IN$THE$CIRCUIT$COURT$OF$MONTGOMERY$COUNTY$MARYLAND …1...

1

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY MARYLAND

BRETT KIMBERLIN, Plaintiff,

v. No. CV 380996

AARON WALKER, 7537 Remington Road, Manassas, VA 20109WILLIAM HOGE SR., 20 Ridge Road, Westminster, MD 21157ROBERT STACY MCCAIN, 10100 Academy Drive, Hagerstown, MD 21740ALI AKBAR, 8116 Heritage Place Drive, Ft. Worth, TX 76137 andANONYMOUS BLOGGER akaKIMBERLIN UNMASKED (address unknown) Defendants.

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR DEFAMATION, MALICIOUS PROSECUTION, HARASSMENT, STALKING, CONSPIRACY, INVASION OF PRIVACY AND

INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

Plaintiff Brett Kimberlin (“Kimberlin”) hereby îles a Complaint for Damages against

Defendants Aaron Walker (“Walker”), William Hoge Sr. (“Hoge”), Robert Stacy

McCain (“McCain”), Ali Akbar (“Akbar”) and Anonymous Blogger aka Kimberlin

Unmasked (“KU”) for defamation, malicious prosecution, harassment, stalking,

conspiracy, invasion of privacy and in^liction of emotional distress.

NATURE OF THE ACTION

1. This matter arises out of a multi-‐year campaign by Defendants to smear,

destroy and imprison Plaintiff by knowingly, maliciously, and intentionally

îling numerous frivolous, defamatory and malicious court îlings -‐-‐ including

civil suits, peace orders, and criminal charges – and then publishing false,

defamatory, and tasteless stories about those îlings as if the allegations were

true, all the time raising funds from unsuspecting people who read the

stories.

2

2. Defendants used their legal îlings to stalk and harass Plaintiff, invade his

privacy and in^lict emotional distress on him and his family.

3. Defendants portrayed Plaintiff in a false light as engaging in criminal activity,

being a pedophile, rapist and domestic terrorist, and engaging in domestic

violence.

4. Defendants falsely wrote that other targets of theirs were part of “Team

Kimberlin” and published that Plaintiff controlled, paid, and directed this vast

network of “unsavory” operatives.

5. None of these portrayals is based on reality.

6. The defamatory statements made by Defendants were published on the

Internet in various forums, including blog posts, on Twitter, and on message

boards, and were widely accessible to the public both directly and by Google

searches, and they were seen by many people including Plaintiff ’s business

associates, friends and family. They were also published in numerous court

documents îled in courts in Montgomery County and Carroll County

Maryland, Prince William County Virginia, and United States District Court in

Greenbelt, Maryland. They were made to various law enforcement ofîcials.

7. Defendants have persisted in their smear attacks despite being asked by

Plaintiff to be left alone, to remove false posts, and to respect the privacy of

Plaintiff and his family.

8. Defendants have proîted from their attacks against Plaintiff by raising funds

online using his name and their false narratives, court îlings and defamatory

3

publications to demonize him. They have also obtained other things of value

such an online traf^ic to their websites.

9. Plaintiff has initiated this action to recover compensatory and punitive

damages from Defendants for the substantial injury they have caused to

Plaintiff by their intentional, malicious and outrageous conduct.

PARTIES

10. Plaintiff Brett Kimberlin is the Director of Justice Through Music, a Maryland

based 501c3 non-‐pro^it that uses music to inspire people to engage in civic

participation. Plaintiff has held that position for almost ten years and he

resides in Bethesda, Maryland.

11. Aaron Walker is an unemployed attorney who resides in Manassas, Virginia

who writes a conservative Internet blog called Allergic2Bull, and publishes

on various other online outlets including Twitter.

12.William Hoge Sr. is a conservative blogger who resides in Westminster,

Maryland and writes a blog called HogeWash. He publishes on various other

online outlets including Twitter.

13. Robert Stacy McCain is a conservative blogger who resides in Hagerstown,

Maryland who writes a blog called The Other McCain, and publishes on

various other online outlets including Twitter, Viral Read and The American

Spectator.

14. Ali Akbar is the director of The National Bloggers Club who resides in Ft.

Worth, Texas and Lynchburg, Virginia, and he publishes on various Internet

4

sites and on Twitter. He is the reputed boss of Walker, Hoge and McCain and

has provided each of them with remuneration.

15. Kimberlin Unmasked is an anonymous conservative blogger who has both a

website and a Twitter account that were speciîcally created to attack

Plaintiff on a daily basis.

16. The publications of the Defendants are available on the Internet in Maryland.

Defendants Walker, Hoge, McCain and Akbar have all traveled to Montgomery

County Maryland in the past year as part of their campaign and conspiracy to

attack, smear, stalk and harass Plaintiff.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

17. This Court has personal and subject matter jurisdiction over this matter

pursuant to Maryland Civil Code.

18. Venue is proper because many, if not all of the acts occurred in Montgomery

County Maryland, Plaintiff is a citizen of Maryland and Montgomery County,

the torts were committed in Montgomery County, and the injuries were

sustained in Montgomery County.

STATEMENT OF THE FACTS

19. In 2010, Plaintiff îled a defamation suit in this Court against a blogger named

Seth Allen. That suit resulted in a judgment in Plaintiff ’s favor on November

16, 2011.

20. Defendant Walker, using the pseudonym Aaron Worthing, attempted to assist

Mr. Allen in post judgment motions until Plaintiff identiîed him as Aaron

Walker, the publisher of a Muslim hate blog called Everyone Draw

5

Mohammed. Judge Quirk denied Defendant Walker’s post trial motion to

declare Plaintiff a public îgure.

21. After Defendant Walker was identiîed, he began stalking Plaintiff and

harassing him with court îlings and defamatory attacks. He came to a court

hearing on January 9, 2012 and assaulted Plaintiff outside the courtroom. He

îled multiple criminal charges against Plaintiff in Montgomery County in

2012, he îled a civil suit against Plaintiff in Prince William County Virginia in

2012, and he îled a civil suit against Plaintiff in United States District Court

in Greenbelt in 2012. All of these cases were nolle prossed or dismissed as

without merit.

22. In March 2013, Defendant Walker attempted to île a Peace Order against

Plaintiff in Montgomery County but was denied.

23. In July 2013, Defendant Walker further stalked Plaintiff by attending,

uninvited, a family court matter involving Plaintiff and Plaintiff ’s wife, and

then following the wife out of the courtroom, making contact with her,

offering her things of value, preparing false documents for her to île in court,

and advising her to make false allegations and change her allegations against

Plaintiff both criminally and civilly. Defendant Walker then published these

false allegations on his blog and on Twitter, and had the other Defendants do

the same on their blogs and on Twitter. These defamatory publications by

Defendant Walker falsely stated categorically that Plaintiff is a rapist,

pedophile and committed domestic violence against his wife.

6

24. Over the past two years, Defendant Walker has published hundreds of blog

posts and thousands of Twitter tweets falsely accusing Plaintiff of numerous

crimes and other nefarious activity, including rape, pedophilia and domestic

violence.

25. Defendant Walker has recruited Defendants Hoge, McCain, Akbar and KU to

write hundreds of false and defamatory blog posts and Twitter tweets over

the past year attacking Plaintiff as a criminal rapist and pedophile who

commits domestic violence.

26. Defendant Walker has stated scores of times on his blog, in Twitter tweets

and elsewhere that his goal is to have Plaintiff imprisoned and have his

business destroyed.

27. In 2013, Defendant Hoge ^iled a false Peace Order and two malicious criminal

charges against Plaintiff in Carroll County accusing Plaintiff of harassing him.

That Peace Order was denied in June 2013 and the criminal charges were

nolle prossed in April 2013.

28. Defendant Hoge has written literally hundreds of blog posts attacking

Plaintiff, and directed attention to them with thousands of Twitter tweets. He

writes a daily “Team Kimberlin Post of the Day” which accuses Plaintiff or

others he falsely states are members of Team Kimberlin of engaging in some

type of criminal or nefarious activity. Mr. Hoge has stalked Plaintiff by

attending court proceedings that do not involve him, and then publishing

twisted accounts of those hearings that portray Plaintiff in a negative light.

7

29. In July 2013, Defendant Hoge further stalked Plaintiff by attending a family

court matter involving Plaintiff and Plaintiff ’s wife, and then following the

wife out of the courtroom, making contact with her, offering her things of

value, preparing false documents for her to île in court, and advising her to

make false allegations against Plaintiff both criminally and civilly. Defendant

Hoge then published these false allegations on his blog and on Twitter, and

had the other Defendants do the same on their blogs and on Twitter. These

defamatory publications falsely stated categorically that Plaintiff is a

pedophile, rapist and committed domestic violence against his wife.

30. In July 2013, Defendant Hoge published an online fundraising tool on his blog

to ostensibly raise funds for Plaintiff ’s wife, and for her legal representation

by the same attorney who represented Defendant Hoge in his previous

malicious îlings against Plaintiff in Carroll County. At least $3,000 of those

funds were then used to pay for that attorney who thereby beneîtted from

the malicious legal action. This legal fundraising tool is part of a pattern of

conduct that the Defendants used previously in other court cases, which

always resulted in attorneys, including Defendant Walker, receiving a

înancial beneît while defaming and harassing Plaintiff. Defendant Walker

also used said legal defense funds raised in previous îlings for living

expenses while claiming that he needed said funds because Plaintiff caused

him to lose his previous job, which was another false narrative. This pattern

of conduct of using Plaintiff to raise funds keeps the false narratives going,

while enriching the Defendants.

8

31. In August 2013, Plaintiff ’s wife advised Defendants Hoge, Walker and McCain

that she did not want them raising any money on her behalf or using her

name, and asked them to remove all blog and Twitter tweets they had

published about her since July 9, 2013 because they were inaccurate and

harmful to her family. She also asked Defendant Hoge to refund all the

donations he has gotten using her name. Defendants refused to remove the

blog posts and tweets, including those posts asking people to send money for

Plaintiff ’s wife.

32. In July and August 2013, Defendants Walker, Hoge, McCain, Akbar and KU all

published blog posts and tweets quoting from a defamatory îling prepared

by Defendant Walker in the Family Court case. That îling falsely accused

Plaintiff of rape, pedophilia and domestic violence. Defendant Walker also

prepared a defamatory îling that he manipulated Plaintiff ’s wife to île with

the Montgomery County State’s Attorney falsely accusing Plaintiff of criminal

activity. That criminal charge was nolle prossed on August 23, 2013.

33. On August 23, 2013, Plaintiff ’s wife îled to dismiss the Family Court case and

told Defendants Walker, Hoge and McCain that she did not want to pursue it,

and that the allegations Defendant Walker wrote for her in court îlings and

online were inaccurate. Defendant Walker responded by falsely suggesting

that Plaintiff was blackmailing Plaintiff ’s wife. Defendant Walker urged her

to destroy Plaintiff ’s family by continuing with the false narratives he

prepared for her. Defendant Walker then refused her requests to remove

posts/articles already written by him, and claimed that Plaintiff was an unît

9

father and that Plaintiff ’s wife knew it, and she should leave him and take the

children from him as soon as possible.

34. Defendant Akbar stated on or about August 18, 2013, that he controls

Defendants Hoge, Walker and McCain and can order them to stop posting

negative stories about another person.

35. Defendant Akbar tweeted many times in July and August 2013, that Plaintiff

is a criminal pedophile, rapist and abuser of women.

36. Defendants Walker, Hoge, McCain, Akbar and KU promoted the unauthorized

fundraising tool and pro^ited from the money raised. Defendant Hoge, who

controlled the money raised through his PayPal account, refused Plaintiff ’s

wife’s demand that all the money be returned to the donors, instead saying

he would give it to charity.

37. Defendant McCain published accounts on Defendant Akbar’s and his The

Other McCain and Viral Read websites in which he called Plaintiff a vile,

sadistic, and abusive person. He attacked a reporter from the Washington

Post who wrote a positive story about Plaintiff ’s family in 2007 calling her

and the Washington post “agents of evil.” He went even furthering a July 16,

2013 web post:

“The Washington Post is a disgrace to journalism that employs hired liars like Monica Hesse. The Washington Post and Monica Hesse are engaged in a conspiracy to conceal the truth about Brett Kimberlin. In 2007, Monica Hesse did not tell the truth about Brett Kimberlin, and in 2013, she will not tell the truth about Brett Kimberlin. The truth about Brett Kimberlin has never been printed in theWashington Post, nor will it ever be. No honest person would work for the Washington Post, which only publishes evil lies.”

https://twitter.com/MonicaHesse/with_replies




http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2010/10/11/Progressives-Embrace-Convicted-Terrorist






http://theothermccain.com/2012/07/05/when-jessica-was-10-11-12/

http://theothermccain.com/2012/07/05/when-jessica-was-10-11-12/



10

He further attacked Plaintiff ’s daughter in at least one tweet on August 28,

2013.

38. Defendant KU has created a website called Kimberlin Unmasked and a

Twitter site @Kimberlinunmask at which he falsely accuses Plaintiff of

various crimes including pedophilia, rape and domestic violence. These sites

are intended to smear and harm Plaintiff ’s reputation with false allegations,

innuendo, speculation, false associations and false accusations of supervision.

39. Defendants are not legitimate journalists and they do not follow the Society

of Professional Journalist Code of Ethics.

The Lawsuits, Peace Orders and Criminal Charges

40. Defendant Walker has ^iled the following lawsuits, Peace Orders and criminal

charges against Plaintiff since January 2012:

• January 31, 2012, Montgomery County District Court, One Count Perjury

(nolle prossed February 10, 2012)

• April 17, 2012, Montgomery County District Court, Five Counts Perjury (nolle

prossed April 30, 2012)

• January 30, 2012, Prince William Virginia Circuit Court, Multiple Counts

Alleging Criminal and Civil Torts (dismissed by judge December 4, 2012)

• June 22, 2012, United States District Court Maryland, Greenbelt, Multiple Civil

Torts, (dismissed by judge November 26, 2012)

• March 13, 2013, Montgomery County District Court, Peace Order (denied by

judge on March 13, 2013)

11

• December 2011, Montgomery County Circuit Court, numerous îlings for Seth

Allen alleging fraud and perjury (denied January 9, 2012)

• July 30, 2013, Montgomery County District Court, prepared pleading in

Family Court matter alleging rape and domestic violence (denied August 12,

2013)

• July 29, 2013, Montgomery County District Court, prepared criminal charge

for third degree sexual assault (nolle prossed August 23, 2013)

41. Defendant Hoge has îled the following Peace Orders and criminal charges

against Plaintiff since February 18, 2013:

• February 18, 2013, Carroll County District Court, Two Counts Harassment

(nolle prossed April 17, 2013)

• March 22, 2013, Carroll County District Court, One Count Harassment (nolle

prossed April 17, 2013)

• March 22, 2013, Carroll County District Court, Peace Order (denied March 29,

2013)

• April 3, 2013, Carroll County Circuit Court, Peace Order Appeal (denied July

2, 1013)

42. Plaintiff has been required to respond to many of the above frivolous and

malicious legal îlings, and has been forced to appear in court to attend

mandatory hearings on more than a dozen occasions, including having to

drive long distances to Manassas, Virginia where the Prince William County

Circuit Court is located, and to Westminster, Maryland where the Carroll

County Courts are located.

12

43. Plaintiff has expended legal fees to an attorney to represent him in one of the

Peace Orders in Carroll County. Plaintiff has borne costs of responding

including mailing, copies, transcripts, audio ^iles, transportation and other

costs.

44. Some speci^ic examples of Defendants’ defamatory publications are as

follows:

Aaron Walker-Allergic2Bull, Twitter@AaronWorthing, Gazette

• August 28, 2013-‐Bethesda Gazette-‐Comments believed to be written or

directed by Defendant Walker under one or more names-‐Brett…committed

rape

• August 15, 2013-‐Vile, Brett Kimberlin’s Manipulation of His Daughter

• August 12, 2013-‐ Brett Kimberlin is an out-‐and-‐out pedophile

• August 6, 2013-‐The Pedophile Brett Kimberlin’s “Brass Knickle Defense”

• August 5, 2013-‐So Why is the Pedophile Brett Kimberlin Mad at Us

• August 3, 2015-‐For the Pedophile Brett Kimberlin, It’s All About the Kids

• August 1, 2013-‐if you just believe in helping get her kids away from her

pedophile husband

• July 31, 2013-‐Pedophile Brett Kimberlin Violates A Domestic Violence

Protective Order

• July 30, 2013-‐Brett Kimberlin is a Pedophile

• August 10, 2013-‐Twitter-‐LG is the paid troll of pedophile Brett Kimberlin

• August 10, 2013-‐Twitter-‐I suggest we rechristen Team Kimberlin as Team

Pedophilia

13

• August 6, 2013-‐Twitter-‐The Pedophile #BrettKimberlin Brass Knuckle

Defense

• August 5, 2013-‐Twitter-‐Why is Pedophile #BrettKimberlin Mad At Us

• August 4, 2013-‐Twitter-‐Brett Kimberlin will have his trial. But I don’t have to

wait to call him a pedo.

• August 3, 2013-‐Twitter-‐Yes, #Brett Kimberlin is a pedo regardless of charges

• July 31, 2013-‐Twitter-‐#Brett Kimberlin Violates A Domestic Violence

Protective Order

• July 30, 2013-‐Twitter-‐next hearing date will be in circuit court, where

PedoBrett tends to lose.

• July 29, 2013-‐Twitter-‐Brett Kimberlin is a Pedophile

• July 29, 2013-‐Twitter-‐What does #Brett Kimberlin, who tried to have sex with

a 12-‐year old, deserve?

• July 29, 2013-‐Twitter-‐I am not calling him allegedly anything. He is a

pedophile.

• July 29, 2013-‐Twitter-‐So I am going to say something de^initive. #Brett

Kimberlin is a pedophile.

William Hoge-Hogewash and Twitter @wjjhoge

• August 15, 2013-‐She not only needs help with the legal expense involved in

getting herself and her daughters free from Brett, she needs help resettling

herself

14

• August 14, 2013-‐ The Kimberbots are the fanboys, cheerleaders, and enablers

who tweet and blog their admiration and support for The Dread Pedo

Kimberlin

• August 13, 2013-‐ You can donate to help Tetyana get herself and her children

away from her abusive husband. Click on the Tetyana’s Fund link to learn

more.

• August 13, 2013-‐ Tetyana Kimberlin is trying to get herself free from her

abusive husband. She is trying to get her children away from her pedophile

husband.

• August 12, 2013-‐ During that time, he has used mentally abusive tactics to

keep her and her children bound to him

• August 1, 2013-‐Brett Kimberlin, Dread Pedo Kimberlin

• July 30, 2013-‐ However, I do believe that Brett Kimberlin most likely is a

pedophile.

• July 29-‐August 15, 2013-‐Twitter-‐Team Kimberlin Post of the Day (directing

readers to his Hogewash posts above)

• July 29, 2013-‐Twitter-‐Brett Kimberlin:Pedophile?

Robert Stacy McCain-The Other McCain

• July 18, 2013-‐If Brett Kimberlin hates you, he will do anything within his

power to harm you — even though he derives no bene^it from these

destructive acts other than the sadistic vengeful pleasure of in^licting harm.

15

• July 18, 2013-‐ Evil is what Brett Kimberlin is. Evil is what Brett Kimberlin

does. Everyone who assists Brett Kimberlin is an accomplice to evil, and

silence about Brett Kimberlin’s evil is a form of assistance

Ali Akbar-Twitter-@ali

• August 13, 2013-‐Twitter-‐We’re about to raise some money for an abused

immigrant trying to escape #BrettKimberlin.

• August 9, 2013-‐Twitter-‐pointed out Brett Kimberlin’s pedophilia

• July 31, 2013-‐Twitter-‐Pedophile and terrorist bomber #Brett Kimberlin

• July 31, 2013-‐Twitter-‐ Police, myself, and everyone who has written seriously

on the matter believe that #BrettKimberlin killed a grandma to sleep with a

10 yr old.

• July 31, 2013-‐Twitter-‐#Brett Kimberlin has no moral equivalent this side of

Satan.

• July 31, 2013-‐Twitter-‐#BrettKimberlin is a pedophile.

• July 31, 2013-‐Twitter-‐So we’ve uncovered #BrettKimberlin’s big secret: he’s a

pedophile with other pedophiles around his children!

KimberlinUnMasked-KimberlinUnmasked Blog and Twitter

@KimberlinUnmask

• August 13, 2013-‐Bill Schmalfeldt is the worst misogynist I’ve ever heard of,

except Brett Kimberlin

• July 30, 2013-‐I am going to re-‐name Team Kimberlin to Team Pedo. It’s

shorter and it’s in Brett Kimberlin’s honor.

16

• August 1, 2013-‐ The implications of Brett Kimberlin selling viagra are

disturbing, considering we are talking pedophilia

• July 29, 2013-‐Brett Kimberlin, Pedophile?

• July-‐August 2013-‐KimberlinUnmask superimposed a copyrighted photo of

Plaintiff ’s face on to a what is understood to be a graphic of a pedophilia bear

to portray Plaintiff as a pedophile. He did this without consent.

45. The statements of the Defendants as set out above cast Plaintiff in a false

light.

46. Defendants’ purpose in publishing the above statements was to cause injury

to Plaintiff ’s reputation, business and family.

47. The false statements above have caused Plaintiff serious emotional distress,

embarrassment, humiliation and mental anguish.

48. Plaintiff has repeatedly asked Defendant Walker and Defendant Hoge to leave

him and his family alone but they hove continued to harass and stalk him and

his family, both online and in person.

49. Plaintiff has asked Defendant KimberlinUnmask to remove copywrited

photos from his blog site but KimberlinUnmask not only refused to do so but

actually posted more copyrighted photos along with insults and mocking

stating that he would never remove any material from the blog.

50. Plaintiff ’s wife repeatedly asked Defendants Walker, Hoge and McCain to

remove posts about her and her family from their websites and Twitter but

they have refused to do so.

17

COUNT IMalicious Prosecution

51. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1-‐49 above.

52. Defendants Walker and Hoge have engaged in a pattern of îling abusive civil

suits, peace orders and criminal charges against Plaintiff, all of which have

been dismissed or denied, for the purpose of creating false narratives about

Plaintiff that they then publish as gospel, thereby harming Plaintiff, his

business interests and his family. These îlings have been done with malice

and without probable cause. Defendants have used these false, malicious

îlings to raise signiîcant funds to enrich themselves.

53. Defendants’ false and malicious prosecutions have caused Plaintiff to sustain

damages.

54. Defendants’ actions against Plaintiff were willful, wanton and malicious, were

intended to deliberately harm Plaintiff, and were made with a callous

indifference to Plaintiff.

55. Thus, in îling malicious legal actions against Plaintiff, Defendants acted with

an improper and outrageous motive or callous indifference to Plaintiff ’s

rights and interests. As a result of Defendants’ outrageous and repeated

conduct, Defendants should be ordered to pay substantial punitive damages.

18

COUNT IIConspiracy to Abuse Process


57. Defendants Walker, Hoge, Akbar, McCain and KimberlinUnmask have

conspired to engage in a pattern of îling abusive civil suits, peace orders and

criminal charges against Plaintiff, all of which have been dismissed or denied,

for the purpose of creating false narratives about Plaintiff that they then

publish as gospel, thereby harming Plaintiff, his business interests and his

family. These îlings have been done with malice and without probable cause.

Defendants have used these false, malicious îlings to raise signiîcant funds

to enrich themselves.

58. Defendants’ conspiracy of false and malicious prosecutions have caused

Plaintiff to sustain damages.




60. Thus, in îling malicious legal actions against Plaintiff, Defendants acted with

an improper and outrageous motive or callous indifference to Plaintiff ’s

rights and interests. As a result of Defendants’ outrageous and repeated

conduct, Defendants should be ordered to pay substantial punitive damages.

19

COUNT IIIDefamation


62. Defendants have intentionally, knowingly and/or recklessly published and

disseminated the false and defamatory statements identi^ied above on the

Internet where they have been easily accessible, and were accessed my many

people, including Plaintiff ’s family, children, friends, business associates and

actual and prospective partners and others.

63. The statements have caused and continue to cause substantial injury to

Plaintiff, his business and personal well-‐being.

64. The statements have caused and continue to cause deep embarrassment,

humiliation, opprobrium, emotional distress and mental suffering to Plaintiff.

65. Defendants’ false and defamatory statements and the implications drawn

from them concerning Plaintiff are defamatory per se because they make

Plaintiff appear odious, infamous, and/or frightening.

66. Defendants published these false and defamatory statements to third parties

who reasonably understood the published statements to be defamatory.

67. Defendants were aware of the defamatory implication of their statements

about Plaintiff, and intended and endorsed the defamatory implication.

68. Defendants published these false and defamatory statements about Plaintiff

even though they knew that Plaintiff had told them to leave him and his

family alone.

69. Defendants published these false and defamatory statements about Plaintiff

with knowledge of their falsity and/or reckless disregard for their truth.

20

70. Alternatively, Defendants published these false and defamatory statements

about Plaintiff negligently as the truth or falsity of what they were saying.

71. Each of the Defendants was directly involved and responsible for the false

and defamatory statements that were published about Plaintiff.

72. Defendants published these false and defamatory statements with both

common law and actual malice, and with the intent of harming Plaintiff.

73. Defendants published these false and defamatory statements day after day,

week after week, with the attacks becoming more aggressive and nastier as

time progressed.

74. Defendants also published these defamatory and false statements in order to

increase traf^ic to their blogs and to raise money from unsuspecting readers

who believed their statements.

75. Defendants’ false and defamatory statements have caused Plaintiff to sustain

damages.




77. Defendants refused Plaintiff ’s request to be left alone and refused Plaintiff ’s

wife’s request to remove the defamatory and false statements despite

knowing that what they had published about Plaintiff was false and

defamatory and had caused damage to Plaintiff and his family.

78. Thus, in publishing the numerous false and defamatory statements about

Plaintiff, Defendants acted with an improper and outrageous motive or

21

callous indifference to Plaintiff ’s rights and interests. As a result of

Defendants’ outrageous and repeated conduct, Defendants should be ordered

to pay substantial punitive damages.

COUNT IVFalse Light Invasion of Privacy


80. Defendants’ statements and articles above contained false statements,

representations or imputations about Plaintiff that place her in a false light.

81. As stated in Count III above, Defendants falsely depicted Plaintiff a rapist,

pedophile and domestic violence abuser,

82. Defendant KimberlinUnmask depicted Plaintiff ’s face on a pedo bear graphic

in order to falsely depict Plaintiff as a pedophile.

83. The false light in which Defendants placed Plaintiff would be considered

highly offensive to a reasonable person.

84. Defendants were each complicit in and responsible for casting Plaintiff in a

false light.

85. Defendants disseminated their articles on their websites where they were

widely available to and accessible by members of the general public in

Maryland and beyond.

86. Defendants knew that their actions and statements had the effect of casting

Plaintiff in a false light but nevertheless continued to do so week after week,

article after article and tweet after tweet.

22

87. Alternatively, Defendants were negligent in the publication of their

statements about Plaintiff, the effect of which was to portray Plaintiff in a

false light.

88. Defendants’ portrayal of Plaintiff in a false light, as stated above, caused

substantial injury to Plaintiff ’s reputation, business interests, and mental

well-‐being.

89. Defendants’ placing Plaintiff in a false light has caused Plaintiff to sustain

substantial damages.

90. Defendants’ actions against Plaintiff were willful, wanton and malicious, and

were intended to deliberately harm Plaintiff.

91. Defendants refused Plaintiff ’s requests to be left alone and Plaintiff ’s wife’s

request to remove the defamatory articles and tweets knowing that what

they had published had cast Plaintiff in a false light and had caused serious

injury to him.

92. Thus, Defendants acted with an improper and outrageous motive or careless

indifference to Plaintiff ’s rights and interests. Defendants’ outrageous

conduct warrants the imposition of signi^icant punitive damages.

COUNT VHarassment


94. Plaintiff has repeatedly asked Defendants, both directly and indirectly, to be

left alone.

23

95. Defendants have refused to leave Plaintiff alone and they have published and

continue to publish false and defamatory articles and tweets about Plaintiff

on a regular and even daily basis. Defendant Hoge publishes a “Team

Kimberlin” post of the day. Defendant KimberlinUnmask created a blog and a

Twitter account speciîcally to attack Plaintiff with harassing and defamatory

publications. Defendant McCain harasses Plaintiff on his blog with regular

attacks, and even attacks people who publish positive articles about Plaintiff

or his family. Defendant Akbar issues orders to the other Defendants to

attack Plaintiff, and then does so himself.

96. Defendants Walker and Hoge have appeared at court hearings involving

Plaintiff in which they were not a party. On July 9, 2013, Defendants Walker

and Hoge followed Plaintiff ’s wife out of a family court hearing and badgered

and frightened her, and later even wrote defamatory legal îlings that they

compelled her to île while she was suffering duress and manipulated her

into acquiescing to their demands to harm Plaintiff. When she told them that

she wanted nothing more to do with them, Defendant Walker defamed

Plaintiff, calling him an unît father. He begged her not to remain with her

Plaintiff husband.

97. Defendants McCain and Akbar appeared at a family court hearing on July 29,

2013, and offered Plaintiff ’s wife things of value to turn against Plaintiff.

98. Plaintiff ’s wife asked Defendants Walker, Hoge and McCain to remove blog

posts and tweets they had published about her and Plaintiff but those

requests have been refused.

24

99. Defendants’ harassment has been a malicious course of conduct, and they

have done so in public places and on the Internet for the purpose of seriously

annoying and alarming him.

100.Defendants have harassed Plaintiff intentionally and with malice in order to

harm Plaintiff.

101.Defendants’ harassment has caused substantial damage and injury to

Plaintiff.

102.Thus, Defendants acted with an improper and outrageous motive or careless



COUNT VIInUliction Of Emotional Distress

103.Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1-‐49 above.

104.Defendants, by engaging in a multi-‐year course of conduct of malicious

prosecution, stalking, harassment, defamation, invasion of privacy, and

conspiracy, have caused Plaintiff in^liction of emotional distress.

105.Defendants’ conduct has been intentional, reckless, extreme and outrageous.

The Defendants have said that they want to destroy Plaintiff, to ruin his

family and business and to see him imprisoned. They have created false

narratives and ^iled and conspired to ^ile malicious legal complaints in order

to harm Plaintiff and line their pockets with donations from unsuspecting

readers.

25

106. There is a causal and direct connection between the Defendants’ wrongful

conduct and Plaintiff ’s emotional distress.

107. The distress caused by Defendants’ conduct has been severe and caused

substantial damage and injury to Plaintiff.

108. Thus, Defendants acted with an improper and outrageous motive to

Plaintiff ’s rights and interests. Defendants’ outrageous conduct warrants the

imposition of signi^icant punitive damages.

COUNT VIIStalking

103 Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1-‐49 above.

104 Defendants Walker, Hoge, Ali and McCain have engaged in a course of conduct

of approaching and pursuing Plaintiff knowing that conduct reasonably

placed Plaintiff in reasonable fear of assault.

105 Defendants’ stalking has placed Plaintiff in reasonable fear of assault. This

reasonable fear is based on an assault of Plaintiff by Defendant Walker on

January 9, 2012 in the Montgomery County Circuit Courthouse when he

came to a hearing uninvited and attacked Plaintiff. That assault landed

Plaintiff in the hospital. Defendant Walker has repeatedly stated that he

carries weapons and that he wants to destroy Plaintiff. Defendants Walker

and Hoge told Plaintiff ’s wife that they want to put Plaintiff in prison for the

rest of his life.

106 Defendant Walker has repeatedly called state and federal law enforcement

of^icials and made false reports to them that Plaintiff has committed crimes.

26

Defendant Walker called the FBI on or about August 12, 2013 and told them

to surprised Plaintiff ’s wife at a location known to him, and Defendant

Walker told the FBI falsely that Plaintiff ’s wife would provide evidence of

crimes by Plaintiff to the FBI. When the FBI talked with Plaintiff ’s wife, she

stated that Plaintiff did not commit the crimes alleged by Defendant Walker.

107 Defendants have stalked Plaintiff intentionally and with malice in order to

harm Plaintiff.

108 Defendants’ stalking has caused substantial damage and injury to Plaintiff.

109 Thus, Defendants acted with an improper and outrageous motive or careless



WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Brett Kimberlin respectfully requests that the Court enter

judgment as follows:

1. Awarding Plaintiff compensatory damages in an amount to be determined at

trial;

2. Awarding Plaintiff punitive damages of no less than $1 million;

3. Awarding Plaintiff costs and other expenses; and

4. Awarding Plaintiff such other and further relief as the Court deems just and

proper.

27

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff Brett Kimberlin hereby demands a jury trial on all claims triable.

Dated this 30th day of August, 2013.

Respectfully submitted,

Brett Kimberlin 8100 Beech Tree Road Bethesda, MD 20817

IN$THE$CIRCUIT$COURT$OF$MONTGOMERY$COUNTY$MARYLAND …1...

Documents

Transcript of IN$THE$CIRCUIT$COURT$OF$MONTGOMERY$COUNTY$MARYLAND …1...