Disclaimer: This transcript was written to the best of my ability. Any minor errors I may have made were inadvertent. In my sincere opinion they would not have altered any meaning or the general significance of the proceeding.
Judge Rupp: Civil 339254 Kimberlin versus Seth Allen and you are?
BK: I'm Brett Kimberlin. [Rupp: Alright.]
AW: My name is Aaron Walker. I'm the blogger known as Aaron Worthing, and I have an emergency motion against Mr. Kimberlin for his gross misconduct in this case. I'd like to be heard
Rupp: Listen, I'm not. You're not here on this proceeding. [AW: I understand your honor.] So I'm not going to hear it.
AW: Your honour, he filed an improper motion before this court on Friday, and I had no notion until Saturday morning that he had done that. He has in a blatant attempt to stalk and oppress me
Rupp: Hold it. Hold it.
On the surface, Aaron Walker had a single reason to be at the hearing. This can be easily understood by reading his exchange with Judge Rupp. However, in order to buy this premise, one needs to assume Aaron Walker truly believed his life would be in jeopardy from terrorists, if his identity was made public.
AW: I'm sorry.
Rupp: First off, you don't have any right to be saying anything, [BK giggles] and you don't have a right to be laughing.
Aaron embedded the transcript of this hearing through scribd on his blog on May 17th, 2012. However, he only copied and pasted the parts of the hearing in which he spoke. He downplayed what I had done to defend myself and upgraded his non-role into something more than it was. There were also a few discrepancies I will point out along the way.
Rupp: There was a motion to withdraw as moot a question to compel the secret identity of Aaron Worthing, [AW: Yes] and then there's a Plaintiff's response to Aaron Worthing's motion to quash. And you're Mr. Worthing?
AW: Well I'm Aaron Walker, and I blogged as Mr. Worthing. Yes, that's correct.
Rupp: Why is, why- Are you requiring that he come to court today?
BK: Judge initially, he's an anononymous blogger who's been involved with the stalker.
I'm not a stalker. Kimberlin nor anyone else has ever proved I was. There are no felonies on my record. Nothing. Squat. I'm a college boy. No one has any proof at all I have used sock puppets and engaged in scripted fights on the internet. I cybersleuthed Brett Kimberlin, Brad Friedman, and other topics since 2006. I'm just a blogger who scooped this story over two years before the Breitbart Cult ever heard of it. They have been smearing me and attempting to steal the scoop and unfairly give ownership of it to Mandy Nagy.
Rupp: Why are you, why is he here?
BK: I didn't ask him to be here. He just foisted himself
Rupp: He says he's been summonsed.[AW: Well, no]
BK: He wasn't summonsed.
AW: If I may explain, your honor.
AW: He did actually initially ask me to testify today in his initial correspondence with me. If he's not interested in my testimony today, then I would ask why he has subpoenaed this court in order to obtain my identity.
Rupp: Well he withdr-
BK: I withdrew that
Rupp: It's been withdrawn.
AW: Yes I understand, but why did he do that in the first place?
Rupp: Well, it's been withdrawn. So he says withdrawn as moot.
AW: But your honour, if you look at what he has filed today, all he had to do in order to file that motion was tell the court he obtained my information. He did not even have to say my name. Instead, in this public document now he has put in my name. He has put in my home address. He has put my birth date. He has put the high school I went to. He put the fact that I dropped out of high school. He put the fact I received a ged, that I went to the University of North Texas. He went and put in the fact that I sued the law school admission council. He put in the fact that I was admitted to Yale Law School and graduated in the class of 2002. He put down my current job with my current employer and their address as well. His intent in doing this was so that it becomes a public record, so that he and his friends can put this out in public, so they can stalk and harass me. It is plain on the face of this. I would ask your honour that you swear him in and ask why he put all this unnecessary information in this file.
Rupp: Yeah, it's been withdrawn as moot.
AW: I'm talking about the motion to withdraw itself.
Rupp: Yeah, it's not, it's no longer in effect.
AW: But this is a public document, and his friends will then take this public document, this motion to withdraw as moot and put out all my information.
Rupp: Are you asking that this be sealed?
AW: I would like this to be sealed. I would like
Rupp: Any objection to having it sealed, Mr. Kimberlin?
BK: Judge, this
Rupp: Yes or no.
BK: Yes, I object.
Rupp: Yes why. Why should all this be a matter of public record?
BK: This man has engaged in stalking with the defendant in this case.
Rupp: Well, there's no order against him in this case.
BK: No there's no order against him in this case.
Rupp: So why is he a part of this case?
BK: He did it anonymously. Initially I wanted to call him as a witness, and then when I filed the motion to call him as a witness, he began trying the case on his blog. He filed every, he posted every motion on his blog. And kept accusing me of all kinds of terrible things on his blog, and he ridiculed me. He taunted me. He threatened me. He had people posting on his blog that I was a terrorist and a pedophile, and all this other stuff. And he engaged in unethical behaviour. He said that he represented the defendant in this case as an anonymous person. He can't, a lawyer cannot represent someone as an anonymous person. He asked to be identified. He went on his blog and said I am representing. I entered into an attorney-defendant privileged relationship with Seth Allen as Aaron Worthing. And he's not even a lawyer in this jurisdiction. He lives in Virginia. He can't represent somebody as a fake person as a pseudonym. And so he put himself out there to be identified. I mean if he's a lawyer fine. I have a right to determine if he's a lawyer. He can't say that he's anonymous, and he's representing Seth Allen. It's just it didn't make sense, and I figured I had to find out who this guy is. If he's saying he represents somebody in a case against me, then I need to identify him. So I identified him. I didn't want him to come out and say- the reason I put all that information in the document was because Mr. Worthing has called me a liar over and over and over and I wanted everybody
Brett Kimberlin made a good point. Aaron Walker has been misrepresenting the idea he was my attorney. He even asked me recently if I would waive attorney-client privilege, so he could post an email between us. Aaron Walker was never my lawyer. He can't practice law in Maryland. Never, ever should Aaron Walker have been involved in this case. I get that he wanted his identity to remain anonymous, but let's keep this real.
Rupp: This isn't even in the court. This is incredible.
BK: I know.
Rupp: This whole thing is incredible. I'm going to- there's a motion to quash that was filed on behalf of, that was originally filed by
AW: You're looking at something by Seth Allen
Rupp: No, it was originally filed by Elizabeth Kingsley.
AW: That would be the other attorney who represented me, yes.
Rupp: She filed a motion to file anonymously or under seal. [BK: Right.] She's filed that, and I'm going to grant their request to file this anonymously under seal, and I'll grant the request to seal the information that's contained in docket entry 114 the motion to withdraw as moot. Alright, sir?
AW: Actually, I would like a little more of relief, if you don't mind.
Rupp: No, that's it. I'm done. You're done.
AW: Alright. Thank you, your honour.
Rupp: Alright, Mr. Kimberlin I received a phone call to my secretary from Mr. Allen from the 508 area code number requesting that he be allowed to participate by telephone, and he made representations that he has submitted written requests to participate by telephone. I checked with the clerk's office. I don't see any written requests having been made. So I've reviewed docket numbers 99 and 100 and reviewed your motions for contempt of court against Mr. Allen, and I have to just tell you I'm a little puzzled as to what it is you're claiming he has done that constitutes contempt of court.
So at that point, Aaron Walker for all intents and purposes should have had his ass finally out of the picture.
I've always wondered why Popehat got a pro bono atttorney for Aaron but no one for me. I was the one being accused of contempt of court. Kingsley could have easily thrown in a motion to have Aaron's identity sealed, while simulaneously and easily defending myself for this rubbish attempt by Kimberlin to yet again have me criminalised.
Aaron Walker wants folks to believe he let Kingsley go in order to defend himself. He's never fully explained that. My hunch is Kingsley recused herself after reading the 200 or whatever page insane motion Aaron Walker chucked into my civil suit he had no right to include himself in.
As for the motions I sent in that Rupp never saw, they were in the courtroom just not in his hands. Call it bureaucracy or whatever. I guess I done good by calling in and making sure Judge Rupp knew I wasn't in any further default mode. A court clerk told me the motions had been located, and as they were sent certified mail, I have proof of that. I just have no money to appeal, and Team Breitbart has been using me the whole time for their own ends.
When Aaron wrote it appears Maryland law does not allow people to testify telephonically, he could very well have been talking out of his ass yet again. I think since Rupp didn't have my motions in front of him, he decided to forego allowing me to testify by phone but used the knowledge I was willing to then act on my behalf. That will be clear by the end of this post.
It's disturbing that Aaron Walker has made it seem I may have been a stalker. He has consistently written that as a defendant I deserved legal help. I've yet to see him write unequivocally I did nothing wrong to deserve being sued in the first place. How was I in any way ever a stalker or defamed Brett Kimberlin?
BK: Alright. I'll be happy to go into that. Are we gonna have Mr. Allen on the phone?
Rupp: No, I want to know why you think he should be held in contempt of court.
BK: Well, I have a memorandum. Can I just walk you through it? Can I hand you a copy of it?
Rupp: If you can't tell me, well let me see what you have. You're submitting today a twenty-three page memorandum set for this hearing.
BK: I'm just gonna walk you through this. I just wanted you to have this.
Rupp: Just give me the bottom line. Why do you think he should be held in contempt of court? I don't want to hear anything about Judge Jordan. That has nothing to do with anything before me.
BK: With what?
Rupp: This has nothing to do with what's before me. Judge Jordan has nothing to do with the order that you're seeking of contempt of court. [BK: I know.] So what is it you
BK: There are two things. Judge Jordan issued an order on November 14th in a damages hearing, where he issued a permanent injunction against Mr. Allen prohibiting him from defaming me or [Rupp: Right, I saw the order.] And so Mr. Allen kept telling the judge at the time that he was done blogging about me, that he was not going to say anything more about me.
Rupp: The order says he's to enjoin permanently in engaging in tortious conduct constituting defamation or of interference with business relations of the Plaintiff Brett Kimberlin. [BK: Yeah, right.] So what is it he's done that makes you feel he's violated this order?
BK: And at the time Judge Jordan was very clear to him. He said, I want you to leave this man alone. I want you to stop blogging about him.
Jordan never said I couldn't blog on Brett Kimberlin. That was an outright lie. Thankfully I had a competent judge that day in January.
BK: I want you to quit talking about him. And I can read to you from the transcript if you want. It's on page seven.
Rupp: It's one thing to say that, [BK: I know] but this is what's ordered here: Defamation, interference of business relations. Talking about somebody doesn't constitute defamation.
BK: Well, he's not just talking about me.
Rupp: Well, tell me what he's done that you believe constitutes a violation of this court order.
BK: Well, first of all on August 8th Judge Ruben in a preliminary ruling
Rupp: This is a November 14th order. [BK: I understand] This isn't Judge Ruben's order.
BK: I understand. There was a preliminary injunction in this case requiring, ordering Mr. Allen to delete a number of blog posts he had made on his blog. And Mr. Allen refused to do so, so Google actually deleted those blog posts. So as soon as the hearing was over here on November 14th, Mr. Allen then reposted those blog posts, and that is the subject of the permanent injunction. He said, I had a preliminary injunction already finding these blog posts were defamatory in August. Judge Jordan made this injunction permanent and prohibited him from doing so in the future. And he told him at the hearing, he said that if you write about Mr. Kimberlin you do so at your peril, and you can be in front of the court in contempt. So he was told explicitly not to blog about me, not to defame me, not to repost these things he had already posted. So since then he's, I can just show you the different posts here. It's literally hundreds of pages of posts.
I mean, he didn't just repost what he had been ordered to take down in August in a preliminary injunction. He went on and on. I mean, and not only that he attacked the judge in this case. He called him the worst names you could ever imagine. And this morning he's blogged about you, your honour. He's called you names in two posts this morning.
I mean, I know it doesn't matter, but it just shows there's contempt here. He's contemptuous of the court's order. He has totally ignored the court's admonition both during the hearing and afterwards he's posted and posted. He's reposted, and you know he calls me all sorts of terrible things. He calls me a terrorist. He calls me a cybersmearer. He calls me a pedophile. He calls me
Kimberlin is a liar. I never called him a pedophile ever. I've only pointed out credible sources who have raised the possiblity he was one with Julia Scyphers' granddaughter. Thank God for Judge Rupp the Magnificent. Kimberlin had three hours on November 14th to prove even one instance of defamation or stalking, and he utterly failed because I never did any of those things.
Rupp: I've read the 20 items that you've submitted in your memorandum [BK: right]
This is the point when Aaron Walker decided to butt in, even after he was done with having anything to do with it. He had already won by getting his information sealed. He's lucky Rupp ignored his follow up comment, after Rupp had threatened him with the sheriffs. Aaron Walker is either insane or involved in the Breitbart scam, period.
AW: Your honour. If I may, I'm sorry, break in a second time.
Rupp: No. I had a sheriff up here, because I didn't think one was needed. I'm about to get a sheriff up here to escort you out of here. [AW: I understand.] You're not breaking in. Sit down.
AW: I felt the need to explain something to the court if I could.
Aaron wrote in his entry that he said I don't understand instead of I understand. I heard it as him saying I understand, that he acknowledged having no right to break in and was apologising. As an attorney he had to know he was running the risk of being held in contempt. So why'd he fudge the transcript to make himself appear as a great civil rights lawyer in some great free speech cause, when he's really simply out to hawk his book, peddle for unearned donations, and pimp for the decaying Breitbart Empire?
Aaron wants it both ways. He wants people to believe he actually did something in my defense, when he didn't do one bloody thing. He says he stuck around to see how things turned out for myself. But then he downplayed what actually went down.
So the court went on, looking at post after post at Seth Allen’s blog and deciding that one post after another didn’t constitute defamation and therefore it didn’t violate the order. I didn’t see which exact posts Rupp was talking about, but you can deduce much of it from reading the transcript. So if you are curious—and in the name of full disclosure—embedded here is a full copy of the transcript of that hearing.Aaron and the rest of the Breitbart Cult do not want folks to consider the obvious. There's no logical explanation for why Elizabeth Kingsley stopped representing Aaron Walker. There's no logical explanation for why Aaron opened his yapper and almost got arrested, after for all intent and purposes his involvement was over. There's no logical explanation for why Aaron Walker engaged with Brett Kimberlin after the hearing and grabbed his I-Pad. He thought it was an explosive? No fricken way. Aaron is either unhinged or involved in a scam, possibly both.
The rest of the hearing did go pretty much the way Aaron Walker described. Judge Nelson Rupp read through each of my entries written after November 14th and found that none of them constituted defamation nor interfered with Brett Kimberlin's business.
While taking in below what Kimberlin was saying, please keep in mind that during most of that, Judge Rupp was methodically pouring through my schtick. Rupp mentioned how he didn't understand how I expected the court to know about my motions simply because they were posted. I already explained that above. I do like how somehow I was able to be present in the court via Rupp reading DFQ2. Donkeytale would call that RIOTOUS!
Rupp: Alright, I've got the twenty items here.
BK: Well, I can show you these.
Rupp: What are those?
BK: This is the stuff he's posting on his own blog.
Rupp: What's currently posted?
BK: This is all stuff he has posted since November 14th.
Rupp: What's currently posted as of today?
BK: Oh today about you?
Rupp: No, I'm not interested what he's posted about me. What's he
BK: I'm saying all this is posted on his blog.
Rupp: Didn't he take all of that down?
BK: No, Google took it down in August, and as soon as the judge, he got back after the November 14th hearing, he reposted it and posted more stuff. I mean it's like I've said. This is all since November 14th. This stuff, and it's all about my business. It's all about me. I mean, I was arrested 32 years ago on a case. I got out of jail. I did my time. I run two non-profits in this wonderful city working with kids and Congress members and community leaders. You know, I have two kids and a wife, and this guy will not leave me alone. He wants to post stuff that happened 32 years ago. You know, he dug up 32 year old mug shots of me I had never even seen before.
I'll interject one last comment before I stfu. You'll see at the end, Rupp finally got to the motions I had sent in certified mail that he never saw due to red tape or wtf. One of them said that since I had never been legally served papers for this contempt hearing, the whole proceeding should have been dismissed. Rupp seemed to agree.
Then Kimberlin in all his ineptness as a jailhouse attorney tried one last ditch attempt to have the hearing continued, so he could yet again hire a rent-a-cop to "serve" me papers. I believe Kimberlin wanted so very badly to get me down to Maryland again to once more have me illegally detained. At that point you'll see that Judge Rupp the Magnificent brought the bullshite festivity to an abrupt ending by denying the motion to have me held in contempt of court.
Oh, and one last point. As Kimberlin pointed out on November 14th and yet again in this session, I was clearly the one and only who had exposed him and Velvet Revolution. So who the triple f dooes the Breitbart Cult think they're fooling other than dumbasses suffering from authoritarian personality disorder?
Rupp: That doesn't constitute defamation. It's all true.
BK: It's not true.
Rupp: What, that you were arrested?
BK: I'm not a terrorist. I'm not a pedophile. I mean, that's not true, and the other thing is my original case had to do with not just defamation. It had to do with interference with business. What he's doing with this is interference with business. He posts this on his blog in order to interfere, and we had a big hearing on this at the damages hearing. And Judge Jordan heard over and over, you know how, what his goal is.
Rupp: Do you have there what's currently on the, what currently exists? Is that correct?
BK: Like I said, this is all since November 14th.
Rupp: But that's currently
BK: Yes, that's what's on his blog.
Rupp: As of right now?
BK: Yes, and I have a list
Rupp: Let me see it.
BK: You want to see it? Ok.
Rupp: Ok, this one is dated November 23rd. I don't see anything in here that would constitute defamation.
BK: Well there's a lot of stuff in there. I could certainly find it. What he does is he mixes. He posts something then you know he says Brett Kimberlin the Speedway Bomber, the terrorist, the perjurer, the pedophile, the this and that. You know, and what he does is he tries to do this, so then he can get it on Google or get it on the search engines. And then people who might want to donate to my business which is what Judge Jordan heard the whole case was about, won't want to help me, won't want to donate to my non-profits. And he does this intentionally to harm my business, and Judge Jordan was very explicit. You know, don't mess with this guy anymore. Leave him alone, and he doesn't leave me alone. I mean he's even threatened Judge Jordan. And like I say, it's not true. It's not true what he says. I'm not a hoaxster. I'm not a fraudster. That's what he calls me. I'm a hoaxster. I'm a fraudster. I'm a conman. I'm all this stuff. You know, our non-profits are sanctioned by Guidestar, Network for Good, the Secretary of State of Maryland, the Better Business Bureau. We have not had any problems with anything except Mr. Allen. Only in his mind am I a fraudster, a hoaxster, a conman, and all these other things. He'll do a long post that you're reading, and then all of a sudden in the middle of it, you'll see Kimberlin this, Kimberlin and his partner Brad Friedman are hoaxsters, fraudsters, and he does this to hurt our business and to harass me. And the original complaint charged harassment. That's what this man is doing.
Rupp: I read the one dated November 16th, 2011, and I don't see anything in there that would constitute defamation.
BK: Judge, it's not just defamation. It's interference with my business. That's what Judge Jordan was very clear about. And you know, he reposted posts that were already ordered deleted by Judge Ruben in a preliminary injunction, and Judge Jordan after a long hearing made that injunction permanent. And he just went straight out and reposted them. And bragged about it and said that he wasn't going to listen to the court, that he wasn't going to listen to Judge Jordan.
Sorry one more comment. I reposted one of the deleted entries but then deleted it within hours just in case. Everything I've posted that contains material from deleted entries has been rewritten. Perhaps I could have legally reposted them all as they were, but I wasn't going to risk that. That being said, I definitely needed to rewrite what had been lost, so people could figure out the true story; so they could read materials I documented which transcend myself as an individual.
If I hadn't done so, the hoax purporting Mandy Nagy as having broken the story (over two years after I did) might have taken hold.
Rupp: I read the second one dated November 16th, 2011. I don't see any defamation in there. ... I just read the one dated November 19th, and I don't see any defamation in there.
BK: Judge, when he posts things from my blogs
Rupp: He posts things from your blogs?
BK: He'll take pictures of things from our non-profit organisation blogs, [Rupp: uh-huh] and he'll put them in here interspersed with allegations of murder and terrorism and hoaxing and frauding and things like that. That, that is harassment, and it's interference with my business. Judge Jordan told him not to interfere with my business. That's his whole goal. He's admitted on his blogs that he wants to destroy my business. Judge Jordan told him at the hearing leave this man alone. He's not left me alone. He's doubled down. Judge Jordan told him to let me get on with my life.
Rupp: I read the November 18 and November 24 blogs. I don't see anything in there that's defamation.
BK: I have a peace order against Mr. Allen, because he threatened to murder me.
Darn, I can never shut up. Even hack writer Mandy Nagy has shown that the so-called murder threat was a hoax propagated by internet predator and Kimberlin associate Neal Rauhauser. Ok, I'm done. I'm done. &:)
Rupp: I read the one dated December 10 and another one dated November 18. I don't see anything in there that constitutes defamation. December 20. ...
Rupp: I've read the one for December 20. There are certainly offensive comments, but I don't see they rise to the level of defamation.
BK: But the interference with my business. That's the second part of Judge Jordan's ruling, and he does this on purpose. Because my business is basically virtual. It relies on the internet.
Rupp: What evidence do you have that anything specifically has interfered with your business?
BK: Well, I know for a fact that people when they google my name, the first thing that comes up is Mr. Allen's posts about me being a terrorist or whatever. And they go and read his blog, and then they don't donate to our organisation. This was a very big issue in the November 14th hearing, and Judge Jordan found that Mr. Allen was interfering with my business. And he ordered him not to do that. He ordered him if he was going to write, that he did so at his own peril. And for him to be able to repost posts that Judge Jordan had already found to be defamatory in a preliminary injunction is wrong. I mean, that's why Judge Jordan made that a permanent injunction, so that Mr. Allen would not be reposting the same stuff. He regurgitates the same stuff from 32 years ago, and Judge Jordan, you know, when he was issuing his order, he said 32 years is a long time, Mr. Allen. Even though you say you're propounding the truth, what for? That's what Judge Jordan said. Mr. Kimberlin should be allowed to get along with his life, get on with his life. And he says at the end, give the man a break. His kids and wife don't need to be reading about his past on the internet. That's what Judge Jordan told him, and he told Judge Jordan over and over, Judge, I'm done blogging about Mr. Kimberlin. I'm done. I won't blog about him anymore. That's what he said. And the judge gave him a break with a hundred dollar nominal judgment and said just don't blog about this guy anymore. And what does he do? He doubles down, and he said this morning in his post, if you don't rule in his favour, you're going to get it. And he used a lot worse terms than that.
Rupp: He said in this last blog which is apparently dated December 31st, this is the first I've seen of any request to postpone the hearing and testify telephonically on his blog. And I don't know why he expects the court to know what he's blogging about, but in any event he says that he was never served with the petition for contempt.
BK: Uhm, I realise what he says. I mean, he says a lot of things. Uhm, I mean he, when he was before Judge Jordan he cried poverty.
Rupp: What evidence is there of service of the contempt petition.
BK: Well, I mean that's up to the court, I mean the court
Rupp: No, it's up to you.
BK: No, the court sent him service. [Rupp: No.] He knows about it. I mean he's known about it. He's been blogging about it. He's known about the case. I mean, like I said, this morning he blogged about it, that it's about a half hour session, that Judge Rupp has the case. I mean, he knows everything about this case. And you know, the court sent me copies of the order of the hearing and sent him copies too. Uhm, I mean if you want to continue this hearing I'll be happy to agree to a continuance and allow Mr. Allen to come here and make his case. That's fine with me. I would actually like that.
Judge Rupp: Have you anything further?
BK: Yes, could we get a continuance to allow Mr. Allen to appear? If we get a hearing date, I will hire a sheriff to serve him personally in Massachusetts.
Rupp: Well, I've reviewed what's been submitted. I've reviewed 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 different sets of blogs that have been submitted as well as the memorandum which contains on page 7 items 1-20 of support of the Plaintiff's petition to hold Mr. Allen in contempt. I do not find that there is sufficient evidence that would allow me to conclude that Mr. Allen is in contempt after reviewing all of these documents. I am going to deny the petition attempt. Court's in recess.
Is Mandy Nagy Insane Or Was She Messing With SWAT Patsy Ron Brynaert's Head?
The following is for Mandy Nagy for having continually thrown me under the bus. She snitched for a non-death threat. She thought I worked with Neal Rauhauser. She revealed personal info I had disclosed to her in confidence, and she didn't even get that right. She tried to steal undue credit for the scoop that was mine. She recently stood by and let me get smeared. She has lied over and over again in some petty attempt to make a name for herself. Mandy Nagy is scum.