In a variation on the Huey Lewis and the News hit, Brett Kimberlin wants a new judge to decide Walker v. Kimberlin, in part because Judge Mason has not considered Brett and his family to be victims.
He claims to have submitted an 11 page complaint against Judge Mason, with more than 100 pages of exhibits documenting Mason’s misdeeds. He also states that they are not public records, but I figure Bill Schmalfeldt will eventually publish them.
Here’s a bit of the latest filing. See if you can spot the whopper:
Two words. Substantial and documented. Nothing. Absolutely nothing that Brett Kimberlin has written before in any of the multiple case he has brought has ever been substantial or documented. The reason? Suffice it to say, he lies a lot.
Mark Singer wrote his biography of Brett Kimberlin a couple of decades ago. Singer writes in Citizen K (p. 310):
Once I compared Kimberlin’s renderings of certain incidents with the recollection of other witnesses, the recurring theme of “jumping the connection” almost always emerged. When a dope dealer jumped a connection, he eliminated the middleman, hoping to cut his costs without increasing his risk. Now, both literally and figuratively, it seemed that Kimberlin had this same habit. Figurative instances were narratives in which he claimed center stage, though in reality he’d participated at a distance or not at all. Or, when it suited his purposes, he might do just the opposite, ascribing to others acts he in fact had performed.
Or simply put: Brett Kimberlin tells whatever lie he thinks is to his advantage at any given moment.
Today the lie is all about smearing a judge.