Professional Documents
Culture Documents
HEARING
Rockville, Maryland
January 9, 2012
DEPOSITION SERVICES, INC. 12321 Middlebrook Road, Suite 210 Germantown, MD 20874 (301) 881-3344
WHEREUPON, the proceedings in the above-entitled matter commenced BEFORE: THE HONORABLE NELSON W. RUPP, JR., JUDGE
APPEARANCES: FOR THE PLAINTIFF: BRETT KIMBERLIN, Pro Se (No address provided) FOR THE DEFENDANT, AARON WORTHING: AARON WALKER, Pro Se (No address provided)
I N D E X
Page
Judge's Ruling
23
am 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Allen. THE COURT: And you are? MR. KIMBERLIN: THE COURT: MR. WALKER: I'm Brett Kimberlin. P R O C E E D I N G S Civil 339254, Kimberlin versus Seth
motion against Mr. Kimberlin for his gross misconduct in this case, and I'd like to be heard. THE COURT: MR. WALKER: THE COURT: MR. WALKER: I know it's unusual.
It's not here on your proceeding. I understand, Your Honor. So I'm not going to hear it. Your Honor, he filed an improper motion I had no notice until Saturday He has, in a blatant attempt to
stalk and oppress me, he has put -THE COURT: MR. WALKER: THE COURT: saying anything. Hold it. Yes. Hold it.
I'm sorry.
There's a motion to withdraw as moot plaintiff's motion to compel seeking identity of Aaron Worthing. MR. KIMBERLIN: THE COURT: Yes.
am 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 today? MR. KIMBERLIN: MR. WALKER: Well, I'm Aaron Walker, and I blog as
Mr. Worthing, that's correct. THE COURT: Are you requiring that he come to court
blogger who's been involved with the stalker. THE COURT: But why are you, why is he here? And so, I didn't ask him to be here.
MR. KIMBERLIN:
He just foisted himself on this hearing. THE COURT: Well, he says he's been summonsed. No.
If I may explain, Your Honor. All right. He did actually initially ask me to If he's
not interested in my testimony today, then I would ask why he has subpoenaed this Court in order to obtain my identity. MR. KIMBERLIN: THE COURT: MR. WALKER: I withdrew that.
do that in the first place? THE COURT: says it's withdrawn. Well, it's been withdrawn, so it's, he It's moot.
am 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 effect. MR. WALKER: But this is a public document. MR. WALKER: But Your Honor, if you look at what he
has filed today, all he had to do in order to file that motion was to tell the Court that he obtained my information. not have to even say my name. He did
now, he has put my name, he has put my home address, he has put my birth date, he has put the high school I went to. the fact that I dropped out of high school in this. fact that I received a GED. University of North Texas. He put He put the
He put the fact that I went to the He went and put in the fact that I He put in the fact
that I was admitted to Yale Law School and graduated in the class of 2002. He put down my current job with my current
employer and their address as well. His intent in doing this was so that it becomes a public record so that him and his friends can put this out into the public so they can stalk and harass me. face of this. It is plain on the
ask why he put all this unnecessary information in this, in this filing. THE COURT: MR. WALKER: withdraw itself. THE COURT: Well, it's done. It's no longer in Well, it's been withdrawn as moot. Well, I'm talking about the motion to
And his
am 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 But he -THE COURT: So why is he even a part of this case? He did it anonymously. this case. MR. KIMBERLIN: No, there's no order against him. Kimberlin? MR. KIMBERLIN: THE COURT: Judge, this -like -THE COURT: Any objection to sealing it, Mr. friends will then take this public document, his motion to withdraw as moved, and they will put it out, and then put out all of my information. THE COURT: MR. WALKER: Are you asking that this be sealed? I would like this to be sealed.
I would
Yes, why.
matter of public record? MR. KIMBERLIN: This man has engaged in stalking with
the defendant in this case. THE COURT: Well, there's no order against him in
MR. KIMBERLIN:
Initially, I
And he kept accusing me of all kinds of terrible things And he ridiculed me. He taunted me. He
terrorist and a pedophile and all this other stuff. And he engaged in unethical behavior. He said that
he represented the defendant in this case as an anonymous person. He can't, a lawyer cannot represent someone as an He asked to be identified. I mean, he went
anonymous person.
on his blog and said I am representing, I entered into an attorney-client privilege relationship with Seth Allen as Aaron Worthing. And he's not even a lawyer in this jurisdiction. He can't represent somebody as a fake I mean, that's -- and so he put He
lives in Virginia.
person, in a pseudonym.
himself out there to be identified. I mean, if he's a lawyer, fine. determine if he's a lawyer. I have a right to
the reason I put all that information in the document was because Mr. Worthing has called me a liar over and over and over. And I wanted to, everybody to know --
am 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 suspect. THE COURT: No. It was filed by Elizabeth -Kingsley. THE COURT: incredible to me. MR. KIMBERLIN: THE COURT: incredible. No. I know. It's really incredible. Why is this even in the court? This is
that was filed on behalf of, it was filed originally by -MR. WALKER: If you're looking, it's Seth Allen, I
-- Kingsley. Yeah.
represented me in the past. THE COURT: And she filed a motion to file
anonymously or to file under seal. MR. KIMBERLIN: THE COURT: Right. And I'm going to
grant the request to file this anonymously or under seal. MR. KIMBERLIN: THE COURT: Okay.
information that's contained at Docket Entry 114, which is the motion to withdraw as moot. All right. MR. WALKER: Sir, that concludes your -Actually, I would like a little more
am 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that. relief, if you don't mind me taking a moment. THE COURT: MR. WALKER: THE COURT: That's it. All right. All right. No. I'm done.
10
You're done.
phone call, well, actually, my secretary received a phone call from Mr. Allen -MR. KIMBERLIN: THE COURT: Right.
participate by telephone.
had submitted written requests to participate by telephone. checked with the clerk's office. requests having been made. I don't see any written
But I've reviewed Docket Entry Nos. 99 and 100, which are your motions for contempt of court, against Mr. Allen. And
I have to tell you I'm a little puzzled as to what it is you're claiming that he's done that constitutes contempt of court. MR. KIMBERLIN: All right. I'll be happy to go into
Are we going to have Mr. Allen on the phone or -THE COURT: No. So I proceed. Okay.
am 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 done? me. it, Judge. you. THE COURT: Just give me the bottom line. Okay. The -just walk you through it? THE COURT: looking at it -MR. KIMBERLIN: THE COURT: No. I can tell you. Can I hand you a copy of it?
11
And, you know, these cases are set for hearings. I'm just going to walk you through
MR. KIMBERLIN:
Why do you think he should be held in And I don't want to hear anything about
12
issued an order on November 14th at a damages hearing where he issued a permanent injunction against Mr. Allen, prohibiting him from defaming me or -THE COURT: Right. I saw that.
MR. KIMBERLIN:
judge at the time that he was done blogging about me, that he was not going to say anything more about me. THE COURT: Well, the order says he's to enjoin
permanently from engaging in tortious conduct constituting defamation of or interference with business relations of the plaintiff, Brett Kimberlin. MR. KIMBERLIN: THE COURT: Right. Uh-huh. And so --
you to believe he's violated this order? MR. KIMBERLIN: And, you know, at the time, Judge He said I want you to leave I want
you to quit talking about him. transcript, if you want. THE COURT:
It's on page 7.
am 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 about me. relations. MR. KIMBERLIN: THE COURT: Right. MR. KIMBERLIN: THE COURT: I know, but I --
13
constitution defamation. MR. KIMBERLIN: He's -THE COURT: Well, tell me what he's done that you Well, it's, he's not just talking
believe constitutes a violation of this court order. MR. KIMBERLIN: Well, first of all, in August, August
8th, Judge Rubin entered a preliminary injunction -THE COURT: Well, this is a November 14 order. I understand.
MR. KIMBERLIN:
preliminary injunction in this case requiring, ordering Mr. Allen to delete a number of blog posts that he had made on his blog. And Mr. Allen refused to do so, so Google actually
deleted those blog posts. So as soon as the hearing was over here on November 14th, Mr. Allen then reposted those blog posts, and that is the subject of the permanent injunction. He said, I had a
preliminary injunction already finding that these blog posts were defamatory in August. Judge Jordan made this injunction
am 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
14 permanent and prohibited him from, from doing so in the future. And he told him at the hearing, he said, if you write about Mr. Kimberlin, you do so at your peril and you can be in front of the court on contempt. So he was told explicitly not to
blog about me, not to defame me, not to repost these, these things that he had already posted. So since then, he's, I mean, I can just show you the different posts here. posts. It's literally hundreds of pages of
to take down in August in a preliminary injunction, he went on and on. I mean, and not only that, he attacked the judge in He called him the worst names
And this morning, he's blogged about you, Your Honor. He's called you names in two posts this morning. I mean, of
course, it's no big deal, but it just shows that there's contempt here. And he's contemptuous of the Court's order. He
has, you know, totally ignored the Court's admonition, both during the hearing and afterwards. posted. He's reposted. He's posted and posted and
And, you know, he calls me all kinds He calls me a cyber He calls me a perjurer.
of things. smearer.
am 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 about me. this is -THE COURT: What are those? memorandum. MR. KIMBERLIN: MR. WALKER: break in a second time. THE COURT: You know, I had a sheriff up here, Right.
15
because I didn't think one would be needed. sheriff to escort you out of the courtroom. MR. WALKER: THE COURT: MR. WALKER: the Court, if I could. THE COURT: All right. I don't understand -You're not breaking in.
Sit down.
MR. KIMBERLIN:
Well, what's currently posted? This is all stuff since November 14th
What's currently posted as of today? Oh, today about you? I'm not interested
am 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 terrorist. blog. THE COURT: Didn't he take all of that down? No.
16
MR. KIMBERLIN:
And as soon as the judge, he got back after the November 14th hearing, he reposted it and posted more stuff. I mean, it's And
like I said, this is all since November 14th, this stuff. it's all about my business, and it's all about me. was arrested 32 years ago on a case. my time.
I mean, I I did
working with kids and congress members and community leaders. And you know, I have two kids and a wife. not leave me alone. years ago. And this guy will
that I had never even seen before, that had never been posted. THE COURT: It's all true. MR. KIMBERLIN: THE COURT: It's not true. Well, that doesn't constitute defamation.
What, that you were arrested? I'm not a terrorist. I'm not a
MR. KIMBERLIN:
You know, and the other thing is, you know, my original case had to do with not just defamation. with interference with business. interfere with my business. interfere. It had to do
am 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 23rd. hearing.
17 And the judge, Judge Jordan heard over and over, you
know, how, what his goal is -THE COURT: And you have there what's currently on
the, what currently exists, is that correct? MR. KIMBERLIN: November 14th. THE COURT: But that's currently what's on his -That's what on his blog, yeah. Like I said, this is all since
As of right now? Yes. And I have a list of it -Let me see it. Okay.
All right.
All right.
I don't see anything in here that would constitute -MR. KIMBERLIN: THE COURT: Well, I mean --
MR. KIMBERLIN:
mixes, he posts something, and then he'll say, oh, and then Kimberlin, the speedway bomber, the terrorist, the perjurer, and the pedophile did this or that. And you know, what he does
is he tries to do this so that he can get it on Google or get it on the search engines, and then people who might want to donate to my business, which is what Judge Jordan heard the whole case about, won't want to help me, won't want to donate
And Judge Jordan was very explicit, you know, don't Leave him alone. And he doesn't
And like I say, it's not true, what he says is not I'm not a hoaxster. I'm not a fraudster. I'm a fraudster. That's what I'm a con man,
he calls me.
I'm a hoaxster.
Guide Star, Network for Good, the Secretary of State of Maryland, the Better Business Bureau. We have not had any Only in his mind am
I a fraudster or a hoaxster or a conman and all these other things. And he'll do a long post that you're reading, and then all of a sudden in the middle of it, you'll see, you know, Kimberlin this, Kimberlin and his partner, Brad Friedman, are hoaxsters, fraudsters. and to harass me. harassment. And he does this to hurt my business
That's what this man is doing. All right. I've read the one dated
THE COURT:
November 16, 2011, and I don't see anything in there that would constitute defamation. MR. KIMBERLIN: Judge, it's not just defamation. That's what Judge Jordan
am 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 alone. And he, you know, he's reposted posts that were already ordered deleted by Judge Rubin in a preliminary injunction.
19
And Judge Jordan, after a long hearing, made that And he just went straight out and
injunction permanent.
reposted them and bragged about it, and said, you know, that he wasn't going to listen to the Court. to Judge Jordan. THE COURT: November 16, 2011. All right. And I've read the second one dated I don't see any defamation in there. I've just read the one dated November 19, He wasn't going to listen
and I don't see any defamation in there. MR. KIMBERLIN: from my blogs with -THE COURT: what you said? MR. KIMBERLIN: He'll take pictures of things from He posts things from your blogs, is that Judge, when he, when he posts things
our non-profit organization's blogs, and he'll put them in here, interspersed with allegations of murder and terrorism and hoaxting and frauding and things like that. That is Judge That's his
harassment, and it's interference with my business. Jordan told him not to interfere with my business. whole goal.
destroy my business. Judge Jordan told him at the hearing, leave this man He's not left me alone. He's doubled down. Judge
am 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 blogs. Jordan told him to let me get on with my life. THE COURT:
20
I don't see anything in there that's defamation. MR. KIMBERLIN: I have a peace order against Mr.
Allen because he threatened to murder me. THE COURT: I have read the one dated December 10 and I don't see anything in there November 20. I've read the one
another one dated November 18. that constitutes defamation. for December 20.
but I don't see they rise the level of defamation. MR. KIMBERLIN: But they interfere with my business. And he does It
this on purpose, because my business is basically virtual. relies on the internet. THE COURT: And people --
anything has, anything specifically has interfered with your business? MR. KIMBERLIN: Well, I know for a fact that people,
when they Google my name, the first thing that comes up is Mr. Allen's posts about me being a terrorist or a whatever. they go and read his blog. organization. hearing. And
And Judge Jordan found that Mr. Allen was interfering And he ordered him not to do that. He
with my business.
am 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 own peril. And for him to be able to repost posts that Judge Jordan had already found to be defammatory in a preliminary injunction is wrong.
21
a permanent injunction, so that Mr. Allen would not be reposting the same stuff. years ago. He regurgitates the same stuff 32
And Judge Jordan, you know, when he was issuing his Even That's
though you say you're propounding the truth, what for? what Judge Jordan said.
get along with his life, get on with his life. the end, give the man a break.
to be reading about his past on the internet. Judge Jordan told him.
And he told Judge Jordan over and over, Judge, I'm done blogging about Mr. Kimberlin. about him anymore. I'm done. I won't blog
him a break with $100 nominal judgment and said just don't blog about this guy anymore. doubles down. And now what does he do? He
And he said this morning in his post that if you And he used a
don't rule in his favor, you're going to get it. lot worse terms than that. THE COURT:
apparently dated December 31st, this is the first I've seen of any requests to postpone the hearing and to allow him to
am 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 testify telephonically.
he thinks the Court's going to know what he blogs about, but in any event, he says that he was never served with the petition for contempt. MR. KIMBERLIN: says a lot of things. I realize what he says. I mean, he
of the contempt petition? MR. KIMBERLIN: Well, I mean, that's up to the court.
I mean the court sent him -THE COURT: No, it's up to you. No. The court sent him service.
MR. KIMBERLIN: mean, he's known about it. known about the case. blogged about it.
And, of course, he knows about it. He's been blogging about it. He's
He said that it's a half-hour session, that I mean, he knows everything about
of the order about the hearing and sent him copies, too. I mean, if you want to continue this hearing, I'll be happy to agree to a continuance and allow Mr. Allen to come here and make his case. like that. That's fine with me. I would actually
23
will hire a sheriff to serve him personally in Massachusetts. JUDGE'S RULING Well, I've reviewed what's been submitted. I've
reviewed one, two, three, four, five, six, seven different sets of blogs that have been submitted, as well as the memorandum, which contains on page 7, items 1 through 20 of support of the plaintiff's petition to hold Mr. Allen in contempt. I do not
find that there is sufficient evidence that would allow me to conclude that Mr. Allen is in contempt after reviewing all of these documents. I'm going to deny the petition for contempt.
am
24
Digitally signed by Audrey Murphy DIGITALLY SIGNED CERTIFICATE DEPOSITION SERVICES, INC. hereby certifies that the
foregoing pages represent an accurate transcript of the duplicated electronic sound recording of the proceedings in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County in the matter of: Civil No. 339254 KIMBERLIN v. ANONYMOUS CYBER STALKER, ET AL.
By: