which I personally am convinced of), and we see incredibly aggressive lying on the stand in court, resulting in injustice.

    They could do this to any of us. They could silence you by lying to a judge who doesn’t respect the rule of law. So many who cherish their freedom have reacted to these stories by standing up against them.

    Dustin (330eed)

  21. More of a Judge Judy approach, methinks.

    Simon Jester (d7dbd9)

  22. Just added excerpts cut by Lee Stranahan.

    Patterico (feda6b)

  23. Radar,

    You’re just mad because the judge mentioned you by name in his judgement and declaried you a prohibited method of communication.

    Seriously, to this Judge, the Internet is as incomprehensible as RADAR. He’s in his 70s? So are my in-laws, and they know the friggin’ difference between email and RADAR.

    Pious Agnostic (7c3d5b)

  24. As an attorney for over 30 years, 25 of which were spent as a federal prosecutor, I must say I’m appalled at the demeanor of the magistrate I see in these excerpts. The animus revealed here by the magistrate toward Walker is palpable, as though the magistrate had had a very negative prior experience with him. But as I understand it this was the first appearance by Walker before this magistrate. So what gives?

    Folks, were this my case, I’d be finding out the answer to this question immediately, because there appears to be something else going on here, and it’s wrong. I’d be investigating this magistrate’s connections, politically and personally.

    And not just because of the apparent bias in the transcript: we know from his past how Kimblerin is willing to abuse the judicial process. It wouldn’t surprise me in the least that Kimberlin found a way to get to the magistrate and ensure a favorable response long before the hearing began. It appears to me the magistrate either knows Kimberlin personally or by reputation, or has been “educated” beforehand.

    Aaron Walker desperately needs a lawyer. NOW. He also needs high-level forensic and technical assistance, because Kimberlin is clearly able to cover his own tracks as well as spoof addresses and communications so as to make it appear to judges and magistrates (who are almost almost universally ignorant of what even a modestly skilled computer hacker can do) that someone has said or done something online which they in truth have not.

    Kimberlin is miles ahead in his skills, his strategy and his willingness to do virtually anything to subvert justice to achieve his cynical purposes. Kimberlin has access to virtually unlimited funds; he has experience in how to unjustly blacken the name of whatever poor soul falls in his sights; and he certainly has the willingness to do whatever is called for to win. I submit that decent law-abiding members of society need to organize to protect our political and judicial process from being hijacked by Kimberlin and his Soros-funded allies in the Democrat Party. There needs to be an organized and well-funded response just to protect what we hold dear from being subverted.

    It’s going to take money and people to keep Kimberlin from running roughshod over the basic rights of everyone he politically opposes. Because he will keep doing this despicable kind of thing until he is stopped cold.

    Sardondi (f9b7e8)

  25. Hmm… in an odd sort of way, Vaughey stated, through the peace order, that Walker is not even allowed to appeal his ruling until mid-November.

    After all, if Walker appeals the ruling he will have caused not only contact to be made, but will be speaking, writing, etc. about “the other person”.

    While I agree that the appeal process is (should be?) outside that order, it wouldn’t surprise me in the least if “the other person” attempts to use such contact as a violation. Not to mention all the “e-mailing him or Twitting him or Googling him or Tooting him or smoking (ph) him” that “the other person” brings onto himself with the self-requested reports from other people discussing this travesty….

    Dilligas (cc8ddb)

  26. This hearing was no accident, I hope this opens the eyes of many of what we are up against in the progressive courts. This is not a game folks as the Judge says and encourages this is life or death. Start understanding your enemy for he has powerful friends. and stop bringing a squirt gun to a gun fight that is using real bullets. This is not a Sport as the judge likes to say of Aaron although Aaron was the prey before he ever walked into the court room. The cell was cleaned out and waiting for him before he ever woke up.

    Sanmon (98e434)

  27. I know I’m beating a dead horse, but it amazes me that the Judge is ruling on a case that hinges on whether or not internet communication constitutes harassment, and he thinks that “Googling” is something that someones does to someone else.

    I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect the judge on a case to have a basic grounding in what the case if supposed to be about. Am I naive?

    Pious Agnostic (7c3d5b)

  28. Indeed, Dilligas, I would be shocked if Kimberlin didn’t cite all the criticism of this backwards ruling as a violation of the peace order, even though Aaron did not personally instigate it.

    Kimberlin and the judge were crediting Stranahan’s initiative to Aaron. Why not everything else?

    And maybe Vaughey will file a peace order against Patterico or the insightful commenter Sardondi for writing critical things about him!

    This is the direction things are headed in. Maryland’s laws in peace orders were designed for emergencies, and are being abused. I suspect that this will lead to reforms that will probably make it more difficult for those in actual need to get a peace order. That’s Vaughey’s fault. That’s the MD State Attorney’s fault too. These two combined reward perjury instead of punishing it. That’s one basic way Maryland’s system puts an honest and just man at a severe disadvantage.

    Dustin (330eed)

  29. I’m just a civil servant doing my job.

    How encouraging!

    Jay (4f25cc)

  30. Aaron Walker needs to not represent himself in court.

    What’s the saying about a guy who has himself for a lawyer?

    FUBAR (bdb541)

  31. Kimberlin is an obvious sociopath and this judge is totally clueless about the 1st Amendment to the Constitution regarding FREE Speech.

    Please, someone…get Walker a good litigating lawyer and sue these bast**ds.

    crypticguise (82d864)

  32. In the Libby case, Walton didn’t care about the law,
    in Stevens, Sullivan did much the same, only retroactively after the Senate race did it matter.
    Whoever failed to reign in Earle, didn’t either, are you noticing a pattern?

    narciso (494474)

  33. Mark,

    Maybe you and Sardondi are right. Maybe this is a judge who, while condemning judges who take money to influence a decision, will gladly let friendship or political ideology influence his decision. Or maybe he simply wants to protect victims and he’s made a bad judgment about who the victim is here.

    I don’t know but I’m willing to be convinced –either way — as we learn more.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  34. The judge over stepped his bounds by choosing to willfully ignore SC president. However Walker was also an idiot for not listening and responding to the Judge. The judge was moving to stop what he saw as a developing and potentially violent vendetta. Once the judge made this statement it was time to stop arguing the law and start arguing based on the emotions of the judge.

    James (158ce8)

  35. For those serious about complaining about Judge Vaughey, here is the site for Maryland’s Commission on Judicial Disabilities–and you don’t have to be a MD resident or party to complain, it’s “open to all!”:

    http://www.courts.state.md.us/cjd/complaint.html

    JewishOdysseus (57038c)

  36. Or worse than that, you could be in contempt of this court, where you could — I could do anything that I deem necessary to keep you away from — or e-mailing him or Twitting him or Googling him or Tooting him or smoking (ph) him, whatever phrase you use. I don’t know if [inaudible]. Thank you [inaudible].

    How on earth can the judge rule that he cannot do things that he plainly doesn’t even know what they are? Like googling? That’s insane.

    Lea (b59bf7)

  37. As with any incompetent “public servant,” the judge here deserves all the scorn and ridicule that is hopefully coming his way.

    JVW (4d72aa)

  38. _____________________________________________

    Or maybe he simply wants to protect victims and he’s made a bad judgment about who the victim is here.

    DRJ, this case is peanuts compared with what I observed back in 1995. I recall arguing until I was blue in the face with two people who were otherwise somewhat sensible or reliable (one of the two leaned right in general, the other one was ideologically squishy) about the likely guilt of OJ Simpson. For some odd reason they couldn’t help but sympathize and give a million benefits of the doubt to that murderer, albeit a famous one. That was one of my original wake-up calls on the phenomenon of this:

    prismdecision.com:

    Here’s a typical pattern in collaborative decision-making. A team meets, works through a series of issues and reaches agreement on a course of action. They leave the meeting confident that there is consensus and alignment. They begin to act on the details of their agreement. In the days and weeks that follow, however, it becomes increasingly apparent that team members have left the meeting with different and sometimes conflicting interpretations of their agreement.

    Yes, team members sometimes lack integrity and speculate on ulterior motives. However, very often the scenario described above results from the “Rashomon effect,” named for Akira Kurosawa’s cinematic masterpiece, Rashomon. In the film, four individuals witness an horrific crime. Each then recounts the story with absolute honesty but in mutually contradictory ways. The Rashomon effect is the “effect of the subjectivity of perception on recollection, by which observers of an event are able to produce substantially different but equally plausible accounts of it.”

    ^ This is a big reason why I’m far more leery about human nature. It doesn’t even include the way that people’s personal biases also shape their perceptions (and opinions) of an individual (eg, a politician), event or controversy.

    To me it’s almost a slam-dunk that Vaughey’s left-leaning sentiments magnified the “Rashomon Effect” on him, regardless of his knowledge or ignorance about things like Google, Facebook, Twitter, the internet, cell phones, computers, etc.

    Mark (cf1348)

  39. The seems to be a clear prior restraint. Unconstitutional. Illegal. So where is the writ seeking immediate vacation of the “judge’s” order?

    Was this a hearing with even 48 hours notice? If so, did Walker submit even a small brief re First Amdt?

    Do Judges get taught the constitution anymore? Or just make it up as they go along –”within reason?”

    Harcourt Fenton Mudd (329cc1)

  40. Milhouse and gang,

    Kimberlin was sentenced under the old revolving-door system, before Congress removed most discretion from the system with truth-in-sentencing and sentencing guidelines reforms. IMHO guidelines unreasonably tie the hands of judges, but it was unreasonable judges who brought that on the profession themselves. When the public doesn’t trust judges, expect judges’ discretion to be throttled.

    So Kimberlin had to be paroled under the old system, and offered good time under the old system. Now, a guy who gets fifty years in the fed system would do at least forty. But the legal changes that made that happen are not retroactive.

    Ultimately, most people who go to prison get out. And most prisoners who get out at less than social security age return to crime. This is especially true of violent felons like Kimberlin. QED.

    Unrelated question: Some practicing attorney please tell me that judges this senile are rare. Please?

    Kevin R.C. O'Brien (3bd484)

  41. As a Marylander, my fervent wish is that this judge will become the laughingstock of the State and will be reluctant to show his impressively idiotic face in public ever after.

    Joe Miller (00407a)

  42. Remember that Judge Vaughey is a senior/retired judge, and therefore much older than most.

    In my experience, I’ve always enjoyed working w/senior judges, they have always showed a broader perspective, they really know the law, and they were NOT full of themselves–in fact, the opposite.

    But I do not practice in MD.

    JewishOdysseus (57038c)

  43. I just wanted to note, for those who have expressed this concern: Aaron has a lawyer now.

    And I’ve looked into it and it appears he has a very good one. Which is an answered prayer for many.

    It’s a shame Aaron cannot blog about this himself because the state of Maryland may arrest him for doing so. I’m amazed at the changes to my country over the past ten years or so.

    Dustin (330eed)

  44. Is “Sport” now an acceptable way to address someone in court? Right there I could have predicted how this was going to turn out. Somehow I’m not surprised that he chose to ignore the Supreme Court–after all, he’s a judge in Maryland!

    rochf (f3fbb0)

  45. ______________________________________________

    Some practicing attorney please tell me that judges this senile are rare.

    I observe people like Warren Buffett (or certainly George Soros), well past the age of grade school and college — well past the age of raising a young family — who continue to be wedded to liberal sentiments, and I think that unless such a condition can be attributed to senility, it’s a cop-out to blame that innate bias on an aging mind. Of course, that’s assuming left-leaning emotions aren’t intrinsically “senile.”

    The saying of the day:

    “If you’re not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you’re not a conservative at forty you have no brain.”

    Mark (cf1348)

  46. …and at seventy you reminisce fondly about the good old days when disputes were settled with a little kidnapping, riverside battery and attempted murder.

    Pious Agnostic (7c3d5b)

  47. I think all the ink spilled about the courtroom demeanor (of Aaron, of the judge, etc.) is overstated.

    Yes, I think Aaron made some “mistakes” interrupting the judge here and there, but I don’t think it was as bad as reported, and I don’t think they had any bearing on the outcome. The greater mistake was not answering the question that the judge asked, and trying to lead the judge into the thick weeds. But Kimberlin did the same thing, too. It’s very frustrating for a judge to ask a specific question, and have the litigant not answer the question but instead, talk about what HE wants to talk about. But even then, I think the judge got the answers to questions eventually, and I don’t think it bore on the final outcome.

    I disagree with those who think that Aaron hurt himself by sparring with the judge. Aaron had the floor about five times more than Kimberlin, and was able to present his case thoroughly. I’m sure Aaron had more to say (he always does), but it wasn’t relevant to the peace order — a point the judge had to say several times.

    And the judges’ demeanor, under the circumstances, was fine. Aaron got a little combative and seemed (a couple of times) to avoid answering the question the judge directed to him; the judge had to take him down a little. It happens all the time.

    Brandenburg obviously controls here, and the Brandenburg test is relevant. But I foresee a problem in that the judge (arguably) made a finding of fact that Aaron’s intent was to harass (“And you’re doing this, I think, under a guise — under this new banner of, ‘I’ve got the right to do.’ You can’t.”). That’s the prong of the Brandenburg test that saves (or should save) Aaron. And “the determination of an accused’s intention is, in the first instance, for the trial judge, when sitting without a jury, and this determination will not be disturbed on appeal unless clearly erroneous.”   State v. Raines, 326 Md. 582, 590, 606 A.2d 265, 268 (1992).

    Kman (5576bf)

  48. Endlessly rehashing the judge’s stupidity won’t move the ball downfield. Where’s the legal defense fund? He needs to appeal, and he needs some first amendment expertise, maybe at a pro bono rate. Nice if the mainstream media could chime in with an amicus curiae brief, although probably not realistic, since they see blogs not censorhip as the greater threat in their little world.

    Bud Norton (29550d)

  49. KIMBERLIN: So not — so on — last week, he got all these bloggers all over the country to create Let’s Blog about Brett Kimberlin Day, over 350 blogs blogged that I framed him. And that led to a number of, probably scores of death threats to me…

    WALKER: But, your honor, I would like to object here. He is characterizing the statements of third parties–

    THE COURT [to Aaron]: –You got any clients?!

    WALKER: Well, I — I can bring some awareness. There’s now 400,000 posts on Google. You — you look up Google, you’ll find 400,000 hits for him, discussing him. And I believe probably at least 300,000 of them are not very pleasant toward him. These are people calling for him filing a charge. I mean –

    THE COURT: –But who started this?

    WALKER: Who started this? Mr. Kimberlin started this.

    THE COURT: No. No. No. You started it.

    WALKER: How did I start this?

    THE COURT: You Googling all these people and getting them all excited and charge 10 or 11 [inaudible].

    Based on these two segments, I don’t think the judge understands how the internet works. And I don’t think the judge understands what Google is or how it works.

    It seems that he thinks that Aaron spent days contacting 350 people to blog about the story, which is why he questioned whether Aaron has any clients. And he seems to think that Aaron contacted these 350 people or 400,000 people personally via Google.

    aunursa (199523)

  50. The tipoff is that ‘Kimberlin v. White’ puts the lie to the reputation he’s been building as victim for years. In addition, I see no proof of that other claim made against the judge who revoked his parole,

    narciso (494474)

  51. Was it Heinlein who said, (paraphrase) “In any sufficiently advanced society, civil servant translates as civil master.”?

    Most smart things were at one point or another said by Heinlein, so it’s possible.

    Random (fba0b1)

  52. Cue Mark squawking the “librulizm is fer dummies” canard…

    Leviticus (e445f5)

  53. Under the wording of the ruling, is Aaron allowed to email a third party with information about Kimberlin? That does not constitute “contacting” him in any way.

    And if that third party takes the content of the email and blogs it, it isn’t anything Aaron did, so it couldn’t be covered by the order, right?

    Or would this moron rule it contempt of court?

    The Monster (e2c448)

  54. It’s the only point he seems able to make in his own words, without a block of copypasta.

    Leviticus (e445f5)

  55. Great job on this. Still going through it but this judge should have stayed retired.

    Harrison (975823)

  56. It wasn’t until I got to the judge’s diatribe about the Irish and boxing that I decided Vaughey is a full-blown Capt. Queeg.

    CrustyB (69f730)

  57. I’m not a lawyer or anything, but it seems this judge basically flipped off the Supreme Court?? lol

    Comment by Connee — 6/4/2012 @ 1:01 am

    That’s about the shape of it.

    That and waxing nostalgic about the days you could get your friends together and use violence and the threat of violence to adjust the behavior of one guy to your liking.

    However, several people speaking freely and honestly about a situation? That’s unconscionable (and cowardly) bullying, in Cornelius J. Vaughey’s view of life. No wonder he sympathized so much with poor Mr. Brett Kimberlin. No wonder he despised Aaron Walker.

    And no wonder he trashed Supreme Court precedent on the First Amendment … and substituted in its place “Vaughey’s Way”, akin to “Kimberlin’s Way”.

    Random (fba0b1)

  58. Leviticus,

    It does tend to amuse me that Mark does not understand how a person can be intelligent and decent and grow up preferring lefty views.

    I know a lot of people like that. Some of the smartest men and women I know are lefties on many matters. I think they are wrong in their opinions, but it’s not a very big deal.

    I worry that this kind of argument is a major distraction from what everyone, left and right, can see is a severe injustice.

    Dustin (330eed)

  59. No wonder he sympathized so much with poor Mr. Brett Kimberlin. No wonder he despised Aaron Walker.

    that was my reaction too, when I noticed that part.

    Tossing a person in the back of the truck to rough him up is something Aaron simply could never do, even if it was within his power. Brett on the other hand… Judge Vaughey on the other hand…

    Dustin (330eed)

  60. And not just because of the apparent bias in the transcript: we know from his past how Kimblerin is willing to abuse the judicial process. It wouldn’t surprise me in the least that Kimberlin found a way to get to the magistrate and ensure a favorable response long before the hearing began. It appears to me the magistrate either knows Kimberlin personally or by reputation, or has been “educated” beforehand.

    Sardondi, this thought occurred to me, too. Kimberlin does go on a great deal about how he’s been victimized by the corruption in the judicial process (and government in general, but that’s a separate topic). Sociopath’s project, among other things. They see themselves as victims of the same motives and behaviors in which they victimize other people.

    I.E. his parole was revoked because the judge accepted a bribe, when that isn’t what happened in his case. I.E. the parole board had an animus against him, when he created the appearance of animus by accusing Dan Quayle of buying pot from him back when he was a college student, then accused the parole board of making him a political prisoner as a favor to Dan Quayle (Kimberlin v. White). I could go on.

    In point of fact, he’s no victim but he corrupts the system to victimize others. I’m not saying at all he corrupted this magistrate. Actually, although the question did occur to me though, I then concluded it’s not necessary to go that way.

    Kimberlin certainly did manipulate him; sociopaths are highly manipulative. I believe the term is gaslighting; he provides a slightly altered version of reality that makes it appear his accuser must be unbalanced.

    Worthing’s major mistake is that he went in thinking all he needed was the facts and the law. Kimberlin knew he just had to play the judge like a fish. Kimberlin was far, far better at reading this judge, and manipulating him, than Aaron could ever hope to be. I’m sure if Kimberlin had never encountered this judge before (a big if, I’d like to see how many hundreds of his lawsuits had ever involved this judge) he could read him like a book. For instance the judge has grandkids, Kimberlin established a connection by talking about his preteen daughter. How would the judge feel if his preteen daughter was “googling” death threats (to put it in the judge’s conception).

    We can all see that that the judge did not base his decision on the facts or the law. He didn’t even require Kimberlin to prove his allegations. And the judge was much harder on Worthing (sorry, I keep using his nom de blog) to the point of threatening him with criminal sanction.

    I said on a different thread that it’s no surprise to anyone that Kimberlin is a sociopath, but it’s interesting and valuable to listen to a tape of how they operate. I firmly believe we’ve listened to a textbook example of a victim being manipulated by a sociopath as well.

    Steve (958caf)

  61. Was the trial held in Valkenvania?

    bofh (bdc1eb)

  62. Shorter version:

    Worthing went in to this with stacks of documentation and legal references thinking that Judge “I care about Bradenburg” was going to decide this.

    Kimberlin went in there knowing he wanted Grampaw “I don’t care about Bradenburg” deciding this.

    Game, set, match to the sociopath. Sociopaths can be very successful at getting what they want, you know.

    Steve (958caf)

  63. You keep insisting that the law matters in these circumstances, I’m sorry that just isn’t so;

    http://www.frontiersman.com/news/palin-stalkers-released/article_00b268b4-ad31-11e1-9886-001a4bcf887a.html

    narciso (494474)

  64. ______________________________________________

    Cue Mark squawking the “librulizm is fer dummies” canard…

    And, Leviticus, cue my saying that just as long as people of the left don’t believe they’re imbued with greater compassion, generosity, humaneness and sophistication than the average person and certainly their political opposites have — and definitely that they’re boosted with greater common sense than they’d otherwise have — I can’t hold their leftism against them as much as I do towards those who believe their ideological impulses are pure, wonderful, non-selfish and golden.

    Which is a good segue to Cornelius Vaughey displaying a certain twisted, ironic sympathy to vigilante justice, based on this sarcastic, and yet accurate, interpretation of some of the comments he made during the hearing:

    …and at seventy you reminisce fondly about the good old days when disputes were settled with a little kidnapping, riverside battery and attempted murder.

    ^ Although Vaughey applied this type of musing to the predicament of Walker, in light of the absurdly one-sided comments he, the judge, ended up making in deference to Kimberlin, it actually possible illustrates the deep-seated sympathy that Vaughey feels for the ruthlessness of Kimberlin. I wouldn’t put it past the judge to have perverted Kimberlin’s activities by filtering it into a form of “Occupy Wall Street” do-gooderism, or a struggle against the forces of evil, the heroic proletariat fighting the good cause.

    If so, Vaughey would be similar to the various liberal politicians in cities like Los Angeles who bent over backwards to accommodate weeks of disruptive protests, camp outs, loitering, and destruction of public property, but only because it emanated from the left and not from, say, the Tea Party.

    Mark (cf1348)

  65. Sorry. Brandenburg.

    Steve (958caf)

  66. And I’ve looked into it and it appears he has a very good one [lawyer].

    Randazza?

    Random (fba0b1)

  67. I observe people like Warren Buffett (or certainly George Soros), well past the age of grade school and college — well past the age of raising a young family — who continue to be wedded to liberal sentiments, and I think that unless such a condition can be attributed to senility, it’s a cop-out to blame that innate bias on an aging mind. Of course, that’s assuming left-leaning emotions aren’t intrinsically “senile.”

    This. The judge wasn’t senile.

    Random (fba0b1)

  68. Mark, I think you guys are way overthinking this. As Patterico has noted, Kimberlin isn’t even a real leftie. He just knows how to play on leftie sympathies to his own ends. It’s what sociopaths do for a living.

    He might have concluded that Vaughey was a leftie. That just made him easier for him to manipulate. It doesn’t mean the judge went in there with the intention of imposing his biases. It may have been a part.

    But it’s the emotional connection that Mr. Brett “I was just a teenaged perjurer, Grampaw” Kimberlin made with Mr. Vaughey the retiree that won the day.

    Steve (958caf)

  69. ________________________________________________

    It does tend to amuse me that Mark does not understand how a person can be intelligent and decent and grow up preferring lefty views.

    Actually, Dustin, it’s interesting you reference the matter of intelligence, since it’s often the left that ascribes a lack of such to people on the right. I’ve never equated one’s level of intelligence to his or her ideological biases, and, if anything, I’m fully aware that someone like an Albert Einstein, no less — not to mention a Warren Buffett — may be of the left.

    That’s why my interest has always been the way that various adherents of liberal ideology are triggered by a belief that their sentiments — their gut biases — are full of great compassion, generosity, tolerance, sophistication, worldliness and, yes, intelligence.

    Mark (cf1348)

  70. This judge’s cheese has slipped off its cracker.

    Jeffersonian (4ce4f8)

  71. Up until about 2 months ago, as a convicted perjorer, Brett Kimberlin’s testimony would not have been legal in Maryland. However it seems that sometime in March or April, both houses passed bills to allow them to testify if they were a witness or victim. I can’t see whether the bill has passed overall, but they seem to have got “unfavorable”s from the judiciary committees.

    http://www.carrollcountytimes.com/news/local/state-s-attorney-s-office-looking-to-change-testimony-allowance/article_0682420a-7203-572e-9157-ba607515fe1c.html

    So where does this leave all the court proceedings before these bills were passed?

    Nancy Gilly (06c781)

  72. This case presents a wonderful opportunity for review of the competence of the trial judge; and if not his disbarment, at least removal from the bench.

    AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92)

  73. It’s a shame Aaron cannot blog about this himself because the state of Maryland may arrest him for doing so.

    Surely the order is void, and he can ignore it. Surely any officer who would arrest him for it has only qualified immunity, which means he’d be subject to a Bivens suit for such a blatant violation of the law — and being warned of that would think twice before doing so. Or if he he did arrest Aaron, surely his house and pension would be adequate compensation. No?

    Milhouse (312124)

  74. Where did they dig up this judge?
    Comment by Steve — 6/4/2012 @ 1:14 am

    – Literally!

    Icy (e8e25c)

  75. I made fun of Aaron for promoting “my BLOCKBUSTER STORY” under the masthead of his blog back when it wasn’t all that blockbuster (although it was bad for him and his wife). However, darned if it isn’t a BLOCKBUSTER FIRST AMENDMENT story now.

    Intentionally or not, Aaron was prescient.

    Random (fba0b1)

  76. Kevin R.C. O’Brien, my question is not answered. I know he was sentenced under the old system which is why he was eligible for parole in 1994. But did he get paroled again in 2001? I have not seen any mention of that anywhere. If he was, then how can he be free of conditions? Surely he must still be under the parole board’s supervision, and his shenanigans last year and this should have got his parole revoked again. And surely the parole board would not grant a second parole without doing something to try to ensure that the offense that got it revoked the first time not be repeated, so why wasn’t he back inside by 2004 at the latest?

    He seems to be claiming that he’s not on parole; if so, how else could he be out?

    Milhouse (312124)

  77. Comment by Milhouse — 6/4/2012 @ 9:40 am

    Surely the order is void, and he can ignore it.

    I’m not sure the order is void – even illegal court orders I think are valid so lonmg as they stand, although maybe he could avoid being held in contempt – but the order certaionly is unclear.

    What do you make of this:

    The Respondent shall not contact the person in person, by telephone, in writing or any other means, and any other means is putting it on a blog, a Tweet, a megaphone, a — smoke signals — what else is out there — sonar, radar, laser, nothing.

    Does mentioning his name on a blog constitute contacting? CAN A JUDGE BY FIAT MAKE IT CONTACT? And surely he is not attempting to prohibit him from blogging altogether?So what makes it contact? Normally, intention does.

    The judge also does not understand the difference bwteen a tweet that mentions someone, a tweet that uses his twitter handle @whatver and a direct message.

    you could be in contempt of this court, where you could — I could do anything that I deem necessary to keep you away from — or e-mailing him or Twitting him or Googling him or Tooting him or smoking (ph) him, whatever phrase you use.

    The judge seems to think that all of these are a variety of e-mail.

    Late rthe judge refewrs to things as:

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  78. Comment by Milhouse — 6/4/2012 @ 9:40 am

    Surely the order is void, and he can ignore it.

    I’m not sure the order is void – even illegal court orders I think are valid so lonmg as they stand, although maybe he could avoid being held in contempt – but the order certaionly is unclear.

    What do you make of this:

    The Respondent shall not contact the person in person, by telephone, in writing or any other means, and any other means is putting it on a blog, a Tweet, a megaphone, a — smoke signals — what else is out there — sonar, radar, laser, nothing.

    Does mentioning his name on a blog constitute contacting? CAN A JUDGE BY FIAT MAKE IT CONTACT? And surely he is not attempting to prohibit him from blogging altogether?So what makes it contact? Normally, intention does.

    The judge also does not understand the difference bwteen a tweet that mentions someone, a tweet that uses his twitter handle @whatver and a direct message.

    you could be in contempt of this court, where you could — I could do anything that I deem necessary to keep you away from — or e-mailing him or Twitting him or Googling him or Tooting him or smoking (ph) him, whatever phrase you use.

    The judge seems to think that all of these are a variety of e-mail.

    Late rthe judge refewrs to things as:

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  79. The saying of the day:

    “If you’re not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you’re not a conservative at forty you have no brain.”

    Is stupid and false.

    In any case, the original is: “Not to be a republican at 20 is proof of want of heart; to be one at 30 is proof of want of head.” (That is “republican” with a small “r”; the opposite is “monarchist”, not “Democrat”.)

    Milhouse (312124)

  80. However, darned if it isn’t a BLOCKBUSTER FIRST AMENDMENT story now.

    Don’t believe the hype. Step outside the blogosphere and ask the average man on the street who Kimberlin or Walker is.

    Kman (5576bf)

  81. Umbday

    Icy (e8e25c)

  82. Scoffing at this order sounds really badass and cool. But who is the next judge Aaron will appear before? What lies will Brett tell? How effective will he be if he can show Aaron openly ignoring the last order?

    Aaron’s handling this well. That is obviously not good enough, nor was having the truth and the law on his side, but he’s got to play as though the next MD judge or prosecutor he runs into will reward perjury instead of punishing it. He would be insane not to expect that at this point. He needs to toe the line right now.

    Dustin (330eed)

  83. Message got accidentally sent a little bit too sonon.

    “Later the judge refers to things as…”

    should be before the last paragraph in boldface, and edited a bit.

    I think the judge thinks Googling someone means putting somebody on some sort of a mailing list.

    His knowledge of the Internet doesn’t sound like it’s advanced since about 1992.

    I am not sure he knows the difference between the World Wide Web, and services like Prodigy, Compu$erve, AOL, and Genie. Well, he didn’t mention them.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  84. Just a bit more checking, and I can’t find where the house version of that bill has passed, but even if it has, the two versions have been reconciled or whatever they do in Maryland, and has been signed by the governor, it apparently doesn’t take effect until this October.

    If this is the case, would not ALL of Kimberlin’s court testimony up to this point be illegal?

    (Standard disclaimer, I’m NOT a lawyer, I don’t play one on TV, and I didn’t even stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night.)

    http://mlis.state.md.us/2012rs/bills/hb/hb0926f.pdf

    HOUSE BILL 926
    Article – Courts and Judicial Proceedings
    14 9–104.
    15 (A) [A] EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN SUBSECTION (B) OF THIS SECTION, A
    16 person convicted of perjury may not testify.
    17 (B) A PERSON CONVICTED OF PERJURY MAY TESTIFY IF THE
    18 TESTIMONY RELATES TO EVENTS IN WHICH THE PERSON IS AN ALLEGED VICTIM.
    19 SECTION 2. AND BE IT FURTHER ENACTED, That this Act shall take effect
    20 October 1, 2012.

    Nancy Gilly (06c781)

  85. Kman — the blockbuster aspect is that a judge has ordered someone not to speak or write about a public figure for 6 months. This is clearly unconstitutional, and what’s more the judge expressly said he’s ignoring the relevant Supreme Court precedent and substituting his will over the law.

    Random (fba0b1)

  86. This was a blockbuster story when Aaron proved that the state attorney’s office in Maryland had proof of a serious crime and didn’t do anything about it. It was a blockbuster story when Aaron showed that a psycho was framing him for a crime and stupidly did it in a way where video disproved his lies (I bet the next person Brett frames isn’t so lucky, which is why it’s important MD actually prosecute him this time).

    Now that Aaron’s rights have been taken away, and he was arrested for free speech? The story has gone beyond blockbuster, in my opinion.

    Those who disagree tend to be Kimberlin advocates.

    Dustin (330eed)

  87. Patterico may inadvertently do the judge a service, by getting him to go online and read a blog.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  88. This was a blockbuster story when Aaron proved that the state attorney’s office in Maryland had proof of a serious crime and didn’t do anything about it.

    Actually that’s really common.

    It was a blockbuster story when Aaron showed that a psycho was framing him for a crime ….

    Actually, details aside, that’s fairly common.

    What’s uncommon is judges saying they are ignoring Supreme Court rulings, substituting their own will, sympathizing with those who settle matters violently or with threats of violence including using groups of thugs, reminiscing on when they used to settle matters with threats of or actual violence using groups of thugs, and strongly implying that those who settle matters with speech — united speech — are cowards.

    That’s pretty uncommon behavior from the bench.

    Random (fba0b1)

  89. Comment by narciso — 6/4/2012 @ 9:08 am

    No, they were doing the harassing themselves against the Palin’s and her lawyers. Brandenburg is about protected speech and the limits sets forth which is acceptable as long there’s no obvious intention to cause riots, danger to others, etc. Sending off a twitter to a person’s fan base to harass a guy into oblivion and possibly off the guy (not Walker vs Kimberlin contrary to Kimberlin’s claims) is not protected speech. Criticizing a guy about their performance ie Walker against Kimberlin and the fan base interpreting that as encouragement to harass is protected speech. See the difference?

    Kaitian (b51c21)

  90. Now that Aaron’s rights have been taken away, and he was arrested for free speech? The story has gone beyond blockbuster, in my opinion.

    You need to get out more. The court system is filled with people who think that their story is a travesty — a travesty! — of justice and if only the whole world knew about it, people would be shocked, SHOCKED, I say.

    I think what is happening is interesting, and mostly interesting because of the legal question. The factual issue boils down to little more than a flame war getting out of hand. The reaction of the judge (with his “don’t you people have anything better to do” attitude) is indicative of how most people would react if they heard, and most people haven’t heard. In other words, I don’t think it’s going to be a major motion picture, if you know what I mean.

    Kman (5576bf)

  91. Here’s a thought: Brandenburg was decided in 1969; is it possible that this judge never got the news, and when AW brought it up he simply didn’t know what he meant? Maybe he thought AW was quoting some book which he’s entitled to disagree with.

    Milhouse (312124)

  92. Good god, if the simple facts of what he is and has done, is incitement, then we’re doomed, I would think NY Times v. Sullivan was on point, becaue they were in fact telling the truth,

    narciso (494474)

  93. Patterico may inadvertently do the judge a service, by getting him to go online and read a blog.

    “Oh, that’s what googling is!”

    — Cornelius J. Vaughey, Disbarred Former Judge, Sometime in Late 2012

    Random (fba0b1)

  94. Considering the judge’s order regarding communication extend far beyond MD’s borders would not Walker be able to take this to a federal district court? The internet certainly extend far beyond MD’s statutory borders.

    cubanbob (ad2274)

  95. Kman has a, shall we say, less-than-reasonable grip on what the word “blockbuster” means in this context.

    Icy (e8e25c)

  96. Milhouse asks a question that I’ve been wondering myself:

    He seems to be claiming that he’s not on parole; if so, how else could he be out?

    I’ve seen it asked, but not adequately answered.

    Double Secret Exoneration?

    Pious Agnostic (7c3d5b)

  97. is it possible that this judge never got the news

    Unlikely. I would like to believe that since the judge got his law license before the ruling was made therefore bases all of his training and experiences prior to Brandenburg.

    Born in Far Rockaway, New York, August 16, 1938. Villanova University, B.S. (economics), 1961; University of Maryland School of Law, LL.B., 1965. Admitted to Maryland Bar, 1968. Law clerk for Judge Walter H. Moorman, Montgomery County Circuit Court, 1968-69. Member, Montgomery County Bar Association. Jurist Award, Montgomery County Bar Association, 1998.

    It’s pretty damn thin but he has got to know about Brandenburg and what it entails.

    Kaitian (b51c21)

  98. “Kafkaesque” is the term that comes to mind.

    htom (412a17)

  99. “What’s uncommon is judges saying they are ignoring Supreme Court rulings, substituting their own will, sympathizing with those who settle matters violently or with threats of violence including using groups of thugs, reminiscing on when they used to settle matters with threats of or actual violence using groups of thugs, and strongly implying that those who settle matters with speech — united speech — are cowards.

    That’s pretty uncommon behavior from the bench.”

    - Random

    Well said.

    Does anyone know if this judge has a record of military service? I’m curious.

    Leviticus (e445f5)

  100. ___________________________________________

    In any case, the original is: “Not to be a republican at 20 is proof of want of heart;

    The more recent variation of the phrase in question has been attributed to Winston Churchill, but probably incorrectly since there’s no written record of his saying such a thing. Whether he made that observation or it was made by some figure from French history generations ago, the phrase certainly fits the pattern of human nature. So if the saying is “stupid and false,” then it can be easily said that human nature in general — or people’s stereotypes of others — is stupid and false. Which it definitely can be, since it’s naive (or stupid and false) to equate conservatism with a lack of “heart,” and, in turn, to believe that liberalism renders a person mentally deficient—and therefore excuses him or her of making poor choices and showing lousy judgment.

    Speaking of which, I’m bothered by people using Judge Cornelius Vaughey’s advanced age (or his growing up in the pre-computer/internet age) as a reason for his foolishness, because it implies he’s senile instead of what I suspect has always affected (or afflicted) him: Innate liberalism or leftism.

    Mark (cf1348)

  101. The judge needs this primer on the internet, courtesy of Ted Stevens:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f99PcP0aFNE

    carlitos (49ef9f)

  102. Wouldn’t this judge have been drawn,

    http://www.courts.state.md.us/press/2006/pr01-04-06a.html

    note the irony at te end of the description;

    narciso (494474)

  103. I think the time has come for conservative bloggers to focus on how to bring Kimberlin down and bring him down hard. Use the law against him. Get him sent back to prison. Nothing illegal. Just crowd source the ideas on how to take him down and out permanently. In prison for the rest of his miserable life.

    Antimedia (6db190)

  104. I’m not sure the order is void – even illegal court orders I think are valid so lonmg as they stand, although maybe he could avoid being held in contempt – but the order certaionly is unclear.

    What possible authority could the order have? Surely the judge was ultra vires and therefore the order is not a court order at all, but just a worthless piece of paper. No?

    Milhouse (312124)

  105. I think maybe it is past time that judge resumed civilian life, as he is pretty obviously unfit for office.

    I think he needs to try life on Beam Pipers New Texas……………

    Tim McDonald (33a58b)

  106. I think the time has come for conservative bloggers to focus on how to bring Kimberlin down and bring him down hard. Use the law against him.

    Lawfare?

    Kman (5576bf)

  107. Does anyone know if this judge has a record of military service? I’m curious.

    Judging by his biography, no.

    1938 0 years old – Born
    1961 23 years old – Economic Degree
    1965 27 years old – Law Degree
    1968 30 years old – Admitted to Bar
    1969 31 years old – end of law clerk term
    Fill in the blank here
    1992 54 years old – Starts District Court Judge position
    2005 67 years old – Retires from Bench
    2012 74 years old – Presides over Walker / Kimberlin case

    Kaitian (9c5cd9)

  108. Scoffing at this order sounds really badass and cool. But who is the next judge Aaron will appear before? What lies will Brett tell? How effective will he be if he can show Aaron openly ignoring the last order?

    How does obeying the non-order make things any better? Kimberlin will lie anyway. If AW gets the chance to demonstrate that he has obeyed it, then he must equally have the chance to demonstrate that it’s a nullity and he didn’t have to obey it.

    he’s got to play as though the next MD judge or prosecutor he runs into will reward perjury instead of punishing it. He would be insane not to expect that at this point. He needs to toe the line right now.

    On the contrary, if he knows that the next judge or prosecutor will reward perjury then why toe the line? If he really knows that, then maybe he should lie too.

    Milhouse (312124)

  109. _______________________________________________

    note the irony at te end of the description;

    I’m also interested in this small passage:

    Judge Vaughey said he worked to make the courts more inclusive

    “Inclusive” may be another hint of Vaughey’s political orientation. He’s probably one of those who turns inclusion into “diversity for diversity’s sake,’ which morphs into favoring (or excusing) people based on superficial qualities, as codified by the left, which finally then morphs into political correctness run amok.

    So people of different backgrounds based on only their race or ethnicity are brought in, but people who are different ideologically (ie, of a rightward tilt) need not apply or don’t count. If so, Aaron Walker then meanders into Vaughey’s courtroom and — whoops and whoa — he’s one of those who doesn’t apply or count. Vaughey may even be the type who thinks: “People like Walker are the reason our court system wasn’t more inclusive in the past. Damn him! He’s the reason Occupy Wall Street is needed every so often! His kind is a pain in the butt and heartless! Grrr.”

    Mark (cf1348)

  110. If he really knows that, then maybe he should lie too.

    Given the bullshit that Kimberlin has pulled off and able to charm the judge, it would become a lose-lose scenario with perjury being the far worse punishment.

    Kaitian (9c5cd9)

  111. An order signed by a Judge is NOT void just because it is illegal. AW knows this, hence his smart approach to keep mum.

    In the real world, if a real police officer comes to your real home with a real arrest warrant, he will put you in a real jail–no matter how eloquently you argue about the legal nullity of the order.

    Lawsuits against these illegal orders/seizures are virtually never successful. Need to show some type of judicial corruption. If anyone here can dig up one (and it wd be a HUGE story), I’d love to see it.

    JewishOdysseus (57038c)

  112. I don’t see anything in the transcript indicating how the judge got Aaron arrested.

    So the question is…did the judge get him arrested or was a sheriff waiting outside the door with a warrant in his hand to arrest Aaron?

    lurker9876 (bb50a1)

  113. Why is Kmart harassing AW?

    JD (075baa)

  114. BTW, I once had a judge call my client “Ace” as he commented on his behavior…Too bad the jury had just found him NOT guilty, heheh…

    JewishOdysseus (57038c)

  115. Lurker – I made that point yesterday. It seems to get conflated because of the timing. Vaughey didn’t have him arrested. Vaughey just took a dump on AW’s Rights.

    JD (075baa)

  116. 1. Holy crap. It’s like Deadwood-level lawlessness. I half expected the judge to send Aaron to be eaten by Mr. Wu’s pigs.

    2. Dammit all to hell — DON’T GO IN UNREPRESENTED.

    Ken (2e87a6)

  117. I agree with JewishOdysseus.

    The Cory Maye case comes to mind where the police executed a no-knock order at the wrong address for a drug bust. The unfortunate result was the raiding officer was killed who happened to be the Chief of Police’s son and Cory Maye was sentenced to death on a murder charge. The order may have been wrong but if it was done with the right intentions, it becomes legally valid which the courts decides after the fact it was not. Thankfully Cory Maye got off death row and released from prison when he plead guilty to manslaughter and time served.

    So an illegal order can still be valid as long there was good faith behind it.

    Kaitian (9c5cd9)

  118. This judge didn’t have Aaron arrested.

    What happened (the best I understand it) is:

    1) Kimberlin had a temporary Peace Order sworn out against Aaron.

    2) Memorial Day weekend before the trial (which was Tuesday following Memorial Day) Kimberlin went to court crying that he feared for his life based on the temporary Peace Order, and somebody in the courthouse rubber-stamped a warrant for Aaron’s arrest.

    3) Aaron showed up for court on Tuesday, did his thing, heard the idiot respected jurist’s decision.

    4) Outside, the warrant was served and Aaron was taken into custody. Judge Vaughey (as far as I know) was not involved.

    Pious Agnostic (7c3d5b)

  119. #118,

    That’s exactly what happened. It was a catch 22 situation where neither outcome was good for Walker. Don’t show up and get default judgment for Kimberlin against Walker. Show up and get arrested by the temporary peace order signed by a commissioner.

    Kaitian (9c5cd9)

  120. Leviticus, he might have served as a JAG between his graduation from Law School, and his admittance to the BAR – there is a 3-year gap there.
    He would have lost his Selective Service deferral upon LS graduation, and there was a need for manpower at the time.

    AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92)

  121. Random and Leviticus,

    I viewed most of the Judge’s anecdotes as just that — anecdotes — and that’s something many older and a few younger jurists do quite often. I’m not saying it is always appropriate, especially by today’s standards, but it’s not uncommon. As for ignoring First Amendment law, I agree that’s a problem but I imagine real First Amendment issues don’t come up often at peace order hearings.

    Milhouse,

    I think Aaron submitted a Motion to Dismiss and memorandum of authorities at the beginning of the hearing. I assume the memo set forth the legal authorities Aaron was relying on, and Aaron also may have tendered that to the court at an earlier date.

    Kman,

    It’s possible the judge was following his interpretation of the law as you suggested above. But if that were the case, I don’t think the judge would have said to ignore Bradenburg [sic] and follow the Vaughey test/rule. Instead, wouldn’t he have been more likely to say he found in Kimberlin’s favor after applying the Brandenburg test?

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  122. Sending off a twitter to a person’s fan base to harass a guy into oblivion and possibly off the guy (not Walker vs Kimberlin contrary to Kimberlin’s claims) is not protected speech.

    It is if it’s not both intended and likely to cause someone to go immediately and do it. Which is difficult to do on a blog. That’s why I say it’s almost impossible for a blog posting to constitute incitement. Not impossible, but nearly so.

    Milhouse (312124)

  123. I would think NY Times v. Sullivan was on point, becaue they were in fact telling the truth,

    No they weren’t. If they were then it would never have got that far. Truth is always a defense against defamation. Sullivan says that in the case of public figures even lies are not necessarily defamation.

    Milhouse (312124)

  124. Update to Vaughey’s background. No military experience whatsoever and spent his entire life on the law although he conveniently forgot about Brandenburg.

    1938 0 years old – Born
    1961 23 years old – Economic Degree
    1965 27 years old – Law Degree
    1968 30 years old – Admitted to Bar
    1969 31 years old – end of law clerk term
    1973 35 years old – Rockville Board of Appeals
    1976 38 years old – End of Rockville Board of Appeals
    1980 42 years old – Montgomery County Circuit Court Judge
    1984 46 years old – End of Montgomery position
    1984 46 years old – Associate Court Judge
    1992 54 years old – Starts District Court Judge position
    2005 67 years old – Retires from Bench
    2012 74 years old – Presides over Walker / Kimberlin case

    Kaitian (9c5cd9)

  125. I viewed most of the Judge’s anecdotes . . . .

    DRJ, you’ve obviously never been male. This is the reality among men: you settle things by talking, or you settle things by violence or the threat thereof (courts being kind of a hybrid between the two).

    Analogies? Yeah, they were analogies — drawn from his past. These things happened and happen. A lot. And that’s what our species is like.

    The point is, the law’s not meant to condone or encourage them: quite the opposite.

    Random (fba0b1)

  126. Looks like Judge Vaughey will be starring in a new television show on Animal planet — The Marcupials Court.

    Someone needs to explain to the judge that he is in contempt of Constitution.

    Rhymes With Right (c6e21c)

  127. it’s house policy
    yeah it’s just the same old song
    I believe it is

    http://th260.photobucket.com/albums/ii4/bglsbaby/th_Aykroyd_Dan_NothingButTrouble_05.jpg

    Colonel Haiku (7aca33)

  128. SUNDAY! SUNDAY! SUNDAY!

    WALKER VS. KIMBERLIN CAGE MATCH!

    TWO MEN ENTER! ONE MAN LEAVES!

    Judge Cornelius J. Vaughey presiding

    Pious Agnostic (7c3d5b)

  129. Whether he made that observation or it was made by some figure from French history generations ago, the phrase certainly fits the pattern of human nature. So if the saying is “stupid and false,” then it can be easily said that human nature in general — or people’s stereotypes of others — is stupid and false.

    No, it can’t. There is nothing in human nature that should make a 20-year-old with a heart think it’s OK to steal from people.

    Milhouse (312124)

  130. Random,

    I’m not sure why you think I approve of his anecdotes. I said it’s common for some judges to tell them, and it is.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  131. I’m not sure why you think I approve of his anecdotes. I said it’s common for some judges to tell them, and it is.

    I know that it is. But my point is he told an analogy about how violence settles it in pretty much glowing terms, and went on about how Aaron is a coward for talking about Kimberlin, while expressing great sympathy for Kimberlin — a proven man of violence.

    Random (fba0b1)

  132. Random,

    Are you saying the judge — as a man, and you know all about men — was suggesting violence as a solution or inciting the parties to violence?

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  133. I can’t believe Patterico left off this part in this post:

    At 43:54:

    WALKER: But pardon your honor, he started when he committed a crime against me.

    COURT: No. He did not commit a crime against you.

    WALKER: Your honor, you have no –

    He did not commit a crime against you. He is innocent until proven guilty.

    WALKER: Well I’m entitled –

    COURT: Now you’re in the [unintelligible]. You take the actions to Mr. McCarthy. You don’t get all these people from Oklahoma, Indiana, Wyoming, wherever the heck it is, and all these past things.

    Good, I’m going to rule right now; I’ve heard enough. I don’t need arguments. I could be a hundred, almost an hour on this case, and all I’ve learned is one guy hides behind the sheets and runs his little machine, while the other man suffers.

    Random (fba0b1)

  134. An order signed by a Judge is NOT void just because it is illegal.

    How can it not be void? Where does it get its authority from?

    Lawsuits against these illegal orders/seizures are virtually never successful. Need to show some type of judicial corruption.

    Have you never heard of Section 1983? All you need to show is that the arrest violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known”. You can’t sue the judge, but you can sue the arresting officer.

    Milhouse (312124)

  135. I don’t see anything in the transcript indicating how the judge got Aaron arrested.

    He didn’t. The arrest had nothing to do with anything that happened in this hearing.

    Milhouse (312124)

  136. Are you saying the judge — as a man, and you know all about men — was suggesting violence as a solution or inciting the parties to violence?

    He was reminiscing on the good old days when that was done, yes. While sympathizing with a convicted domestic terrorist and bomber with a long record of actually harassing people. While implying someone using free speech is cowardly.

    Random (fba0b1)

  137. I’m not sure he had that section in his transcript, Random. Why don’t you send it to his attention.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  138. #134–What portion of S. 1983 suits are successful? And how long do they take? Did it stop the officer on 5/29/12 from arresting AW? I tell my clients: “My goal is NOT to win on appeal–my goal is to WIN.”

    JewishOdysseus (57038c)

  139. Hides behind the sheets…

    I wonder what he meant by that. It reminded me of the KKK, but I suspect he was imagining something a bit more…delicate, if you take my meaning.

    Pious Agnostic (7c3d5b)

  140. So an illegal order can still be valid as long there was good faith behind it.

    No, it can’t. I don’t know what you think the Cory Maye case has to do with it. There was no illegal order in that case. The only question in that case was whether Maye knew the intruders were police. The prosecution claimed that he did know, he claimed that he didn’t. None of us know who was right. But that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

    Milhouse (312124)

  141. #118
    Kimberlin went to court crying that he feared for his life based on the temporary Peace Order, and somebody in the courthouse rubber-stamped a warrant for Aaron’s arrest.

    Nobody knows who did that?

    Gerald A (cc0aaa)

  142. I’m not sure he had that section in his transcript, Random. Why don’t you send it to his attention.

    Well Patterico asked me to summarize the transcripts that had been left by a certain time and put them in one comment by 7 pm Pacific, after they’d been verified and edited. I did that here, so I assume he’s aware of those.

    Random (fba0b1)

  143. Milhouse,

    I can’t vouch for this website but I think it accurately explains the law. Court orders are voidable until they are declared void or otherwise overturned. They are rarely void ab initio.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  144. ______________________________________________

    There is nothing in human nature that should make a 20-year-old with a heart think it’s OK to steal from people.

    You’re overlooking the sentiments in humans that make, for example, certain judges believe that the way a suspect in a crime case has to be treated depends on whether society provided the accused — as he was growing up — good daycare, good housing, good nutrition (at school), good teachers, good welfare programs, good after-school activities, etc, etc.

    From that you have politicians easily excusing and tolerating the mess, including vandalism, created by Occupy Wall Street demonstrators not long ago. That, in turn, is not a far leap from a person (say, Vaughey) excusing Kimberlin because he was “fighting the good fight, for the proletariat, for the common man, for the welfare of society!” The type of jurist who may be less bothered by T-shirts with an image of Che Guevara imprinted on them compared with an image of, say, the US flag, a Christian cross or words like “Tea Party Time!”

    Mark (cf1348)

  145. Judge Vaughey : He did not commit a crime against you. He is innocent until proven guilty.

    So accusations of crimes cannot be believed because they require a jury verdict but any other kind of accusation can be believed on somebody’s say-so???.

    By the way, I get the feeling there was some ex parte communication, maybe with a clerk, before the whole hearing began.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  146. What portion of S. 1983 suits are successful?

    Most such suits are frivolous and lose because they should lose.

    And how long do they take?

    Who cares how long they take? The point is that the fear of such a suit should deter any officer from enforcing the order; and AW can serve notice on the sheriff’s department reminding them of this. Either they take heed and he can blog with impunity, or they ignore it and arrest him, in which case he spends a night in custody and is compensated with the arresting officer’s house.

    Milhouse (312124)

  147. I can’t vouch for this website but I think it accurately explains the law. Court orders are voidable until they are declared void or otherwise overturned. They are rarely void ab initio.

    Yeah.

    I think Milhouse is smart, but I often thinks he lives in some kind of fantasy world where mostly universally recognized abstract principles trump actual human behavior, and this isn’t that world. 24-year old cops aren’t going to substitute their considered legal opinions for judges based on someone’s “eloquent argument”, even if it’s a good one.

    Nor would they be expected to by the courts. The courts fix their errors through appeals processes and challenges, not beat cops or even their supervisors.

    Random (fba0b1)

  148. ______________________________________________

    While implying someone using free speech is cowardly.

    The irony is so thick, you can’t cut it with even a sharp knife. But that contradiction is another reason I suspect Vaughey consciously or deepdown — due to his liberal sentiments — shrugged off the crimes of Kimberlin while being far more perturbed by or resentful towards Aaron Walker.

    Mark (cf1348)

  149. DRJ, that page is about contracts and judgments, not orders. Surely this order is by definition void, since the judge had no power to make it. It has no more force than it would if you or I were to make it.

    Does the term ultra vires really mean nothing to any of you?

    Milhouse (312124)

  150. I haven’t listened to the audio, but when I read it, Vaughey sounds just like Joe Biden in my head.

    Memories (16de83)

  151. #144, I’m not overlooking those sentiments, I’m denying that there’s anything natural about them, or that they tend to indicate the possession of a heart.

    Milhouse (312124)

  152. “Lawsuits against these illegal orders/seizures are virtually never successful. Need to show some type of judicial corruption. If anyone here can dig up one (and it wd be a HUGE story), I’d love to see it.”

    http://www.aclu-mn.org/news/2011/09/02/district-court-lifts-unconstitutional-restraining-order

    It can be done.

    Aaron should call the ACLU.

    For myself, I flatly refuse to obey an edict coming from a court in Maryland that tells me I can’t discuss political issues, the DeLong lawsuit or the past and present antics of Brett Kimberlin. I have every right in the world to do so, and not being a resident of Maryland, I’m not subject to their laws.

    California Constitution Article 1, Section 2

    “SEC. 2. (a) Every person may freely speak, write and publish his or her sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of
    this right. A law may not restrain or abridge liberty of speech or press.”

    My state Constitution says that I can do these things, and no court in Maryland is going to tell me otherwise.

    You want to try and shut me up? Bring it on dickheads.

    Dave Surls (46b08c)

  153. 137. I’m not sure he had that section in his transcript, Random. Why don’t you send it to his attention.

    Comment by DRJ — 6/4/2012 @ 11:38 am

    DRJ, no disrespect intended, but Random has a point. And he’s highlighted all the statements the judge made to back it up. He may not have actually been advocating violence, but he was reminiscing about back in the day when men were men, and stating in no uncertain terms Worthing was most certainly not a man.

    When you cut through the BS, the judge called Aaron a p***y. He was hiding “behind the sheets” running “his little machine” and the judge wasn’t going to let him hide behind the law.

    Steve (958caf)

  154. 24-year old cops aren’t going to substitute their considered legal opinions for judges based on someone’s “eloquent argument”, even if it’s a good one.

    Nor would they be expected to by the courts. The courts fix their errors through appeals processes and challenges, not beat cops or even their supervisors.

    If that were true then section 1983 suits wouldn’t exist, and Mr. Bivens would have lost. There’s a reason qualified immunity is different from absolute immunity. The whole point of s 1983 and Bivens is that 24-year-old cops do have to obey the law if it’s so well-established that they can be expected to know it. The first amendment is certainly well-established, and every cop has a duty to know it, especially if he’s been put on notice of it.

    Milhouse (312124)

  155. Judge Vaughey responds: “Forget Brandenburg [sic]. Let’s go by Vaughey right now.”
    I did not realize before that “Vaughey” referred to himself, not a different ruling that was at an angle different than Bradenburg. I know you folks have a Latin phrase for “the thing speaks for itself” (I guess it is the intellectual way of saying “duh!”), that must apply to a judge saying, “I’m ignoring the SCOTUS and doing what I want”. I mean, not even the 9th Circuit is that direct…

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  156. @ MD in Philly

    It’s a bit breathtaking, eh?

    Random (fba0b1)

  157. drew swords and shot
    Seems not many of you are old enough to remember a poem I had to memorize in grade school:
    “One fine day in the middle of the night” (Journal Versions)

    One fine day in the middle of the night,
    Two dead boys* got up to fight, [*or men]
    Back to back they faced each other,
    Drew their swords and shot each other,

    TennLion (97403b)

  158. “THE COURT: People honestly read this stuff?”

    BTW, it’s none of your damned business what I choose to read.

    Judging by that statement and the actions of the court, they seem to be trying to tell me what I should and shouldn’t read.

    And, that ain’t going to happen.

    Dave Surls (46b08c)

  159. “There is nothing in human nature that should make a 20-year-old with a heart think it’s OK to steal from people.”

    - Milhouse

    They’re called “taxes,” and they’re one of the prices of living in a civilized society. They’re a fairly common thing in the modern world, I’ve heard.

    If you want to claim that governments have no right to tax citizens, fine. You’re entitled to your opinion, and I won’t waste my time arguing with you. But if you want to argue that governments have a right to tax citizens for stuff you like, but that every tax you don’t like is “stealing”…

    Actually, I still won’t waste my time arguing with you. I’d be interested in seeing you rephrase that comment in a way that demonstrated an iota of good faith.

    Leviticus (e445f5)

  160. THE COURT: People honestly read this stuff?”

    If nobody reads the stuff, what’s the problem?

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  161. Painted Jaguar (a sockpuppet): So… (Sleepily with a yawn, showing teeth), the judge said no, “No twitting, googling, or tooting…“, nor noodling either, I guess. (Though, quite frankly, noodling is not encouraged in the deep, dark, turbid waters of the Amazon. About the best you can hope for is to get the bones of your hand back, held together with ligaments after the piranha get through with it… and that is the best…)

    The dictionary says:
    twit [twit] verb, twit·ted, twit·ting, noun
    verb (used with object)
    1. to taunt, tease, ridicule, etc., with reference to anything embarrassing; gibe at. Synonyms: jeer at, mock, insult, deride.
    2. to reproach or upbraid. Synonyms: chide, scold, rebuke, criticize, revile, castigate.

    By this definition, maybe the judge would like to outlaw twitting altogether. The question is what is the relation between twit, Twitter, twitting, and tweeting.

    You need to understand that by the deep, dark, turbid waters of the Amazon it is hard to keep a computer functioning because of the humidity (hanging mist shorts them out). Even if you did, Internet access is nigh unto impossible unless you go through a satellite phone connection, There are tremendous service problems stringing cable through our ‘hood, if you know what I mean.
    So, I know tweeting is one way to denote in English the sound of birds, which we have many of, quite beautiful too. And a twit is a very annoying individual. It is not good to be a twit in the the jungle by the deep, dark, turbid waters of the Amazon, for if you annoy your guides and expedition team too much, they may assign you “guard duty” at night, out in the open, 20 yards from light, near a tributary to the deep, dark, turbid waters of the Amazon, and notification of your demise will be when the birds go a-twitter as you are taken away by one of my relatives, an Anaconda, or some of the humans who are not quite as “civilized” as you folks up north. None of which are good options.

    I could go on about the relation between googling and gurgling, but I will not.

    Painted Jaguar (a sockpuppet) (3d3f72)

  162. Reading is dangerous!

    Kaitian (b51c21)

  163. “…Vaughey sounds just like Joe Biden in my head.”

    In actuality, he sounds more like someone doing a bad impression of Regis Philbin.

    Pious Agnostic (ee2c24)

  164. Comment by Rhymes With Right — 6/4/2012 @ 11:23 am

    Looks like Judge Vaughey will be starring in a new television show on Animal planet — The Marcupials Court.

    Well, Judge Wapner did that.

    http://www.tv.com/shows/judge-wapners-animal-court/

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0281416/

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  165. “When you cut through the BS, the judge called Aaron a p***y. He was hiding “behind the sheets” running “his little machine” and the judge wasn’t going to let him hide behind the law.”

    - Steve

    Which is a sickeningly disingenuous thing for a judge to do, given the constant, unrelenting focus of the law on preventing self-help. If A.W., Seth Allen, Liberty Chick, Mike Stack, Erick Erickson, Ken, Patterico, etc. had plopped Kimberlin in the back of the ole’ mudrunner, taken him down to the river, and whupped his ass, this same judge would be sitting there bloviating about how justice does not allow a private citizen to take the law into his own hands, and decrying the descent of modern society into lawlessness, not like back when people had respect and decency, no sirree, see back then we just did things a little different, yes we did

    and so on and so forth.

    Leviticus (e445f5)

  166. So then, Leviticus, I take it you saw what I saw in the ruling.

    Steve (958caf)

  167. THE COURT: –Just hold on, hold on, wait. You could have this thing going for three days. I intend to be finished here in 10 minutes..

    After all, that’s about as long as Judge Marilyn Milian takes, as did Judges Sheindlin, Koch and Wapner, as well as Judge Judy. Or at least it looks that way when edited for television.

    As it is, he took about 40 minutes – just right I guess for a one hour TV show.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  168. What would be really ironic is for BK to find out that Judge Vaughey is well known and well liked by many, far and wide, and did not appreciate the way BK suckered him into this little affair, greatly contributing to a sudden drop in standing among liberals far and wide, and a rash of his efforts being promptly thrown out of court and FBI surveillance of his electronic communications. It would be just remuneration for his efforts.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  169. “So then, Leviticus, I take it you saw what I saw in the ruling.”

    - Steve

    Yessir.

    I think so, anyway: I saw a bored old judge chiding A.W. (who’s disabled, if I remember correctly) for not just challenging Kimberlin to pistols at dawn like a man.

    If that’s what you saw, then I saw what you saw.

    What I saw was outrageous.

    Leviticus (e445f5)

  170. Can anyone provide information on the current status of the case,

    thanks

    joe (835831)

  171. BREAKING: Tweet from @Ali

    I cannot believe this. ‪#BrettKimberlin‬’s associates have now literally gone after my family. Prayers please.

    https://twitter.com/ali/status/209727325930127361

    Pious Agnostic (ee2c24)

  172. #165 Leviticus

    Vaughey actually does *both* in the transcript.

    He talks about the good ol’ days of beating the snot out of someone and that’d be the end of it:

    And I’m not going to talk about those ways, but boy, it ended fast. I even can tell you, when I grew up in my community, you wanted to date an Italian girl, you had to get the Italian boy’s permission. But that was the old neighborhoods back in the city. And it was really fair. When someone did something up there to you, your sister, your girlfriend, you got some friends to take them for a ride in the back of the truck.

    Then he tells AW that it’s up to the courts to decide is someone is guilty or not:

    THE COURT: You know, I shouldn’t say this, but I think you’ve got it twisted. The one who decides to prosecute the crimes is the government– () –and only the government, and not you.

    Judge Bullcrap is pulling whatever he wants from his neither regions. Neither reason, logic or consistency is shown here. He is the King of this damned court.

    And you punks stay off his damn lawn.

    Memories (16de83)

  173. I’m bothered by people using Judge Cornelius Vaughey’s advanced age (or his growing up in the pre-computer/internet age) as a reason for his foolishness, because it implies he’s senile instead of what I suspect has always affected (or afflicted) him.

    I guess he’s never queried a case based on a specific text search. That would seem nearly impossible.

    ∅ (721840)

  174. Thanks, Leviticus. I don’t agree with Random on a lot of things, but I thought I’d side with him in his friendly disagreement with DRJ.

    Any man who’s ever been called out would recognize exactly what the judge was saying, I think.

    I’d find it especially galling to have my manhood called into question by some guy yapping like a small safe dog hiding behind a black robe, who may be Irish and like to talk about how the Irish are great counterpunchers but judging by his resume was never the type to step into a ring himself (I have; three three minute rounds are a lot easier said than done).

    And it is despicable behavior for a judge. I prefer that word to outrageous. Just a personal preference.

    Steve (958caf)

  175. #155

    I think that’s “res ipsa loquitor.”

    Russ (13eae2)

  176. Pious – shocking, huh?

    JD (075baa)

  177. Maybe the judge was afraid of getting blow up by the convicted bomber.

    Running Bare (cc00e9)

  178. DaveSurls, it is my understanding that AW does a lot of legal work in MD, hence its jurisdiction over his person…and the very real threat to him a real arrest warrant wd present. Of course, if he never goes into MD for the rest of his life, a peace-order warrant wd likely be a dead letter, and he cd laugh at it.

    “The point is that the fear of such a suit should deter any officer from enforcing the order.” “Should” is a nice word. This sounds like an argument that someone who’s never actually defended someone subject to an arrest warrant wd make.

    14 years in trial court, I cannot recall ever seeing the words “ultra vires.” before. But maybe I’m the one who’s lived a sheltered life.

    I want to see AW win ASAP in the real world, not in theory or in appeals court. I believe he shares the same goal.

    JewishOdysseus (e3eb41)

  179. Apparently, the courts of Maryland consider themselves something like a game of Monopoly:

    http://www.courts.state.md.us/district/archive/retrospective.pdf

    The PDF looks like it is of poor quality. The letters on the Monopoly board are blurred. This dates from 2001. They don’t seem to have a space for go to Jail – it’s been relabeled.

    ACCOMPLISHMENTS….

    ….Continued to smoothly operate Landlord-Tenant Court with the revamped procedures put in
    place by Administrative Judge Cornelius Vaughey several years ago. While the number of
    landlord-tenant cases has increased, staffing remains the same.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  180. JD — At this point, I’m not shocked my much I hear about this crew. I hope details are forthcoming.

    Pious Agnostic (ee2c24)

  181. They explain “peace orders”

    1999

    The legislature establishes peace orders to provide relief similar to that provided by
    protective orders in domestic violence cases. Peace orders provide protection from assault,
    false imprisonment, harassment, malicious
    destruction of property, stalking, and trespass. The District Court is given exclusive jurisdiction for peace orders.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  182. The District Court is given exclusive jurisdiction for peace orders.

    Does this mean: No appeal?

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  183. Vaughey actually does *both* in the transcript.

    He talks about the good ol’ days of beating the snot out of someone and that’d be the end of it:

    Then he tells AW that it’s up to the courts to decide is someone is guilty or not:

    Judge Incoherent is all over the map; telling Worthing that if he was any sort of man he’d have settled this without making him take precious time off from his retirement while at the same time issuing a “Peace Order” directing him not to do anything that may put sweet, gentle, bambi-like Kimberlin in fear of his life or bodily harm.

    Steve (958caf)

  184. I can’t listen to the recording, so I appreciate the transcripts that are available. Thanks to all those involved in providing them.

    I was wondering, though, since Aaron Walker has a disability, was there anything in the recording suggesting the Judge was perhaps being discriminatory, too? I was involved in a local matter where a Judge kept calling a disabled woman “Sweetie”, and the references to “Sport” seemed possibly similar. I can’t tell from the information available to me.

    Sue (54b03a)

  185. Click.

    Random (fba0b1)

  186. “If nobody reads the stuff, what’s the problem?”

    The problem is that I do read this stuff, and now, thanks to some wannabe tyrant in some backwardass hellhole back east, I can’t read what Aaron has to say, because Aaron is now afraid he’ll get tossed in jail if he speaks his mind.

    And, what’s this flagrant abuse of power for? It’s all to protect non-existent rights of some scumbag criminal with dozens of felony convictions under his belt.

    In effect the court in Maryland has invented a new right: the right of scumbag criminals to silence people who want to discuss said scumbag’s criminal background, which imaginary right somehow trumps our freedom of speech.

    Well, that ain’t going to fly with this irate citizen. I’ll say what I please, and read whatever I wish, and if some court in Maryland, which has no lawful power to tell me what acts I can engage in outside of the state of Maryland, arbitrarily decides I can’t, then I defy them to do their worst.

    Go ahead and issue a restraining order telling me I can’t talk about Brett Kimberlin’s criminal past, Judge Vaughey. I’ll refuse to obey that order and I’ll fight it tooth and nail, if you try. All the way to the Supreme Court of te United States, if that’s what it takes.

    Dave Surls (46b08c)

  187. One fine day in the middle of the night,
    Two dead boys* got up to fight, [*or men]
    Back to back they faced each other,
    Drew their swords and shot each other,

    A deaf policeman heard the noise,
    he came and shot those two dead boys.

    Milhouse (312124)

  188. s/shot/killed

    Milhouse (312124)

  189. PDF from a law form about Maryland “peace orders:

    http://andalmanflynn.com/library/peaceorder1.pdf

    E) The duration of a Protective Order under the Domestic Violence Statute is 12 months, while a Peace Order expires after 6 months. The Peace Order provides only the relief that is minimally necessary to protect petitioner, while a Domestic Protective Order provides a much broader range of protective measures….

    One difference: Peace orders cannot contain a firearms prohibition.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  190. “Was there anything in the recording suggesting the Judge was perhaps being discriminatory, too? I can’t tell from the information available to me.”

    – That was actually something I thought about when the judge told him to grip a pencil, but then I figured that judge wasn’t all together enough to say something potentially offensive on purpose.

    Matt S. (ab8324)

  191. Another website:

    http://www.womenslaw.org/laws_state_type.php?id=530&state_code=MD

    http://www.womenslaw.org/laws_state_type.php?id=530&state_code=MD#content-13574

    A peace order is similar to a domestic violence protective order in that they both require you to be a victim of abuse and they both offer you similar forms of protection from the abuser. However, if your relationship to the abuser falls under the category for a domestic violence protective order, (see Who can get a protective order?), you would NOT be eligible for a peace order.

    What acts of abuse would qualify me for a peace order?

    If you meet the relationship requirement (explained in Who can get a peace order?), you can file for a peace order if one or more of the following acts has happened within 30 days before you file for the order:

    An act that causes serious bodily harm;
    An act that places you in fear of immediate serious bodily harm;
    Assault in any degree;
    Attempted or actual rape or sexual offense; (go to MD Statutes, and read sections 3-303 through 3-308 for the definitions);
    False imprisonment;
    Harassment (read the defintion at MD Statutes section 3-803);
    Stalking (read the definition at MD Statutes section 3-802);
    Trespass;
    Malicious destruction of property (read the definition at MD Statutes section 6-301).*

    Brett Kimberlin presumably was claiming “An act that places you in fear of immediate serious bodily harm”

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  192. I agree the judge thought Aaron was hiding behind his “internet mob” instead of confronting Aaron directly. What I didn’t understand (and still don’t) is that the judge expected Aaron to handle this situation with violence. But I’ll defer to the men here.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  193. DC – Detective Comics – Issue No. 900 JULY 2012

    Top panel:

    There was the RIDDLER, the JOKER, the PENGUIN AND the CATWOMAN. But, till now, Batman has never faced an enemy as diabolical as….THE LITIGATOR!

    ————————————————–

    HA, HA! THE LAW IS PUTTY IN MY HANDS!! IT DOESN’T MATTER WHAT THE LAWMAKERS ACTUALLY WANTED, I CAN GET THE LAW TO DO ANYTHING I WANT! I DON’T NEED BOMBS ANY MORE! * ALL YOUR BAT TOOLS ARE USELESS AGAINST ME! I ALREADY GOT YOUR SECRET IDENTITY, BRUCE WAYNE! AND NOW, I’LL GET YOU ARRESTED!!!

    There’s a picture of Batman, looking, in this drawing, scared. A bubble over his head goes:

    I HAVE TO TALK TO COMMISSIONER GORDON! WAIT, I CAN’T!! HE ALREADY HAS AN INJUNCTION FORBIDDING COMMISSIONER GORDON, AND THE ENTIRE POLICE
    DEPARTMENT, FROM HAVING ANY CONTACT WITH ME! EVEN IF I CALL 911, THEY CAN’T ANSWER!

    You can see THE LITIGATOR in the picture. A blindfold, but only covering one eye, like a pirate’s patch. Green scales, like an alligator. A spiked tail. He’s standing somewhere above him and to the right. Overall, he looks a little like a human size Godzilla. He is wearing a shirt with a big letter “L” imprinted on it. Papers are sticking out of a briefcase tied to his body, which is emblazoned with a Monopoly Board.

    In one hand, he’s swinging the scales of justice like a weapon. It has various symbols engraved in it, like the five dots from a pair of dice. He also has the staff of justice, swinging it like a
    nightstick.

    And on another panel:

    BUT DON’T WORRY! YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT!! HA, HA! ONLY MORE SO!! HA, HA! THIS TIME, IT IS NOT JUST A RIGHT, BUT A LEGAL DUTY! DON’T SPEAK TO THE JUDGE!!

    …..OR TO ANYBODY ELSE!!! HA, HA, HA!!

    Also a box near the bottom right, with a note:

    * ACTUALLY, BACK IN 1978, WHEN THE LITIGATOR DETONATED BOMBS, THE BOMBS WERE NOT DETONATED FOR THEIR OWN SAKE, BUT ONLY TO DERAIL A MURDER
    INVESTIGATION! AND IT WORKED! EXCEPT FOR THE FACT THAT ONE PERSON WAS VERY SEVERELY INJURED. AS A RESULT OF THAT, THE LITIGATOR SPENT 17 YEARS IN JAIL, IN TWO SEPARATE SESSIONS.

    DC Comics (sock) (d22d64)

  194. DRJ – I don’t think that the Judge was actually advocating that Aaron fight Kimberlin.

    I think that the Judge wished that he had, in fact, attacked Kimberlin so that it would then have been a criminal trial which would then be out of his jurisdiction.

    And then the Judge could have slept in that day.

    Pious Agnostic (ee2c24)

  195. Of course, if he never goes into MD for the rest of his life, a peace-order warrant wd likely be a dead letter, and he cd laugh at it.

    JewishOdysseus, doesn’t the full faith and credit clause make a judicial order, even a “Peace Order” from a Maryland judge of Vaughney’s low quality, enforceable in Virginia? I was under that impression.

    Steve (958caf)

  196. What I didn’t understand (and still don’t) is that the judge expected Aaron to handle this situation with violence. But I’ll defer to the men here.

    DRJ, that’s understandable. The judge was telling Vaughney to do both. Settle things between the two of them like men, and let the law sort things out.

    But he was definitely calling Worthing a wimp for not doing the first and attempting to do the second.

    Steve (958caf)

  197. The judge was telling Worthing to do both.

    Sorry, I’ve got a case of Vaughney on the brain. Which has got to be the mental version of herpes. Once you catch it, it never really goes away.

    Steve (958caf)

  198. I see the execrable Alex Jones copied on those tweets – what the hell?

    carlitos (49ef9f)

  199. Steve #153,

    My comment about sending a portion of the transcript to Patterico was unrelated to the discussion about the judge, anecdotes, and men. At least it was to me. How is it related to you?

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  200. “DaveSurls, it is my understanding that AW does a lot of legal work in MD, hence its jurisdiction over his person…and the very real threat to him a real arrest warrant wd present.”

    That would be an excellent reason for Aaron to obey the court order, whether the order is just or not.

    But, that doesn’t apply to me, I’ve never been to Maryland, and have no intention of going there.

    Also, I’ve been tossed in the hoosegow lots of times, and I’ve been arrested for the crime of exercising my freedom of speech too, and the prospect of going through it again doesn’t worry me all that much.

    I’m just an old country squire who prefers to avoid trouble…but, nobody’s going to shut me up, when it comes to matters of justice or politics.

    I have every right in the world to talk about Brett Kimberlin’s criminal past, as well as the past and present political activities of Kimberlin and his lowlife lefty friends, and no podunk judge in Maryland is going to stop me. Not over the long haul.

    Dave Surls (46b08c)

  201. Steve #196,

    Thank you for understanding and I apologize for belaboring this. Was the judge advocating violence or was he calling Aaron a wimp? I thought it was the latter but some said otherwise. Now it seems like we agree.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  202. Steve, it has been my experience that non-felony warrants are routinely NOT communicated outside of state lines, since it wd not be worth the costs of extradition for the issuing state. But you raise a good point, since this case is so uniquely f@cked up we’d likely see another precedent trashed…

    In any event, this is why AW got hisself a real loyah, who can counsel him in the real world w/out the distractions of us kibbitzers.

    JewishOdysseus (e3eb41)

  203. And then the Judge could have slept in that day.
    Comment by Pious Agnostic — 6/4/2012 @ 1:09 pm

    – Slept in, phoned it in, and ‘had it in’ for the accused.

    Icy (e8e25c)

  204. Steve,

    Maybe I should ask it this way: To a non-wimpy man, is settling a problem “like a man” always by using violence?

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  205. “I’ve been tossed in the hoosegow lots of times, and I’ve been arrested for the crime of exercising my freedom of speech too, and the prospect of going through it again doesn’t worry me all that much.”

    You’re a better man than I am, Gunga Din!

    JewishOdysseus (e3eb41)

  206. DRJ, he didn’t advocate violence per se, but (1) he sympathized with the leftist guy who is violent (2) he reminisced on violence settling matters in his past (3) he derided the conservative disabled guy as a wimp and bully — for speaking.

    Random (fba0b1)

  207. Random & DRJ, good points, I, too found that dreamy-eyed endorsement/condoning of violent self-help the most shocking & despicable part of the Judge’s performance.

    JewishOdysseus (e3eb41)

  208. In fairness, Steve, I do agree the judge might have been saying that, in older times, he thinks Aaron should have handled this with his fists instead of the courts. But I don’t think that was really his point and I didn’t perceive him as saying that’s the way to handle this now.

    I think the judge was saying it’s cowardly or wimpy for a real man to let others do their battles. In other words, I think the judge was objecting to Aaron hiding behind (in the judge’s view) an internet mob.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  209. Was the judge advocating violence or was he calling Aaron a wimp? I thought it was the latter but some said otherwise. Now it seems like we agree.

    Comment by DRJ

    Your interpretation is reasonable, of course.

    However, it’s all about interpretation. Had Aaron said what the judge did, it would have been interpreted as a threat. Apparently some people get to say whatever they want and expect a generous heap of benefit of the doubt, while at the same time going far beyond what makes sense to deny peaceful speech to others.

    Dustin (330eed)

  210. Maybe I should ask it this way: To a non-wimpy man, is settling a problem “like a man” always by using violence?

    DRJ, if Kimberlin had been a disabled free-speech advocating lefty and Aaron a convicted violent felon who had his people intimidate and get his enemies fired, I guarantee this judgement would have been a lot different.

    Vaughey was using the force of his office to protect fellow-leftist Kimberlin and attack Walker, much like Kimberlin does when he can and Vaughey remembers fondly from his past.

    That, plus he’s an idiot when it comes to the Internet and Supreme Court precedent. But he wanted to be ignorant. He had to be. It’s the only way he can justify to himself and others doing what he wanted to do.

    You’re too heavily invested into seeing most judges as fair actors, or at least as genuinely wanting to be so. My firm opinion is that Vaughey was no such thing and was biased as all hell, plus willing to use the force of his position to silence Aaron Walker and help Kimberlin.

    Random (fba0b1)

  211. Judges get more latitude, Dustin. Is that really surprising?

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  212. How does obeying the non-order make things any better?

    It manages the risks as Aaron fights back within the judicial system. I admit this is not the easiest call to make, but it is a wise one at this point because Aaron’s forced silence actually speaks powerfully.

    Dustin (330eed)

  213. You’re entitled to your opinion, Random, and it was very forceful.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  214. DRJ @208 is correct.

    The bench is like a bully pulpit, and I’m certain the judge was just musing out loud (as he is permitted to do).

    Kman (5576bf)

  215. What I didn’t understand (and still don’t) is that the judge expected Aaron to handle this situation with violence. But I’ll defer to the men here.
    Comment by DRJ — 6/4/2012 @ 1:06 pm

    – Well, of course you don’t understand. As Random said: “DRJ, you’ve obviously never been male.”

    Personally, I think they should settle their differences with bombs at twenty paces (slight advantage — Kimberlin).

    Icy (e8e25c)

  216. Judges get more latitude, Dustin. Is that really surprising?

    Comment by DRJ

    A lot more. A universe more.

    And yeah, this surprises me a lot. Someone actually could, in good faith, interpret the judge’s remarks as an invitation to do Aaron or Brett harm with a pack of vigilantes in the back of a truck. Had Aaron blogged that, verbatim, I think he would have actually been violating a peace order.

    It was one example of the judge’s temperament that I didn’t expect and Aaron wasn’t prepared for. It bugs the hell out of me.

    Dustin (330eed)

  217. That’s (morbidly) hilarious, Icy. Thanks for making me laugh.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  218. Good judges watch their rhetoric, Dustin, but they are still human.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  219. “…this new mechanical stuff out here, the electronic stuff, that you can just ruin somebody without doing anything.”

    The judge obviously has a huge bias about the new media. It may be that he has purposely chosen to not embrace this new world. I know plenty of elderly people who you ‘could not take for a ride in the back of a truck” and make them use it.

    It would be even more damning if this bias was the main reason for his ruling.

    jem (465b58)

  220. Guys (and honorary guy, DRJ), if you haven’t already, check this out. Especially note Ali’s last tweet (for the moment, per the advice of John Hawkins).

    Random (fba0b1)

  221. The judge might vote Progressive Left, but I don’t think his decision has a thing to do with politics. It certainly doesn’t engage judicial precedent.

    No, I think that this was, again, more Judge Judy than Oliver Wendell Holmes. This judge saw a couple of guys having what he saw as a nerd-fight and wanted them to go away.

    If it was political, it was stupidly political, due to First Amendment considerations…and more to the point, not looking like a nimrod in front of the media. As the judge will be looking shortly.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  222. I think the judge wanted to hear how Aaron planned to stop his “internet mob” from threatening Kimberlin and his family. I don’t think the judge heard anything that suggested things would change, so he entered the peace order to stop Aaron from blogging.

    IMO the judge’s ruling was wrong and overbroad, but we don’t know that he did this out of liberal spite. It’s also possible his motive was to stop the situation from escalating further and he used the only tool he had to stop it.

    Finally, I’m not picking on Aaron or how he handled this hearing. I thought he did very well, and I also understand why he felt he couldn’t afford counsel. I might very well have done the same thing myself. But if Aaron had had counsel, he might have realized and addressed what the judge was trying to say. I think Aaron saw it at the end but, most of the time, he was focusing on the free speech aspects because that’s what mattered most to him.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  223. “I think the judge was saying it’s cowardly or wimpy for a real man to let others do their battles.”

    Easy to say, for a guy who has a host of armed guards constantly at his beck and call.

    A man should fight his own battles! And if you disgagree with that, I’ll have the bailiff take you into custody!!!

    Judge Tough Guy = Big fat hypocrite

    Dave Surls (46b08c)

  224. My understanding based only on the transcript:
    The judge made a comment that in the past violence was used as a solution to these types of disagreements.
    The judge was intent on preventing the potential use of violence. EG the judge truly believed Kimberlin was at risk.
    The cause of this belief seems to be a lack of knowledge concerning blogs and Google that resulted in the judge believing that Aaron had directly, personally contacted 350 people in an effort to intimidate Kimberlin.

    None of this is ment to imply a correct judgement.

    James (158ce8)

  225. Random,

    Thank you for that link. Speaking of internet mobs, how sad that another family is being hurt by this.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  226. Maybe the judge was afraid of getting blow up by the convicted bomber. This would call for a certain amount of intelligence, as well as a believe that the bomber was unreformed. Oh.

    DRJ — Maybe I should ask it this way: To a non-wimpy man, is settling a problem “like a man” always by using violence?

    I have a wimpish streak, in that I’ll let things slide if I think the other party might have some good explanation for their behavior. If I don’t think that, I’m perhaps too inclined to direct, in your face, verbal confrontation. Doesn’t have to be violence (and rarely is.) Sneaking around and having a court hassle someone, attacking their friends or family, … are the acts of a bullying coward.

    htom (412a17)

  227. htom,

    I like verbal confrontation, too. Maybe there’s a good reason I’m an “honorary male.”

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  228. You are very welcome, DRJ.

    Icy (e8e25c)

  229. Won’t THE LITIGATOR need a nemesis–THE OTHER LITIGATOR?:
    From Other People’s Money: “Of course I’ve got lawyers. They are like nuclear weapons; I’ve got em coz everyone else has, but as soon as you use them they screw everything up.”

    JewishOdysseus (e3eb41)

  230. !52–Dave Surls, sorry I was unclear. I meant lawsuits, for damages, against those officers who enforced unlawful but facially valid court orders, were practically unheard-of. I know for a fact that unlawful orders themselves can & are successfully challenged, I’ve got quite a few dismissed myself.

    Sorry for the confusion.

    JewishOdysseus (e3eb41)

  231. Can one of the law-talkin’ guys (aka attorneys, for those unfamiliar with Lionel Hutz, Esq.) who frequent this establishment explain to me how it is that Kimberlin can lie under oath repeatedly about his parole being revoked with no consequences whatsoever? I feel like I’m living in bizarro world here.

    radar (257ad5)

  232. DRJ — I’d never thought of you as an “honorary male”, but I can see how that description would fit what I know of you, and some other women I know. “A stand up Lady, who smacks ‘em down herself when they need it” is how I think of you. “Honorary — and honorable — male”, I can see a correspondence there. And I like it, it reminds me of my Spice.

    htom (412a17)

  233. Radar, great question, AW’s atty needs to get a certified copy of BK’s conviction, and have it ready to proffer to the Court next time.

    People accuse each other of lying in peace order/injunction court all the time, and to be fair they are probably right at least 1/2 the time… so judges usually take that claim in court w/a grain of salt. But the charge of lying under oath/perjury is usually not so easy to prove as when a convicted criminal is properly cross-examined after denying said conviction, with a certified conviction copy.

    IMHO, that shd have been AW’s very first step at his hearing (once his Motion2Dismiss was denied)–prove to the judge, w/a legal document, BK’s conviction, and force BK to admit to it. Or perjure himself, AGAIN.

    JewishOdysseus (e3eb41)

  234. @AceOfSpadesHQ tweets:

    National Blogger Silence Day: On friday, I will not blog anything. I will be silent, as the enemies of free speech desire, and…

    ..the supposed protectors of free speech support.

    https://twitter.com/AceofSpadesHQ/status/209755407755919361

    Pious Agnostic (ee2c24)

  235. You folks are still talking about this as if the boundaries of this are in the court room. BK uses the courts to further his cause. AW tried to fight under these boundaries in the court, and the Judge told AW to settle this as BK has in the past. Many great legal minds here, but not all issues are legal. Tides Foundation funds BK and their fight method is cage match style. Keep fighting and defining this issue limited by Marquess of Queensberry mind set, your going to end up damaged and not knowing what took your friends down. Know your opponent more than your case.

    Sanmon (98e434)

  236. Apparently occupyrebellion/Sheridan/rauhauser is posting Photos of Ali’s house, and filing complaints as to the 501 status.

    JD (075baa)

  237. “Sorry for the confusion.”

    No problem.

    Dave Surls (46b08c)

  238. Apparently occupyrebellion/Sheridan/rauhauser is posting Photos of Ali’s house, and filing complaints as to the 501 status.

    Projection, again?!

    Rob Crawford (c55962)

  239. Maybe Aaron’s judge needs to be shown what is happening to Ali? I know he doesn’t have e-mail, but surely someone can send him this information.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  240. I’m not an attorney, not any kind of legal expert. Just a layman, just a retired guy who always followed the rules.

    This case make me feel sick to my stomach. That a convicted bomber could effectively harass bully and intimidate people.. endanger their lives, (SWATTING).. and knowing that freak was connected to one unsolved murder.. how can you be targeted by this thing and not be worried about the safety of your family…

    and then we get a judge who not only sides with him but almost tongue bathes his views on bullying… “ahh the days when me and the boy’s would jes rough em up to adjust their thinking”

    It makes you want to see the judge publicly disgraced and that Kimberlin returned to prison for the entirety of his miserable life.

    Mark Edwards (daefee)

  241. Ali Akbar @Ali
    https://www.facebook.com/aliakbar

    reports that his family has been targeted.

    https://twitter.com/ali/status/209727325930127361

    @Ali: “I cannot believe this. ‪#BrettKimberlin‬’s associates have now literally gone after my family. Prayers please.”

    Venusian (b1153c)

  242. From Velvet Revolution’s demand letter…

    “This memorandum is to inform you about potential civil litigation in connection with
    your and your organization’s participation in a dirty tricks and defmation campaign
    against Velvet Revolution, Justice Through Music and their staff.”

    I just want to say that I’ve never in my life “defmated” Velvet Revolution or Justice Through Music or their respective staph infections.

    I have however mentioned from time to time, that these organizations, and their activites are a stench in the nostrils of honest men, and that their membership is composed primarily of left wing maggots and convicted felons, and that if there was any justice Brett Kimberlin’s alleged rock band would be incarcerated for making some of the worst “music” known to God or man. Calling Bretty boy a talentless hack is an insult to talentless hacks.

    And, knowing me, I’ll probably mention it again.

    Dave Surls (46b08c)

  243. P.S. You also be aware that our flea market underwear rides up and Mc
    Donald’s very stingy on the McCafee flavors.

    nk (875f57)

  244. David Hogberg at IBD has more — Parsing Brett Kimberlin’s Arrest Warrant Vs. Aaron Walker.

    I’ll comment here:
    Did Aaron incite the speedway bomber to indirectly send himself a threatening email not to show up on the 29th? I would sure like to see the full header lines from the offending emails. Has he supplied them to the police? If not then I can surely form my own conclusion as to the first question.

    pdxnag (005163)

  245. Thanks for the link to David Hogberg’s recent article, pdxnag. It was well done.

    Random (fba0b1)

  246. BREAKING: National Bloggers Club president targeted by Brett Kimberlin supporters; National Day of Blogger Silence planned for Friday

    At Michelle Malkin’s Twitchy

    “Twitchy has confirmed that a suspected Kimberlin associate used online intimidation tactics to target Ali and at least one member of his family. Attempts have been made to access sensitive information about his family members and to hack his personal Twitter account and multiple National Bloggers Club accounts.

    But instead of retreating as these serial harassers intended, he’s reloading:

    Ali A. Akbar @ali
    “And for the record Brett and Neal, I’m doubling down my support for Aaron and committing everything I have to getting charges filed.”

    http://twitchy.com/2012/06/04/national-bloggers-club-president-targeted-by-brett-kimberlin-supporters-national-day-of-blogger-silence-planned-for-friday/

    Venusian (b1153c)

  247. 199. Steve #153,

    My comment about sending a portion of the transcript to Patterico was unrelated to the discussion about the judge, anecdotes, and men. At least it was to me. How is it related to you?

    Comment by DRJ — 6/4/2012 @ 1:21 pm

    It appeared to me you were telling Random you just couldn’t see what he was talking about (i.e. Aaron should have settled things with Kimberlin mana a mano, and that he was hiding like a coward) anywhere in the transcript you were reading.

    Steve (958caf)

  248. Comment by JewishOdysseus — 6/4/2012 @ 2:22 pm

    IMHO, that shd have been AW’s very first step at his hearing (once his Motion2Dismiss was denied)–prove to the judge, w/a legal document, BK’s conviction, and force BK to admit to it. Or perjure himself, AGAIN.

    Brett Kimberlin didn’t deny his conviction. Just that he was known as the “Speedway bomber.” And he wasn’t until somewhat recently. (The term is not in the 1996 book “Citizen K” as far as I can tell)

    Now Kimberlin knew that this phrase has been around so much in the last year or two or maybe a little bit longer that someone might find he had responded to a message or a blog post or a tweet in which this was included, and maybe he could even name the roof, so when asked if he read himself described that way he said “I’ve read a lot of things”

    I don’t think he ever denied the actual conviction. He just claimed not to recognize that nickname.

    I heard of Brett Kimberlin in 1992. (it turns out he actually had tried to spread the story in 1988. Gary Trudeau in Doonesbury and others gave it a boost in 1992.) Brett Kimberlin was the person who made the person who claimed he had sold marijuana to Dan Quayle – something there was no reason for a unbiased person to believe.
    That was enough to establish him as extremely dishonest. That was, I guess the beginning of his political activism. A reasonable person should assume everything else was of a piece with his dan Quayle accusations.

    He was described in 1992 as a marijuana dealer. So you thought that’s what he was in prison for. Large scale marijuana dealing. I knew nothing of the bombing conviction until last year.

    Sammy Finkelman (a78b17)

  249. Ace is warning about malicious links posted in comments on his blog.

    Warning: DO NOT CLICK ON ANY SITE YOU DON’T TRUST ABOUT THIS STORY. I think there is reasonable grounds for suspicion that your IP will be captured, and a malicious tracking cookie (or worse) inserted onto your computer.

    Do not click on any of the “bad” sites for this. Only go to trusted sites.

    I am sorry if this warning comes too late — I had it in my actual post on Ali.

    Have Internet Situational Awareness, here. I do not know if my suspicious are accurate, but there is no harm in being prudent.

    Venusian (b1153c)

  250. 222. I think the judge wanted to hear how Aaron planned to stop his “internet mob” from threatening Kimberlin and his family. I don’t think the judge heard anything that suggested things would change, so he entered the peace order to stop Aaron from blogging.

    IMO the judge’s ruling was wrong and overbroad, but we don’t know that he did this out of liberal spite. It’s also possible his motive was to stop the situation from escalating further and he used the only tool he had to stop it.

    Finally, I’m not picking on Aaron or how he handled this hearing. I thought he did very well, and I also understand why he felt he couldn’t afford counsel. I might very well have done the same thing myself. But if Aaron had had counsel, he might have realized and addressed what the judge was trying to say. I think Aaron saw it at the end but, most of the time, he was focusing on the free speech aspects because that’s what mattered most to him.

    Comment by DRJ — 6/4/2012 @ 1:51 pm

    I agree with you that he probably didn’t do this out of liberal spite, but Kimberlin was able to manipulate the judge and exploit his ignorance into believing that Aaron was hiding behind an internet mob that was threatening his family in the first place.

    Which is why I keep saying the key to this is that Kimberlin is a sociopath. He knew how to play this judge like a Stradivarius. Aaron thought it was a simple matter of facts and the law.

    Exploitive and manipulative; that’s how sociopaths get their way.

    The American Thinker: The Left and Con Men

    I don’t know if you been following the stories about the problem some bloggers such as Robert Stacy McCain, Patterico, Liberty Chick, Aaron Worthing, and Virginia attorney Aaron Walker have been having with harassment by a convicted felon, domestic bomber Brett Kimberlin. Kimberlin now runs a not-for-profit called the Justice Through Music Project. Kimberlin, a jailhouse lawyer, has also filed dozens of suits.

    …That TIME article, “The Wizard of Odd,” details how Kimberlin used personal contacts and some heavy stroking of the political far left’s insistence that the 2004 presidential election had been stolen to become a player in the 2007 debate over the validity of electronic voting. Because his contacts had gathered some valid information, Kimberlin was able to leverage said information for access to credible opinion-makers in academia think-tanks and in government. This access, in turn, helped Kimberlin further stoke the more lunatic fringes on the left.

    I was a subscriber to the New Yorker when they ran Mark Singer’s story about how he came to know that Kimberlin had been lying to him about Dan Quayle. After reading that piece, I decided not to renew my subscription. I don’t think I have picked up a copy since except to kill time in a waiting room. Not only had a magazine once renowned for its fact-checking originally run an inflammatory accusation, the sole source of which was a man sitting in prison for a bombing, but Singer had been an entirely willing dupe. I remember being appalled. Singer’s rationale for swallowing what was an obvious fabrication boiled down to the expression of a wish. The story should have been true. In a better world, it would have been true. Why? Because it is an ironclad law for sophisticated New Yorkers that that all conservatives are hypocrites? Midwestern conservatives doubly so? Singer wanted that story to be true so badly that he willingly surrendered whatever common sense he possessed until the stench of Kimberlin’s collective lies became too obvious to ignore.

    Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/05/the_left_and_con_men.html#ixzz1ws1r3gLT

    I may sound like a broken record, but as much as I find this judge’s behavior despicable I don’t believe the judge is the key to this at all. Kimberlin is, and he probably could have figured out what some other judge wanted to believe and given him or her that equally as well as he did in this case and arrived at the same successful conclusion.

    I really don’t think Aaron knew what he was dealing with, or how to deal with it. And I don’t mean to cast doubt on his ability to practice law. It has nothing to do with the law.

    Just like this magistrate’s decision. Grampaw Vaughey doesn’t want big, bad wolf Worthing and his gang of cowardly bullies hiding behind the mechanical, uhh, electronic “sheet” of the interwebs googling those nasty death threat tweets to Brett Kimberlin, sweet Ma Kimberlin, and most of all young Miss Kimberlin.

    Steve (958caf)

  251. Aaron’s next court date is set (so far) for 07/12/2012. Here’s to hoping that the attorney mentioned by another commenter pulls this together. I would like to see a counter suit entered and concluded in his favor. There are better and more competent judges in Maryland.

    RosalindJ (ba5fe4)

  252. That was actually something I thought about when the judge told him to grip a pencil,

    I thought that was friendly advice; he could see that AW was nervous and stuttering, so he gave him an way to calm himself down and be able to get his points out. That wasn’t a hostile moment.

    Milhouse (312124)

  253. In fairness, Steve, I do agree the judge might have been saying that, in older times, he thinks Aaron should have handled this with his fists instead of the courts. But I don’t think that was really his point and I didn’t perceive him as saying that’s the way to handle this now.

    I think the judge was saying it’s cowardly or wimpy for a real man to let others do their battles. In other words, I think the judge was objecting to Aaron hiding behind (in the judge’s view) an internet mob.

    Comment by DRJ — 6/4/2012 @ 1:31 pm

    As I said earlier, I found the judge incoherent. I don’t know what he believes. He was definitely reminiscing fondly of the good old, take the guy for a ride with six or 10 of your best friends days.

    What purpose that served other than to reinforce the notion he should stay retired, I don’t know.

    As far as your question to non-wimpy men goes, no (if you care to believe I am a non-wimpy man) I don’t believe settling things “like a man” means through violence. Quite the opposite, I’m no where near insecure enough to be intimidated into violence. If I didn’t think violence has its place in the great scheme of things I wouldn’t have spent 20 years in the Navy, and if I absolutely have to I’ll defend myself (and have, more or less successfully apparently since I’m typing this). But self-defense is one thing; that is entirely lawful. I wouldn’t take the law into my own hands.

    Understand, I was never insinuating I thought Aaron was acting unmanly. It’s exactly the opposite on my part; he did exactly the right thing.

    Which is why I found this 70 something semi-retired judge’s conduct so despicable. A man his age ought to know better. And I don’t care what lesson he meant to impart by wistfully meandering down memory lane to when the micks and the wops used to brawl over girls.

    Steve (958caf)

  254. Ace is warning about malicious links posted in comments on his blog.

    Warning: DO NOT CLICK ON ANY SITE YOU DON’T TRUST ABOUT THIS STORY. I think there is reasonable grounds for suspicion that your IP will be captured, and a malicious tracking cookie (or worse) inserted onto your computer.

    Do not click on any of the “bad” sites for this. Only go to trusted sites.

    I am sorry if this warning comes too late — I had it in my actual post on Ali.

    Have Internet Situational Awareness, here. I do not know if my suspicious are accurate, but there is no harm in being prudent.

    Comment by Venusian — 6/4/2012 @ 4:39 pm

    Any more on this? I clicked on Random’s link.

    Steve (958caf)

  255. Sure sounds to me that Kimberlin is using these non profit organizations’ resources to defend his personal reputation.

    That would be arguably an illegal redirection of corporate resources to personal gain.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  256. All hail the civil servant master.

    Fixed that fer ya. Glad I could help.

    Smock Puppet, 10th Dan Snark Master (8e2a3d)

  257. #139 – Pious Agnostic
    “Hides behind the sheets…

    I wonder what he meant by that. …”

    Probably because I’m of an age with the Judge, but I think he was referring to the movie _Wizard of Oz_, in the scene which originated the line, “Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain…”

    bud (3f9181)

  258. Steve,

    I agree with you about the way real men act and that Aaron acted appropriately. I don’t agree the judge was incoherent. Wrong, but not incoherent.

    And on a completely separate matter, I told Random to send that portion of the transcript directly to Patterico because I didn’t think Patterico had seen it.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  259. Steve, it’s a good idea to run anti-virus software and not follow weird links or links from strangers.

    I actually suggest you use a different computer for reading about these matters (at least if you plan to look at the bad guys’ stuff) than you use for any kind of home banking or anything you find sensitive.

    In fact, all I’ve ever found on the sites that defend Neal Ron and Brett, such as Qritiq’s blog and Kid Kenoma’s, are psychotic rambling and smears. Sometimes they talk about how they wish for someone’s painful and untimely death (no exaggeration, and yet somehow no peace order, either). Sometimes they just smear someone and talk about their family or pet.

    Sick people, and you learn much more about this story by reading Stranahan, Patterico, RSM, and Hogberg than you’ll ever learn from Brett’s team.

    I have had three instances where my antivirus picks up a trojan or trojan downloader while I’m reading one of the psychos’ blogs. Ace’s concern is 100% valid.

    If you’re inclined and have Windows 7, try a virtual machine running Windows XP, and then start it from scratch each session. Alternatively, just read the twitter feeds for Liberty Chick and Stranahan and you’ll probably be up to date.

    And be wary of linking to the actual smear blogs. I think they try to be awful in hopes people show others how awful they are. If you want to do that, use a screenshot and imgur.

    Dustin (330eed)

  260. As a complete aside, Batman can always rely on the legal skills of The Huntress, who is in one of her secret identities Helena Bertinelli from the law firm of Cranston and Grayson.

    luagha (72a2e7)

  261. Bud,

    I’m from the same generation but I wouldn’t use that phrase. The Wizard of Oz had a curtain. The Klan had sheets. I think it was the judge’s way of saying he hates mobs with the kind of hate people feel for the Klan.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  262. So Friday will be a day of silence with an open letter to be sent to our congress people.

    lurker9876 (e62692)

  263. Mobs in sheets are the Klan; Svengali wannabes operate behind curtains, they don’t hide in them.

    htom (412a17)

  264. Thanks, Dustin. That’s good advice, although I’m not tempted to actually give any traffic to team Brett. Not intentionally. In the interim I also learned how to delete flash cookies.

    Steve (958caf)

  265. I really don’t think Aaron knew what he was dealing with, or how to deal with it. And I don’t mean to cast doubt on his ability to practice law. It has nothing to do with the law.

    I agree with this. It had nothing to do with the law, but it had everything to do with expectations. To me, it seems AW believed a judge would see, understand and agree with his not only rational arguments, but legally sound ones, thus consequences would be in the making against BK, and AW would get some relief and vindication. What he didn’t plan on was a judge who viewed this through lens where the historical and personal experience was the greater influence in his decision making.

    With that, Steve’s comment,

    The judge was telling Vaughney to do both. Settle things between the two of them like men, and let the law sort things out.

    But he was definitely calling Worthing a wimp for not doing the first and attempting to do the second.

    I don’t see this as either the Wizard and screen, or the Klan and bedsheets, but the natural expressions of a judge who took the time to inform his audience about things used to be settled when he was young, “in the old days, you’d settle scores against your enemies by getting some friends to “take them for a ride in the back of the truck.” It was testosterone, old school masculinity, etc. Definitely a belittling of AW and his lack of manly response for not doing the first.

    Dana (4eca6e)

  266. WALKER: And you were known as the “Speedway Bomber,” were you not?

    KIMBERLIN: I don’t know that.

    WALKER: You don’t know that you were known as the Speedway Bomber? Do you not know that you — you never read this before in your life?

    KIMBERLIN: I’ve read a lot of things.

    I’m curious about this. Kimberlin can deny reading about being called the speedway bomber, maybe.

    But apparently when he was in jail awaiting trial for the bombings, he offered to post bail for another inmate so he could plant a bomb using the same components he had previously used. Thus attempting to convince the authorities he wasn’t the Speedway Bomber.

    In writing. This note found its way to the prosecutor in the case. Is it possible that Kimberlin’s file still exists? Perhaps in scanned electronic form? It might show that Kimberlin is well aware that he was called the Speedway Bomber, and if so could it prove he perjured himself at trial?

    Steve (958caf)

  267. Link to an article discussing the note.

    http://www.indystar.com/assets/pdf/BG164276919.PDF

    Steve (958caf)

  268. Any more on this? I clicked on Random’s link.

    Comment by Steve — 6/4/2012 @ 5:10 pm

    My link was safe. It was to Twitter – about them going after Ali Akbar’s family.

    Random (fba0b1)

  269. _____________________________________________

    I think the judge was saying it’s cowardly or wimpy for a real man to let others do their battles. In other words, I think the judge was objecting to Aaron hiding behind (in the judge’s view) an internet mob.

    I’d say that a window into the mind of Cornelius Vaughey was his, on one hand, sounding dreamy-eyed about street-side justice — based on his early years in New York City — while on the other hand suddenly becoming Miss Manners and Miss Prim-and-Proper when it came to Aaron merely desiring that the judicial system be goaded into cracking down on Kimberlin. In so many words, Vaughey thundered, “How dare you, a peon, try to get we who stand on Mount Olympus (the sacred clique otherwise known as the public sector) to respond to your agenda!!”

    That contradiction is why I have a hunch that Vaughey isn’t quite so bothered by a form of vigilantism when it’s sheathed in Occupy Wall Street leftism, but can’t stomach Worthing merely pointing the finger at a troublemaking ultra-liberal, much less trying to enlist the legal system to assist him in that effort.

    Strip away the top layer of Cornelius Vaughey, and you may very well see under that a two-faced, phony-ass liberal. Or the contemptible type who is a dime a dozen in places like Hollywood and Berkeley, or Venezuela or Cuba.

    I’d love to see a history of Vaughey’s rulings to determine whether I’m overstating his ideological biases or if I’m portraying what makes him tick correctly. Of course, it would be interesting — and no less revealing — to know which politicians and ballot initiatives he’s either voted for or against over the past several decades.

    He may very well not be a dyed-in-the-wool liberal or a hard-core leftist, but my suspicions are that he actually is, or that he’s certainly not a centrist, much less a card-carrying Republican conservative.

    Mark (299eb0)

  270. Comment by Mark — 6/4/2012 @ 8:20 pm

    Exactly.

    Random (fba0b1)

  271. Brett Kimberlin didn’t deny his conviction. Just that he was known as the “Speedway bomber.” And he wasn’t until somewhat recently. (The term is not in the 1996 book “Citizen K” as far as I can tell)

    Inaccurate. The papers back in the 70′s when he set off those bombs used the label “Speedway bomber”.

    http://cdn.breitbart.com/bigjournalism/files/2010/10/indystar21.jpg

    They attributed it to Kimberlin.

    Kaitian (b51c21)

  272. George Stephanopoulos wrote a book in 1999 and attributed the term “Speedway Bomber” to Kimberlin.

    But late in the race, a federal prisoner named Brett Kimberlin (aka the Speedway Bomber) was telling reporters he once sold drugs to Dan Quayle

    Kaitian (b51c21)

  273. can anyone sue Brett to slow him down?

    lurker9876 (e62692)

  274. On what basis? You need to have standing to bring a case against him.

    Kaitian (b51c21)

  275. Steve,

    I agree with you about the way real men act and that Aaron acted appropriately. I don’t agree the judge was incoherent. Wrong, but not incoherent.

    I’ve reread the transcript a couple of times and I can see how you’ve arrived at the opinion you have. I think the judge could have made his point less ambiguously if he didn’t say things about the old days like “and it was really fair.” Or talk about how quickly things were settled back in the day after saying (or before, I’m unsure of the sequence) that he didn’t plan on spending more than about 10 minutes on Kimberlin v Walker.

    I will continue to hold a different opinion, but perhaps we can agree he wasn’t entirely clear of his meaning.

    And on a completely separate matter, I told Random to send that portion of the transcript directly to Patterico because I didn’t think Patterico had seen it.

    Comment by DRJ — 6/4/2012 @ 6:32 pm

    Yes, I can see that. Random, over at the “Kimberlin Harassment Update: Kimberlin’s Latest Documented Lies Told Under Oath” is doing that exact thing. He’s under the impression that Pat had seen it already, as was I when I replied to you earlier.

    Now on another separate entirely separate matter, I do think the judge behaved despicably in this case in several respects. But that isn’t to say I think that characterizes his entire career. I have no reason to believe that he may in the aggregate have been competent, perhaps exemplary. (Although, I would still like to know if Kimberlin, in the course of filing his 100s of lawsuits, had been before this particular judge before.)

    Which is why I’m not attributing the obscene outcome in this case to Judge Vaughey’s political biases. I simply think Kimberlin manipulated him and exploited his weaknesses. I don’t believe Kimberlin’s type is unique among violent felons. It was interesting to read the newspaper articles covering his original convictions. He was described as a man without a conscience. He protested his complete innocence daily, while he conspired with other jail inmates to have a “hit list” killed, the prosecutor blackmailed, and another inmate to continue his bombing spree while out on bail to make people think the Speedway Bomber was not Brett Kimberlin sitting in jail. He accused the government in general and the judiciary in particular of corruption, while vowing to sue every witness against him for their perjuries.

    He hasn’t changed. I think another judge more used to dealing with felons would not have been so easily and lightly convinced of anything by him.

    And in a way I feel sorry for him. Because when this thing plays out I suspect this episode will tarnish whatever reputation; indifferent, good, fine, or outstanding, he established during his 34 years on the bench.

    Steve57 (958caf)

  276. Maybe we can all chip in and buy Judge Vaughey a copy of:

    Citizen K: The Deeply Wierd American Journey of Brett Kimberlin

    So he can learn how he’s been had by a top flight conman. And that he’s not the first one.

    Steve57 (958caf)

  277. Searching newspaper articles on Kimberlin, there is a lawyer that represented the DeLong’s. Christine Hickey. Which I’m assuming this is her, http://www.rubin-levin.com/professionals/index.cfm?action=detail&id=982

    I’m wondering if it would be possible that someone with the actual reputation should contact Hickey and ask if the term “Speedway Bomber” was discussed in court. So that way she can be used as an expert witness if that is allowed to testify that Kimberlin definitely knows the term “Speedway Bomber.”

    Kaitian (b51c21)

  278. And in a way I feel sorry for him. Because when this thing plays out I suspect this episode will tarnish whatever reputation; indifferent, good, fine, or outstanding, he established during his 34 years on the bench.

    To me, Vaughey belittled and mocked AW several times. It wasn’t a one time occurrence, which makes me really wonder about whether or not this was his typical demeanor in his courtroom. Thus, I really wonder if this is typical of him. It just might be entirely consistent with his decades on the bench.

    Dana (4eca6e)

  279. Steve #266–”But apparently when he was in jail awaiting trial for the bombings, he offered to post bail for another inmate so he could plant a bomb using the same components he had previously used. Thus attempting to convince the authorities he wasn’t the Speedway Bomber.

    In writing. This note found its way to the prosecutor in the case. Is it possible that Kimberlin’s file still exists? Perhaps in scanned electronic form? It might show that Kimberlin is well aware that he was called the Speedway Bomber, and if so could it prove he perjured himself at trial?”

    I like the way you’re thinkin’…

    JewishOdysseus (57038c)

  280. No wonder why Kimberlin is using the tactic of trying to eliminate his responsibility to the Speedway Bombing.

    “The Indiana Court of Appeals threw out the wrongful death damages in May 1993, saying Kimberlin wasn’t liable because DeLong committed suicide. Kimberlin asked the Supreme Court to look at the case, saying the courts were wrong to use his federal convictions as proof he was responsible for damages.”

    Kaitian (b51c21)

  281. BAM!

    http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/7/527/479269/

    Since this is a public document of a court case that Kimberlin himself participated in, can this be used in court to accuse him of committing perjury?

    Kaitian (b51c21)

  282. Kimberlin v. White is (one of) the case(s) that Kimberlin told AW, with a straight face no less, that he had never read.

    Steve57 (958caf)

  283. Of course, that could be shown to be false if Kimberlin was acting as his own jailhouse lawyer, no?

    Steve57 (958caf)

  284. 279. I like the way you’re thinkin’…

    Comment by JewishOdysseus — 6/4/2012 @ 9:26 pm

    Thanks. It’s a rare compliment. I mean, to be accused of thinking.

    Think this might be an avenue to pursue? I don’t know why not. Back in the ’90s a buddy of mine, during a routine real estate license renewal, got hauled before the board and grilled about a DWI arrest (note, no conviction) he had never told them about back in the early ’70s in West Texas. Apparently it was still in some dusty card file in the gun rack capital of the world.

    Recall during the 2000 election the October surprise was Dubya’s DWI incident in Maine back in the Mid-70s.

    I’m thinking if they kept those records 25 years, and the press and the Texas Board of Realty can access them, then more than likely Kimberlin’s file still exists and can be accessed relatively easily.

    Steve57 (958caf)

  285. http://www.state.in.us/judiciary/opinions/previous/archive/08319901.trb.html

    Kimberlin, the popularly designated “Speedway Bomber,” had previously been convicted of injuring people and destroying property by means of an explosive.

    Kaitian (b51c21)

  286. Kaitlin, maybe we’re overthinking this.

    There’s got to be a transcript of the original trial of the Speedway Bomber, Brett Kimberlin, somewhere. A court proceeding in which he was sitting right there at the defense table.

    Who wants to bet the term “Speedway Bomber” wasn’t uttered at least once or twice at that proceeding?

    I’d like to see a good attorney get this guy on the stand, and question someone who is this intensely interested in what people are saying about him on the internet:

    COURT: Now how many did he do?

    KIMBERLIN: Oh, Thousands, thousands (inaudible)

    WALKER: Your honor, your honor not all (inaudible)
    COURT: Hang on to this, I’ll, I’ll, I’ll…

    KIMBERLIN: Id say this is 54 pages of tweets by Mr. Walker himself.

    COURT: And that’s all I care about.

    KIMBERLIN: Ok well…

    COURT: You say somebody else did (inaudible) this.

    KIMBERLIN: This all (inaudible) this is all during the last 30 days.

    COURT: How many?

    KIMBERLIN: This is last day, this is last week on a on a single day this is Mr. Walker’s twitter account, ok, that’s, and most of them…

    COURT: How do you get this?

    KIMBERLIN: How do the get it? I’m the director of several non profits in the area I work with human rights issues and government accountability issues and so it’s part of my job to to work on the internet because it’s basically a social networking job and so I get Google alerts all the time mentioning my my organizations, my name what work we do and (inaudible)

    COURT: And you can just (inaudible) to what he does and see, you can go into his private…

    KIMBERLIN: No this is twitter, this is public.

    COURT: Oh, it’s public (inaudible)?

    KIMBERLIN: It’s all public.

    And ask him how such a guy could fail to notice what people were saying about him in front of his face during the trial that sentenced him to 50 years in the clink.

    That sort of event has got to be unforgettable. Like your first kiss, your first car, the first time you had a female FBI agent in the back seat of your ’68 Dodge Charger…

    Wait, where did that last one come from?

    Steve57 (958caf)

  287. I’m mortified that the judge brought up the fact that’s he Irish. What an embarrassment to our heritage, and America in general.The more free speech is attacked, the harder we have to push back. That has become obvious. I never thought I’d see the day where your right to free speech is contingent upon whether the government likes what you’re saying. It’s bullshit. You must feel pretty betrayed. So sorry for you.

    Syjere (c51c3d)

  288. Whoa, we are probably waaaaay overthinking this.

    Maybe we already have the answer to the riddle, “Did Brett Kimberlin know he was known as the Speedway Bomber back in the day?” onsite. Or at least the resources to find out.

    Patterico, you wrote this post back in 2010:

    Joe Gelarden, Indianapolis Star Reporter Who Covered Brett Kimberlin, Weighs in on the Kimberlin Saga

    I’m sure this question probably didn’t come up in that conversation you had with Joe Gelarden a couple of years back. Perhaps you can still get in touch with Joe and find out if the term “Speedway Bomber” was used at the original trial.

    Also, Kimberlin filed a prisoner’s petition on 12/21/1984 with the US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana and sued Joe, a couple of other reporters, as well as Indianapolis Newspapers Inc., parent corporation of the Indianapolis Star, over an alleged civil rights violation. It wasn’t much of a case; it was closed on 02/27/1985. Still, the petition might also shed light on whether or not Kimberlin was aware he was the Speedway Bomber.

    I’m sure Kimberlin thinks he’s a genius, but anyone who files hundres of lawsuits leaves something of a paper trail.

    He attempted to sue Michael Dugan, Paula Knight, and Sandra DeLong on 4/4/1984, and Thomas Gahl, R.W. Davis, Richard Darst, Kennard Foster, and Jack Thar in 1982.

    The latter five named defendants prosecuted Kimberlin at his original trial.

    Jack Thar is still practicing law in Indianapolis.

    http://www.icemiller.com/lawyer_detail_popup/id/885/bioid/214/index.aspx

    I’m sure Mr. Thar can shed light on whether or not the term “Speedway Bomber” was ever discussed in Kimberlin’s presence at his trial. His contact info is at the link.

    Steve57 (958caf)

  289. Actually, I’m sure any one of the named individuals could impeach Kimberlin’s claim that he never knew until recently he was then known as the “Speedway Bomber.”

    Steve57 (958caf)

  290. I wish there was an “edit post” function.

    A reading from the book of obvious:

    How can you sue the newspaper and reporters who NAMED YOU the “Speedway Bomber” in 1984 and claim not to have known you were known as the “Speedway Bomber” until recently?

    Steve57 (958caf)

  291. “It might show that Kimberlin is well aware that he was called the Speedway Bomber, and if so could it prove he perjured himself at trial?”

    I don’t think so.

    Sure, he’s lying…but, it’s not really material.

    Dave Surls (46b08c)

  292. Dave, I didn’t think this “Speedway Bomber” thingy would be the earthshattering discovery that would “blow this case wide open” or anything to that effect.

    It would just be for piling on. Gilding the Lily. Especially if you could find something that shows Kimberlin using the words “Speedway Bomber” in reference to himself, either in print or in a trial transcript. If not, maybe an affidavit from the prosecutor or a reporter that he called Kimberlin the Speedway Bomber to his face. It would only take a phone call, and apparently we have Gelardin’s and Thar’s.

    Not the cake, not even the frosting, just some nice sprinkly decorations to put on it.

    Steve57 (958caf)

  293. For those hoping for relief: Please recall the MAryland legislature (or a number of the legislators) called for the prosecution of Linda Tripp on wiretapping charges because she got Clinton in trouble.

    Eventually, she had countless legal fees and a destroyed marriage.

    mzk1 (f537c4)

  294. #291

    Sure, the guy is lying his ass off. The term was used in various court documents that he was party to.

    But, it’s not a lie on a material matter (at least it doesn’t look like it to me), so he’s not really perjuring himself.

    If he falsely claimed that he was subjected to a death threat, that would be material, and he could be brought up on perjury charges.

    Dave Surls (46b08c)

  295. “Clinton”

    Now, there’s an example of perjury. Too bad it was never prosecuted.

    Dave Surls (46b08c)

  296. An article I read said this ‘The federal prosecutors’ memorandum to the judge describes Kimberlin as the leader of a large and highly sophisticated narcotics smuggling ring and says he is “devoid of conscience and amoral in conduct.”‘

    Are federal prosecutor’s material open to the public because I’m wondering if it’s possible to get a hold of the memo.

    Kaitian (b51c21)

  297. I was able to collect 38 newspaper articles and compile them into an album at imgur.com

    Here it is.
    http://imgur.com/a/mRVUR

    A pastebin with all the news article onto a plain text sheet
    http://pastebin.com/21NkZLjW

    Please do click on the link guys.

    Kaitian (b51c21)

  298. “Please do click on the link guys.”

    I did. Thanks.

    Reading newspaper articles about convicted felons/scumbags is a hobby of mine.

    Dave Surls (46b08c)

  299. “The proof is clear beyond a reasonable doubt that Brett C. Kimberlin was the Speedway bomber … and injured two human beings,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Kennard Foster told jurors just before Chief Judge Wiliiam Sleekier began instructing them.

    I know it’s probably not important, Dave, but I believe we have our proof that Kimberlin knew he was known as the Speedway Bomber before his trial ended in 1981.

    Of course, I’d like to know what Aaron was driving at when he questioned Kimberlin about being known as the Speedway Bomber, first, before writing it off as completely irrelevant.

    Also, I loved this part about his alibi witness:

    1981 09 22 – Witness Says She Was With Kimberlin
    INDIANAPOLIS (UPI) — The chief alibi witness for accused Speedway bomber Brett C. Kimberlin testified Monday she was with him the night four of the explosions occurred during September 1978.
    Sandra Barton said she slept on the floor outside Kimberlin’s bedroom on Sept. 1, 1978, after dining with him earlier in the evening. She testified she and Kimberlin engaged in a 20-minute meditation session before he went to bed.

    She said she had no reason to believe he left the house near Eagle Creek Reservoir on the west side of Indianapolis.

    I mean, if I didn’t just fall off a turnip truck I might suspect they were trying to manufacture an alibi.

    Brett just knew the corrupt gub’mint was out to frame him, so he had relays of women sleeping outside his bedroom door like dogs so he couldn’t leave without tripping over them and waking them up.

    It was physically impossible for him to be outside his home on the nights of the bombings! Free Mumia Kimberlin!

    You have to wonder how this guy got convicted. How could a jury not be convinced by something so airtight?

    Steve57 (958caf)

  300. Good work, Kaitian. An entertaining read to go with my morning coffee.

    Steve57 (958caf)

  301. Steve, I’ll have to look that portion up, to see if its the situation I’m thinking of, Sandra Barton’s daughter wrote a letter to a friend that dashed at least one “dinner out with Kimberlin” alibi.

    Mom showed up at her work, a fast food restaurant, and spent time and I believe ate dinner with her daughter. Across town from where S Baron said she had dinner with Kimberlin.

    I’d have to look up to see if this is the same “Dinner out with BK” alibi.

    Also in Singer’s book are some very interesting passages about secret egresses Kimberlin made for himself, or was believed to have made for himself. Singer catches Kimberlin in a “tell” regarding one that BK denied to him. The “tell” is one of those peculiar over-lies, an excessive denial. Kimberlin complains that officers were trying to paint a picture of him as a super sneaky criminal with elaborate and devious ways…. as if it were utterly preposterous that he could create and use such an egress, but he had either been caught doing it before or even BOASTED of it before to Singer.

    I’ll try to find both passages so you can see what it is I am referring to in Singer’s words.

    Sarahw (b0e533)

  302. Sarahw, are you thinking of the night mentioned in this article Kaitian found?

    1981 09 23 – Witness In Denmark Sought
    INDIANAPOLIS (AP) – Attorneys for both the U.S. government and accused Speedway bomber Brett Klmberlln talked with a defense witness in Copenhagen.

    …Stanton said Miss Duerden was a waitress at an Indianapolis restaurant where Kimberlin and two teen-age girls went Sept. 2,1978. She was sought as a defense witness to corroborate testimony by the teen-agers.
    The girls testified Kimberlin took them shopping and then to dinner at a northwestside restaurant where Miss Duerden worked.
    The defense says the Miss Duerden dropped several plates that night and was consoled by Kimberlin who left her a $10 tip.

    Steve57 (958caf)

  303. Oh, wait, sorry. You meant the fact mom was at lil’ Debbie’s place meant mom couldn’t alibi Kimberlin.

    Slow on the uptake. I need a second cup of joe.

    Steve57 (958caf)

  304. The undermined alibi is that relating to Sept. 1:
    it is on pages 167-168

    Any with access to the book can also read about “the secret room” business in the appendix on page 378.

    I’ll attempt to excerpt for folks who cant just page to it.

    Sarahw (b0e533)

  305. Kids. They say the darndest things.

    Steve57 (958caf)

  306. ” It was a letter she had received from her neice, Yvonne [ name changed by Singer] Barton – Sandi’s older daughter. [...]
    Yvonne briefly took the stand. Her testimony was a single-thrust assault upon the foundation of Kimberlin’s alibi. The evening of 1 September 1978, she said, around seven-thirty, her mother arrived, alone, and the Burger King on the west side of Indianapolis where yvonne worked as a waitress. Sandi waited until Yvonne finished her shift, then drove her to Fred Scyoher’s house, reaching there about eight-thirty. This was an even far enough out of the ordinary –Yvonne was then living with her grandfather, not with her mother –that she noted it in a letter to her aunt, with whom she maintained a steady correspondence. “It was really weird tonight at work,” the letter said. ” I was running for drive-thru, and we had a rush. I had just gotten a fish sandwich and taken it to the window and somebody goes ‘Yvonne.” So I looked out and Mom was sitting there. It totally flipped me out.”
    Sandi could not have been simultaneously with her daughter in a Burger King on the west side of town and having dinner with Brett at the Earth Garden cafe, on the east side of town. If the letter was in fat written on September 1 – to discount any suggestion that she was mistaken about the date, the government introduced another letter she’d written to [the aunt], this one September 2– Yvonne had effectively nullified the defense’s entire version of Kimberlin’s whereabouts and activities the night of the first four bombings

    Sarahw (b0e533)

  307. p.378 – Citizen K:

    Even if Sandi Barton had been with Kimberlin the night of September 1. the prosecution tried to show that he still could’ve planted the first four bombs without her knowledge by leaving his house via the secret room.
    In 1975. . . Kimberlin subdivided a walk-in bedroom closet, creating a hidden interior “dead space” about ten feet square, accessible by a hinged wall panel activated by an electromagnetic switch. . . .Kimberlin told me, he stored “a bunch of silver, valuable rugs, and stuff I didn’t want people know about if they robbed the house.” The room’s other purpose was to provide a refuge in case an intruder entered the house.
    While cross-examining Kimberlin, Foster introduced the prosecution theory that the room also served as an escape route. Originally, a retractible ladder had been installed in the ceiling above the secret room, providing access to the attic. Floorboards laid across the attic joists created a path to a window above the garage. An employee of the Indianapolis Department of Recreation and Parks, which owned the house, discovered the secret room after Carolyn Kimberlin vacated the property in 1979.[...]The prosecution wanted the jury to believe [a drywall cap] had been installed after September 1978, and it showed the jury photographs of the opening in the ceiling. . .
    This was just more theater by the Govt [Kimberlin] wrote. “If I had wanted to leave I would simply have gone out the window or the door but the Govt wanted the jury to think that I was some kind of weirdo who had secret egress and exits”
    [...] Yet, though I [Singer] doubted the governments scenario, I found Kimberlin’s logid defective in a different sense. Somehow he had forgotten describing to me in lavish detail the hidden features of his Jackson County compound: the hundred-yard escape tunnel from his basement to the woods; the trapdoor in the upstairs closet leading to the vertical passageway, opposite a vent. Unless Kimberlin’s self-righteous allegation that “the Govt wanted the jury to think that I was some kind of wierdo who had secret egress and exits” was intended ironically, it was laughable.

    Sarahw (b0e533)

  308. All hail the civil servant.

    Sieg heil!

    Let’s forget about Vaughey & go with Long. I sentence Judge Heehaw & Baby-Shaped Kimbie to i[naudible].

    Anson E. Long (1af04e)

  309. Re: Speedway bomber:

    A Google Books search found a good number of references:

    http://www.google.com/search?q=%22speedway+bomber%22&btnG=Search+Books&tbm=bks&tbo=1

    There’s actually 11 references in “Citizen K” I only looked at scattered pages and even where I did read, I think I might have skipped sentences or words.

    On page 90:

    The first night–Friday, 1 September 1978–four explosions occurred, at irregular intervals: shortly before ten o’clock, in a trash container in front of a stereo equipment store in a shopping center; fifteen minutes later, in a dumpster in a motel parking lot; half an hour after that, in a residential area; finally more than three hours later, under a crab apple tree near the entrance to a school. The shopping center was called the Speedway Shopping Center, the motel the Speedway Motel and the school Speedway High School, so there was no choice but to call the perpetrator the Speedway Bomber. It had an evocative ring–name-brand recognizability. All the bombs detonated within a half-mile radius and could be heard five miles away. The third excavated some shrubbery in the 1600 block of Whitcomb Avenue which ran parallel to Cunningham Drive. As the crow flew, it was less than a hundred yards from the Scyphers residence.

    I read (or scanned) that paragraph. It might have just passed over me. What I took away from The shopping center was called the Speedway Shopping Center, the motel the Speedway Motel and the school Speedway High School – and I might have stopped reading right there because I probably decided to look up something at that point (or maybe I had already done that.) I might have checked an Atlas at that point.

    The thing I took away from that is that these all took place within the legal boundaries of the small town called Speedway near the Indianapolis Motor Speedway, which is entirely contained within the city of Indianapolis – and that this might have been done for legal reasons – to confine the investigation to the Speedway police department.

    The population of Speedway in 1960 was 9.624, and of Indianapolis (before Mayor Lugar expanded the boundaries) was 476,258 and the population of the Indianapolis metropolitan area was 639,340, and of Marion County, 697,567. Maybe the bomber would have to have been very careful to stay within the boundaries of Speedway.

    The reference to him being called the Speedway Bomber may have just passed over me, since Singer doesn’t say any more there. In any case this was clearly just a newspaper name.

    I also missed the change in the name of Sandi Barton’s daughters between the 1981 Indianapolis Star article by Jose[h Gelarden and the book “Citizen K”

    Sammy Finkelman (a78b17)

  310. If the goal was to have only the Speedway Police Department investigate this it was maybe not 100% successful, because Mark Singer writes, bomb squads from the Indianapolis police department, and the 64th Ordinance at Ft. Benjamin Harrison did show up (as well as officers from the Indiana state police, the Marion County Sheriff’s Department and the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms.

    But actually Kimberlin may not have wanted the investigation strictly confined to the Speedway Police Department, but just to have them have jurisdiction rather than the Indianapolis police department.

    And he may have very much wanted the BATF involved – that would be why he chose bombing as his crime. The goal may have been to trade a federal prosecution (hopefully for him culminating in an acquittal because of alibis and lack of motive) for a state one for murder, and at worst, not to get a big sentence. The injury to Carl DeLong was probably unanticipated and the bombings completely stopped after that happened.

    Sammy Finkelman (a78b17)

  311. Who the hell is this “judge”? That’s one of the worst examples of twisted bias I have ever seen.

    SFC MAC (81dbc7)

  312. What the judge issued is a Restraining Order, or, more likely, a Temporary Restraining Order in a civil case, and it carries criminal penalties if violated, not simply civil penalties. How can this be? Ask any man who has ever been divorced and had one filed against him. You have no constitutional rights or protections under this perversion of our legal system. The judge is acting as he would in a typical case under family law. He is the norm, not the exception. The defendant, who is not called a defendant, has to prove himself innocent. There is no presumption of innocence, but instead, the Napoleonic Law presumption of guilt until proven innocent is substituted in this perversion of our legal system. The simple charge against him is a conviction of guilt! This is Mr. Walker’s position, and he doesn’t have much chance of prevailing.

    Ken Brewer (4b598a)

  313. Aaron is prohibited to blog about Kimberlin, but, he is free to blog about sociopaths all he wants. It would be a shame for him not to avail himself to the opportunity presented by the popularity of his case.

    Personally, I had a sociopath for a boss once. It took me months to have him fired, and, after that he was obsessed with revenge. He repeatedly threatening me with death to any third party who would listen.

    BigSkyBob (3011dd)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.9226 secs.