Download - Brett Kimberlin Hearing 4.11.12 Transcript (OCR)

DEPOSITION SERVICES, INC.12321 Middlebrook Road, Suite 210

Germantown, MD 20874(301) 881-3344

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND

------------------------------x:

BRETT KIMBERLIN, ::

Plaintiff, ::

v. : Civil No. 8444D:

AARON WALKER, ::

Defendant. ::

------------------------------x

TRIAL

Rockville, Maryland April 11, 2012

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND

------------------------------x

BRETT KIMBERLIN,

Plaintiff,

v.

AARON WALKER,

Defendant.

------------------------------x

Civil No. 8444D

Rockville, Maryland

April 11, 2012

WHEREUPON, the proceedings in the above-entitled

matter commenced

BEFORE: THE HONORABLE ERIC M. JOHNSON, JUDGE

APPEARANCES:

FOR THE PLAINTIFF:

BRETT KIMBERLIN, Pro Se

Bethesda, Maryland 20817

FOR THE DEFENDANT:

REGINALD W. BOURS, III, Esq.Reginald W. Bours, III, P.C.401 East Jefferson Street, Suite 103Rockville, Maryland 20850-2617

DEPOSITION SERVICES, INC.

I N D E X

PageOpening Statements :

Brett Kimberlin 5Plaintiff Pro Se

Reginald W. Bours, III, Esq. 8For the Defendant

WITNESSES DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS

For the Plaintiff :

Bruce Sherman 13 22 -- --Brett Kimberlin 35 57 83 --

For the Defendant :

(None)

EXHIBITS MARKED RECEIVED

For the Plaintiff :

Exhibit No. 1 20 20Exhibit No. 2 -- 49Exhibit No. 4 50 --Exhibit No. 5 50 --

For the Defendant :

Exhibit No. 1 29 30Exhibit No. 2 31 31Exhibit No. 3 -- 33Exhibit No. 4 72 76Exhibit No. 5 -- 77Exhibit No. 6 -- 79Exhibit No. 7 -- 79

Judge's Ruling 89

cc 4

P R O C E E D I N G S1

THE CLERK: Case 8444, Brett Kimberlin versus Aaron2

Walker.3

MR. KIMBERLIN: Good morning, Your Honor.4

THE COURT: State your name, please.5

MR. KIMBERLIN: Brett Kimberlin.6

THE COURT: All right.7

MR. BOURS: For the record, Your Honor, Reginald W.8

Bours, sir, on behalf of the respondent in the orig inal9

proceeding and the appellant in this Court. His na me is Aaron10

Walker.11

THE COURT: All right. Thank you.12

Any preliminary issues?13

MR. KIMBERLIN: No, sir.14

MR. BOURS: I thought I would, perhaps, give the15

Court a little background on the case to speed us a long. 16

I do want to ask for a rule on witnesses, although I17

have no objection to Lieutenant Colonel Sherman bei ng in the18

courtroom during this statement. I don’t know if t he young19

lady that’s in here is a witness. The gentleman on the far20

left of the courtroom is not a witness. 21

THE COURT: Are you a witness, ma’am?22

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: No.23

THE COURT: Okay. Fine.24

MR. BOURS: I just wouldn’t want any potential25

cc 5

witnesses, if Mr. Kimberlin wants to call anyone, t o be sitting1

in here while I’m making statements.2

THE COURT: All right. Mr. Kimberlin, do you wish to3

make an opening statement?4

MR. KIMBERLIN: Yes, sir.5

THE COURT: I’ll hear you and then I’ll hear from M r.6

Bours. Go ahead.7

OPENING STATEMENT BY BRETT KIMBERLIN, PLAINTIFF8

This case arises out of a peace order from the9

District Court. The District Court found, by clear and10

convincing evidence, that Mr. Walker has been haras sing and11

that he assaulted me in this courthouse on January 9th, 2012. 12

Mr. Walker has been engaged in a campaign of bullyi ng13

towards me online and this resulted in him showing up in a14

court case that I was involved with, getting admoni shed by15

Judge Rupp to remain quiet in the court case, and f ollowing me16

outside the courtroom where he continued to berate me and came17

at me in an aggressive manner which resulted in me taking a18

photograph of him as he was coming to hit me. He d id assault19

me at that time. 20

The courtroom staff came out of the courtroom, from21

Judge Rupp’s court, called the sheriff. Nine deput ies showed22

up and they advised me that they could not arrest M r. Walker23

because they didn’t see the assault, advised me to go to the24

commissioner’s office and press charges, which I di d, and I got25

cc 6

a peace order at that time also. Subsequently, the State’s1

Attorney’s office chose to nolle prosse the case, b ut the peace2

order has remained in effect. 3

Since then, since that January 9th attack, Mr. Walk er4

has retaliated against me in a number of ways, by f iling a5

false criminal charge against me which didn’t even get past the6

screeners at the State’s Attorney’s office. He fil ed a false7

peace order against an associate, sending the polic e out to my8

house to serve him when he has never even visited m y house. 9

He’s filed a $66,000,000 lawsuit against me, a friv olous and10

malicious lawsuit against me in Virginia. He has e ngaged in a11

Twitter campaign against me. I don’t tweet, but he has tweeted12

scores of posts about me on Twitter. He has posted on his own13

blog that I’m “human filth” and asked people not to donate to14

my nonprofits and if they do, that he will consider charging15

them with criminal and civil penalties.16

I’m the director of a nonprofit. I have been for17

over 10 years here in Maryland. I work with young people,18

Congress members, congressional offices, government offices,19

and community leaders to get young people out to vo te and20

engage in the world. 21

I was arrested 34 years ago on a crime. I was22

charged with a bombing case. I was charged with a conspiracy23

to possess marijuana case. When I was a teenager, I was24

charged and convicted for perjury forty years ago.25

cc 7

Mr. Walker seems to think that I cannot live that1

down. He has used his blog over and over for month s and months2

to call me a terrorist and a perjurer, and asked pe ople to3

harass me. I’ve gotten death threats because of hi s actions. 4

I’ve been called terrible names and it’s a continui ng process5

of harassment, and he has attempted to destroy and besmirch my6

reputation. 7

I’m a father. I’m a husband and I’m a community8

leader here in the area, and Mr. Walker wants to de stroy that9

because I, in my nonprofit, have helped Muslims -- Muslims,10

moderate Muslims. 11

I work with Muslim artists and activists. My 12

nonprofit is called Justice Through Music. Justice Through13

Music is a 501(c)(3) here in Maryland and as part o f our work,14

we work with Muslim activists here and abroad to pr ovide15

reconciliation between Muslims and Christians, and to oppose16

oppression and anarchy in dictatorial countries ove rseas. The17

State Department sends young Muslim activists to tr ain with my18

organization every year. 19

Mr. Walker does not like my work with Muslims. He20

runs -- he’s a publisher of a blog called Everyone Draw21

Mohammed. Everyone Draw Mohammed asks people to dr aw insulting22

depictions of the prophet Mohammed. He has over 80 0 depictions23

of the prophet Mohammed on his blog. 24

He calls -- he tells people on his blog to -- he25

cc 8

tells “Muslim bitches,” quote, to come to his blog and if they1

don’t like what he says about insulting them, to co me to his2

home in Manassas, Virginia, where he’ll engage in a gun battle3

with them.4

So Mr. Walker does not like the fact that I support5

Muslims. He tells people on his blog that the only way he’ll6

post a depiction on his blog is if considers it fat wa worthy, a7

fatwa being an edict by a Muslim cleric that -- an edict8

condemning the work or actions of a certain party.9

So this has gotten into quite a contentious situati on10

and I’ve been harassed. I’ve asked to be left alon e. Mr.11

Walker harassed me through a pseudonym called Aaron Worthing. 12

Aaron Worthing was --13

THE COURT: Excuse me. 14

MR. KIMBERLIN: Yeah.15

THE COURT: I asked for an opening statement, which16

is, as you may know, a preview of what the case is about and I17

think I’ve got it.18

MR. KIMBERLIN: You’ve got it. Okay.19

THE COURT: Let me hear from Mr. Bours.20

MR. KIMBERLIN: All right.21

OPENING STATEMENT BY REGINALD W. BOURS, III, ESQ.22

ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT23

Your Honor, from my perspective, what we’re really24

here to determine is whether the elements under the peace order25

cc 9

statutes are met by anything that is actually prove n in this1

Court. 2

I think a really good place to start is Mr. Kimberl in3

is absolutely incorrect when he says that a Distric t Court4

judge found that, by clear and convincing evidence, that there5

had been an assault. You have the file there and I ’ll simply6

conveniently hand up the final peace order signed b y Judge7

Everngam in District Court. 8

He found, by clear and convincing evidence, two9

things. He found that there had been harassment an d that it10

was likely to continue.11

We’re here de novo so I’m not going to say that Mr.12

Kimberlin can’t bring up anything at all. I’m goin g to leave13

that up to the Court to decide. But what is absolu tely wrong14

with the District Court’s finding is that harassmen t is defined15

under the criminal laws of the State, and I’ll argu e this16

later. I have the statutes here with me. You’ll f ind that17

nothing that Mr. Kimberlin actually testifies about , even if18

you accept his testimony, constitutes harassment un der the19

criminal statute and if it doesn’t, then a judge ca n’t order a20

peace order based on that. So that’s just the star ting point.21

Let me tell you that my client is a practicing22

attorney. He’s admitted to the bar in the District of Columbia23

and in the State of Virginia. He has a hobby invol ving24

blogging. He has a blogging site, as it were, call ed “Allergic25

cc 10

to Bull.” It’s a political type of site and it bas ically talks1

about politics, all kinds of different issues. I t hink,2

indirectly, that’s how he came to Mr. Kimberlin’s a ttention.3

What is really in the background of this case is Mr .4

Kimberlin was convicted of a number of things that he hasn’t5

told you about. He was convicted as an adult of pe rjury before6

the grand jury in Indiana. He was given a 50 year sentence for7

bombing, and one of the aspects of that bombing is that an8

individual who had his leg blown off committed suic ide, and his9

widow sued, and collected, not collected but got, a $1 million10

judgment against Mr. Kimberlin, which he later refu sed to pay11

and a federal court found him in violation of his p arole and12

revoked his parole for not paying the civil judgmen t that was13

part of his parole conditions. Some of these thing s happened14

as recently as 1999.15

Be that as it may, what happened in the background of16

this case is that this gentleman, Mr. Kimberlin, su ed somebody17

named Seth Allen in this court. I have the files h ere, but18

there was a court proceeding on January 9th. The c ase is Civil19

No. 339254V. Mr. Kimberlin sued somebody named Set h Allen. He20

got a judgment for $100 from Judge Jordan for defam ation, the21

defamation involving some of these same matters abo ut his22

background, supposedly. Judge Jordan also ordered and cited an23

injunction saying that Seth Allen should not do any thing24

harmful to Mr. Kimberlin’s business.25

cc 11

As near as I can place it, the only connection my1

client has to any of this is that he heard about th e action2

against Seth Allen and told Seth Allen he should ge t a lawyer,3

because Seth Allen defaulted in the case I just men tioned. So4

everything that happened between Kimberlin and Seth Allen was5

on a default judgment basis. 6

After Judge Jordan on November 14 issued an7

injunction and awarded $100 in damages to Mr. Kimbe rlin, Mr.8

Kimberlin claimed that Seth Allen was continuing in his9

defamatory or business interference activities. Be cause the10

name Aaron Worthing had come up in the proceedings, he issued11

subpoenas to Google, among others, to reveal the id entity of12

Aaron Worthing, the blog that I was telling you abo ut. 13

My client got involved in that litigation14

peripherally, but only after he sent -- he, meaning Mr.15

Kimberlin -- sent him an e-mail in which he brought out all of16

his personal data in a motion that he had filed to withdraw the17

request for subpoenas to Google. 18

This makes no sense to most people, I think, maybe19

not to the Court, but what’s going on here is that Mr.20

Kimberlin was actually engaging in a campaign again st Mr.21

Walker, not the other way around. In fact, the onl y thing that22

had happened prior to January 9th involving a blog or anything23

was on December 11th of 2011. That’s the only thin g my client24

had done at all.25

cc 12

So, at any rate, my client comes to the courthouse on1

January 9th because there’s a motion in front of Ju dge Rupp2

across the hall, and he stood up in front of Judge Rupp, and3

pointed out that this man had put his identity out in a4

pleading that’s filed in the court, and he asked th at it be5

sealed, which he did; that is, Judge Rupp did agree to seal the6

document this man put out. This man was doing it b ecause he7

actually was attempting to cause harm to my client.8

What he’s told you about this Muslim Web site and9

everything else, there’s maybe a grain of truth to it, but what10

you’ll find in the end, if you ever get to it, is t hat I think11

that Mr. Kimberlin was hoping that somebody would c ome to my12

client’s home because of the litigation in which he was13

identified and actually cause him harm. That’s a p rocess of14

intimidation that is typical with Mr. Kimberlin as we may show15

during the evidence.16

At any rate, my client and Mr. Kimberlin were pro s e17

in the proceedings below. My client is not a Maryl and lawyer. 18

The matter of the statutes on harassment wasn’t eve n argued in19

the proceedings below. We have a transcript if you need to see20

it. In fact, under the Maryland law, number one, m y client has21

not committed harassment within the meaning of that statute. 22

That statute requires a course of conduct that just isn’t going23

to be shown by the evidence.24

Secondly, they have no connection to each other at25

cc 13

this point in time, other than maybe this lawsuit t hat was1

filed against Mr. Kimberlin in Virginia. But this is not an2

appropriate proceeding in which to order a peace or der against3

Mr. Walker and I think you’ll find at the end of th e case that4

the petitioner should not be believed, that the evi dence is not5

clear and convincing of either an assault or harass ment.6

THE COURT: Thank you.7

Are you your first witness, sir?8

MR. KIMBERLIN: I can -- because the sheriff is her e,9

I would be happy to call him so he can --10

THE COURT: That’s fine. You call witnesses in the11

order you want to.12

MR. KIMBERLIN: Yeah. I’ll call Sergeant Sherman, I13

think is your name.14

THE COURT: I don’t think he appreciates being15

busted. It’s Colonel Sherman.16

MR. KIMBERLIN: Oh. Colonel. Sorry.17

BRUCE SHERMAN18

called as a witness on behalf of the plaintiff, hav ing been19

first duly sworn, was examined and testified as fol lows:20

THE COURT: You may inquire, sir.21

DIRECT EXAMINATION22

BY MR. KIMBERLIN23

Q Hi. Colonel Sherman, you’re familiar with an24

incident that occurred on this floor on January 9, 2012?25

cc 14

THE WITNESS: Your Honor, I’m familiar with an1

incident report No. 12 -- I’m sorry, an incident re port dated2

January 9, 2012, that was filed by deputies in the Montgomery3

County Sheriff’s Office. 4


BY MR. KIMBERLIN:6

Q Can you tell us what that incident report says?7

MR. BOURS: Object.8

THE COURT: I sustain that objection. 9

Let me just say this for the record, sir. 10

I know this matter was down in District Court and i n11

the District Court, by rule and practice, the Court is12

permitted to relax the rules of evidence, the reaso n being that13

most people who come to District Court, particularl y with small14

claims, do not have lawyers. Often times the claim s in15

District Court, the amount of the claim, certainly the legal16

fees, would exceed what the amount of the lawsuit i s. So most17

of the people or many of the people who appear in D istrict18

Court are not represented, and so the Court relaxes the rules19

and allows citizens to sort of present their case.20

Here in the Circuit Court, we are not permitted to do21

that. The rules of evidence and the rules of proce dure apply22

whether the person is a lawyer or whether they are not a23

lawyer. We have one set of rules. 24

So, the objection that counsel has made is to the25

cc 15

reading of a report which includes hearsay informat ion that1

doesn’t fall within any -- well, I haven’t read it, so I don’t2

know, but presumably, it doesn’t fall within any ex ception to3

the hearsay rule and would not be admittable here i n Circuit4

Court. At any rate, police reports and the sheriff ’s5

department is a law enforcement agency, police depa rtment. 6

Those reports are not admissible. 7

MR. KIMBERLIN: So you’re saying the police report is8

not admissible because the person that wrote it is not here? 9

Is that what you’re saying?10

THE COURT: I’m saying that it is hearsay. It11

doesn’t fit within any exception to the hearsay rul e and they12

are routinely not admitted in the Circuit Court.13

Now anything that the sheriff saw, anything that he14

witnessed, he can certainly testify about that.15

MR. KIMBERLIN: Okay.16

BY MR. KIMBERLIN:17

Q Were you there at the incident?18

A No, sir.19

MR. KIMBERLIN: Then I have no further questions.20

THE COURT: Any questions?21

MR. BOURS: I did not subpoena Colonel Sherman, but I22

have some things I’d like to introduce through him at the23

appropriate time.24

THE COURT: Well, I know --25

cc 16

MR. BOURS: So I would ask that the Court allow him1

to remain or ask him to remain until it’s our turn to present2

evidence.3

THE COURT: I know how busy they are, so what I wil l4

allow you to do is clear the hurdles of evidentiary rules and I5

won’t rule on the admittance or not of those things , and he6

doesn’t need to stay.7

Are you following me, sir?8

MR. KIMBERLIN: Well, could I just ask him another9

question then?10

THE COURT: Sure. But I’m going to let Mr. Bours11

mark and identify whatever it is needs to come thro ugh him. So12

the issue of whether it comes in or not won’t be wh ether it13

comes in through him. He’ll be gone. The issue wi ll be14

whether whatever it is is admissible otherwise.15

But if you have other questions, you may ask. Go16

ahead.17

BY MR. KIMBERLIN:18

Q Are you -- is a part of your job description to be19

the keeper of the video tapes of the courtroom inci dents?20

A The Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office does keep s ome21

video recordings. In the current technology, they are not22

tapes but they’re hard drives.23

Q Okay.24

A But the Sheriff’s office does maintain some video25

cc 17

data that includes video activity in the courthouse .1

Q Are you familiar with a video that was taken of th e2

incident of January 9th?3

A I’m not personally familiar with it. I’m aware th at4

there was some video coverage of an incident in the courthouse5

on January 9th and that that DVD of that video was provided to6

both the State’s Attorney, for discovery purposes, and you for7

discovery purposes.8

MR. KIMBERLIN: Your Honor, am I allowed to show yo u9

that video?10

THE COURT: If you can have it properly identified.11

MR. KIMBERLIN: I mean is there going to be an12

objection to the video?13

THE COURT: A party doesn’t worry about what the14

other side is going to object to. You call your ow n plays. If15

they object, that’s what they do. You don’t try th e case to16

them. You try it to this Court and if I find that the evidence17

is admissible, it will be admissible over objection , if that’s18

the appropriate thing to do.19

BY MR. KIMBERLIN: 20

Q If I show you a video, can you tell the Court whet her21

that is the video of that event? 22

A I can tell you that the Sheriff’s office maintains23

videos and that as a result of request from the par ties, those24

videos were copied onto DVDs and provided either in criminal25

cc 18

discovery or pursuant to an information request to yourself. 1

I was not there for the incident. I didn’t see the2

incident occur. I would only be able to say that w hatever is3

on the DVD system is a recording of what our DVD an d -- or our4

recording system and video cameras –- observe in th e5

courthouse, but I don’t have any personal knowledge of what6

happened on that date or any time between you and a ny other7

individual. 8

MR. KIMBERLIN: Okay. Your Honor, I do want to9

introduce this video at some point. I can do it no w or I can10

do it as we go.11

MR. BOURS: I’m going to object again.12

THE COURT: Have the item marked.13

MR. KIMBERLIN: I mean it’s on a video. It’s on a14

computer. 15

THE COURT: You don’t have a disc?16

MR. KIMBERLIN: I don’t have a disc.17

THE COURT: How would I receive it into evidence,18

take your computer?19

MR. KIMBERLIN: Well, I mean you can see it. You c an20

view it.21

THE COURT: But it has to be a part of the record. 22

We have to have it. It can’t --23

MR. KIMBERLIN: So you can’t --24

THE COURT: You don’t have a disc of it?25

cc 19

MR. KIMBERLIN: No.1

THE COURT: Then it won’t be able to be a part of t he2

record. In other words, the exhibit will have to b e marked by3

the clerk, shown to the witness, have the witness i dentify it,4

then the Court would receive it into evidence.5


THE COURT: I understood that there was a disc made7

and given to both sides?8

MR. KIMBERLIN: Yes. There was a disc made. I9

didn’t bring the disc because I’ve had it on my com puter. I10

downloaded it on my computer because I didn’t think you would11

be able -- it’s in a very strange format and we --12

THE COURT: Well, we deal with those formats all th e13

time. As you see, we have a machine here for showi ng the disc.14

MR. KIMBERLIN: Can I -- I’d like to --15

THE COURT: If you have photographs, that’s --16

MR. KIMBERLIN: I do.17

THE COURT: You can have them marked by the clerk a nd18

see if the sheriff can identify them.19

MR. KIMBERLIN: May I approach?20

THE COURT: Sure.21

BY MR. KIMBERLIN:22

Q I’m going to hand you three photographs and --23

THE COURT: Let Mr. Bours see them.24


cc 20

BY MR. KIMBERLIN:1

Q I’m going to hand you three photographs here. If you2

could just look at those and state to the Court whe ther those3

appear to be from the video in question.4

A They appear to be printouts from the Sheriff’s off ice5

video system showing scenes on the ninth floor lobb y of the6

judicial center. The camera frame identifies it as January 9,7

2012. They appear to be from the Vicon system that the8

Sheriff’s office uses for video cameras in the cour thouse.9

MR. KIMBERLIN: Thank you.10

Your Honor, would you like to see these?11

THE COURT: Any objection as to these?12

MR. BOURS: The objection I really have is they don ’t13

show a complete sequence of events. They are picke d by him for14

whatever he intends to show with them. I think we need to have15

the complete record.16

MR. KIMBERLIN: I have the video here and I can sho w17

that, too.18

THE COURT: Anything else?19

MR. BOURS: No.20

THE COURT: Overruled. I’ll receive the pictures.21


(The photographs were marked for23

identification as Plaintiff's Exhibit24

No. 1 and were received in evidence.)25

cc 21

MR. KIMBERLIN: May I describe what they are or not ?1

THE COURT: Well, I’ll look at them. The witness i s2

on the stand if you want to ask him questions about them.3

BY MR. KIMBERLIN:4

Q Can you identify anything in these pictures at all ?5

A Mr. Kimberlin, there are three pictures. There’s one6

taken at 11:42:34 a.m., according to the marking on the7

picture, one taken at 11:43 a.m., and one taken at 11:45:028

a.m. 9

The first one appears to be a picture of the ninth10

floor lobby taken from the camera in the lobby. Th ere appear11

to be three individuals in the picture, too, on the left side,12

one on the right side, and some briefcases, two bri efcases on13

the floor. I can’t identify who the people are. I don’t --14

have no idea who they are.15

Q Okay.16

A The second picture was, is marked as being, taken at17

11:43 a.m. I think there are one, two, three, four , five18

people in the photograph. I can’t identify who the y are.19

And in the last picture taken at 11:45:02 a.m. on20

January 9, 2012, there appear to be a whole lot of people in21

there, probably 10 people, of which three appear to be22

Montgomery County deputy sheriffs, people wearing t he tan23

Montgomery County deputy sheriff uniform that I’m w earing; one24

or two people in a dark blue uniform, which appear to be25

cc 22

sheriffs or law enforcement officers, and then four to six1

civilians. I can guess at who the people are, but I can’t2

identify their faces.3

MR. KIMBERLIN: All right. I have no further4

questions for the Colonel.5

THE COURT: Any questions?6

MR. BOURS: May I have the photographs?7

CROSS-EXAMINATION8

BY MR. BOURS:9

Q Do you know a deputy named Jim Johnson?10

A Yes.11

Q Is he in any of these photographs, if you want to12

look again?13

A He’s not in the first two. The one taken at 11:45 :0214

a.m., may be a picture of him. It’s taken from qui te a ways15

across the lobby. It’s what I would say is a rear profile16

picture, so you know, it’s hard to tell. It’s kind of back17

lit, but it could be Jimmy Johnson.18

Q Is he the author of the report that was mentioned19

earlier in your testimony?20

A Yes.21

Q Was his report submitted to the State’s Attorney’s22

office?23

A Yes.24

Q Was the video that we’ve been talking about, the f ull25

cc 23

video, not just individual photographs, was that al so submitted1

to the State’s Attorney’s office?2

A Yes. To my knowledge, the DVD video, the incident3

report from the Sheriff’s office, and perhaps print ed out4

frames of pictures may have been submitted for disc overy in a5

criminal case.6

Q Do you supervise Deputy Johnson?7

A Not directly, but I’m in the supervisory chain.8

Q From your knowledge, did he testify in the Distric t9

Court peace order proceedings?10

A In fact, I was summoned as a witness in the Distri ct11

Court peace order proceeding, I think by Mr. Walker . Both12

Deputy Johnson and myself were there, and Deputy Jo hnson did,13

in fact, testify in the District Court peace order proceeding.14

Q But you did not in that proceeding?15

A I think I was called to the stand and I identified16

the report.17

Q Was the DVD shown in District Court?18

A I have no idea. We were there. We were called as19

witnesses. After we testified, we left. So it was not shown20

by myself or Deputy Johnson. Whether it was shown after we21

left, I have no way of knowing.22

Q Deputy Johnson, where is he this week?23

A He’s, I think, on the eastern shore of Maryland at a24

training program.25

cc 24

Q So he’s not available to testify today?1

A No, sir.2

Q Were you in the courtroom when he testified in3

District Court?4

A Yes, sir.5

MR. BOURS: Judge, I’ll just proffer so that we don ’t6

have to fence around about it. I do have a disc an d I can have7

it marked. It’s currently in the only computer I c ould get it8

to work on and I’m reluctant to take it out and rui n that. But9

I’d like to show this to the Colonel and see if he can agree10

that this is the full video.11

THE COURT: And to Mr. Kimberlin.12

MR. BOURS: How long will this last if we don’t plu g13

it in again?14

MR. WALKER: I think we got half an hour.15

MR. BOURS: Okay. You want to pull out the plug16

then?17

MR. KIMBERLIN: I have no objection.18

THE COURT: Okay. But you might want to take a loo k19

at what it is he’s showing.20

MR. KIMBERLIN: I assume it’s the same thing. Yeah .21

BY MR. BOURS:22

Q Tell me about the system that these photographs ar e23

taken with or these videos are taken with.24

A There’s a Vicon system that has a number of hard25

cc 25

drives, maybe two or three hard drives. I’m not ex actly sure1

about the electronics, but there is a rack in the S heriff’s2

office on the T8 level in the courthouse that recor ds video3

feeds from cameras that are installed in the courtr ooms,4

installed in the hallways in the courthouse, pursua nt to a5

security study done by the National Center for Stat e Courts6

some years ago. 7

They typically -- some of them are fixed cameras. 8

Some of them are directable cameras and they record what I9

would call multiplexed video. In other words, it’s not a10

continuous stream of photographs. There are maybe 16 cameras11

being recorded on one hard disc and it will switch from each of12

those 16 cameras, as I understand it, take a fracti on of a13

second, switch to the next camera, and then it gets14

multiplexed. Then there’s a software kind of set u p that15

allows it to separate those pictures out again.16

Q Okay.17

A So it will take a picture but it will be every18

sixteenth of a second. There may be some gaps in i t.19

Q So it’s every sixteenth of a second that it --20

A I don’t know the exact fraction of a second. I kn ow21

that the multiplexing will go through a number of d ifferent22

cameras and then when you view it, it reassembles t hose. But23

it won’t be like a high definition movie that you w ould watch24

on your cable tv where it’s continuous.25

cc 26

Q The thing that is recording it is on a, I’ll call it,1

a pole or some kind of extension that comes down fr om the2

ceiling and has multiple views around the ninth flo or, is that3

right?4

A The -- there are cameras installed in various5

locations in the courtroom, courthouse, in the lobb y.6

Q Can you tell from this video though where this one is7

from?8

A This appears to be a camera in the ceiling of the9

lobby on ninth floor of the courthouse. There’s a wire or a10

conduit, whether it’s optical cable or electrical c able, that11

then runs back down from that camera to the basemen t in the12

courthouse to a essentially a computer hard drive. It gets --13

the information gets recorded on that hard drive.14

Q You know for a fact that the disk that is playing15

this was recorded for a period of time beginning at roughly16

11:40 a.m. on January 9th?17

A I -- other than looking at the data that’s display ed18

on the picture itself, I wouldn’t know what the tim e frame,19

date of it is or the time frame. It’s self authent icating in20

the sense that the frames have a date indication th at I would21

presume is correct.22

Q Just so you don’t have to come back, I’m going to23

start this real quick because it doesn’t take very long, and24

ask if it appears to be genuine to you.25

cc 27

(Whereupon, the video tape referred to was played.)1

THE WITNESS: Without going frame by frame through2

each picture frame in there, I would characterize i t as3

apparently a stop motion picture of the lobby that’ s outside4

this courtroom.5

BY MR. BOURS:6

Q This would be the disk that was submitted to the7

State’s Attorney’s office for discovery purposes, c orrect?8

A Again, without seeing the disk, I -- the Vicon9

presentation that you have on the screen appears to be what I’m10

used to seeing from the Vicon system. I didn’t mak e the disk11

myself. I don’t know whether the State’s Attorney gave you the12

original disk that the Sheriff’s office provided to them, or13

whether they duplicated it, or what not, but the im agery seems14

to be consistent with what I’m used to seeing on Vi con.15

Q Do you see any evidence of tampering with this as you16

watch it?17

A Again, there’s not any way I could tell whether it ’s18

been tampered with or not. I don’t see anything ob vious.19

Q Toward the end of this, there may be some deputies20

that show up and I’d like to see if you can say who they are21

and if Jim Johnson was one of them, according to on e of the22

photographs that’s on the moving screen.23

A Can you move it a little closer? The elimination is24

not really pretty.25

cc 28

Q Sure.1

A Um -- it would appear that one of them may be Jimm y2

Johnson, Deputy Johnson.3

THE COURT: The short one?4

THE WITNESS: I mean I think the Court -- if the5

Court looks at it, he can -- Your Honor can see who they are as6

well as I can. I think there’s Kim Meronawitz (pho netic sp.). 7

I think there may be --8

THE COURT: Let me see.9

THE WITNESS: I think Jimmy Johnson is one of them. 10

He’s the shorter one with short blonde hair.11

BY MR. BOURS:12

Q I’m going to show you a package that appears to co me13

from the State’s Attorney from Montgomery County re garding14

discovery and just ask this one question. The firs t document15

that I’m pulling out here is a two-page report. Is that a true16

and accurate copy of Deputy Johnson’s report?17

A Yes, sir.18

Q Is that report kept in the ordinary course of19

business of the Sheriff’s office regarding any inci dents that20

occur in the courthouse?21

A Yes, sir.22

MR. BOURS: May we have this marked as Respondent’s23

No. 1?24

MR. KIMBERLIN: No objection.25

cc 29

(The document referred to was marked1

as Defendant’s Exhibit No. 1 for2

identification.)3

BY MR. BOURS:4

Q If an event occurs in the courthouse where injurie s5

are sustained by someone as a result of that incide nt, is there6

any part of this report or any report that you woul d keep7

regarding injuries?8

A One of the questions on the incident report is a9

question about injuries.10

Q In reference to this incident, was there any repor ted11

or obvious injury to Mr. Kimberlin?12

A The only way I would know would be by reading the13

incident report and the incident report reflects th at it was,14

first of all, that it was prepared by people respon ding after15

the incident was over. I think, if I could see the document,16

there’s a section of injuries under the name Brett Kimberlin. 17

Injuries. It says unknown.18

Q Would it have been at least part of the sheriff’s19

duties to inquire about injury or help someone obta in treatment20

for injuries, I assume?21

A Normally, if there were obvious visible injuries o r22

if there were some allegations of injuries, there w ould be a23

request as to whether or not somebody was injured. But in a24

situation where deputies respond after the fact to an incident25

cc 30

and there’s no obvious gross physical injury, they may put down1

unknown.2

Q Were you present in District Court when Deputy3

Johnson testified that there were no signs of injur y on Mr.4

Kimberlin?5

A I was present in District Court when Deputy Johnso n6

testified for the entire time he testified.7

Q Do you remember that part of his testimony?8

A I don’t specifically remember that.9

MR. BOURS: Your Honor, I’m going to offer10

Respondent’s No. 1.11

THE COURT: Any objection?12


THE COURT: I’ll receive it.14

(The item marked for identification as15

Defendant's Exhibit No. 1 was received16

in evidence.)17

BY MR. BOURS:18

Q Based on your recollection of this entire matter, did19

you submit to the State’s Attorney’s office individ ual20

photographs taken from the video? Was that part of what you21

all submitted to the State’s Attorney’s office?22

A To my knowledge, the Sheriff’s office, through Dep uty23

Johnson, would have submitted the incident report, the DVD, and24

several photographs printed out.25

cc 31

Q I’m going to hand that to you and just ask if you1

could look at each one and tell me whether that’s t he format in2

which Deputy Johnson would have submitted photograp hs from the3

video. In other words, if, are these Sheriff’s dep artment4

productions, as it were?5

A Those appear to be consistent with printouts from the6

Sheriff’s office Vicon video system.7

MR. BOURS: I’m going to ask that the Clerk staple --8

I’m sorry. I didn’t mean to ignore you, Mr. Kimber lin, if9

you’d like to look at them.10


MR. BOURS: I’d like to have these marked,12

collectively, as Respondent’s No. 2, then you can s taple them13

further if you’d like, and offer them. I think the re’s no14

objection.15

THE COURT: All right. I’ll receive it.16

(The items were marked for17

identification as Defendant's Exhibit18

No. 2 and were received in evidence.)19

BY MR. BOURS:20

Q Now the time each one is taken is shown down in th e21

lower right-hand corner, is that correct?22

A They’re self authenticating as to date and time.23

Q When we play this for the Judge, or if we play thi s24

for the Judge, that continues to be true, it’s 25

cc 32

self-authenticating as to the time it was taken?1

A Yes. And you can see the time switch from each fr ame2

and you can see that each frame is roughly two seco nds after3

the previous frame.4

Q One other area that, I guess, qualifies as my part as5

opposed to Mr. Kimberlin’s direct, you’re familiar with the6

rules of this Court and of the Maryland Court of Ap peals, are7

you not, with regard to taking photographs in the c ourthouse?8

A Yes, sir.9

Q I’m going to show you Respondent’s Exhibit No. 3 f or10

identification. This is a copy, I believe, of the Maryland11

Rule, is that correct?12

A Yes, sir.13

Q Would you just state for the record what the polic y14

is of people taking photographs inside this court b uilding?15

A Pursuant to Maryland Rule 16-110, the taking of16

photographs within the court facility is prohibited absent17

permission from one of the judicial members of the court.18

Q Are you aware of any permission having been grante d19

to Mr. Kimberlin to take a photograph of anybody or anything on20

January 9th?21

A On January 9th and until some time after January 9 th,22

I had no idea who Mr. Kimberlin was, so I wouldn’t know whether23

or not he had any permission to do anything.24

MR. BOURS: I offer Respondent’s 3.25

cc 33

THE COURT: I’ll receive it.1


(The document marked for3


No. 3 was received in evidence.)5

BY MR. BOURS:6

Q Are you aware of whether or not Deputy Johnson7

investigated an iPad or some form of tablet compute r in Mr.8

Kimberlin’s possession for whether it had a photogr aph on it?9

A I’m unaware -- I am aware that in the incident rep ort10

there is some discussion of an iPad that -- again, my source is11

the incident report, but that apparently there was an iPad that12

Mr. Walker purported -- that Mr. Walker had that wa s returned13

to Mr. Kimberlin in the lobby of the courthouse.14

Q Do you know whether, based on the report of course ,15

whether it was examined to determine whether --16

A As far as I can tell, there was no examination of the17

iPad. It was simply one person claimed it was his. Deputy18

Johnson had it returned to the person who claimed i t was his.19

Q Is there any indication in the incident report tha t20

there was damage to that iPad?21

A I didn’t see any indication in the report of damag e.22

MR. BOURS: That’s all the questions I have.23

THE COURT: Any other questions, sir?24

MR. KIMBERLIN: No further questions.25

cc 34

THE COURT: All right, sir. Thank you very much.1

THE WITNESS: Thank you.2

Would you like your computer back?3

MR. BOURS: Yes. I think we’ll plug it in and use it4

later.5

(Witness excused.)6

MR. KIMBERLIN: May I continue?7

THE COURT: Yes, sir. Who is your next witness?8

MR. KIMBERLIN: I would like to be my own witness.9

THE COURT: Okay. You can come up, please. You ca n10

bring whatever you need.11

Actually, are you going to be offering those? Are12

those exhibits and so forth that you will be offeri ng?13

MR. KIMBERLIN: Maybe. I don’t know yet.14

THE COURT: Well, it might be better to just testif y15

from there because I don’t want you jumping up and down off the16

witness stand and running around to get things mark ed and so17

forth.18

MR. KIMBERLIN: Okay. That’s better.19

THE COURT: Any objection from you, Mr. Bours?20

MR. BOURS: Maybe at the time of cross-examination,21

it would be better for him to be there, but for rig ht now I22

don’t have a problem with it.23

THE COURT: For cross, he’ll be on the witness stan d,24

but as for now. 25

cc 35

Swear him in, please.1

BRETT KIMBERLIN2

the petitioner, having been first duly sworn, was e xamined and3

testified as follows:4

DIRECT EXAMINATION5

THE COURT: Sir, you have applied for a peace order6

against this gentleman. This is a trial de novo, a s if it7

didn’t happen in the District Court.8

THE WITNESS: Right.9

THE COURT: So why is it that you believe you shoul d10

have a peace order issued against this man?11

THE WITNESS: Mr. Walker has been harassing me,12

bullying me, inciting others to do --13

THE COURT: You can have a seat. You don’t have to14

stand. If you were in the witness stand, you would n’t be15

standing up.16

THE WITNESS: Okay.17

Inciting others to do that --18

MR. BOURS: Excuse me. I have to object the kind o f19

conclusory and unsupported --20

THE COURT: Yes. I sustain the objection. You hav e21

to testify to factually what happened. In other wo rds, when22

one says that one was harassed, that’s a conclusory term.23


THE COURT: One has to say that he kept shooting a25

cc 36

water gun in my face, or pulling my hair, or whatev er it is he1

was doing. 2

THE WITNESS: Okay.3

THE COURT: Presumably, you’re not going to say tho se4

things, but you have to say factually what occurred . The5

reason that this case is here, is for the Court to determine6

whether or not what, in fact, occurred was harassme nt. 7

Go ahead.8

THE WITNESS: All right. 9

MR. BOURS: Judge, if we could, the peace order10

statute requires that the testimony to the material must be11

something that happened within 30 days of January 9 th. In12

other words, the Court has no authority to grant a peace order13

for something that happened in 2005 or 2007, or eve n August of14

last year. 15

This peace order was applied for on January 9th. I t16

does somewhat specifically deal with something that happened on17

January 9th, but if it would help, I have a feeling Mr.18

Kimberlin wants to try to talk about things that ha ppened --19

THE COURT: Yes. It will shorten this proceeding a nd20

we can get through it very quickly. That is a stat utory21

requirement and it’s a pretty obvious reason why th at’s in the22

statute, so that we don’t have people coming to cou rt23

testifying regarding things that happened a year ag o, or six24

months ago, or two years ago.25

cc 37

So whatever you’re going to testify that he did, it1

must have occurred between December 9th and January 9th. 2

THE WITNESS: I mean I feel like I have to give a3

little background, just a slight little background, not way4

back. Just a little background.5

THE COURT: Very little background because I can’t6

consider that.7

THE WITNESS: Well, I mean one of the things I have8

to do is correct Mr. Bours’ opening statement. He said that9

Mr. Walker only got involved with me or my issues i n December10

of 2011. 11

Really what started this inquiry into Mr. Walker wa s12

I had, as stated, I had a civil case against a stal ker named13

Seth Allen that resulted in a judgment and also res ulted in a14

peace order against Mr. Allen. The reason that I g ot a peace15

order against Mr. Allen was that he had written, on August16

23rd, an e-mail to Mr. Walker and in that e-mail --17

MR. BOURS: Object.18

THE COURT: Yes. I’m going to sustain that.19

What you need to understand is that if he did what he20

is alleged to have done, between December 9th and J anuary 9th,21

and the evidence is clear and convincing, then a pe ace order22

will issue even if there was no background. It wou ldn’t23

matter. Even if you had never seen him before, if he violated24

the law such that a peace order should be issued, i t will be25

cc 38

issued. It doesn’t matter whether you had a histor y with him1

or whether you didn’t have a history with him. A p eace order2

would be appropriate.3

So it’s not important and this is a Court trial, no t4

a jury trial. The Court is not going to be influen ced by any5

history between these parties. You could have a mo rtal enemy6

living right next door and have no contact with tha t person.7

THE WITNESS: Well, I just wanted to get to how Mr.8

Walker got involved with this case or how he --9

THE COURT: But you don’t do that in your testimony . 10

If you want to talk about it in closing argument or something,11

fine, but I’m not going to have you just correct Mr . Bours. 12

You don’t have to do that. 13


THE COURT: What he said wasn’t evidence. What Mr.15

Bours said and what you said in your opening statem ents, that’s16

not evidence. That’s just what the parties believe the case is17

going to show. Now you have to show what you said you believe18

it was going to show, but it has to have occurred b etween19

December 9th and January 9th.20

THE WITNESS: On or about December 20th, I wrote to21

Mr. Walker, who I believed at the time was named Aa ron22

Worthing, an e-mail asking if he would cooperate in providing23

some information about a stalker that I had sued in Judge24

Jordan’s court named Seth Allen. Mr. Walker respon ded --25

cc 39

MR. BOURS: Object.1

THE COURT: Sustained. That’s hearsay.2

THE WITNESS: I went online and saw Mr. Walker’s3

response where he posted on his blog, Allergic to B ull, that4

“Brett Kimberlin, convicted terrorist and perjurer” --5

MR. BOURS: Object. Your Honor, I object.6

THE WITNESS: This is something I read.7

MR. BOURS: This is not self-authenticating.8

THE WITNESS: This is something I read and it shows9

his harassment of me.10

THE COURT: Okay. Understand something. In this11

book, Subtitle 5, these are the rules of evidence t hat this12

Court is governed by. People in the public think t hat if you13

get something off the Web, all of a sudden it’s adm issible in14

court. It couldn’t be further from the truth. It still has to15

be authenticated, like any other document.16

THE WITNESS: All right.17

THE COURT: Spiderman could be putting stuff on the18

Web. You have to be able to authenticate it and yo u can’t19

authenticate that.20

THE WITNESS: Well, I can tell you what I read and I21

can --22

THE COURT: I can’t consider what you read. These23

rules of evidence have been tested over time and th ey are there24

to protect you as well as people who are accused of doing25

cc 40

things.1

THE WITNESS: All right. Well, when Mr. Walker2

testifies, then I’ll ask him if he wrote these. 3

THE COURT: That’s up to you. I can’t tell you how4

to try the case.5

THE WITNESS: That’s the only way I can get it in.6

So I asked Mr. Walker if he would provide informati on7

about Mr. Allen and we had a -- there was a hearing set in Mr.8

Allen’s case for January 9th. During the period of December9

20th and January 9th, Mr. Walker secured the assist ance of an10

attorney. Of course, I --11

MR. BOURS: I think that’s conclusory, too. I mean12

he can provide evidence of that, but I don’t see th at he’s13

authenticated that either, that is to who did what.14

THE COURT: Let me just ask you a question. What d id15

this gentleman do to you and when did he do it?16

THE WITNESS: I’m trying to explain that. He calle d17

me terrible names and --18

THE COURT: Where was he when he called you 19

terrible --20

THE WITNESS: On his blog. 21

THE COURT: How can you prove he did that?22

THE WITNESS: Well, I prove it when he gets on the23

stand.24

THE COURT: Okay.25

cc 41

THE WITNESS: I mean he admitted that he did it. 1

It’s his blog. He writes that blog. But he was wr iting all2

this terrible stuff on his blog about me.3

THE COURT: How can you prove that? How can you4

prove that his cousin wasn’t sitting in his living room at his5

computer writing that?6

THE WITNESS: Because he said he did it.7

THE COURT: The answer to truth is because he said8

it?9

THE WITNESS: It’s his blog. He owns the blog. He10

publishes the blog. It’s his blog.11

THE COURT: I don’t think you’re understanding my12

question. How can you prove that something that co mes off my13

computer was not done by my daughter, sitting at my house,14

typing it on my computer? How can you prove that?15

THE WITNESS: Judge, because his lawyer -- he 16

filed -- the brief that he filed in Judge Rupp’s c ourt, he17

posted online. It says, “I respond to Brett Kimber lin’s motion18

and subpoenas.” That’s what he said. That’s --19

THE COURT: So if I write online “I, Mr. Kimberlin, ”20

whom I’m not, did something, sit right here now and type it21

online, post it, and somebody gets it offline, make s a copy of22

it, you think they can take that to court that I wr ote, saying23

I’m Mr. Kimberlin, they can take that to court and prove that24

you wrote that?25

cc 42

THE WITNESS: Judge, whether I can prove it or not,1

he admitted that he did it.2

THE COURT: You don’t understand something. You su ed3

somebody.4

THE WITNESS: Yes.5

THE COURT: This is a lawsuit. You brought a6

lawsuit.7

THE WITNESS: Uh-huh.8

THE COURT: You have to prove those things that you9

allege in your lawsuit and you need some evidence i ndependent10

of “He admitted he did it.” Even a criminal lawyer in a room11

of prosecutors needs more evidence than that. A St ate’s12

Attorney can’t come in here and say, “Judge, this g uy is guilty13

because he said he did it.” You need more than tha t.14

THE WITNESS: Judge, you asked me what he did to me .15

THE COURT: You’re telling me something about onlin e. 16

I want to know what he did to you. How is this man harassing17

you?18


THE COURT: You don’t even have to read what’s20

online.21

THE WITNESS: I know. I don’t have to.22

MR. BOURS: Your Honor, may I interject for just a23

moment?24

THE COURT: Sure.25

cc 43

THE WITNESS: I don’t have to read what’s online.1

MR. BOURS: The peace order statute is very limited2

in its scope and what it says is that he may be ent itled to a3

peace order if he can show harassment under the cri minal law4

article, not some vague feeling of harassment or no t liking5

what’s being written about him. 6

But under the Criminal Law Article, Section 3-803,7

there are elements to the crime of harassment in Ma ryland law. 8

What he’s got to show, between December 9, roughly, and January9

9, is that Mr. Walker did the things described in t he criminal10

law article, not that there’s a post, or e-mails, o r anything11

else. He’s got to show what’s in that article. It ’s12

subsection A.13

THE COURT: Excuse me. Mr. Bours, would you give h im14

this? Let him see what the problem is. He thinks the Court is15

giving him a hard time. I want him to look at, rea d what the16

law says. I have to follow the law.17

MR. BOURS: Actually, I would give him both because18

the definition of stalking is in 3-802. 3-802 is s talking19

under the Criminal Law Article and 3-803 is the har assment20

statute.21

THE COURT: But let him read that. 22

See what it says. If he did any of those things th at23

are listed there in that section, any of those thin gs. It24

can’t be just something that’s annoying someone. I t has to be25

cc 44

one of those things that’s listed in that law, othe rwise1

different judges would be making different decision s willy2

nilly based on whether or not the judge found that it was3

harassment. 4

That’s the reason that the legislature said, “Look,5

if you’re going to get a peace order for harassment , then the6

elements of harassment will be those elements that are defined7

in the Criminal Law Article,” those things. So I h ave to find8

that he did one of those things or more than one.9

THE WITNESS: All right.10

THE COURT: Did he do any of that?11

THE WITNESS: Yes, he did.12

THE COURT: Okay. Well, let’s talk about that, whe n13

he did it and where.14

THE WITNESS: Let’s talk about it. 15

A person may not follow another in or about a publi c16

place and maliciously engage in a course of conduct that alarms17

or seriously annoys another with the intent to hara ss, alarm,18

or annoy another. That’s what he did.19

MR. BOURS: Please keep going.20

THE COURT: Yes. Read the rest, sir.21

THE WITNESS: After reasonable warning or request t o22

stop by or on the defendant and without legal purpo se. This23

section does not apply to peaceable activity intend ed to24

express political view or provide information to ot hers. A25

cc 45

person who violates this section is guilty of a mis demeanor,1

dah, dah, dah.2

THE COURT: Okay.3

THE WITNESS: Okay. So --4

THE COURT: What did he do in violation of that5

statute?6

THE WITNESS: He came to court --7

THE COURT: When?8

THE WITNESS: On January 9th.9

THE COURT: Okay. Go ahead.10

THE WITNESS: He had not filed his appearance in th e11

case. He was not a lawyer in the case. He was not subpoenaed12

in the case. He came before Judge Rupp. He asked to make an13

emergency motion to seal a document that I had file d in court14

identifying him as Aaron Walker rather than Aaron W orthing. I15

put enough information in my filing in the court to identify16

him so that he could not say that he was not Aaron Walker.17

He came into the court. The judge was taken aback by18

him --19


THE COURT: Sustained.21

THE WITNESS: I have the transcript here. I can sh ow22

the Court.23

In short, the judge allowed him to seal the motion24

which identified him, asked him to sit in the spect ator’s25

cc 46

seating. Mr. Walker kept objecting --1

MR. BOURS: Object.2

THE COURT: I’ll sustain that. He can object to3

whatever. That has nothing to do with you.4

THE WITNESS: Well, the judge told him if he kept5

objecting, he would have the sheriff remove him.6

Mr. Walker -- When the hearing ended, Mr. Walker7

followed me outside the courtroom and told me that he was going8

to continue harassing me. He --9

MR. BOURS: Judge, could you instruct Mr. Kimberlin10

at least to give quotes of what was said as opposed to11

characterizations?12

THE WITNESS: I heard Mr. -- okay. I’ll say what I13

heard.14

THE COURT: You need to say exactly what he said. 15

Don’t characterize it.16

THE WITNESS: Okay. Mr. Walker said that he was17

going to continue harassing me.18

THE COURT: Well, I don’t think he said he was goin g19

to continue harassing you. He didn’t speak in thos e terms. 20

What did he say? Quote him.21

THE WITNESS: That’s what I recall.22

Then as we --23

THE COURT: You’re not understanding me. Mr. Walke r24

did not come out of that courtroom and say he is go ing to25

cc 47

continue -- he said, quote, “I” what?1

THE WITNESS: “I am going to continue to harass,2

expose,” something about that. I’m going to contin ue bothering3

you, something to that effect. I recall the word h arassment. 4

Maybe it was bothering, exposing, something to that effect.5

And as we exited the two doors, he said, “You abuse d6

the court process by using subpoenas to identify me .”7

As we continued to exit the second door, he got ver y8

loud and I felt threatened by his aggressive behavi or toward9

me. I backed up. I backed up more and more. Fina lly, I10

pulled out my iPad because I wanted to document the fact that11

he was coming at me. 12

As I lifted my iPad, Mr. Walker came to me with 13

his -- with his hand and hit me in the eye, or the face. He14

continued to come at me and wrestled with me for my iPad. 15

Fearing that my iPad would be destroyed from Mr. Wa lker’s16

conduct, I finally released it and I heard someone come behind17

me, out of the courtroom, saying, “He attacked him, he attacked18

him.”19

Two courtroom staff came running out of the courtro om20

and told Mr. Walker to get away from me, and they c alled the21

police. The -- within a very short time, eight or nine22

deputies came up to the ninth floor and Mr. Walker had my iPad23

still. He -- the deputy went over and took the iPa d away from24

him. I told the deputies that he had struck me, as saulted me. 25

cc 48

They advised me to go to the commissioner’s office and get a --1

press assault charges and to get a peace order agai nst Mr.2

Walker. That’s what happened on January 9th. I di d that. 3

Since then, I have been retaliated against. First of4

all, after that incident, I had a very distinct pro blem with my5

eyes. I had blurry vision in my eyes and --6

MR. BOURS: Object.7

THE COURT: What’s the basis of that?8

MR. BOURS: It sounds like he’s trying to give a9

medical diagnosis. There are proper ways to do tha t. But I10

think all he’s entitled to state is what my client did to him,11

not what it caused.12

THE COURT: Yes. There are no damages awarded in a13

peace order. 14

THE WITNESS: Well, I ended up at the hospital. I15

ended up at Suburban Hospital for six hours.16

THE COURT: I mean you understand you don’t get17

damages in a peace order.18

THE WITNESS: I’m not asking for damages right now. 19

THE COURT: But go ahead.20

THE WITNESS: I’m saying what happened. I had a21

terrible -- a screaming headache. I had blurry vis ion in my22

eye. I had back pain. I went to a clinic over her e on Seven23

Locks and the doctor looked at me and --24


cc 49

THE COURT: Sustained. You can’t say what the doct or1

said.2

THE WITNESS: Well, the result was I was sent to th e3

emergency ward at Suburban Hospital where I went th ere and was4

there for approximately six hours, and had a CAT Sc an, multiple5

other evaluations --6

MR. BOURS: Judge, I object again.7

THE COURT: I sustain that. 8

You see, that has nothing to do with whether a peac e9

order is granted or not.10

THE WITNESS: You’re going to sustain the objection11

you said?12

THE COURT: Yes.13

THE WITNESS: So I had -- I was assaulted. I was - -14

I have a picture that I took. Here’s the picture t hat I took15

from my iPad and I would like to introduce that int o evidence.16

THE COURT: Well, I’ll receive it.17

THE WITNESS: And I would like to show how it18

corresponds --19

THE COURT: Taking pictures in a courthouse is20

illegal, but if you want to offer that up, I’ll rec eive it.21

THE WITNESS: Yeah. I’d like to. I mean I was22

taking a picture to protect myself.23

(The photograph was marked for24

identification as Plaintiff's Exhibit25

cc 50

No. 2 was received in evidence.)1

THE WITNESS: You know, this -- on the pictures tha t2

I introduced into evidence earlier, the same -- you can see3

also the picture of the hand coming towards me, hit ting me. 4

The following day, I took pictures of the black eye5

that I had. I would like to introduce these, too.6

THE COURT: You have to have an item marked before I7

can address it.8

THE WITNESS: Do you want to see these, either one of9

these?10

THE COURT: Have it marked first so the record show s11

what it is that the Court is considering.12

What are those, 4 and 5?13

(The photographs were marked for14


Nos. 4 and 5.)16

MR. BOURS: Judge, I think he does need to testify as17

to each exhibit before they are admitted, not just hand them18

up.19

THE COURT: He hasn’t offered them yet.20

THE WITNESS: Okay. I’d like to offer them into21

evidence the exhibits.22

THE COURT: What is the number of the exhibit?23

THE WITNESS: Exhibit No. 4.24

THE COURT: What is No. 4?25

cc 51

THE WITNESS: Plaintiff’s 4 is a picture of Mr.1

Walker’s hand coming towards my face.2

THE COURT: What is No. 5?3

THE WITNESS: It’s a picture of the day after the4

event, a picture of my black eye from the assault.5

MR. BOURS: I object to that.6

THE COURT: Okay. You can have a seat. You’re7

testifying now, so have a seat.8

I’ll reserve on that.9

What else happened on that day?10

THE WITNESS: So on that day, that’s what happened. 11

I spent my evening in the hospital.12

And since then, Mr. Walker has been engaged in a13

campaign, up until the peace order was issued in th is case,14

Your Honor, in a campaign against me.15

MR. BOURS: Object to the characterization.16

THE COURT: Sustained. You have to testify as to17

what he did.18

THE WITNESS: Okay. Mr. Walker filed a criminal19

charge against me, which the District Attorney dism issed20

without even --21

MR. BOURS: Object. Object.22


THE WITNESS: Mr. Walker also filed a peace order24

against another man named Neil Ralhouser (phonetic sp.).25

cc 52

MR. BOURS: Object.1

THE COURT: Sustained, sir. That has nothing to do2

with it. Mr. Ralhouser’s case has nothing to do wi th this3

case.4

THE WITNESS: Well, he sent the police out to my5

house to serve Mr. Ralhouser.6

MR. BOURS: Object.7

THE COURT: Well --8

THE WITNESS: That’s harassment. I mean it’s9

annoyance.10

THE COURT: You can testify that somebody came to11

your house, but you can’t testify as to what he tol d them or --12

THE WITNESS: Okay. Three deputies showed up at my13

house to serve a peace order on Neil Ralhouser and I told them14

Neil Ralhouser has never even been to my house. Mr . Walker --15

MR. BOURS: Your Honor, I object. This really isn’ t16

relevant.17

THE COURT: Sustained. It’s not. Sustained.18

THE WITNESS: Also, when I went to the peace order19

hearing on Mr. Ralhouser and told the judge what ha ppened, 20

she, she threw out the peace order against Mr. Ralh ouser.21



THE WITNESS: Then Mr. Worthing engaged, again, in a24

Twitter campaign against me online.25

cc 53

MR. BOURS: Object.1

THE COURT: Sustained. 2

That objection is going to sustain every time you3

characterize things like “engaged in a campaign.” If you try4

to stick to what that statute says, you won’t be dr awing5

objections.6

THE WITNESS: Mr. Walker filed a $66,000,000 lawsui t7

against me in Virginia.8

MR. BOURS: Object.9

THE WITNESS: Here’s a copy.10

THE COURT: I have no doubt that he filed a lawsuit11

against you. There’s a lawsuit --12

THE WITNESS: I’m saying --13

THE COURT: You’re being sued in Virginia. I mean14

what does that have to do with this case?15

THE WITNESS: Well, it’s retaliation. It’s just16

because I filed a peace order against him. I filed criminal17

charges against him. This is all retaliation. Tha t’s what18

it’s about.19

So that’s what Mr. Walker has done. 20

THE COURT: Sir, at Docket Entry No. 1 --21


THE COURT: -- in this file --23

THE WITNESS: Yes.24

THE COURT: -- you have a petition for a peace orde r.25

cc 54


THE COURT: In that petition, Docket Entry No. 1, a nd2

the Court will take judicial notice of its own plea dings in3

Case No. ending in 8444, and what you have alleged and what you4

have to prove, and the only thing you have to prove , is this. 5

In paragraph 1, the details of what happened are de scribed as6

follows, and the instructions on the form are be as specific as7

you can. What you wrote is, Mr. Walker assaulted m e while8

leaving the courtroom. He hit me in the face, ches t, and9

shoulder, and took my iPad, and threatened to --10

MR. BOURS: I believe that says to harass me more.11

THE COURT: Harass me more. That’s the limit of wh at12

you need to prove. That is exactly what you need t o prove and13

that is why this case is here.14

THE WITNESS: I think I --15

THE COURT: So do you have any other testimony as16

regards that, because that’s what you went to court for?17

THE WITNESS: Yeah. And that’s -- I believe that18

I’ve proven that. He assaulted me. It resulted in injuries. 19

I went to the hospital.20

THE COURT: On the form, it also lists, you have to21

indicate whether there was kicking, punching, choki ng,22

slapping, shooting, rape, or other things, hitting, stabbing,23

shoving, threats, and you checked shoving, threats of violence,24

harassment, and stalking. I don’t know about stalk ing, but you25

cc 55

checked those things and you have testified that he did those1

things.2

Is there anything else that he did on that day?3

THE WITNESS: Not on January 9th.4

THE COURT: Okay. You understand that you’re limit ed5

to that? That’s what you filed in court. That’s a ll the Court6

can consider is what happened on that day and that’ s what this7

appeal is from.8

Had the complaint alleged some of the conduct that9

you have testified that he engaged in, that would b e one thing. 10

I could consider it. But you don’t allege it. It’ s not there. 11

It’s a trial de novo, but it’s not a trial de novo to go back12

and bring up all the things that are not in the com plaint, that13

you didn’t file. It’s a trial de novo on the case below. You14

can’t add things when you come up here that are not in the file15

below.16

Now if there were things in here, but they were not17

argued or were not mentioned, but they are in the c omplaint,18

you wouldn’t be prohibited from bringing up those t hings. 19

Lawyers often bring up things in Circuit Court in a trial de20

novo that they realize that they didn’t argue, or d idn’t21

articulate, or didn’t point out to the court in tri al below,22

but you don’t have that here. 23

So is there anything else about that day that you24

wish to testify to before I allow Mr. Bours to cros s, if he has25

cc 56

any, on that day?1

THE WITNESS: Well, I would like to point out since2

you’ve seen the pictures, I would like to describe in the one3

picture where his hand came towards me, which is on the 4

Court --5

THE COURT: I saw that.6

THE WITNESS: And also the fact that I didn’t call7

the police. Someone else called the police to come up.8

MR. BOURS: Object to that.9

THE COURT: I’ll sustain the objection.10

Clearly in the photographs, the sheriffs are here. 11

THE WITNESS: Because --12

THE COURT: There are cameras in the courthouse. 13

They don’t need to be called. They’re being watche d all the14

time --15


THE COURT: -- and there are cameras. There’s one17

right there. If I were to start flipping out on th e bench, the18

sheriffs would be here in just a few minutes. So m aybe they19

didn’t need to be called, but it’s lunch time, gent lemen.20

THE WITNESS: Oh boy.21

THE COURT: So why don’t we take a break, have lunc h,22

come back, and we’ll finish up when we come back fr om lunch.23

No witnesses in this case. There was a rule on24

witnesses and any witnesses should not speak among themselves25

cc 57

or with anyone else about their testimony.1

You can leave that unless you want to work on it. I2

mean, Mr. Bours, you can leave anything in the cour troom that3

you want to leave.4

MR. BOURS: Judge, what I’m going to do is I’m goin g5

to leave with the clerk just so I won’t be carrying this around6

all day.7

THE COURT: It will be locked.8

THE BAILIFF: All rise. The Court is in recess.9

(Recess)10

THE COURT: Thank you. Hope you had a good lunch. 11

Thanks. Have a seat, please.12

Are you ready to proceed, Mr. Bours?13

MR. BOURS: Yes. I believe Mr. Kimberlin is finish ed14

on his direct examination.15

THE COURT: Okay. Do you want him to take the stan d?16

MR. BOURS: Please.17

CROSS-EXAMINATION18

BY MR. BOURS:19

Q Sir, if you would, please, you may just simply tur n20

those documents over. You are not required to refe r to them. 21

If you need to refresh your recollection about some thing in22

order to give an answer, say so before you look at documents.23

First thing I want to ask you is, I notice that you24

brought with you this laptop of some sort. It’s an Apple25

cc 58

product, is it not?1

A Yes, sir.2

Q Is that called an iBook?3

A No. That’s a MacBook.4

Q A MacBook. The MacBook is actually like a laptop5

computer, is that correct?6

A Yes, sir.7

Q It’s different from an iPad?8

A Yes, sir.9

Q Did you bring the iPad with you today?10

A No, sir.11

Q You did have an iPad with you on January 9th, thou gh,12

when you appeared before Judge Rupp on motions, is that13

correct?14

A Yes, sir. Yes, sir.15

Q Why specifically did you bring an iPad to court on16

January 9th?17

A Well, there were notes in there that I had taken f or18

the court proceedings.19

Q Pardon me?20

A There were notes in the iPad that I had taken for the21

court proceedings and it’s very easy to carry.22

Q But did you bring this MacBook?23

A No. The reason I brought that today was because i t24

has the video on it and video can’t -- I couldn’t g et -- I mean25

cc 59

that video is a strange video and I could not get i t on the1

iPad.2

Q Okay.3

A So I brought -- I loaded it on this one.4

Q Now the iPad you brought with you on January 9th h ad5

a camera in it, correct?6

A Yes, sir.7

Q Tell the Court physically how you operate that cam era8

from the iPad.9

A It’s just one button. Just one button.10

Q Are you talking like an icon that you push and it11

activates the camera?12

A I believe so. It’s -- the camera is actually a pa rt13

of the iPad and so if you just hold the iPad up, an d you don’t14

have to even focus it or anything. You just push t he button15

and it takes the picture.16

Q So are you saying on the iPad, when you push the17

button on the iPad --18

A On the i --19

Q -- it actually takes the picture?20

A Well, I mean if it’s on. You just push the icon a nd21

it takes a picture. Right.22

Q Was your iPad on when you walked out of the courtr oom23

on January 9th?24

A I believe I had it on during the session just in c ase25

cc 60

I needed to refer to notes. Uh-huh. They last -- the battery1

lasts a long time.2

Q But the proceedings were completely finished in fr ont3

of Judge Rupp that day, correct?4

A Excuse me?5

Q The proceedings had completely finished, is that6

right?7

A I believe I had it on during the proceedings, yeah ,8

just as a -- when you say on, I mean the cover is c losed. The9

iPad that I had has a cover that closes and puts it to -- it’s10

kind of to sleep when it’s closed. So the iPad was technically11

on, but the cover was closed. So in other words --12

Q So it would have been closed when you walked out o f13

the courtroom?14

A Exactly. Uh-huh.15

Q The hearing that day was designed to get damages16

against Mr. Allen or a contempt citation against Mr . Allen, the17

defendant in that case, for continuing to interfere with your18

business and --19

A And for violation of the court order. Uh-huh.20

Q In order to support the claim that he had done tha t,21

didn’t you ask that the identity of Aaron Worthing be22

established so you could subpoena him as a witness?23

A Yes, I did.24

Q Then you learned who Aaron Worthing was, the blogg er25

cc 61

Aaron Worthing was, is that correct?1

A Not through the court proceedings.2

Q I understand that, but how and when did you learn3

that?4

A I learned it on December 31st.5

Q How?6

A I got a tip, anonymous tip.7

Q An anonymous tip via the internet, e-mail, or what ?8

A Yes. It was actually by phone.9

Q By telephone?10

A Uh-huh.11

Q After you received that information, what did you do12

with it?13

A I tried to verify it. I did Google searches and14

tried to verify that, in fact, Mr. Walker was Aaron Worthing15

and vice versa, and I was able to locate a bunch of -- a lot of16

documents online that made me comfortable that Aaro n Walker was17

actually Aaron Worthing.18

Q Pending before the Court, in that civil action19

against Mr. Allen, was a motion to require Google t o disclose20

the identity of Mr. Worthing, is that correct?21

A Right. Right.22

Q So after you learned the information December 31st ,23

you filed a request to withdraw that motion, is tha t right?24

A Yes, because I had already learned the information . 25

cc 62

I didn’t want to take up the Court’s time with a mo tion that1

was basically moot.2

Q But in the motion you filed to withdraw, you put a ll3

that information in your motion, didn’t you?4

A Not all of it. I have a lot more information that I5

didn’t put in there. I put his name, his address, where he6

worked, where he went to school, and things like th at so that7

there would be no question that he was that person.8

Q That’s what you say your motive was, but, in fact,9

that put it in a public record, is that correct?10

A Well, it’s a court case.11

Q And you knew that that made it public by your fili ng12

it there, correct?13

A I filed it in a court case. I didn’t make it -- I14

didn’t go public with it. I haven’t done that.15

Q Prior to your doing that, Mr. Worthing, through an16

attorney named Kingsley, had filed an opposition to disclosure17

of his identity, had he not?18

A It’s a she. Kingsley is a she.19

Q Worthing. Let’s assume Worthing is a he.20

A Okay.21

Q Through Beth Kingsley, a motion had been filed22

opposing the disclosure of his true identity, corre ct?23

A Right. And the judge was going to have a -- I24

believe that the judge was going to have a hearing on that on25

cc 63

the 9th and because I found out that information th rough other1

means and verified that information through online sources --2

Q This is really kind of a simple proposition, Mr.3

Kimberlin.4

A Okay.5

Q You were trying to find out the identity through6

court processes. That was being opposed by an atto rney named7

Beth Kingsley on --8

A Right.9

Q -- behalf of the anonymous blogger Aaron Worthing.10

A Right.11

Q That was all going on.12

A Right.13

Q In other words, they were opposing the identity be ing14

revealed, correct?15

A Right. 16

Q And opposing your subpoena for him to be a witness .17

A Yeah. That’s basically the motion. It was a moti on18

to quash.19

Q So then you filed in the jacket all the identifyin g20

information about him and you withdrew the motion b efore Judge21

Rupp, is that correct?22

A Yeah. I -- yeah. I let the judge know that it wa s23

moot and this is why.24

Q You agree, I think you even said on your direct, t hat25

cc 64

this gentleman to my left came to court and asked t hat your1

motion to withdraw be sealed because it contained h is identity,2

correct?3

A Yes. And the judge granted that motion.4

Q But you still had your iPad with you and you tried to5

take a photograph of him outside the courtroom, did n’t you?6

A That’s not the series of events. I would not have7

taken --8

Q Well, you did try to take a photograph with your9

iPad.10

A Yeah. I did take a photograph. I did take a11

photograph.12

Q It’s the one you put in evidence.13

A Exactly.14

Q You claim you took that only because he was attack ing15

you?16

A No. He was -- he was being an aggressor. He was17

verbally aggressive and physically aggressive towar d me, and he18

was coming at me, and I felt that in order to memor ialize that19

aggressive behavior, I took a picture. And I’m ver y well aware20

of the rule requiring -- I mean prohibiting photos in the21

courthouse and so --22

Q You are now or you were then?23

A No. Of course I was then. 24

And I talked to the deputies when they came up and I25

cc 65

told them that I had taken a picture, and --1

2 Q Let's stop here because I want to focus on something.

3 January 9th is the first day you ever saw this gentleman to my

4 left in person, is that correct?

5

6

A

Q

Yes.

You had never seen a picture of him, had you, on his

7 blog or anywhere else?

8

9

A

Q

No.

You've never seen him in any other public place, but

10 a courthouse, have you?

11

12

A

Q

No.

Since January 9th, the only times you've ever seen

13 him have been in connection with court proceedings either you

14 or he filed, correct?

15

16

A

Q

Yes.

Based on what you found out about him December 31st,

17 you understand he lives in Manassas, Virginia?

18

19

A

Q

Yes, sir.

Just state for the record your home address, where

20 you actually live.

21

22

23

24

25

A

Q

A

Q

A

I live in Bethesda.

Would you give us the address?

1111111111111111111111., Bethesda, Maryland.

Do you go to an office or a place of work everyday?

Yes.

cc 66

Q Where is that?1

A It’s in Cabin John, Maryland.2

Q In Cabin John and not Washington, D.C.?3

A No.4

Q Well, when you asked for protection through this5

peace order, you left it open that he couldn’t see you6

anywhere, is that correct?7

A Well, I mean that was actually because the8

commissioner -- I believe it was the commissioner o r the judge,9

one of the two, suggested that that would be a good thing to10

do.11

Q But other than in courtrooms or court settings12

involving legal proceedings, you’ve never seen this gentleman13

to my left at all, right?14

A Never.15

Q He, to your knowledge, has never followed you arou nd16

in a public place other than the limited time that you saw him17

here on January 9th where he came out of the courtr oom behind18

you, correct?19

A No. He’s done a lot of blogging about me.20

Q No, sir. I’m talking about in person.21

A No. He followed me out of that courtroom.22

Q But that’s the only time. You don’t claim any oth er23

time that he has followed you in a public place, co rrect?24

A Well, I don’t know. I really don’t know.25

cc 67

Q Do you have any witnesses here who can say that he1

did that?2

A That he followed me?3

Q Yes.4

A No. I can say --5

Q Before the judge showed you the book today that ha d6

the statutes about stalking and harassment under th e Criminal7

Code, had you ever read those before?8

A Yes. Uh-huh.9

Q Define how he has stalked you within the meaning o f10

the statute.11

A Well, within the meaning of the statute, I don’t12

know. I just know that he has bullied me. He’s ha rassed me13

online. He’s written terrible things about me. He ’s called me14

terrible names.15

Q Well, the terrible things he’s written about you d eal16

with your criminal background, correct?17

A No, not necessarily. I mean if he calls me human --18

Q Well, besides your criminal background, what has h e19

talked about?20

A If he calls me human filth, I’m not human filth. I’m21

a father. I’m a husband. I’m the director of a no nprofit. 22

I’m a human being. I’m not human filth. That’s wh at he called23

me online. And he told people not to donate to my nonprofits24

or he would seek criminal and civil penalties again st them.25

cc 68

Q That’s what you believe based on things you can’t1

authenticate, correct?2

A Okay. When he gets on -- when he gets on the stan d,3

we’ll find out, okay.4

Q Sir, what I’m asking you is did you ever see him d o5

any of the acts that are described in the statute o n stalking?6

A The statute on harassment.7

Q So you admit there is no stalking within the meani ng8

of that statute?9

A Well, possibly. I didn’t say that -- when I read the10

statute over here a minute ago, I said that he had met the11

harassment statute.12

Q Do you have any other testimony yourself or any13

witnesses here about the other elements of the stat ute on14

harassment?15

A The other elements?16

Q Yes.17

A You mean by the fact that he followed me in a publ ic18

place, and he assaulted me in a public place, and t hat he19

retaliated against me after that with --20

Q No. I mean did you read the statute today and do you21

have any other evidence to offer about those issues ?22

A Any other evidence other than the fact that he23

attacked --24

Q No. Not the fact that he -- evidence, an25

cc 69

observation, things you saw or heard in person, not things you1

read on a Web site or anything else.2

A Like I said, Mr. Walker assaulted me, followed me out3

of the courtroom, and attacked me.4

Q In connection with the assault, will you tell this5

Judge now in what manner he assaulted you? Give us a concise,6

but complete statement of the ways in which he assa ulted you on7

January 9th.8

A Well, as I said, he -- when he came out of the9

courtroom, he was berating me with comments, and be ing10

aggressive, and coming toward me. And I felt threa tened, so I11

pulled the iPad out to catch him, because I could s ee that he12

was getting ready to actually physically hit me, an d I backed13

up and clicked the picture. I got his hand as it w as coming14

toward me and it hit me some -- somehow it hit me i n the eye. 15

I mean everything happened very quickly. And he st arted16

wrestling with me and I felt bumps on my side, my c hest, and my17

back twisted. 18

And he’s wrestling me for the iPad and he actually19

took the iPad away from me. And I didn’t want to s truggle with20

the iPad too much because I was afraid it would bre ak, and my21

kids use that iPad a lot and I didn’t want to disap point them,22

so I let it go. And he -- then the man --23

Q Let me try a couple of things here.24

A Okay.25

cc 70

Q Did he knock you down?1

A No. He hit me.2

Q He hit you?3

A Well, his hand hit me. His hand hit me. Whether it4

was his fingers or his hand like this, I don’t know , but I --5

Q Are you claiming that he hit you with his fist?6

A No. I don’t know if it was -- I can’t say it was a7

fist. I can say it was a hand.8

Q Isn’t it really a fact that he was just holding up9

his hand so you couldn’t take a photograph of him?10

A Absolutely not. Absolutely not.11

Q And then he grabbed the iPad from you and walked a way12

from you?13

A No, sir. I -- no, sir. Not at all.14

Q That’s not a fact?15

A That’s not a fact at all. I mean I --16

Q Now you’ve apparently watched the video?17

A Yes.18

Q Do you claim the video supports what you’ve just t old19

us?20

A Exactly. Yeah.21

Q Let’s take it in order, after this happened, what you22

did next. Are you telling us the sheriffs suggeste d that you23

file charges and a peace order or --24

A No. No.25

cc 71

Q -- they said that’s what you would have to do beca use1

they didn’t see it?2

A No. When they came up, I -- when they came up fro m3

the elevator, I met them, and walked them over, and I pointed4

to Mr. Walker. 5

I said, that man hit me, and he’s got my iPad, and6

can you arrest him for assault. 7

And they said, well, we didn’t see it. We can’t8

arrest him for assault right now. You’ll have to g o to the9

commissioner’s office.10

I said, well, where’s the commissioner’s office.11

And they said, it’s across the street at the Distri ct12

Court.13

And I mean there was more of a conversation but14

basically they escorted me to --15

Q But they didn’t tell you that they thought you sho uld16

do that, they just told you how to do it?17

A No. They said that if he assaulted -- if he hit m e,18

then I should go and --19

Q You should go?20

A Yes. Because they could --21

Q Not that that’s the only recourse you had?22

A Yeah. Because they couldn’t arrest him because th ey23

didn’t see it. That’s what they said.24

Q So when you went to the commissioner’s office, you25

cc 72

went over to the new District Court building at 191 East1

Jefferson?2

A Yes, sir.3

Q You dealt with the peace order and the criminal4

charges at the same time?5

A I believe so.6

MR. BOURS: Court’s indulgence.7

BY MR. BOURS:8

Q This is going to be Respondent’s Exhibit No. 4 for9

identification. For explanation purposes, it’s a c ertified10

court record of the District Court of Maryland.11

(The document referred to was marked12

as Defendant’s Exhibit No. 4 for13

identification.)14

A Okay.15

Q I put the exhibit sticker or the clerk has put the16

exhibit sticker on this page, statement of charges.17

A Uh-huh.18

Q I want to ask if the application for statement of19

charges is in your handwriting.20

A Yes, it is.21

Q Did you sign it on the last page of this exhibit?22

A Yes. Uh-huh.23

Q Did anyone make any suggestions on what you were t o24

put in this?25

cc 73

A Just, I think, what we were talking about, the1

employment thing, to leave that kind of amorphous.2

Q This is the application for the criminal charge.3

A Oh.4

Q Did anybody tell you what to put in here?5

A No. Not that I know of.6

Q Did you make an effort to be accurate with what yo u7

put in here?8

A I assume that it was accurate since it was pretty9

much at the time.10

Q Did you sign it under oath?11

A Yes.12

Q Under the penalties of perjury?13

A Yes.14

Q You are the same Brett Kimberlin that was convicte d15

of perjury back in 1980, correct?16

A Yeah. When I was a teenager.17

Q Actually, it was after you turned 18, wasn’t it, M r.18

Kimberlin?19

A I was a teenager.20

Q You were involved in a teenage distribution issue or21

a conspiracy to distribute 10,000 pounds of marijua na, right?22

A No. That wasn’t that. It had nothing to do with23

that.24

Q It had nothing to do with that?25

cc 74

A No.1

Q But it was perjury before the Grand Jury, right?2

A Yeah. It was, like I said, I was 19.3

Q Nineteen. And you were supposed to testify about the4

circumstances of that 10,000 pounds of marijuana, r ight?5

A No. That had nothing to do with that.6

Q That was part of your plea bargain was that you we re7

testifying in front of the Grand Jury.8

A No. No. It had nothing to do with that.9

Q But you were convicted?10

A Of what?11

Q Perjury in connection with that and you served tim e12

in jail on that, didn’t you?13

A Yeah.14

Q As an adult.15

A Eighteen days.16

Q You were subsequently involved in this case where17

bombs were set off and people were hurt, correct, k nown as the18

Speedway Bomb?19

A Yeah.20

Q You were convicted of a number of counts on that,21

correct?22

A Yeah.23

Q And a man who was injured in those bombings actual ly24

killed himself because of his severe injuries, corr ect?25

cc 75

A I have no evidence of that. I have no information1

about that.2

Q You were sued for it and there was $1,000,0003

judgment in favor of his widow against you, right?4

A Yes.5

Q It was a condition of federal parole that you pay6

that judgment, correct?7

A You’re getting into nuances.8

Q Well, it’s not a nuance that your parole was revok ed9

because you didn’t, is that correct?10

A Not exactly, but again --11

Q You filed appeals in connection with that, correct ?12

A Yes.13

Q I’ll come back to that.14

Besides this and the peace order, did you swear und er15

oath to anybody else about the events of January 9t h?16

A What do you mean to anyone else?17

Q Did you file any other applications, or civil suit s,18

or anything else involving the events of January 9t h?19

A The peace order.20

Q Now that same day -- and, by the way, according to21

the documentation, it was about 12:39 when you got the charges22

of assault. Does that sound about right?23

A Approximately.24

Q There wasn’t any delay. You had to run across the25

cc 76

street.1

A No. I went straight over there.2

MR. BOURS: Judge, I’m going to offer Respondent’s3

Exhibit No. 4. Could I explain that I don’t know i t happened,4

but when District Court put together this certifica tion, they5

included somebody else’s case.6

THE COURT: It happens.7

MR. BOURS: Don’t know how, but this is all part of8

one certification and that’s the relevance.9

THE COURT: I see that more times than you would10

guess. 11

Number 5? 12


Defendant's Exhibit No. 4 was received14

in evidence.)15

BY MR. BOURS:16

Q Later in the afternoon on January 9th, did you sen d17

an e-mail to Beth Kingsley?18

A Probably.19

Q Did you use Justice Through Music as your return o n20

e-mail?21

A Yes. Uh-huh.22

Q Do you want to look at this? The top is irrelevan t,23

but is that your e-mail to Beth Kingsley?24

A Uh-huh. Yeah.25

cc 77

Q In that e-mail, did you say, I just finished press ing1

charges against him for assault and battery and got a peace2

order against him. Nine deputies had to back him o ff. He3

decked me in the face, hit me in the shoulder and c hest, pushed4

me, grabbed my iPad away from me, and wrestled me.5

A That’s true.6

Q You say that’s true and that’s also what you put i n7

the e-mail to her, correct?8

A Right. Uh-huh.9

MR. BOURS: I want to offer No. 5.10

THE COURT: It will be received.11


Defendant’s's Exhibit No. 5 was13

received in evidence.)14

BY MR. BOURS:15

Q You have become aware that this gentleman is an16

attorney, correct?17

A Yes.18

Q You also became aware, subsequent to the events of19

January 9th, that the State’s Attorney for Montgome ry County20

was not going to prosecute the criminal case, is th at right?21

A Yeah. Had a long talk with him. They said that22

since there’s a peace order, that they didn’t think that --23

Q Excuse me. Excuse me. 24

A Okay.25

cc 78

Q I want to show you an exhibit. There’s no pending1

question.2

A Okay. All right.3

Q Defendant’s Exhibit No. 6, a certified copy. Did you4

see a copy of this sometime prior to the time when the case was5

dropped?6

A No. I never saw that.7

Q You never saw it?8

A Uhn-uh.9

Q I’ll show you what is marked Defendant’s Exhibit 710

for identification, a certified copy of a motion. 11

A Yeah. So what are you showing me?12

Q Is this genuine and did you file it?13

A Yeah. Uh-huh.14

Q But you’re saying you never saw No. 6?15

A I don’t think I ever saw that. No. I mean I talk ed16

to them and they told me they were dismissing it.17

Q So --18

A I think that --19

Q You styled your pleading Victim Complainant Brett20

Kimberlin’s Motion in Opposition to State’s Motion to Nolle21

Prosse this case?22

A Yeah. They told me they were going to nolle pross e23

it.24

Q But you’re understanding is you never saw the line25

cc 79

where they said they were nolle prossing it?1

A No. I never saw that.2

MR. BOURS: Judge, I’d like to offer 6 and 7, if I3

may.4

THE COURT: They will be received.5

(The documents marked for6


Nos. 6 and 7 were received in8

evidence.)9

BY MR. BOURS:10

Q Mr. Kimberlin, prior to filing that, did you know11

that the State has a right to drop cases?12

A Yeah. I had a very long talk with the lady there and13

she told me that there’s --14

Q Excuse me. Prior to filing the motion that is par t15

of No. 7, did you know the State had the absolute r ight to drop16

a case?17

A Absolutely. Of course.18

Q So in other words, you filed this multi-page19

opposition to their absolute right to drop the case and put20

that in a public record, is that correct?21

A I filed it because I didn’t want them to drop the22

charges. That’s why I filed it. And I felt like I wanted to23

get it before a judge and make my case before a jud ge and I24

thought that I would be able to have that motion he ard. I was25

cc 80

also in touch with several people and they said yes , including1

the victim’s advocate. I talked at long length wit h the2

victim’s advocate and she suggested that I file tha t motion.3

Q She? What’s her name?4

A Donna Becker (phonetic sp.).5

Q She told you could file an opposition in the court6

file?7

A Yeah. Uh-huh.8

Q Sir, isn’t it a fact that this is just part of you r9

ongoing campaign, your campaign, to put materials a bout my10

client in public records so that other people can l ook at them11

and potentially put him in danger?12

A Oh come on. I -- the State’s Attorney called me u p13

and had a long talk with me.14

Q Excuse me. Could you answer my question?15

A That’s totally false.16

Q You are putting these things in public records --17

A That’s totally false. She told me -- she actually18

told me, she said --19

Q She who?20

A The lady that I was talking to, um --21

Q Margaret Schweitzer (phonetic sp.)?22

A No. 23

The lady that I was talking to said I could make a24

plea to Margaret Schweitzer or John McCarthy (phone tic sp.) to25

cc 81

prosecute, and that I could go to court, and that s he would1

give me time, a whole week, to make my plea, to go to John2

McCarthy or Schweitzer and make my case. And the n olle prosse3

motion was filed within two days after she talked t o me. I4

felt like they had misled me.5

Q Okay.6

A And I did write a long letter --7

Q There’s no pending question at this point.8

You do admit that, other than court proceedings, yo u9

have not seen Mr. Walker any other time?10

A No.11

MR. BOURS: Judge, I’d like to reserve, potentially ,12

the right to call him again, but I have no further questions at13

this time.14

THE COURT: Very well.15

Any other witnesses, sir?16

MR. KIMBERLIN: I have no other witnesses. I would17

just like to make a point about two things that he brought up18

during the cross. 19

The first has to do with the policy on phones. I w as20

aware of the -- I mean on photographs. I was aware of the21

policy before I went to court. I did not take pict ures of Mr.22

Walker in the courtroom. If I wanted a, quote, pic ture of him,23

I could have taken it surreptitiously many times, y ou know, if24

that’s what my motive was. 25

cc 82

The only picture that I got was that picture of him1

coming at me with the hand. That certainly -- and the policy2

specifically says violation of the rule. Security personnel or3

other court personnel may confiscate or retain an e lectronic4

device that is used in violation of Maryland Rule 1 6-110,5

subject to further order of the Court or until the owner leaves6

the building.7

I understood that and when the police came up, I to ld8

them that I had taken a picture. I showed them the iPad and9

they did not take the iPad from me. They, you know -- Mr.10

Walker is not a security personnel. He’s not a cou rt11

personnel. He had no right to confiscate my iPad. He took it12

from me. You know, if he didn’t want me taking a p icture, he13

could have stopped right there and said, I’m going to go tell14

the court personnel that Mr. Kimberlin took a pictu re or15

whatever.16

THE COURT: Hold on a second. You’re into argument17

now.18


THE COURT: Have you rested your case?20

MR. KIMBERLIN: No. The other thing that Mr. --21

THE COURT: You’re giving factual testimony.22

MR. KIMBERLIN: Okay. I’m just trying to respond t o23

something that he said. I was trying to --24

THE COURT: Okay.25

cc 83

MR. KIMBERLIN: I was misusing the court process or1

something to identify Mr. Walker.2

THE COURT: For the record, I’ll consider this3

redirect testimony.4

Go ahead.5

REDIRECT EXAMINATION6

THE WITNESS: Mr. Walker had been involved with Set h7

Allen’s case for a long time and Judge Jordan issue d a court8

order that allowed me to take further discovery in the form of9

interrogatories, and I propounded interrogatories t o Mr. Aaron10

Worthing but I couldn’t find him. I didn’t know wh o he was. 11

He professed to be an attorney. I looked on all th e legal12

Martindale-Hubbells and all this, trying to find ou t who Aaron13

Worthing was. There was no Aaron Worthing. So tha t’s why I14

filed a motion with the Court to order the identity of Mr.15

Worthing so that I could serve him with the interro gatories16

that Judge Jordan had ordered and allowed. That’s a simple17

fact. 18

It had nothing to do with, quote, out him or identi fy19

him, or some nefarious purposes that I’m being accu sed of. I20

have never published his name in any way, shape, or form. I21

don’t blog myself. I don’t Tweet myself. I don’t comment on22

blogs myself. So for him to say that was my motiva tion is not23

right.24


cc 84

Any other witnesses?1

MR. KIMBERLIN: No, sir.2

THE COURT: Is the petition addressed?3

MR. BOURS: I’m going to ask that you make a findin g4

now that the petitioner has not met, even initially , the burden5

of proof required under the statute. There’s a par t of this, I6

assume, that he’s just completely unaware and there ’s just been7

no testimony in support of it. A final peace order requires a8

showing that one of the acts that is prohibited und er Section9

3-1503 has occurred and that it’s likely to recur. The statute10

in question is (c)(II). It’s 3-1505(c)(1)(ii), fin al peace11

orders.12

If the judge finds by clear and convincing evidence13

that the respondent has committed one of the acts i n the first14

statute and is likely to commit in the future an ac t specified15

in 3-1503(a) of the subtitle against the petitioner , then you16

can issue the peace order.17

Now I don’t think you should find, ultimately, that18

there’s clear and convincing evidence that any act, including19

assault, has occurred. Certainly, there’s no proof of20

harassment which was the basis of the District Cour t order21

under that statute. On top of that, there is absol utely no22

evidence at all that this man is likely to commit i n the future23

an act specified in 3-1503. There’s just no testim ony at all24

and without that, the Court can’t grant a peace ord er. This is25

cc 85

a peace order that should never have been issued wh en you get1

right down to it. There’s certainly no support for harassment.2

I put the statute back up there, but -- oh. It’s3

Courts and Judicial Proceedings, Your Honor. I’m s orry.4

THE COURT: 3-15 what?5

MR. BOURS: 3-1505(c)(ii). 6

This is very different from protective orders in a7

family case. I mean you don’t even get one bite in the family8

case. If you hit somebody, you can have a protecti ve order9

issued against you.10

THE COURT: Okay.11

MR. KIMBERLIN: May I respond?12

MR. BOURS: So in that -- 13

THE COURT: Sure.14

MR. BOURS: Based on the law, I think you can find,15

at this point, that the petitioner has not met the required16

standard of proof in any respect for the Court to i ssue a peace17

order. We don’t need to go any further.18

THE COURT: Have you rested? You weren’t calling a ny19

other witnesses, correct?20

MR. KIMBERLIN: No. I’ve rested, but I’d like to21

respond to what he just said about future.22

THE COURT: I have to let you respond. I can’t not23

have you respond. 24

MR. KIMBERLIN: Thank you.25

cc 86

THE COURT: I want you to respond and I’ll hear fro m1

you. Go ahead.2

MR. KIMBERLIN: Okay. 3

Now he talks about the future and this is not likel y4

to occur. The problem with his argument is that fo llowing the5

January 9th assault, you know, if Mr. Walker had sa id, I6

apologize, everything is cool, leave me alone, I le ave you7

alone, fine. That’s all I’ve ever asked of him is to just8

leave me alone. But he didn’t. He filed a crimina l charge9

against me. He filed a $66,000,000 --10

MR. BOURS: Objection. That’s not in evidence.11

MR. KIMBERLIN: You’re talking about the future. 12

You’re saying --13

THE COURT: No objection. This is argument.14

MR. KIMBERLIN: But he’s talking about the future,15

whether it’s likely to occur. Its already occurred , you know. 16

Maybe not an assault, but --17

THE COURT: But you understand that what has to occ ur18

is what is prohibited by 1-503(a), those things tha t are19

prohibited in the peace order statute, stalking, an noying. 20

Those are the things that, assault in any degree, a n act that21

places petitioner in fear of serious bodily harm. Those22

things.23

What evidence is there that any of the things that24

are prohibited in Section 3-1503 is likely to re-oc cur? If you25

cc 87

notice, it does not say here that the respondent ma y not file a1

lawsuit, may not press criminal charges. Those thi ngs are not2

prohibited. First of all, they cannot be prohibite d. A person3

has a right if they want to -- because we’re not he re to4

litigate the lawsuit. I know you understand what i ts contents5

are, but that civil law case may or may not stand o n its own6

merit even if this proceeding never occurred.7

MR. KIMBERLIN: No. I know.8

THE COURT: So I cannot prohibit someone, in a9

procedure like this, from filing a lawsuit.10

MR. KIMBERLIN: I’m not saying that. I’m saying th at11

his future conduct. He has already shown that he - - and he’s12

already Tweeted and blogged that in the last couple of weeks13

that as soon as this case is dismissed by you, that he’s going14

to come out again after me on his blogs. 15

The only thing that’s stopped him is this peace16

order. That’s it. Once the judge issued the final peace order17

in this case, the harassment stopped. The Tweets s topped. All18

that stuff stopped, you know. I haven’t had to wor ry about my19

kids reading about me online from something that ha ppened 3420

years ago. I have a right to be a human being.21

THE COURT: I couldn’t prohibit that even if that 22

had --23

MR. KIMBERLIN: No. No.24

THE COURT: -- even if you had gone to court, filed a25

cc 88

petition, and said in your petition that the respon dent is1

saying things about you online and exposing your hi story2

online. 3

Even if you had said those things, I don’t know tha t4

this statute would permit this Court to find that t o be clear5

and convincing evidence of violation of the statute .6

MR. KIMBERLIN: You know, I’m saying that this show s7

his future, possible future. I feel a threat from him. I8

personally feel that threat everyday. I’ve got my kids and9

wife, you know, looking out for him everyday, wheth er they’re10

going to see Virginia license plates show up, you k now. He11

talks about, on his blog, his Second Amendment righ ts, you12

know, and how he’ll invoke them, and how he carries a weapon,13

and all this stuff. This is what I worry about. A nd him14

inciting people.15

He’s got people that comment on his blog that talk16

about, you know, coming and killing me and stuff li ke that. 17

And this is what I worry about, him inciting somebo dy by18

talking about something that happened 34, 40 years ago, you19

know, and blaming me just like his lawyer did for o uting him,20

you know, when he had -- it was his blog. 21

It wasn’t my blog. He published all these things. I22

didn’t publish anything. I’ve never published one single word23

about him ever.24

So this is what I’m worried about.25

cc 89

JUDGE’S RULING1

I have no doubt what you’re worried about and I2

understand your concern, but you sound like a very intelligent3

person. You do understand that the Court must foll ow the law4

and that if any of these things that are prohibited by this5

statute, not in your language, not in your interpre tation of6

them, but what this book says, any of those things, obviously7

are prohibited, any of the things that the statute says.8

A petitioner may seek relief under this subtitle by9

filing with the Court or with the commissioner, und er the10

circumstances specified in this subtitle, a petitio n that11

alleges the commission of any of the following acts against the12

petitioner by the respondent, if the act occurred w ithin 3013

days before the filing of the petition. 14

An act that causes serious bodily harm. We don’t15

have that. That’s the reason why, on cross, Mr. Bo urs very16

carefully questioned you as regards where his clien t’s hands17

were, what he did with his hands, and so forth. So we don’t18

have an act that caused serious bodily harm.19

Number two, an act that places the petitioner in fe ar20

of imminent serious bodily harm. We don’t have tha t. We don’t21

have anything that occurred on January 9th that pla ced him in22

fear of imminent serious bodily harm. What, in fac t, was done23

is that, for the record, I’ll say a camera device o r a device24

capable of taking a photograph was snatched away fr om the25

cc 90

petitioner. 1

Three, an assault in any degree. Now let me just2

say, parenthetically, that I’ll come back to the as sault,3

because technically snatching your iPad out of your hand is an4

assault. I’ll come back to that. So that did occu r. 5

I’m not going to address rape, sexual offense, and so6

forth. There’s clearly no evidence of that and it’ s not7

present here.8

False imprisonment. You weren’t prohibited from9

leaving a place.10

Stalking. Following a person one time out of a11

building or out of a room certainly doesn’t constit ute12

stalking. If it did, we would need a whole docket to deal with13

nothing but that. Stalking is more than that. Sta lking is a14

persistent pattern of conduct which involves follow ing someone15

or showing up where they are for no apparent reason other than16

the fact that that person is present. So we don’t have that.17

Trespass. The encounter, as it were, occurred in a18

public place. A courthouse is a public place. 19

Malicious destruction of property. Well, the iPad20

wasn’t slammed to the floor, or like the fellow did down in21

Alabama, there was no bullet fired through a comput er or22

anything. It was just taken from the respondent an d given back23

to its rightful owner, the petitioner, here in the court.24

The contents of the petition shall be under oath an d25

cc 91

they shall allege that some of that conduct that I just read1

occurred. 2

What occurred? An item was snatched from your hand s. 3

If this was an assault trial, perhaps the evidence would be4

sufficient beyond a reasonable doubt, without addre ssing5

possible defenses, that an assault did occur. Obvi ously6

wrestling something from somebody, he assaulted you . That7

occurred. He did. He assaulted you.8

MR. KIMBERLIN: He also hit me.9

THE COURT: Okay. Assume arguendo that that10

occurred, but your own testimony would suggest that that11

touching, you said with the hand, or a thumb, or so me part of12

his hand, you don’t remember exactly which, but tha t happened13

in the course of this what I would refer to was a m elee, which14

he was attempting to take your iPad from you. So t hat evidence15

is clear and convincing, but the Court needs to fin d more than16

that.17

The Court needs to find that there’s evidence that18

he’s going to do this again. Well, first of all, w e don’t have19

a crystal ball. We don’t know. There’s no evidenc e to suggest20

that he’s going to do this again. The evidence tha t you21

testified about and that you argued that the respon dent did may22

be annoying. Some of it may even violate other sta tutes that23

are not before this Court. I’m not suggesting that they do,24

but the law cannot prohibit all annoying conduct. We’ve25

cc 92

reached a point in this society where people think they have a1

right not to be offended. Where did that come from ? You read2

about it everyday in the paper. Somebody is offend ed by3

something and wants somebody to apologize. Where d id that come4

from? Where is the right not to be offended?5

So there’s a lot of annoying conduct that perhaps6

might be rude and would cause Emily Post to turn ov er in her7

grave. I don’t know if she’s still alive or not, b ut 8

manners -- and just for the record, I am not sugges ting that9

the respondent doesn’t have proper manners or anyth ing like10

that. But what I am saying are examples of annoyin g conduct,11

things that people can do that are just annoying. 12

This Court doesn’t blog. I don’t even know what it13

is. I wouldn’t know how to set-up one and I don’t know if I’ve14

even read one since I don’t know what it is, but I can imagine15

it is a medium in which published material can be m ade16

available to the public. I can imagine that a blog might be17

likened to a magazine except that it’s electronic a nd it’s not18

on paper, unless of course it’s printed out. 19

You say that things have been written about you tha t20

are not right. It is a dangerous, dangerous argume nt to make21

that a sanction should be entered against people wh en they22

choose to exercise their First Amendment constituti onal rights23

just because it’s annoying. 24

Now let me say, parenthetically, there are civil25

cc 93

remedies available if someone defames someone, howe ver, truth1

is a defense. 2

So if a person says somebody has a record and, in3

fact, they do have a record, you’ll have a hard tim e getting a4

judgment in a libel or slander case. If someone sa id someone5

had a record for something that, in fact, they didn ’t do that6

was, in fact, false and it caused the individual ha rm, then7

they perhaps would have a cause of action.8

So the bottom line is this. The advice that was9

given to you or the suggestion that was made to you , if it 10

were -- it probably wasn’t advice -- that if you fe lt that11

these things which occurred to you was conduct by t he12

respondent from which you could be protected by a p eace order,13

you should go to court, that was proper. 14

There was nothing wrong with you filing a petition15

for a peace order. There was nothing wrong with yo u coming to16

court to tell a court what occurred and seek a reme dy. It was17

nothing with that. There was nothing wrong with yo ur18

attempting to link this conduct, which you believed would come19

under the statute, to your evidence why you should get a peace20

order. Nothing wrong with that at all. Nothing wr ong with it. 21

In fact, it would be foolish had you come to court and not22

attempted those things. The only problem with it i s it doesn’t23

come within the statute.24

Assume arguendo, for purposes of this ruling, that25

cc 94

everything you said is true. So. It doesn’t come within the1

statute. By the Court saying the peace order shoul d be denied,2

the Court is not finding in any way that the conduc t that you3

allege occurred did not occur. Don’t have to reach that. 4

Don’t have to go to the blogs, and to the Tweets, a nd to all of5

that. Don’t have to consider it at all because it’ s not6

prohibited by the statute. 7

It’s just not. If it were, maybe we wouldn’t even be8

here. If it were, maybe he would have consented to the9

issuance of a peace order. I don’t know.10

By the way, I didn’t ask you if your client consent ed11

because I think I knew the answer.12

So I’m taking this time, sir, to explain these thin gs13

to you to perhaps help you in any future decision t hat you make14

with respect to how you believe you’ve been aggriev ed. I don’t15

want you to leave court with the notion that the Co urt doesn’t16

find it credible or any of those things. It’s not that at all. 17

It’s just that what I just read to you is what I ha ve to find. 18

One of the factors that the Court could find existe d19

for you to get a peace order is the assault. The p roblem with20

that is there is not one scintilla of evidence that that will21

occur again. In fact, but for the fact that you ha d the22

camera, it’s not a camera but an iPad with a camera , but for23

the fact that you had that, the assault may not hav e happened24

at all. 25

cc 95

So unless there’s an attempt to take his picture,1

hypothetically, when he walks out of this courtroom , which I2

don’t think is going to occur -- well, he’s going t o walk out3

of the courtroom. I don’t mean that not occur, but I mean4

taking a picture. There’s no evidence that he’s go ing to do it5

again.6

I think this respondent, and I haven’t heard from7

him, but I think he, like you, probably would have rather been8

some place else today doing something else, and I’m sure he9

probably would have also. You’ve spent a day away from your10

office, away from doing what you were doing, for le gitimate11

reasons. This is the way we want people to settle disputes. 12

We want them to come into court. We want them to p resent their13

case, but that’s not all. We also want you to unde rstand the14

Court’s ruling, both of you, and to live by it.15

You came to court seeking relief because you believ ed16

the evidence was sufficient to grant it and now aft er a full17

blown hearing and explanation, perhaps ad nauseam, you should18

now understand why this case, these facts, do not e ntitle a19

person to the issuance of a peace order.20

It is in that category of situations that I often21

tell people, not just you and not just the responde nt in this22

case, is that the Court cannot grant a remedy to in dividuals23

who are subjected to every kind of annoying conduct there is24

that people could do. We just can’t. 25

cc 96

The law is attempting to do it. The peace order1

statute has only been around a short period of time .2

Legislature came up with this peace order and we ha ve a3

tremendous amount of litigation, tremendous amount, with these4

statutes because people read them the way you do, t hat if5

you’re annoyed and if a person does something that you believe6

is harassing, that you can get a peace order. You probably7

know now more about the peace order statute than yo u ever8

wanted to know about it or care about it, but going forward, I9

hope it places you in a better position. 10

I hope it places the respondent in a better positio n11

also, because he also now knows the kind of conduct , if you12

engage in it, could land you in court at a hearing like this.13

So I think I’ve taken the time to answer some of th e14

things I’ve said to you were because of things that you15

testified to which gave me a clue, more than a clue , of how you16

believe this statute works and I wanted you to go a way with the17

full understanding of how the statute works, and th at the Court18

is not sanctioning anything that happened here, but it just19

doesn’t come under the parameters that the legislat ure has set20

for issuance of a peace order, and for very good re asons.21

All right, gentlemen. Thank you very much. I’ll22

give both of you a copy of this. I said thank you both, but23

thank all three of you.24

Give them a copy.25

cc 97

MR. BOURS: Judge, I haven’t made up my mind if I’m1

going to, but I want to put the petitioner on notic e that we2

may ask that the record in this case be sealed, bec ause we are3

concerned that a purpose behind a lot of what Mr. K imberlin has4

done is to identify my client. If he’s going to do it by5

referring to court files, we may want this record s ealed. So6

I’m giving him notice now.7

And I will also say this, that if we file a request8

to seal, we have to send him a copy and I’ll send i t at the9

address he gave in his testimony. 10

THE COURT: That was why the questions about where he11

could be located?12

MR. BOURS: That’s right.13

MR. KIMBERLIN: That’s fine. I appreciate that. 14

I would note that Mr. Walker has filed a lawsuit15

against me that says exactly the same stuff. If he wants to16

dismiss that lawsuit, I will voluntarily agree to s eal this17

record right now.18

(The proceedings were concluded.)19

20

21

22

23

24

25

cc 98

/ Digitally signed by Michele R. Collyer

DIGITALLY SIGNED CERTIFICATE

DEPOSITION SERVICES, INC. hereby certifies that the

foregoing pages represent an accurate transcript of the

duplicated electronic sound recording of the procee dings in the

Circuit Court for Montgomery County in the matter o f:

Civil No. 8444D

BRETT KIMBERLIN

v.

AARON WALKER

By:

__________________Michele R. Collyer Transcriber