Walker v. Maryland SAC (Redaction)

8/20/2019 Walker v. Maryland SAC (Redaction)

1/38

MARYLAND:

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY

Aaron Walker,

[redacted

Mana!!a!, "#r$#n#a %&'&(

)la#nt#**

+ Ca!e No -(..//0"

1RETT 2IM1ERLIN,

[redacted

1et3e!da, Mar4land %&.'5

And

TETYANA 2IM1ERLIN

[redacted,

1et3e!da, Mar4land %&.'5

De*endant!

6ECOND AMENDED COM)LAINT

NOW COMES, the Plaintiff, Aaron Walker, Esq., and files this Second Amended

Complaint against the Defendants, rett and !et"ana #im$erlin.

)RELIMINARY 6TATEMENT

%. Altho&gh more detail 'ill $e pro(ided shortl", a $rief o(er(ie' ma" $e &sef&l.

rett Coleman #im$erlin is a felon 'ith con(ictions related to a serial $om$ing campaign,

per)&r", doc&ment forger", and other crimes less rele(ant to these proceedings. *or 'ell o(er

fi(e "ears, Mr. #im$erlin has $een attempting to reha$ilitate his rep&tation, not $" doing good


2/38

'orks demonstrating that he has reformed $&t $" +$rasskn&ckles rep&tation management- %

in(ol(ing attempts to intimidate into silence those 'ho speak and 'rite a$o&t his criminal past

and c&rrent acti(ities.

. Specificall" in relation to Mr. Walker, for a$o&t threeandahalf "ears, Mr.

#im$erlin has $een attempting to intimidate Mr. Walker into silence. *irst, he threatened to file

false charges, false peace orders, and false $ar complaints against Mr. Walker if Mr. Walker did

not silence himself and 'ithdra' a pleading $efore this Co&rt. When Mr. Walker ref&sed to gi(e

in to this e/tortionate demand, Mr. #im$erlin proceeded to do all that he threatened. On 0an&ar"

1, 2%, Mr. #im$erlin attempted to frame Mr. Walker for a crime3filing false charges, peace

orders, and $ar complaints. Specificall", he claimed that Mr. Walker $eat him &p in the

Montgomer" Circ&it Co&rtho&se and prod&ced photographs and medical records p&rporting to

s&pport his stor". 4o'e(er, he made one mistake5 he forgot that there 'ere sec&rit" cameras in

the Co&rtho&se. When the footage emerged sho'ing 'hat had reall" happened, Mr. Walker 'as

e/onerated, and Mr. #im$erlin6s stor" 'as &tterl" discredited.

7. !he charges 'ere dropped, the peace order 'as denied, and the $ar complaint 'as

dismissed. When Mr. Walker so&ght to get )&stice for this attempt to frame him for a crime, the

Montgomer" Co&nt" State6s Attorne" re$&ffed him, so Mr. Walker 'ent p&$lic 'ith his stor",

telling the 'orld ho' Mr. #im$erlin had attempted to frame him for a crime.

8. Mr. #im$erlin declared that this 'as harassment, and he so&ght and o$tained a

temporar" peace order $ased on his misleading statements. !hen he filed false charges claiming

that Mr. Walker had (iolated that peace order on the night $efore the final peace order hearing.

Mr. #im$erlin o$tained a final peace order in significant part $" making false statements to the

% 0. Patrick *re", rett #im$erlin 9ets 4is Wikipedia Entr" :emo(ed, PA!!E:;CO6S

PON!;*;CA!;ONS, Ma" a(aila$le at http5??patterico.com?2%?2=?


3/38

co&rt. At the end of the hearing, Mr. Walker 'as arrested $ased on Mr. #im$erlin6s false charges

that he had (iolated this peace order. Since then, Mr. #im$erlin has %@ stalked Mr. Walker6s 'ife

and placed photos of her on the ;nternet, @ falsel" charged Mr. Walker 'ith another crime

>harassment@, and 7@ con(inced his 'ife, codefendant !et"ana #im$erlin, to file false charges on

his $ehalf >&pon information and $elief, Mrs. #im$erlin 'as &nder d&ress 'hen she did this@.

=. !his la's&it has t'o goals. *irst, it is designed to pre(ent $" eq&it" an" f&rther

a$&se of Mar"land6s criminal )&stice s"stem or peace order s"stem, and an" f&rther (e/atio&s

litigation. Second, it is designed to compensate Mr. Walker for his losses arising from Mr.

#im$erlin6s criminal and tortio&s cond&ct.

)ARTIE6

. !he Plaintiff Aaron Walker is, and at all rele(ant times 'as, a la'"er in good

standing in Birginia and the District of Col&m$ia. O&tside of traffic infractions, Mr. Walker has

a clean criminal record and, indeed, had ne(er e(en $een arrested &ntil the e(ents that are the

s&$)ect of this s&it.


4/38

Kimberlin v. White, < *.7d =th Cir. %117@5

G. !his is certainl" not the onl" criminal or immoral thing Mr. #im$erlin had done.

Mr. #im$erlin also has a histor" of dishonest". 4e has $een con(icted of per)&r", >see, e.g.,

United States v. Kimberlin, G2= *. d %2, 78 >a(aila$le at http5??archi(e.ind"star.com?assets?pdf? 9%8


5/38

%%. !et"ana #im$erlin is a first generation immigrant from Jkraine and, &pon

information and $elief, a nat&raliFed citiFen of the Jnited States. Jpon information and $elief,

she is still married to rett #im$erlin.

HOW MR WAL2ER CRO66ED MR 2IM1ERLIN76 )ATH

%. ;n 221 or 2%2, Seth Allen >a resident of Massach&setts@, $ecame a'are of Mr.

#im$erlin and his criminal $ackgro&nd. Mr. Allen is a li$eral, and he felt that a person 'ith Mr.

#im$erlin6s criminal $ackgro&nd sho&ld not $e a +face- of his political affiliation. 4e also

$elie(ed that Mr. #im$erlin6s charities 'ere +cons- taking &sef&l cash and attention a'a" from

more 'orth" organiFations and ca&ses. 4e $egan 'riting a$o&t Mr. #im$erlin online, calling

him a terrorist, a liar, and a confidence man.

%7. On Octo$er %%, 2%2, Mand" Nag" 'rote an article for reit$art.com entitled

+Progressi(es Em$race Con(icted !errorist.- !his article can $e accessed (ia the internet at5

http5??'''.$reit$art.com?nationalsec&rit"?2%2?%2?%%?progressi(esem$racecon(icted

terrorist?. !he article details ho' Mr. #im$erlin had $ecome a political acti(ist as 'ell as his

criminal past. E(er" 'ord in that article 'as so&rced from either co&rt doc&ments or the

reporting of others. She did not do original reportingK she simpl" aggregated the reporting of

others.

%8. Shortl" after'ard, 0. Patrick *re", Esq., p&$lished an article for Patterico.com

entitled +rad *riedman6s Partner and L&dd"65 A Con(icted om$er, Per)&rer, and Dr&g

Sm&ggler, S&spected M&rderer . . . and Election ;ntegrit" 4E:O- detailing ho' another

prominent li$eral acti(ist had associated himself 'ith this con(icted felon. !his article can $e

accessed (ia the internet at5 http5??patterico.com?2%2?%2?%%?$radfriedmanspartnerand$&dd"

acon(icted$om$erper)&reranddr&gsm&gglers&spectedm&rdererandelectionintegrit"

=


6/38

hero?. Mr. *re" 'rites for and r&ns Patterico.com as a ho$$", 'hile his +da" )o$- is as a Dep&t"

District Attorne" in the 4ardcore 9ang Jnit of the Hos Angeles Co&nt" District Attorne"6s

Office. Soon thereafter, Mr. #im$erlin 'rote to Mr. *re" and Ms. Nag" threatening them 'ith

la's&its. Mr. *re" responded $" asking Mr. #im$erlin to specif" 'hat fact he 'as getting

'rong, and offering3if Mr. #im$erlin had proof3to correct an" errors. Mr. #im$erlin ref&sed

to detail an" specific errors, 'riting instead that +; ha(e filed o(er a h&ndred la's&its and

another one 'ill $e no s'eat for me. On the other hand, it 'ill cost "o& a lot of time and

mone".- !he f&ll te/t of this email e/change can $e accessed at5

http5??patterico.com?2%2?%2?%%?$rettkim$erlinthreatenstos&eme?.

%=. At that time, Mr. Walker 'rote )o&rnalisticall" on Patterico.com d&ring his off

ho&rs5 his +da" )o$- 'as as corporate co&nsel for a home healthcare agenc". Mr. Walker 'rote

anon"mo&sl" >as +Aaron Worthing-@ for t'o reasons. *irst, Mr. Walker has hidden disa$ilities,

and he 'anted to protect himself from &nla'f&l discrimination 'hile speaking freel" a$o&t his

e/periences 'ith those disa$ilities and the discrimination the" inspired. Second, Mr. Walker had

participated online in protests against terroristic attempts to silence others and, o&t of deference

to his 'ife6s fears, he 'ished to remain anon"mo&s for that reason as 'ell.

%. Shortl" after these la's&it threats, Mr. #im$erlin did s&e Mr. Allen. Kimberlin v.

Allen, No. 771=8B >Md. Mont. Co. Cir. Ct. 2%%@. Specificall", he claimed that $" calling him

a terrorist, a liar, and a conman, Mr. Allen had defamed him3e(en tho&gh he 'as collaterall"

estopped from den"ing these claims $" prior con(ictions and his parole re(ocation. 4e also

claimed that Mr. Allen called Mr. #im$erlin a pedophile. Altho&gh Mr. Allen claimed he ne(er

called him that, ironicall" Mr. #im$erlin recentl" lost another case for defamation $eca&se Mr.


7/38

Walker and others called him a pedophile. Mr. Walker and his codefendants 'on that case on

the iss&e of tr&th.

%


8/38

r"naert made the SWA!ting call. !he 'orking theor" is that Mr. r"naert called him that night

$eca&se SWA!ters often like to hear their (ictims s&ffer.

2. One can read a more detailed description of the harassment Mr. *re" faced at the

hands of Mr. #im$erlin and his allies and listen to the SWA!ting call at this internet address5

http5??patterico.com?2%?2=?=?con(icted$om$er$rettkim$erlinnealra&ha&serron$r"naert

andtheircampaignofpoliticalterrorism?.

%. !&rning $ack to the la's&it against Seth Allen, since Mr. Allen 'as 'riting &nder

a pse&don"m, Mr. #im$erlin 'ent thro&gh the process of identif"ing him &nder Indeendent

!ewsaers, Inc. v. "rodie, 82< Md. 8%= >221@, determining his identif" shortl" thereafter. On

or a$o&t 0&l" %8, 2%%, Mr. #im$erlin o$tained a defa&lt )&dgment against Mr. Allen. Mr. Allen

has al'a"s maintained that the defa&lt 'as o$tained $" fra&d. Mr. #im$erlin has a histor" of

forger", and he has s&$seq&entl" confessed to forging a s&mmons in one case >E/hi$it to the

original complaint@, and forging a ret&rn receipt +green card- &sed to ser(e process in another

case, Kimberlin v. Wal#er, et al. No. 7G21B >Md. Mont. Co. Cir. Ct. 2%7@ >E/hi$it C to the

original complaint@, lending credi$ilit" to Mr. Allen6s allegations.

. eca&se Ms. Nag" had prominentl" 'ritten a$o&t Mr. #im$erlin, Mr. Allen

reached o&t to her to seek help in dealing 'ith the la's&it. Ms. Nag" and Mr. *re" 'ere friends

and, therefore, Ms. Nag" kne' Mr. Walker thro&gh Mr. *re".

7. On or a$o&t A&g&st , 2%, Ms. Nag" s&ggested that Mr. Allen contact Mr.

Walker. Altho&gh Mr. Walker co&ld onl" pro(ide limited help gi(en that he is not a Mar"land

la'"er, he did pro(ide Mr. Allen $rief, free legal ad(ice.

8. On or a$o&t No(em$er %8, 2%%, a hearing 'as held in Kimberlin v. Allen. ;n that

hearing, Mr. Allen attempted to set aside the defa&lt, $&t lacking an" legal training 'as &na$le to

G


9/38

do so. ;n the same hearing, this Co&rt determined 'hat damages had $een done to Mr. #im$erlin

$ased on the defa&lted complaint. !his Co&rt fo&nd no damages 'ere pro(en, and granted onl"

nominal damages as 'ell as an &nconstit&tional in)&nction for$idding Mr. Allen from defaming

Mr. #im$erlin in the f&t&re.

=. Mr. #im$erlin then immediatel" claimed that Mr. Allen had (iolated that order

and o$tained a 0an&ar" 1, 2% hearing on 'hether Mr. Allen 'as in contempt.

. " then, Mr. #im$erlin had learned that Mr. Walker had helped Mr. Allen, $&t he

did not "et kno' Mr. Walker6s real name. As one might imagine 'ith a person 'illing to $om$

an entire to'n for nearl" a 'eek, Mr. #im$erlin does not think rationall", and, therefore, he

concl&ded that $" gi(ing Mr. Allen legal ad(ice, Mr. Walker 'as someho' a coconspirator 'ith

Mr. Allen. ;n a (eiled threat, Mr. #im$erlin 'rote an email to Mr. Walker on Decem$er %


10/38

1. According to later testimon", Mr. #im$erlin learned of Mr. Walker6s tr&e identit"

$" other means3allegedl" an anon"mo&s tip3on or a$o&t Decem$er 7%, 2%%.

72. On 0an&ar" 7, 2%, Mr. #im$erlin sent an email to Ms. #ingsle". Altho&gh

st"led as a settlement offer, in fact it 'as an attempt to e/tort Mr. Walker into silence. ;t 'as also

fra&d&lent $eca&se Mr. #im$erlin represented that he didn6t kno' Mr. Walker6s identit". 4e

demanded that Mr. Walker take do'n all posts disc&ssing him and his criminal cond&ct and

threatened to file false criminal charges, false peace order petitions, and false $ar complaints

against Mr. Walker if he ref&sed. When Mr. Walker didn6t gi(e in to those o(ert threats, Mr.

#im$erlin set o&t to do e/actl" 'hat he threatened.

MR 2IM1ERLIN TRIE6 TO FRAME MR WAL2ER FOR A CRIME

7%. On or a$o&t 0an&ar" , 2%, Mr. #im$erlin filed a motion to 'ithdra' his

s&$poena on the $asis of the fact he had recei(ed Mr. Walker6s identit" $" other means.

Altho&gh the onl" thing Mr. #im$erlin needed to incl&de is the fact he had o$tained the

information $" other so&rces, he grat&ito&sl" incl&ded the follo'ing information5 %@ Mr.

Walker6s real name, @ his home address, 7@ his $irth date, 8@ 'hat high school he attended, =@

the fact Mr. Walker dropped o&t of high school, @ the fact Mr. Walker o$tained a 9ED, @ the

fact Mr. Walker o$tained a degree at the Jni(ersit" of North !e/as,


11/38

em$arrassing facts and allegations into legal doc&ments, so that Mr. :a&h&aser >or others s&ch as

Mr. r"naert@ can p&$lish them on the ;nternet &nder the (eil of simpl" sharing p&$lic

doc&ments. !his practice is referred to as +do//ing.-

77. Mr. #im$erlin didn6t ser(e this doc&ment on Mr. Walker &ntil 0an&ar"


12/38

7. After the hearing, Mr. #im$erlin tried to intimidate Mr. Walker again, sa"ing, +;

'o&ld s&ggest, Mr. Walker, that "o& lea(e me alone.-

7


13/38

!he footage demonstrated that Mr. Walker had told the tr&th, and Mr. #im$erlin6s claims that he

had $een $eaten &p $" Mr. Walker 'ere false. !herefore, an" o$)ecti(e o$ser(er 'o&ld

recogniFe that those medical records and photographs 'ere most likel" forgeries $" a con(icted

>and admitted@8 doc&ment forger.

71. As soon as he left the Circ&it Co&rtho&se on 0an&ar" 1, 2%, Mr. #im$erlin 'ent

across the street to the Montgomer" Co&nt" District Co&rt Commissioner6s Office and filed for

criminal charges and a peace order. 4e sa"s he did this $efore going for medical treatment. !he

onl" photographs of Mr. #im$erlin6s alleged in)&ries 'ere taken $" Mr. #im$erlin &sing his o'n

iPad and, therefore, depend entirel" on this con(icted per)&rer for a&thentication, and the" 'ere

not prod&ced at the time he applied for charges. !he onl" p&rported medical records 'ere

gathered $" this con(icted doc&ment forger, and the" 'ere not prod&ced at the time he applied

for charges. No effort 'as made to cond&ct an independent in(estigation $efore charges 'ere

filed. No one asked Mr. Walker6s side of the stor". No one req&ested the (ideo e(idence $efore

filing charges. No one e(en spoke to the co&rtho&se sec&rit" 'ho responded, e(en tho&gh the"

'o&ld pres&ma$l" ha(e told an" in(estigator that Mr. #im$erlin6s application for charges did not

match realit". *or instance, Mr. #im$erlin claimed in the application for charges that 'hen

co&rtho&se sec&rit" arri(ed +Mr. Walker tried to come at me se(eral times $&t 'as restrained.-

;n fact, Mr. Walker made no effort to charge at him, and the co&rtho&se sec&rit" ne(er attempted

to restrain him >$eca&se the" had no need@ as is demonstrated $" (ideo e(idence. Jndo&$tedl",

if asked, sec&rit" personnel 'o&ld ha(e spoken tr&thf&ll", and said the same thing.

82. ;ndeed, the fact that Mr. #im$erlin 'as a con(icted per)&rer 'ith a histor" of

forging doc&ments ga(e the Commissioner no pa&se, either. !his is despite the fact that as a

con(icted per)&rer Mr. #im$erlin 'as categoricall" prohi$ited from testif"ing in Mar"land. MD.

8 See E/hi$it to the original complaint.

%7


14/38

CODE Cts. 0&d. Proc. 1%28. ;nstead, 'itho&t an" e(idence $&t this con(icted per)&rer6s

'ord, the Commissioner filed false charges against Mr. Walker, $ased on Mr. #im$erlin6s

falsehoods.

8%. eca&se the Montgomer" Co&nt" State6s Attorne" takes a +charge first and fig&re

o&t if a person did an"thing later- approach to criminal )&stice, the" allo'ed these charges to

stand for nearl" three months. !herefore, Mr. #im$erlin6s actions ca&sed Mr. Walker to inc&r

legal e/penses and had these charges hanging o(er his head.

8. On the same da" as the alleged in)&r"3and also $efore he allegedl" so&ght

medical attention3Mr. #im$erlin so&ght a peace order alleging that %@ Mr. Walker harassed him

and @ assa&lted him &nder MD. CODE Crim. H. 727. 4e 'as a$le to o$tain a peace order

$ased on false testimon" pro(ided in an e/ parte hearing in 'hich Mr. Walker 'as not present,

the co&rt finding that there 'ere reasona$le gro&nds to $elie(e Mr. Walker assa&lted and

harassed him and 'o&ld do so again in the f&t&re.

87. !hen, in a *e$r&ar" G final peace order hearing, Mr. #im$erlin repeatedl"

per)&red himself again. 4e claimed that Mr. Walker 'as thro'n o&t of the contempt hearing

concerning Mr. Allen, a complete fiction. 4e claimed Mr. Walker decked him. 4e claimed Mr.

Walker str&ck him repeatedl". 4e claimed that Mr. Walker 'restled 'ith him to take a'a" his

iPad. 4e claimed that the co&rt clerks separated him and Mr. Walker. 4e presented these false

medical reports and false photographs= to the co&rt as gen&inel" representing e(idence of in)&ries

Mr. Walker ne(er inflicted on him. Mr. #im$erlin felt free to lie to the co&rt $eca&se it e(identl"

= !he alternati(e, altho&gh stranger, theor" is that Mr. #im$erlin 'as act&all" in)&red that da",

$&t not $" Mr. Walker. !hat is, he either harmed himself or had someone else harm him. !he

more likel" possi$ilit" is that this con(icted doc&ment forger faked the photographs and medical

records, $&t, logicall", $oth are possi$ilities. Either 'a", the medical records and photographs

'o&ld $e false, $eca&se the" did not represent the res&lts of an" in)&r" that Mr. Walker inflicted

>$eca&se he inflicted none@.

%8


15/38

ne(er occ&rred to him that (ideo of the incident 'o&ld emerge. Mr. Walker, eq&all" con(inced

that (ideo of the incident didn6t e/ist, nonetheless told the tr&th.

88. Despite this lack of (ideo e(idence, the District Co&rt for Montgomer" Co&nt"

fo&nd that no assa&lt or $atter" occ&rred &nder MD. CODE Crim. H. 727 >or an" other la'@.

Since Mr. Walker forthrightl" admitted to taking Mr. #im$erlin6s iPad and defended his cond&ct

as selfdefense, the fact that the co&rt fo&nd no assa&lt occ&rred necessaril" means that the co&rt

did not credit Mr. #im$erlin6s acco&nt, e(en 'ith his false medical records and false

photographs. &t the Co&rt fo&nd3contrar" to la'3that Mr. Walker had harassed Mr.

#im$erlin $" 'riting to a general a&dience a$o&t him. !hat holding that Mr. Walker harassed

Mr. #im$erlin 'as o(ert&rned on appeal $" 0&dge Eric 0ohnson, and, accordingl", the entire

petition 'as dismissed.

MR WAL2ER TRIE6 TO )ETITION THE GO"ERNMENT FOR A REDRE66 OF

GREI"ANCE6 AND I6 COMMANDED 1Y A COURT TO 1E 6ILENT

8=. !he da" $efore the appeal of the Peace Order came aro&nd, on April %%, 2%, Mr.

Walker recei(ed a cop" of the (ideo file e/onerating him. After the petition 'as dismissed $"

0&dge 0ohnson, Mr. Walker decided to tr" to con(ince the State6s Attorne" to p&rs&e charges

against Mr. #im$erlin related to his attempt to frame Mr. Walker for a crime. Mr. Walker filed

an application for charges on or a$o&t April %


16/38

#im$erlin to harm his enemies. Since Mr. Walker co&ld not get )&stice and 'as concerned that

some other person might $e an &ns&specting (ictim of #im$erlin6s criminal $eha(ior, he

contin&ed to seek )&stice $" the onl" 'a" he had left5 $" appealing to the p&$lic.

8


17/38

d"sgraphia, and Attention Deficit Disorder. !hese do not tend to make a person more likel" to $e

dangero&s. As Mr. Walker 'rote in a filing in Kimberlin v. !ational "lo$$ers Club, et al. %I&,

No. 904%772=1 >2%7@, 'hen Mr. #im$erlin made another attempt to poison a co&rt 'ith

disa$ilit" discrimination5

E/cept for the direct effect of those disa$ilities, people 'ith learning disa$ilitiesare )&st like an"one else, a$le to f&nction in societ" )&st as s&ccessf&ll" as a person 'ith a socalled ph"sical disa$ilit". !he" are not $arred from the legal profession, for instance. As f&t&re S&preme Co&rt 0&stice Sonia Sotoma"or 'rote+there is no insin&ation, and ; cannot find, that Dr. artlett a d"sle/ic isincapa$le of performing the f&nctions of a practicing la'"er.- "artlett v. !ew'or# State "d. of (aw )*aminers, 1SD N.. %11


18/38

!homas 0efferson had d"sle/ia as 'ell, it can $e said that learning disa$led persons acco&nt for half of the +pop&lation- of Mr. :&shmore. &siness leaderss&ch as !homas Edison, 4enr" *ord, and *rank W. Wool'orth ha(e $eendiagnosed 'ith d"sle/ia, 'hile 0etl&e Air'a"s fo&nder Da(id Neeleman, CEOof Cisco S"stems 0ohn !. Cham$ers, ;kea fo&nder ;ng(ar #amprad, #inkos

fo&nder Pa&l Orfalea ha(e d"sle/ia and ADD?AD4D.G

!hese corporations arenot r&n $" l&natics. Chances are this co&rt has had attorne"s 'ith one of more of these disa$ilities appear $efore it, altho&gh it might not ha(e $een a'are at thetime. ;ndeed, there is hardl" a person ali(e 'ho has no one in their circle of friends, relati(es and respected acq&aintances that doesn6t incl&de at least one person 'ho has some form of learning disa$ilit" or ADD. !he" are not emotionallepers or pariahs. !he" are perfectl" ordinar" people 'ho simpl" ha(e challengesto o(ercome.

" this method Mr. #im$erlin took ad(antage of Mr. Walker6s stat&s as a disa$led person to

allo' Mr. #im$erlin to 'ea(e a stor" that ga(e a 'holl" false impression, 'hile sim&ltaneo&sl"

a(oiding technical per)&r" on that point. On other points, Mr. #im$erlin o&tright lied, s&ch as

claiming Mr. Walker assa&lted him. ased on those misleading comments and per)&red

testimon", Mr. #im$erlin o$tained a temporar" peace order.

=2. A final peace order hearing 'as held on !&esda", Ma" 1, 2%. Mr. Walker 'as

a$le to $e heard at that hearing. Mr. #im$erlin claimed that merel" $" peacef&ll" 'riting a$o&t

him that Mr. Walker 'as engaging in incitement and s&ch incitement 'as therefore harassment.

G !he list of persons cited as ha(ing these disa$ilities is gathered from the follo'ing so&rces

(isited on *e$r&ar" %7, 2%85 3amous 5eole with AD0D, ADJH! A!!EN!;ON DE*;C;!

D;SO:DE: CEN!E: O* MA:HAND >a(aila$le at http5??'''.addad&lt.com?inde/.php?add

ed&cationcenter?famo&speople'ithadhd@K rittan" Shoot, 3amous 5eole With AD0D and

(earnin$ Disabilities, ADD;!JDE >a(aila$le at

http5??'''.addit&demag.com?adhd?article?GG%.html@K D-s$rahia and r$anization,

DS9:AP4;A.O:9.J# >a(aila$le at http5??d"sgraphia.org.&k?inde/.php?d"sgraphiaandmemor"@K

3amous 5eole with the +ift of D-sle*ia, DSHEQ;A !4E 9;*! >a(aila$le at

http5??'''.d"sle/ia.com?famo&s.htm@ and Successful 5eole with D-sle*ia, !4E MEN!;S

*OJNDA!;ON, >a(aila$le at http5??'''.mentisfo&ndation.org?node?G@. Additional famo&s

d"sle/ics incl&de 4arr" elafonte, 0a" Heno, 0ohn Hennon, Ale/ander 9raham ell, !homas

Edison, Nolan :"an, Andre' 0ackson, Woodro' Wilson, 4enr" *ord, Charles Sch'a$, :ichard

ranson, !ed !&rner, Scott Adams, Agatha Christie, *. Scott *itFgerald, and William &tler

eats. *amo&s persons 'ith ADD?AD4D incl&de 4o'ie Mandel, Salma 4a"ek, 0&stin

!im$erlake, Wood" 4arrelson, !err" radsha', and 0ames Car(ille.

%G


19/38

4e claimed to ha(e recei(ed death threats $eca&se of Mr. Walker6s reporting, altho&gh

s&$seq&ent e(idence s&ggested that Mr. #im$erlin or one of his associates 'ere fa$ricating these

threats.1 E(en if the threats 'ere gen&ine, a finding that peacef&ll" 'riting a$o&t a person on the

;nternet amo&nts to incitement is directl" contrar" to controlling S&preme Co&rt la', especiall"

the r&ling in "randenbur$ v. hio, 71= J.S. 888, 88< >%11@, 'hich states that5

the constit&tional g&arantees of free speech and free press do not permit a State tofor$id or proscri$e ad(ocac" of the &se of force or of la' (iolation e/cept 'heres&ch ad(ocac" is directed to inciting or prod&cing imminent la'less action and islikel" to incite or prod&ce s&ch action.

!he &ncontested e(idence sho'ed that Mr. Walker had not e(en ad(ocated an" force or

la'lessness directed at Mr. #im$erlin and that Mr. Walker took steps to protect Mr. #im$erlin

from la'less cond&ct. ;ndeed, Mr. Walker6s e/pression met literall" none of the elements of the

"randenbur$ standard.

=%. !he co&rt did not find that Mr. Walker6s cond&ct met the "randenbur$ standard.

;nstead, 'hen Mr. Walker e/plained the "randenbur$ r&le, 0&dge Corneli&s Ba&ghe" said,

+*orget "randenbur$ . Het6s go $" Ba&ghe" right no', and common sense o&t in the 'orld.-

0&dge Ba&ghe" then 'ent on to agree 'ith Mr. #im$erlin that merel" 'riting negati(e things

a$o&t him amo&nted to incitement and s&ch incitement amo&nted to harassment. !his is not onl"

contrar" to la', $&t if it stood, it 'o&ld ha(e set a dangero&s precedent. " that logic, President

Ni/on co&ld ha(e en)oined Wood'ard and ernstein from reporting on Watergate if he recei(ed

a single death threat $ased on their reportage. S&ch an approach 'o&ld $e the death of free

1 Mr. *re" details the e(idence of s&ch fa$rication at http5??patterico.com?2%?2??strong

circ&mstantiale(idencethat$rettkim$erlinisastrot&rfingtheallegedthreatsagainsthimand

hisallies?. ;t is 'orth noting that 'hile Mr. #im$erlin has ne(er $een sh" a$o&t s&ing

anon"mo&s people on the ;nternet or to file charges against others, he has ne(er made an" effort

to seek to hold these people 'ho allegedl" threatened him ci(ill" or criminal responsi$le. !his

$olsters the s&spicion that all of these alleged threats are fake, and Mr. #im$erlin kno's it.

%1


20/38

speech and freedom of the press. Either this ne(er occ&rred to 0&dge Ba&ghe", or it didn6t $other

him. A first "ear la' st&dent 'o&ld not ha(e made the same mistake.

=. ased on this erroneo&s interpretation of the la', 0&dge Ba&ghe" granted Mr.

#im$erlin6s petition and for$ade Mr. Walker from 'riting a$o&t Mr. #im$erlin in an" for&m for

si/ months.

=7. Jn$ekno'nst to Mr. Walker, Mr. #im$erlin had also filed for criminal charges

)&st $efore that hearing. ;n his application for criminal charges, he falsel" claimed Mr. Walker

had (iolated the peace order. 4e claimed that he 'as recei(ing death threats $" third parties, $&t

made no effort to e/plain ho' Mr. Walker 'as responsi$le for them, )&st that Mr. Walker +had-

other people make s&ch threats. ;n essence, he claimed someone else had committed a crime $&t

Mr. Walker sho&ld $e held responsi$le. 4e did not allege that Mr. Walker conspired 'ith them,

aided them, ser(ed as an accessor" to them, or an" other recogniFed theor" of third part"

lia$ilit". ;nstead, he alleged that $eca&se Mr. Walker 'rote negati(e stories a$o&t him that

someho' Mr. Walker caused these threats and, therefore, engaged in harassment in (iolation of

the temporar" peace order. !he Commissioner, acting contrar" to la', decided to charge Mr.

Wal#er as a res&lt of the alleged cond&ct of third parties for 'hich Mr. Walker 'as not e(en

alleged 'ith an" partic&larit" to $e responsi$le.

=8. As a res&lt, at the end of the peace order hearing, Mr. Walker 'as shocked to find

o&t that he 'as $eing arrested. 4e s&$mitted to this h&miliation 'itho&t incident. *ort&natel",

he 'as released 'itho&t $ail that afternoon, $&t in the meantime and in s&$seq&ent da"s the stor"

er&pted all o(er the ne's. ;t 'as co(ered as far as Canada3the ne's that an American co&rt

had arrested a man for engaging in free e/pression and had for$idden from speaking freel" in the

f&t&re.

2


21/38

==. !his decision 'as so 'rong that a sta" 'as granted on 0&ne =, 2%, $" 0&dge

:&pp $efore the f&ll appeal co&ld $e heard. ;n his order granting a sta", 0&dge :&pp cited

"randenbur$ $" name and restored Mr. Walker6s right to engage in protected, nonharassing

speech a$o&t Mr. #im$erlin. Still, the State of Mar"land had committed a serio&s trespass

against Mr. Walker6s freedom of speech, at Mr. #im$erlin6s &rging.

=. On the same da" that the sta" 'as granted, Mr. Walker 'as SWA!ted, )&st as Mr.

*re" had $een. !hat is, someone called the Prince William Co&nt" Police Department, falsel"

claimed to $e Mr. Walker, and falsel" confessed to shooting his 'ife. *ort&natel", Mr. Walker

had 'arned the local police that this might happen and Mr. Walker and his 'ife 'ere in no

danger 'hen the police sho'ed &p 'ith M8 car$ines at his door to make s&re e(er"one 'as safe.

!he Walkers 'ere incon(enienced, and Mrs. Walker 'as shaken &p $" the 'hole thing, $&t the"

'ere in no danger. Mr. Walker firml" $elie(es the SWA!ting 'as ordered $" Mr. #im$erlin in

retaliation for his (ictor" in co&rt that da".

=


22/38

=1. *irst, on Ma" 1, 2%, after Mr. Walker 'as arrested on false charges and

shackled 'ith a peace order that for$ade Mr. Walker from disc&ssing Mr. #im$erlin, Mr.

Schmalfeldt contacted Mr. Walker (ia !'itter and attempted to ind&ce him into $reaching this

order. !hat is, kno'ing that Mr. Walker cannot speak or 'rite a$o&t Mr. #im$erlin 'itho&t

(iolating this &nconstit&tional order Mr. Schmalfeldt asked Mr. Walker to e/plain 'hat the

contro(ers" 'as all a$o&t. S&spicio&s, Mr. Walker s&ggested 'e$sites he co&ld read 'itho&t

mentioning Mr. #im$erlin $" name.

2. S&$seq&entl", Mr. Schmalfeldt 'ent on to re(eal that he 'as f&ll" in Mr.

#im$erlin6s camp, 'riting defamator" items a$o&t Mr. Walker and others. 4e falsel" acc&sed

Mr. Walker of sending a third part" named 0ohn Norton to enter the propert" Mr. #im$erlin li(ed

on and photograph Mr. #im$erlin and his "o&nger da&ghter .%2 4e also foc&sed his defamation on

Mr. Walker6s friend and reporter Hee Stranahan, falsel" acc&sing Mr. Stranahan of creating child

pornograph" and of prostit&ting his 'ife $ased on no e(idence. When Mr. Stranahan attended

the Democratic National Con(ention in 2%, another person $elie(ed to $e emplo"ed $" Mr.

#im$erlin s&ggested that 'hile Mr. Stranahan is a'a" that criminals $e sent to Mr. Stranahan6s

home to rape his 'ife. Mr. Schmalfeldt defended this cond&ct $" sa"ing that the 'riter had not

act&all" gi(en a'a" their home addressK then he proceeded to p&$lish their home address. Hater,

%2 ;n a peace order hearing against 0ohn Norton the co&rt fo&nd that Mr. Norton did not enter the

propert" Mr. #im$erlin li(ed on. As for his connection to Mr. Walker, the entiret" of Mr.

#im$erlin6s e(idence is that Mr. Norton and Mr. Walker $oth li(e in Birginia, and s&pposedl"

(er" close. Mr. Norton li(es in *airfa/ Co&nt" >pop&lation estimated at %.8 million@, and Mr.

Walker li(es in Prince William Co&nt" >pop&lation estimated at 882,222@. According to 9oogle

maps, Mr. Norton act&all" li(es three miles closer to Mr. #im$erlin than Mr. Walker. Mr.

Schmalfeldt6s acc&sation 'as e(en thinner than that5 he claimed Seth Allen had done the

s&pposed trespass $eca&se Mr. Allen noticed that Mr. Norton p&$lished it online and stated that

someone else had p&$lished it, leading Mr. Schmalfeldt to the illogical concl&sion that Mr. Allen

had taken the pict&re and f&rther $eca&se Mr. Walker 'as Mr. Allen6s la'"er, he m&st ha(e

ad(ised him to do it. !his o$(io&sl" is an illogical leap of logic not 'arranted $" the facts.


23/38

the Stranahan famil" e/perienced traged" 'hen Mrs. Stranahan attempted to gi(e $irth to t'ins,

onl" for one of the children to die in the process. Mr. Schmalfeldt repeatedl" contacted and

hectored Mrs. Stranahan, falsel" acc&sing her of ca&sing her child6s death. 4e e(en filed a false

report to child protecti(e ser(ices claiming that his other children 'ere neglected. ;n regards to

Mr. Walker, Mr. Schmalfeldt contin&ed to directl" contact Mr. Walker despite $eing told to lea(e

him alone. 4e made n&mero&s threats against Mr. Walker. At one point, he s&ggested that Mr.

Walker deser(ed to $e $eaten and said that he 'o&ld pro(ide Mr. Walker6s home address to

an"one 'ho asked.

%. elie(ing this to $e criminal harassment in (iolation of MD. CODE Crim. H. 7

G27, Mr. Walker 'ent to the 4o'ard Co&nt" District Co&rt and took t'o actions. *irst, he filed

an application for criminal charges 'ith the Commissioner. Second, he filed for a peace order.

While he 'as 'aiting for his peace order to $e heard, Mr. #im$erlin learned that Mr. Walker 'as

at the co&rtho&se and dro(e there immediatel".

. Mr. Walker sa' Mr. #im$erlin there $efore Mr. #im$erlin sa' Mr. Walker. Mr.

Walker6s 'ife 'as 'ith him, and he 'anted to keep her a'a" from Mr. #im$erlin. So, $elie(ing

that Mr. #im$erlin 'as merel" there to o$ser(e the hearing, Mr. Walker told his 'ife to 'ait in

the car, and she did so, 'aiting in the passenger seat. Mr. #im$erlin came into the co&rtho&se,

$&t he slipped o&t 'itho&t Mr. Walker kno'ing. 4e approached Mr. Walker6s car and reached

o&t 'ith his hand as tho&gh to do something 'ith it. Mr. #im$erlin has a histor" of setting a

$om$ on a car. 4e sa' Mrs. Walker in the passenger side mirror. 4e circled the car and then

'alked a'a" to his car parked directl" $ehind the Walkers6 car. Mrs. Walker repeatedl" tried to

contact Mr. Walker in a panic, $&t Mr. Walker6s cell phone had poor reception 'here he 'as. Mr.

#im$erlin dro(e aro&nd and parked in front of the Walkers6 car, directl" in front of Mrs. Walker.

7


24/38

4e &sed his iPhone to take se(eral pict&res of her, and then parked near$" to o$ser(e. Soon

after, Mr. Walker learned 'hat 'as happening and came o&tside to his 'ife. 4e reported the

incident to the police as Mr. #im$erlin fled the scene. Shortl" thereafter, Mr. #im$erlin

p&$lished those photos of Mrs. Walker3taken 'itho&t her consent3on the ;nternet.

7. When Mr. Walker asked for a&thorities in 4o'ard Co&nt" to prosec&te Mr.

#im$erlin for this stalking, Assistant State6s Attorne" 0im re'er ref&sed and said that +if "o&

are so concerned for "o&r safet", don6t come to Mar"land.-

MR WAL2ER ATTEM)T6 TO AID MR6 2IM1ERLIN A6 AN ATTORNEY, AND MR

2IM1ERLIN ATTEM)T6 TO CON"INCE MARYLAND THAT IT I6 A CRIME

8. Mr. #im$erlin6s &se of the instr&mentalities of Mar"land la' to a$&se his targets

has not $een limited to strangers. *or instance, aro&nd No(em$er of 2%, rett #im$erlin6s

'ife, !et"ana #im$erlin, separated from him. Aro&nd 0&ne of 2%7, Mrs. #im$erlin and a

paramo&r named 0a" Elliott chose to go on a (acation together. Mr. #im$erlin6s anger 'hen he

learned of this 'as &nderstanda$le, $&t his response 'as inappropriate. *irst, he fired Mrs.

#im$erlin from her parttime )o$ 'ith his nonprofits. Since Mrs. #im$erlin and Mr. Elliot 'ere

in a compan" car, he demanded that the" come $ack from (acation immediatel" to ret&rn the car.

When the" ref&sed, he filed a false report of a&to theft. 4e 'ent on to file an application for

charges against Mr. Elliott 'ith that alleged theft and to file a peace order petition against Mr.

Elliott. Mr. #im$erlin tried to get Mr. Elliott fired from his )o$ and e(ent&all" s&cceeded. 4e

attempted to get Mrs. #im$erlin fired from her f&lltime da"care )o$, e(icted from her

apartment, and tried to ca&se her to lose her car, 'ith partial s&ccess. Mr. Elliott and Mrs.

#im$erlin in t&rn so&ght a peace order and protecti(e order, respecti(el". Mrs. #im$erlin

partic&larl" stated that her h&s$and3a (iolent felon3had threatened her and 'as keeping her

from seeing her children. Mr. #im$erlin retaliated against her $" filing a false petition to ha(e

8


25/38

her committed to a mental instit&tion, res&lting in her arrest at the protection order hearing. ;n

other 'ords, she came to the state for protection and ended &p in handc&ffs, d&e to his false

petition. *ort&natel", and to the credit of 0&dge Mitchell presiding, she 'as released 'ithin

appro/imatel" fifteen min&tes.

=. Mrs. #im$erlin tried to get c&stod" of her children from Mr. #im$erlin. She 'as

&nderstanda$l" (er" an/io&s for their safet" and e/plained the reason for her fear in co&rt

doc&ments. After disc&ssing some of his criminal $ackgro&nd, she e/plained the cr&/ of her

fears as follo's >paragraph n&m$ers omitted@5

rett #im$erlin is a pedophile. ; met rett #im$erlin 'hen ; 'as fo&rteen "earsold in Jkraine. 4e transported me to Mar"land 'hen ; 'as fifteen "ears old, for the p&rpose of enticing me into se/ and marriage. When in Mar"land and 'hile ;'as fifteen "ears old, he had (aginal interco&rse and se/&al contact 'ith me ono(er fift" occasions. 4e 'as o(er fort" "ears of age at the time and therefores&ch cond&ct 'as in (iolation of MD. C:;M;NAH HAW Code 772


26/38

mother co&ldn6t get time off from 'ork, so on these s&mmer tripsit 'as )&st the t'o of them3rett and 0essica.

E"e$ro's le(itated. A dr&gdealing colleag&e had memories of con(ersations 'ith #im$erlin that str&ck him as odd5 +We6d see a

girl 'ho 'as p&$escent or prep&$escent, and rett 'o&ld get thissmile and sa", L4e", 'hat do "o& think ;sn6t she great6 ;t mademe (er" &ncomforta$le.- Another recalled #im$erlin introd&cing0essica as +m" girlfriend,- and if iron" 'as intended, it 'as toos&$tle to register. !o a co'orker at ;JPJ;, Sandi confided that#im$erlin 'as +grooming 0essica to $e his 'ife.-

Page


27/38

#im$erlin 'as a'are of them. *or these peacef&l, la'f&l acts, Mr. #im$erlin filed another

application for charges for harassment against Messrs Walker and 4oge, on or a$o&t 0&l" 72,

2%7. " this time, the State6s Attorne" of Montgomer" Co&nt" had 'ritten a letter to the

Montgomer" Co&nt" Commissioner req&esting that the" stop accepting charges from Mr.

#im$erlin. ;n spite of this 'arning and all of the other reasons to do&$t Mr. #im$erlin6s

(eracit", the Commissioner filed charges against Messrs. Walker and 4oge.

a (eteran )o&rnalist@, Ali

Ak$ar >a political acti(ist@, and an anon"mo&s 'riter on the ;nternet named +#im$erlin

Jnmasked- 'ho he claimed 'as H"nn !homas and Peter Malone. !hat case 'as st"led

Kimberlin v. Wal#er, et al., No. 7G21B >Md. Mont. Co. Cir. Ct. 2%7@.

1. !he case claimed that Mr. Walker and certain other defendants defamed him $"

stating that %@ Mr. #im$erlin cost Mr. Walker his )o$, @ Mr. Walker didn6t assa&lt Mr. #im$erlin

and Mr. #im$erlin attempted to frame him for that crime, 7@ that Mr. #im$erlin is a pedophile,


28/38

=@ that Mr. #im$erlin sed&ced Mrs. #im$erlin 'hen she 'as fo&rteen "ears old >and he 'as in

his forties@ in Jkraine and contin&ed that se/&al relationship &ntil she $ecame of age, incl&ding

se/&al enco&nters 'hen she 'as fifteen "ears old and in the state of Mar"landK and that he

attempted to sed&ce Mrs. #im$erlin6s thent'el(e"earold co&sin, also in Mar"land6s territorial

limits. 4e f&rther claimed that s&ch allegations placed him in a false light, that Mr. Walker and

others had engaged in malicio&s prosec&tion, that he and others engaged in a$&se of process,

stalking, harassment and intentional infliction of emotional distress. All $&t the claims for false

light and defamation 'ere dismissed in a s&mmar" )&dgment hearing3'hich means that Mr.

#im$erlin had literall" no e(idence to s&pport at least one element of each claim >in the case of

harassment and stalking, these 'ere fo&nd not to $e e(en torts@. Mean'hile, after a t'o da"

trial, this Co&rt fo&nd a similar fail&re of e(idence. 0&dge 0ohnson fo&nd that +there6s not one

scintilla of e(idence in this case that the statements that 'ere made $" these indi(id&als 'ere

false- and granted a directed (erdict on that finding.


29/38

'ire fra&d, in an attempt to con(ert 'hat is ordinaril" seen as mere defamation into a ci(il charge

&nder a criminal stat&te. !he false statements at iss&e 'ere highl" d&plicati(e. 4e claimed that

Mr. Walker and other defendants in that case defra&ded the p&$lic $" claiming that %@ he cost Mr.

Walker his )o$, @ Mr. Walker did not assa&lt Mr. #im$erlin and 7@ that Mr. #im$erlin 'as

responsi$le for the spate of SWA!tings, that incl&ding the crime committed against Mr. Walker. %%


30/38

;;.Whether the District Co&rt erred in dismissing t'o co&nts of the Complaint&nder *.:. C(. P. %>$@>@ sic prior to disco(er" that 'o&ld ha(e pro(ided the e(identiar" $asis for the co&nts.

;f disco(er" s&pposedl" 'o&ld ha(e pro(ided e(identiar" $asis, then Mr. #im$erlin plainl"

didn6t ha(e an e(identiar" $asis 'hen he filed s&it. #im$erlin6s appeal 'as dismissed $" the

*o&rth Circ&it on 0&ne %, 2%=.


31/38

pre(io&sl" reported that Mr. #im$erlin had ph"sicall" threatened her, that Mr. #im$erlin 'as

keeping the children from seeing Mrs. #im$erlin, and that she had seen the state of Mar"land

&tterl" fail to hold her h&s$and acco&nta$le for his criminal cond&ct or help her to o$tain c&stod"

of her children, it appears to $e likel" that she did this &nder d&ress, or in e/change for access to

her children. !his is 'h" Mr. Walker has gi(en Mrs. #im$erlin eno&gh of the $enefit of the

do&$t to a(oid seeking monetar" damages against Mrs. #im$erlin, $&t is still seeking in)&ncti(e

relief to pre(ent her from doing it again.


32/38

corr&ption of the $lood. ; specificall" cite that as ane/ample 'hat makes America great. We do not )&dge people $" race, religion or 'ho "o&r parents are, e(en 'hen"o&6re a traitor. We do not )&dge "o&r children $" "o&r treacher", e(en 'hen "o&6re a terrorist.

;ndeed, the original post 'here Mr. Walker first made this point, Mr. Walker e/plains that he 'as

sharing 'ith his readers p&$lic doc&ments, $&t that +; 'ill as &s&al $e redacting personal

information from it, as 'ell as an" information a$o&t rett #im$erlin6s eldest da&ghter.- !hat

is, e(en tho&gh the information is p&$lic, Mr. Walker still redacted some information to protect

the pri(ac" of the #im$erlins3going as far as ne(er to mention #.#.6s real name on his $log.

When e/plaining 'h" Mr. Walker $elie(ed in $eing decent to'ard the children of a man 'ho has

$een tormenting him for "ears 'ith false charges, peace order petitions and la's&its, Mr. Walker

'rote5

*or me, one of the great &nderappreciated cla&ses of o&r Constit&tion is in the!reason cla&se. ;t sa"s5 +$&t no Attainder of !reason shall 'ork Corr&ption of lood, or *orfeit&re e/cept d&ring the Hife of the Person attainted.- !he second part of that is fairl" eas" to &nderstand, $&t 'hat a$o&t the first What the helldo the" mean $" the corr&ption of the $lood

Well, the ans'er is the" are sa"ing "o& cannot p&nish the famil" of a traitor astho&gh the" 'ere traitors, too. ;t is a talisman of 'hat makes this co&ntr" great.*&ndamentall" 'e don6t care 'ho "o&r ancestors 'ere. !he" co&ld ha(e $eenkings, the" co&ld ha(e $een $eggars. !he" co&ld ha(e $een heroes and the"co&ld ha(e $een terrorists. We don6t care. eca&se "o& are )&dged as "o&.

So not kno'ing this girl, she en)o"s the pres&mption of innocence that $elongs toall strangers. 9i(en the 'a" rett #im$erlin lies a$o&t e(er"thing, ; ha(e noreason to think he is telling her the tr&th a$o&t 'hat is going on and therefore ;ha(e no reason to think she appro(es of 'hat is act&all" happening here. ;f shekne' the tr&th she 'o&ld kno' that her father has $een 'orking for "ears tos&ppress the tr&th a$o&t his illegal and immoral cond&ct, and his criminal andimmoral cond&ct, com$ined 'ith his attempt to silence his critics, has $ro&ght allthis attention on this famil".

&t allegedl" a fe' people ha(e harassed her online, on her face$ook and the like.!here is al'a"s concern, of co&rse, that rett or his allies might $e faking a lot of that $eha(ior. &t regardless, if an" person dra's an" negati(e concl&sion a$o&t

7


33/38

her $ased on her father, the" are not $eing charita$le eno&gh. !he" are forgettingthat e(en 'hen 'e are talking a$o&t enedict Arnold, 'e do not hold the childresponsi$le for the cond&ct of the father.

>;nternal h"perlinks omitted@. E(er" other time Mr. Walker has disc&ssed the concept of the

+corr&ption of the $lood,- he has either done so to reiterate that point or to point o&t 'here Mr.

#im$erlin has pre(io&sl" lied a$o&t 'hat he said.%7 So, far from sa"ing #.#. sho&ld $e targeted

$eca&se of her father6s (ile $eha(ior, Mr. Walker has made an eloq&ent and morall" pers&asi(e

arg&ment that she sho&ld not $e. 4e has said literall" the opposite of 'hat the Application

claims.

G2. ;n another e/ample of the dishonest" in the Application, on the $ottom of the first

t"ped page, Mrs. #im$erlin complains that +the" ha(e posted comments on $log posts talking

a$o&t #.#.6s Ltitties6 and falsel" insin&ated Lse/&al a$&se.6- *irst, this passage is not acc&sing

Messrs. Walker or 4oge of talking a$o&t #.#.6s $reasts or an" potential se/&al a$&se, $&t that

the" commented in a disc&ssion 'here it 'as mentioned 'itho&t an" attempt to descri$e their

contri$&tion to that disc&ssion. !h&s, the Application is attempting to practice g&ilt $"

association 'itho&t an" attempt to e/plain ho' Messrs. Walker and 4oge co&ld $e held

responsi$le for the 'ords of third parties.

G%. 4o'e(er, Mr. Walker has fo&nd the post in q&estion. What the rele(ant

disc&ssion concerns is a m&sic (ideo created $" #.#. and &nkno'n others called +Whisper.-

!he disc&ssion of her $reasts 'as in the conte/t of disc&ssing ho' #.#. 'ore an e/tremel" lo'

c&t $lo&se in that (ideo and leaned for'ard thro&gh a$o&t half the (ideo, displa"ing her

clea(age. !he entire (ideo can $e (ie'ed at https5??'''."o&t&$e.com?'atch(U!&"kkqeP2.

eca&se the (ideo 'as p&$lished 'hen #.#. 'as onl" fifteen "ears old, one commenter q&ite

%7 Mr. 4oge has similarl" onl" mentioned the concept of the corr&ption of the $lood to point o&t

that Mr. #im$erlin had lied a$o&t 'hat Mr. Walker said.

77


34/38

reasona$l" 'as rep&lsed $" 'hat the" called a +titt" shot- and others (oiced the concern that an

ad)&dicated pedophile 'as se/&aliFing his &nderage da&ghter. !his is an entirel" (alid >al$eit

cr&de@ and reasona$le criticism of this (ideo that #.#. and her famil" has p&t $efore the p&$lic,

and it is protected opinion &nder the *irst Amendment. As if all of that 'as not ridic&lo&s

eno&gh, the (er" first comment $" Mr. 4oge after these statements 'ere made 'as +Please lea(e

Miss #im$erlin alone.-%8 So according to the Application, it 'as someho' criminal for Mr.

4oge to ask people not to talk a$o&t #.#. So 'hile there is no literal lie in that passage, the

phrasing $etra"s a deli$erate intent to decei(e.

G. !he remainder of the Application falls into those t'o categories3either o&tright

lies, or statements deli$eratel" designed to decei(e. ;f Mr. #im$erlin had instr&cted his 'ife to

tell the tr&th, and the 'hole tr&th, in regards to e(er" allegation, no charges 'o&ld ha(e $een

filed. And the &ltimate charge3that 'e ha(e harassed his da&ghter3is false.

G7. Mr. Walker attempted to file a (ersion of this complaint on Monda", 0&ne ,

2%=, $&t inad(ertentl" forgot to sign it, ca&sing it to $e ret&rned the follo'ing !h&rsda" >0&ne

=@. " this time, Messrs. Walker and 4oge learned that these latest criminal charges 'ere nolle

prossed allo'ing this paragraph to $e added.

COUNT I:

Mal#c#o;! )ro!ec;t#on

erl#n Onl4?

G8. !he Plaintiff realleges paragraphs %G.

G=. Mr. #im$erlin, angered $" Mr. Walker6s la'f&l representation of his opponents in

legal disp&tes >Mr. Allen, Mrs. #im$erlin and others@, Mr. Walker6s peacef&l and la'f&l 'ritings

critical of Mr. #im$erlin6s criminal and immoral cond&ct has filed fi(e malicio&s ci(il la's&its

%8 Mean'hile, Mr. Walker does not comment on the post at all, in keeping 'ith Mr. #im$erlin6s

o(erall pattern in litigation of sa"ing +the"- 'hen he often is onl" referring to one person.

78


35/38

>to peace order s&its and three ordinar" s&its@ and fo&r malicio&s criminal charges. !h&s in each

case5

a. !here has $een a prosec&tion of ci(il s&its and criminal case initiated $" Mr. #im$erlin against

Mr. WalkerK

$. ;n all $&t the most recent ci(il s&it the" 'ere all terminated in fa(or of Mr. WalkerK

c. Each of these cases 'ere $ro&ght 'itho&t pro$a$le ca&seK

d. !hese cases 'ere initiated 'ith malice, or a p&rpose other than $ringing Mr. Walker to )&stice.

e. !his cond&ct ca&sed Mr. Walker damages.

G. Accordingl", for all of the criminal charges and all $&t the most recent ci(il s&it a

claim lies for malicio&s prosec&tion. Mr. Walker f&rther e/pects that most recent ci(il s&it 'ill

shortl" $e concl&ded in his fa(or, and, th&s, Mr. Walker is (er" likel" to $e a$le to amend this

complaint to incl&de it in his malicio&s prosec&tion co&nt.

G


36/38

12. ;n doing so Mr. #im$erlin acted 'ith an &lterior p&rposeK he engaged in a 'illf&l

act in the &se of process not proper in the reg&lar cond&ct of the proceeding.

1%. S&ch a$&se of process damaged Mr. Walker $" %@ opport&nit" costs in terms of

time 'asted fighting this a$&se of process 'hen he co&ld ha(e $een 'orking for pa"ing clients,

@ legal costs of his attorne" at that time, eth #ingsle", 7@ costs associated tra(el and prod&cing

doc&ments need to fight this effort, and 8@ pain and emotional s&ffering. Mr. Walker asks for

I%22,222 in compensator" damages and I%,222,222 p&niti(e damages for s&ch a$&se of process.

COUNT III:

Fal!e I=@r#!on=ent

erl#n Onl4?

1. !he Plaintiff realleges paragraphs %1%.

17. On Ma" 1, 2%, Mr. Walker 'as arrested.

18. !hat arrest depri(ed of his li$ert" 'itho&t his consent >altho&gh he did not resist

arrest@.

1=. S&ch depri(ation of li$ert" 'as 'itho&t )&stification $eca&se it 'as $ased on the

falsehoods of Mr. #im$erlin in filing a false Application for Statement of Charges.

1. eca&se the arrest 'as $ased on Mr. #im$erlin6s false and malicio&s statements

to the commissioner, this depri(ation 'as ca&sed $" Mr. #im$erlin.

1


37/38

11. !he pre(io&s paragraphs esta$lish that the #im$erlins ha(e $een a$&sing the

co&rt s"stem in an attempt to silence Mr. Walker and p&nish him for la'f&l representation for

o(er three "ears repeatedl" (iolating, and attempting to (iolate Mr. Walker6s legal rights. !he"

ha(e filed misleading charges, peace order actions, and malicio&s and fri(olo&s la's&its. !his

$eha(ior is likel" to $e repeated in the f&t&re, and 'hile some of the harm can $e repaired $" an

a'ard of monetar" damages, the onl" 'a" to allo' Mr. Walker to get $ack to his ordinar" life is

in)&ncti(e relief.

%22. While this Co&rt is free to fashion 'hate(er remed" it 'ants, Mr. Walker offers

the follo'ing s&ggestions5

a. A prohi$ition against l"ing $" the #im$erlins in an" Application for Statement of Charges >or

an" other legal doc&ment@K

$. A prohi$ition against misleading statements $" the #im$erlins in an" Application for Statement

of Charges >or an" other legal doc&ment@K

c. A req&irement that e(er" fact&al allegation made the #im$erlins in a legal doc&ment $e $acked

&p $" admissi$le e(idenceK

d. !hat the #im$erlins $e $arred from e(er claiming again that Mr. Walker assa&lted or $attered

Mr. #im$erlin on 0an&ar" 1, 2%, in an" legal doc&mentK

e. !hat $efore the #im$erlins can file an" more criminal charges or an" ci(il action, the" m&st

o$tain preclearance from this Co&rt req&iring them to sho' the e(identiar" $asis of an" fact&al

claimsK

f. !hat Mr. #im$erlin $e prohi$ited from testif"ing in an" hearing in Mar"land >incl&ding e/ parte

hearings@ or, in the alternati(e, that Mr. #im$erlin $e prohi$ited from testif"ing 'itho&t first

7


38/38

informing the co&rt that he is a con(icted per)&rer ordinaril" prohi$ited from testif"ing >allo'ing

him to arg&e that the stat&te sho&ldn6t $e applied for 'hate(er reason@K

g. !hat the #im$erlins $e prohi$ited from seeking an" f&rther &nconstit&tional prior restraints on

Mr. Walker6s speechK

h. !hat Mr. #im$erlin $e prohi$ited from an" acti(it" designed to intimidate Mr. Walker, his 'ife,

or their respecti(e familiesK and?or

i. An" other relief this Co&rt deems appropriate.

W4E:E*O:E, the Plaintiff req&ests an a'ard of compensator" damages against Defendant

rett #im$erlin I22,222 per instance of malicio&s prosec&tionK compensator" damages of

%22,222 for a$&se of processK I22,222 compensator" damages for false imprisonmentK

p&niti(e damages of I7,222,222 for all three ca&ses of actionK in)&ncti(e relief designed to

pre(ent f&t&re false charges and (e/atio&s peace orders ,and litigationK and an" and all relief this

Co&rt deems )&st and eq&ita$le.

Dated5 !h&rsda", 0&ne =, 2%=

:espectf&ll" s&$mitted,

Aaron Walker, Esq.redactedManassas, Birginia 2%21redactedAaron0W%1No fa/@Birginia State ar 8GGG
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]

Walker v. Maryland SAC (Redaction)

Documents

Transcript of Walker v. Maryland SAC (Redaction)