DEPOSITION SERVICES, INC.12321 Middlebrook Road, Suite 210

Germantown, MD 20874(301) 881-3344

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND

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

BRETT KIMBERLINE, ::

Plaintiff, ::

v. : Civil No. 339254:

SETH ALLEN, ::

Defendant. ::

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

HEARING

Rockville, Maryland November 14, 2 011

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND

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

BRETT KIMBERLINE,

Plaintiff,

v.

SETH ALLEN,

Defendant.

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

Civil No. 339254

Rockville, Maryland

November 14, 2011

WHEREUPON, the proceedings in the above-entitled

matter commenced

BEFORE: THE HONORABLE RICHARD E. JORDAN, JUDGE

APPEARANCES:

FOR THE PLAINTIFF:

BRETT KIMBERLINE, Pro Se

FOR THE DEFENDANT:

SETH ALLEN, Pro Se

I N D E X

Page

Opening Statements :

Brett Kimberline, Pro Se 9For the Plaintiff

WITNESSES DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS

For the Plaintiff :

Brett Kimberline 13 26 -- --

For the Defendant :

Seth Allen 68 83 -- --

EXHIBITS MARKED RECEIVED

For the Plaintiff :

Exhibit No. 1 -- 82Exhibit No. 2 -- 82

For the Defendant :

Exhibit No. 1 69 82

PageClosing Arguments :

Brett Kimberline, Pro Se 97For the Plaintiff

Seth Allen, Pro Se 101For the Defendant

Judge’s Ruling 107

pfa 4

P R O C E E D I N G S1

THE CLERK: This is Civil No. 339254, Brett2

Kimberline versus Seth Allen.3

THE COURT: Good morning. For the record, Mr.4

Kimberline is here?5

MR. KIMBERLINE: Yes, sir.6

THE COURT: Mr. Allen is here.7

MR. ALLEN: Yes.8

THE COURT: Okay. This matter is scheduled today f or9

proof on claimed damages, and there is also, a moti on was filed10

by Mr. Allen to set aside the default judgment. It ’s entitled11

Motion to Revise Default Judgment. I’ve read the m otion. Do12

you have anything to add other than what’s in the m otion, Mr.13

Allen?14

MR. ALLEN: I, I do not. I just noticed the law15

that, and it’s, I don’t have the expertise to, to d ecide --16

THE COURT: What kind of disability are you talking17

about? Do you have, is somebody a guardian, a lega l guardian18

of your person as opposed to --19

MR. ALLEN: That --20

THE COURT: -- your property?21

MR. ALLEN: That, yes. They, the person on that, o n22

that cover letter, he has control of my funds. The re is, and I23

have contact with a social worker who, who also has , covers,24

does the people with the disability trust. And, I mean, I, I’m25

pfa 5

kind of, I’m not, I’m not, I’m at a loss for words, but I’m,1

I’m not, I’m going to have, it’s called an adjuster . 2

And they’re going to, I guess, I, they, I’m going t o3

meet with, with him or her four times a year. And I’m going to4

try to find a better place to live, get some counse ling, things5

like that.6

THE COURT: Are you living on your own now?7

MR. ALLEN: Yes, I am. 8

THE COURT: Okay.9

MR. ALLEN: I, I asked, I guess, it’s hearsay. I,10

I’m not sure, but it, it appears that no one, no on e can get a11

disability trust unless they’re disabled.12

THE COURT: Okay. Are you --13

MR. ALLEN: I --14

THE COURT: -- living in an apartment, home? What’ s,15

what is your home setting?16

MR. ALLEN: I have an apartment. I mean, I mean, I ’m17

functioning. I don’t have a job. I haven’t, my re sume is kind18

of full of cheese, Swiss cheese. And I’ve been blo gging the19

last years. 20

I was a high school teacher and I finally went into21

the job, and, but then the World Trade Center, righ t after that22

happened, they let me go and they never explained w hy. And23

it’s a Massachusetts law that they don’t have to ex plain24

within, like a month, when they let a new teacher g o. And the25

pfa 6

year before, I had been the house substitute teache r and I just1

had no explanation. And it, it kind of, my teach, it was very2

difficult to get a high school social studies job. It is just3

the toughest, most competitive discipline. I worke d at, at a4

mortgage company for a bit. 5

My mom got diagnosed with cancer in 2001, and that’ s6

where I picked up Internet skills, searching. And I know I’m7

kind of rambling, but, I don’t know. I think I nee d, I think I8

never got bereavement counseling, because my mom he ld on for9

about six weeks. She had ovarian cancer, but she d idn’t die10

from that. She actually died from starvation. So actually,11

and I was visiting her a lot. 12

So I should have -- I’m not sure. I’m not an exper t. 13

I can’t diagnose myself. But, but I’m under the im pression14

that someone in Massachusetts cannot have a disabil ity trust15

unless they are disabled.16

THE COURT: Do you see a psychiatrist or mental17

health care provider on a regular basis?18

MR. ALLEN: No. I’ve been kind of wallowing, and19

that’s why I apologize for never taking this more s eriously.20

THE COURT: Okay. Do you have a lease where you21

live?22

MR. ALLEN: Yes, I do. The, the trust covers it. 23

They’re trying to make the, the money last so, for, for as many24

years as possible.25

pfa 7

THE COURT: Did you sign that lease or did the1

trustee sign the lease?2

MR. ALLEN: I, I don’t remember. They, they do pay3

it, they directly pay that, my electricity. They p ay all my4

bills. They give me a $200 a month allowance, and I’m5

collecting food stamps. I mean, I’d like to get a job. I’d6

like to be a, I’d like to be functioning better.7

THE COURT: Okay. All right. Taking into8

consideration what you’ve said and what I’ve read i n the9

motion, I’m going to deny the motion.10

I do find that, first of all, that the request is11

untimely. It was filed more than 30 days after the default12

judgment was entered.13

MR. ALLEN: I, I, I accept that.14

THE COURT: And that, on the merits of it, aside fr om15

the timeliness issue, that there is lacking suffici ent evidence16

for the Court to find that you are under a disabili ty that17

would justify, under the law, service upon somebody else other18

than yourself of the process. That is, the Court p apers.19

From observing you in Court, you do appear to be20

competent, and that the letter that was submitted w ith your21

motion appears to describe a trust situation that h as to do22

with finances. So if there is a guardianship or gu ardianship23

type situation in Massachusetts, it appears to be o ver the24

property and not over your person. That is, over y our funds,25

pfa 8

not over you personally, and you’re living on your own. So the1

Court does not find that there is a disability.2

MR. ALLEN: Objection.3

THE COURT: For those reasons, I deny the motion to4

set aside the default.5

MR. ALLEN: Court’s objection.6

THE COURT: What’s -- go ahead.7

MR. ALLEN: Like you, like you had to research what8

the law was in Massachusetts for the writ of summon s. I’m9

wondering if it’s possible to see if there’s a law in10

Massachusetts that no one can have a disability tru st without11

being disabled in Massachusetts.12

But if you’re going with the time factor so that,13

that doesn’t matter, then I guess it’s moot.14

THE COURT: Well, it’s both reasons. I’ve just sai d15

on the time and on the merits of it, as well.16

MR. ALLEN: Okay. Thank you.17

THE COURT: Okay. Thanks. So that leaves us with18

the issue of Mr. Kimberline’s claim for damages. S o you’re on,19

Mr. Kimberline.20

MR. KIMBERLINE: I have a, a statement of damages. 21

Can I approach the clerk?22

THE COURT: Okay. Has Mr. Allen seen a copy of thi s?23

MR. KIMBERLINE: No. I can, I can hand it to him, if24

you like.25

pfa 9

OPENING STATEMENT BY BRETT KIMBERLINE, PRO SE1

I have listed there the out of pocket expenses. I2

think it’s $867 that I have spent on this case. An d then the3

compensatory damages in, in cases of defamation of this type4

where I have been accused of, of a serious criminal , criminal5

offenses and fraud, and other things. Damages are presumed in6

defamation cases, cases. It’s, it’s called damage, damages,7

per se, I believe.8

And on the punitive damages, Mr. Allen has chosen t o9

keep, keep going with this, keep escalating this, n o matter10

what he’s been told. I’ve asked him to stop. The courts have11

asked him to stop. Other people have asked him to stop. And12

he refuses to do so.13

When the Court ordered him to take down the offendi ng14

defamatory posts, he refused to do so. Google had to do, do15

that pursuant to a court order. After that, once G oogle did16

that, he, Mr. Allen posted on his blog that people could find17

the offending posts by going to Google cache, and t hat he was,18

had made copies of all the posts and he planned on putting them19

up at a later date or putting them in some other fa shion. 20

He went on other Web sites and posted about donors,21

funders. I run two nonprofit organizations here in town. One22

is called Justice Through Music. We work with famo us bands and23

artists, and get young people involved with voting and social24

issues. And Mr. Allen contacted directly, one of t he funders25

pfa 10

of Justice Through Music via e-mail, and told her t hat I was a,1

a fraudster, and a criminal, and not to fund us any more. 2

He has intentionally posted things on the blogs. H e3

said because he wants to kill my organizations. Al so, he sent4

me a, he sent people threatening e-mails that he wa nts to5

murder me. 6

So the punitive damages are, are, I think, warrante d7

in this case. He, he just, he won’t stop. 8

I’ve, I asked him on October 7th to go into all the9

blogs where he’s posted stuff, in light of all the court10

rulings, and remove them and, and he refused to, to remove, to11

remove anything. And, in fact, he, he said that he intends to12

re-post and post more. And he says that, that he h as to get13

the truth out about me, that I’m a pedophile, that I’m a14

fraudster, that I’m a murderer, that I’m a bomber, that I’m a15

terrorist, that I’m, you know, all these terrible, terrible16

things. 17

I, I run two nonprofits here in town. I have a wif e. 18

I have two kids. I have been the Director of Justi ce Through19

Music. I work with Congress members every single d ay of the20

week, and I have to deal with his crap, you know, w here people21

go online every day and see, “Brett Kimberline is a terrorist.” 22

“Brett Kimberline is a murderer.” “Brett Kimberlin e is a23

pedophile.” I’m, you know, the, the punitive damag es are24

incredible. 25

pfa 11

And I’m, I’m just, I mean, I had, after the last1

Court hearing here, I went over and got a peace ord er. The2

Judge issued a peace order against him. And what d oes he do? 3

He, he continues piling on. He doesn’t stop, you k now. It’s,4

it’s just, it’s, it’s incredible. 5

And, you know, he says, “Oh, I’m insane. I’m, I’ve6

got problems. I’m mental,” you know, all this. “I ’m autistic. 7

I’m Asperger’s. I’m,” you know, whatever, but that ’s not my8

problem. These are damages that I’m facing every s ingle day.9

I’ve lost, I’ve lost grants. I’ve lost, you know,10

grants from the, from the Endowment for Democracy, downtown,11

because of this guy. I’ve lost grants from the Sta te12

Department --13

THE COURT: Okay. Let me --14

MR. KIMBERLINE: -- because of this guy.15

THE COURT: Let me just stop you.16

MR. KIMBERLINE: Excuse me?17

THE COURT: Let me take a look at your memo --18

MR. KIMBERLINE: Okay.19

THE COURT: -- and I’ll -20

MR. KIMBERLINE: And I can, I have documents here i f21

you want to see them.22

THE COURT: Okay. And ultimately, you’re going to23

have to testify because right now, I’m --24

MR. KIMBERLINE: Okay.25

pfa 12

THE COURT: -- just viewing that --1

MR. KIMBERLINE: I’ll testify.2

THE COURT: -- as basically an opening.3

MR. KIMBERLINE: Of course, I’ll testify.4

MR. ALLEN: Am I being arrested?5

THE COURT: No. Okay. Mr. Kimberline, at this poi nt6

in time, we are on damages.7

MR. KIMBERLINE: Yes, sir.8

THE COURT: And it is your burden of proof to prove9

damages.10

MR. KIMBERLINE: Uh-huh.11

THE COURT: So I suspect that what you want to do i s12

testify, or do you --13

MR. KIMBERLINE: Yeah.14

THE COURT: -- have witnesses --15

MR. KIMBERLINE: I, no, --16

THE COURT: -- to testify about --17

MR. KIMBERLINE: -- I --18

THE COURT: -- harm to you?19

MR. KIMBERLINE: -- have documents. I have20

witnesses. I mean, I don’t have, witness in myself .21

THE COURT: Okay. Well, why don’t you come on up t o22

the witness stand --23

MR. KIMBERLINE: Okay.24

THE COURT: -- and I’ll swear you in and hear what25

pfa 13

you have to say. 1

THE CLERK: Sir, remain standing, please. Raise yo ur2

right hand.3

BRETT KIMBERLINE,4

the plaintiff, having been first duly sworn, was ex amined and5

testified as follows:6

THE CLERK: You may have a seat.7

THE WITNESS: Thank you.8

DIRECT EXAMINATION9

BY THE COURT: 10

Q Okay. Just state your name for the record and 11

then --12

A My name is Brett Kimberline.13

Q Okay. Mr. Kimberline, what would be helpful to th e14

Court in deciding damages, would be to know what st atements15

were made that, for which you are seeking damages, and what the16

actual damages are to, any loss of finances, damage to17

reputation, et cetera, so --18

A There were four, I think, four counts in the, in t he,19

in the complaint, and interference with business, d efamation,20

harassment, maybe stalking, and so the judgment is in, in favor21

of all those.22

Mr. Allen has been on a three year campaign to23

destroy my business, my reputation, my partner’s re putation. 24

Brad Friedman is my partner, business partner out i n25

pfa 14

California. And we, we have a, a nonprofit we work on1

together.2

Q Yes.3

A And Mr. Allen took it upon himself to decide that we4

were fraudsters, and criminals, and pedophiles, and murderers.5

And, and my, my partner is Jewish, and he made a po st to the6

Jews, “Jews are the scourge of the earth” and that Jews should7

“die in the ovens.” And he has called me a pedophi le, a8

murderer, a fraudster, a con man, --9

Q Okay. 10

A -- a terrorist. I mean, the list goes on. 11

(Unintelligible) --12

Q Okay. What I need though is, I mean, right now,13

you’re giving me conclusions and --14

A Right. Okay.15

Q -- I need hard facts. 16

A Give me, as far as, as the -- when, when you say,17

hard facts, you mean --18

Q Yes. I mean, you’re saying he said this --19

A Well, he posts --20

Q -- except where are the statements we’re talking21

about?22

A No. He’s posting these on his blog. These, these23

were, these were the, the, I mean, not just on his blog, but24

these were the statements that, or the posts that t he Court25

pfa 15

ordered Mr. Allen to, to remove from his post, --1

Q Okay.2

A -- from his blog, which were already, which was --3

Q What are the --4

A -- in, in August.5

Q What are the posts? I’m just hearing conclusions. I6

need to have the statements to know --7

A You mean, the actual, you want the physical posts?8

Q Not the physical posts, but the --9

A Oh.10

Q -- words.11

A He, like I said, he said that I was a pedophile.12

Q Okay.13

A He said that I was a con man, a fraudster. He sai d14

that I was a, a murderer, that I was responsible fo r people’s15

deaths. I mean, these, these were just straight ou t. I mean,16

he didn’t even mince any words. He just came right out and17

said it.18

Q Are those contained in your complaint?19

A Yes. Yes.20

Q Okay.21

A All right. This was the, this was the order from the22

Court, originally, where the Judge, the Court, orde red him to23

remove all these posts that (unintelligible) defama tory24

statements in them, which he refused to do.25

pfa 16

Q Do you have any printouts of those?1

A I, I didn’t bring those. 2

Q Okay.3

A I mean, in his, in his, that he, he filed this wit h4

the Court recently, plaintiff’s interrogatories, yo u know, and5

he says the same thing, that I’m a bomber, that I’m a con man,6

that I’m a drug smuggler, I’m a murder suspect, I’m a, I’m in,7

spreading conspiracy bunk in pursuit of hefty donat ions. 8

Let’s see, that -- I mean, he, he just goes on and on9

and on. And the whole reason for this is that he w anted to10

destroy my business. I mean, he said it. He, he s aid it11

straight out, you know. And he wrote, and I have a n, an e-mail12

that he wrote to this funder:13

“I’m curious if you’re aware of Brett Kimberline’s14

criminal past and propensity for making things up. 15

“The Michael Connell story is not true as he portra ys16

it.17

“Would you mind telling me how much money you have18

donated to Brett Kimberline over the years or any o ther19

organizations he has run?20

“I can tell you are very sweet lady and I can’t thi nk21

of any other explanation, that you have been conned out of22

money by Brett Kimberline.”23

There is his e-mail to, to a funder, a person that’ s24

been funding one of my organizations or both, for, for years.25

pfa 17

Q Okay.1

A I mean, this is his, this was his whole, whole2

intent, was to destroy the funding base for my busi ness by3

posting garbage on Google, so people that, that rea d it. And,4

and, and, you know, when I would, got denied grants from5

different places like the, like the USAID, which I had, had6

this one, it was a, it looked like it was going to be granted7

and then all of a sudden at the last minute, they d id a Google8

search of me, and I’m sure Mr. Allen will get a kic k out of9

this, you know, they, they read his post and, and t hey decided10

not to give me that $1,250,000 grant.11

Q Did they tell you why?12

A Well, they’re not going to say, I read Mr. Allen’s13

posts, you know. But when they go, Google me and, and see14

this, this stuff, I mean, here’s, here’s their deni al. It’s15

just, you know, USAID has completed it’s review of your16

submission and your application was not selected. I mean,17

that’s, that’s, but, I mean, I know what they told me on the18

phone. And, and a, and another grant was, was deni ed, the19

same, the same thing.20

Q Did they explain any of that, as to why --21

A No, they don’t explain it in the letter. But Mr.22

Allen posted this on August 10th. This is a, the d onor that he23

wrote to and he posted her picture on a post. And not only did24

he post her picture, but he says if high priced don ors find out25

pfa 18

the truth about me, then they won’t donate to me. And he’s the1

one that’s going to tell them the truth by, with al l this,2

this, these lies that he’s saying on -- he wants to tell them3

that he was cyber-stalked, defamed, and had death t hreats made4

on him due to my writing. It’s not my money he’s a fter, he’s5

trying to hide his tarnished image from people like this6

funder, you know.7

And so this is, this is his M.O. I mean, he, he8

wants to destroy the business. He wants to destroy -- I don’t9

know how many people have not donated to us for, ov er the past10

three years because they have read his, his stuff. 11

But, you know, I’ve asked for a lot less than the12

donations that have been denied or these grants tha t have been13

denied. I mean, you know, the request to the State Department14

and the USAID, were for a lot more money than what I have asked15

for in damages here.16

So I think we could presume that, that we’ve lost a17

considerable amount of money.18

Q Well, the standard of proof is by a preponderance of19

the evidence. You’ve got to show a causal connecti on between20

defamatory statements and losses, --21

A Okay.22

Q -- financial losses. So --23

A Well, I mean, --24

Q -- the issue is, presumptions are not --25

pfa 19

A -- I mean, I --1

Q -- (unintelligible).2

A -- also know the law says that, you know, in cases of3

these types of, of accusations of fraud, I mean, we ’re members4

in good standing with Network For Good, with Guide Star, with5

the Better Business Bureau. We’ve never had a sing le complaint6

against us, ever, in 10 years. And yet, this guy i s out there,7

you know, saying that, that we’re fraudsters, and w e’re conning8

people, and we’re taking all this money from rich h eiresses,9

you know. And it, it’s ludicrous. 10

I mean, you know, I deal, like I said, I deal with11

Congress members. I deal with civic leaders. I de al all the12

time with outstanding individuals and, and, and I h ave never13

had this kind of, of stuff, you know. But then peo ple read14

this online and they say, “Brett, what’s this about this guy15

saying you did this and that,” and dah, dah, dah, d ah, dah. 16

And, you know, I have to deal with it all the time and that’s17

what he wants, and that’s what he gets off on.18

Q Okay. What’s the name of your organization?19

A I have two organizations, Justice Through Music,20

which has been in business for about 10 years. The executive21

director is Jeff Cohen (phonetic sp.). And it’s a Bethesda22

based operation, and we work with young people, mos tly, to get23

them involved with voting. We’ve registered tens o f thousands24

of kids to vote. And we get them involved with soc ial causes. 25

pfa 20

We work with very famous artists and bands and get them talking1

to kids abut the importance of getting involved wit h the world2

and so on and so forth.3

The other organization is called Velvet Revolution. 4

And Velvet Revolution is a, it’s an organization th at has over5

150 organizations affiliated with it nationwide, wi th a6

membership base of over, over a million people, and we have, we7

deal with a lot of issues. Presently, we’re dealin g with8

voting issues. We were instrumental in getting pap er ballots9

placed in, in Maryland and many other states. And we’re10

involved with anti-corruption campaigns against peo ple in both11

government and corporations.12

And, like I said, we work very closely with members13

of Congress on this.14

Q Okay. Are both of those entities incorporated --15

A In Maryland.16

Q -- or partnerships or --17

A No, they’re Maryland-based, right here, corporatio ns. 18

They’re nonprofits.19

Q They’re both nonprofit --20

A Yeah.21

Q -- corporations?22

A Uh-huh. Uh-huh.23

Q Okay. And what do you have to say in terms of the24

ultimate financial loss to you, personally, and how you tie25

pfa 21

that, if you contend it, to the defamatory statemen ts that1

you’re talking about?2

A Well, it’s not just that but, you know, like I sai d,3

in, in my complaint I, I alleged interference with business4

too, and that was ruled in my favor. So it’s not j ust the5

defamation.6

Q Well, the problem with interference with business is,7

you’re the only party.8

A I --9

Q So what I’m getting at is, what’s the impact on yo u,10

personally, --11

A Well, --12

Q -- financially?13

A -- I mean, as far as, emotional, you know, I mean,14

this, this guy threatened to murder me. And he, I don’t know15

if he’s going to come to my house with a gun or not . I’ve had16

to post his picture for my mother, and my wife, and my kids, to17

see what he looks like. You know, I’ve had to deal with the18

FBI --19

Q Was that the murder threat from two months ago?20

A Yeah. Uh-huh. And --21

Q That’s not part of your lawsuit.22

A No. It’s, it’s, well, it’s, I mean, it’s obviousl y23

included in my lawsuit.24

MR. ALLEN: Objection.25

pfa 22

THE WITNESS: But --1

THE COURT: Overruled.2

THE WITNESS: But the thing is, I mean, he’s been,3

he, he did this anonymously, keep in mind, for thre e years. I4

didn’t know who he was. I didn’t know if he was do wn the5

street. I didn’t know if he was, you know, in anot her, another6

state or whatever. And it was this Court that orde red Google7

to, to disclose who he was. 8

BY THE COURT:9

Q Yes.10

A And so, you know, I’m getting all this, this flack ,11

you know, these grenades thrown at me from all over the12

Internet, and I’m wondering, you know, who is this guy? Where13

is he coming from? You know, is somebody paying hi m this, you14

know, what, what’s going on here? Is this oppositi on to my, my15

business? 16

It’s, you know, so there was a lot of sleepless17

nights and emotional upset. My, my wife and, and k ids are,18

were upset, and, and my, my mother was upset. And, and, you19

know, I would get calls from, from people around th e country,20

you know, wondering, “What is this guy? What’s he saying?” you21

know. 22

And, and, so, you know, as far as personal, you kno w,23

financial loss, I mean, like I said, I put out, per sonally,24

out, out of my pocket, you know, roughly a $1,000, you know. 25

pfa 23

But, but as far as emotional cost, I mean, it’s, it ’s been1

devastating.2

You know, when these kinds of things happen, you3

know, you, you’re, things go not as smooth at home,4

(unintelligible) testy and, and upset, and, and, yo u know,5

fearful and things like that.6

Q Okay. All right. I understand what you’re saying in7

terms of people don’t tell you why you don’t get fu nding.8

A Uh-huh.9

Q Can you tie that decision, --10

A Yes.11

Q -- those decisions directly to what Mr. Allen has12

said about you that --13

A Well, I, --14

Q -- you say is defamatory?15

A -- I, and like I said, I mean, I know that, that16

when, when he, you know, he wrote this e-mail to th is lady, you17

know, she freaked out, she called me up, you know. Then he18

posted her picture on, online on a post and, you kn ow, said19

that kind of stuff about her. I mean, and, and the n, you know,20

she, she’s a, a very well liked person in Californi a and, and21

does a lot of very respectful work out there. And for him to22

post this stuff online and, and make her, put her i n fear, I23

mean, she called, she, and when she, immediately wh en she got24

that, you know, she sent it to me. She said, “Bret t, what the25

pfa 24

heck is this? Who is this guy?” you know? And --1

Q Did she cut off her financial support?2

A She severely diminished it, if that’s what you wan t3

to ask. 4

Q Okay.5

A I mean, it’s gone down about 80 percent since, sin ce6

she got that.7

Q Did she tell you that it was because of the postin gs?8

A She didn’t say that exactly, no. I mean, she just ,9

she’s been more distant since then.10

Q Okay.11

A And, you know, just for your own, for proof, the,12

this is from Yahoo and it shows that his, that’s on e of his 13

e-mail accounts. And he’s, he’s admitted that he’s done this,14

so I don’t think that’s going to be a question.15

Q Yes. I don’t know, an issue about the connection,16

it’s drawing the connection, --17

A You know, but I, --18

Q -- to the causation issue.19

A -- but I, but I can say this, you know, I don’t ma ke20

that much money in, in my business. You know, I, I take a21

salary of about $20,000 a year and had I gotten the se -- you22

asked about my personal loss, you know, had, had we gotten23

these grants with the USAID or the State Department , which24

again, I, I, I can tell you that they were, looked like they25

pfa 25

were going to be granted according to what all the1

preliminaries were, and all the discussions I had t here. And2

then all of a sudden, they did a, a Google search a nd they said3

they couldn’t approve it, you know. And so had, ha d those been4

granted, my salary would have gone up considerably.5

Q Okay. Okay. Anything else before Mr. Allen has a6

chance to ask you questions, if he has any?7

A No.8

Q Okay.9

THE COURT: Mr. Allen, you may ask questions. It’s10

called cross-examination.11

MR. ALLEN: Thank you.12

THE COURT: But I want you to understand, as I tell13

all parties that are not represented by an attorney , if you14

want to testify, you come up here. We’ll put you u nder oath,15

then you can testify. 16

MR. ALLEN: Okay.17

THE COURT: So this is an opportunity to ask18

questions, but not for you to testify. You can cer tainly ask19

him, is such and such true or not true. But you as k questions,20

you don’t make statements, okay? And I’ll let you know if21

you’re not following what I’m talking about.22

MR. ALLEN: I’ll try my best and I’m willing to23

testify.24

THE COURT: Okay.25

pfa 26

MR. ALLEN: I just took notes from listening to tha t. 1

So I guess I should get to the, Brett Kimberline ju st said that2

I wrote that you -- oh --3

THE COURT: You ask him. Mr. Kimberline, --4

MR. ALLEN: Okay.5

THE COURT: -- isn’t it true, such and such.6

MR. ALLEN: Okay. I know that he doesn’t like me,7

and it’s -- All right. I’m sorry.8

CROSS-EXAMINATION9

BY MR. ALLEN:10

Q You said that, Mr. Kimberline, you say that I wrot e11

that Jews are the scourge of the earth. Do you hav e proof of12

that, or is that potentially slander?13

THE COURT: At this point, we’re talking about14

damages.15

THE WITNESS: We’re talking about damages.16

THE COURT: Okay. So there’s default judgment17

entered against you on the claims before the Court, primary,18

you know, the crux of which --19

MR. ALLEN: Okay. Okay.20

THE COURT: Wait a second. The crux of which is21

defamation. The only reason we’re here now is to a ssess what22

damages, if any, should be awarded because of that defamation.23

MR. ALLEN: Okay. And I can get a, is there a tape24

recording of this?25

pfa 27

THE COURT: Yes.1

MR. ALLEN: Yeah. Okay. Okay. I understand.2

THE COURT: Okay. All right. And I know you’re no t3

an attorney. Just, if you have questions, --4

MR. ALLEN: No, I understand. If, the, my concerns5

are, my concerns are for another venue, if that’s - - I’ll leave6

it at that.7

THE COURT: All right. Just ask him questions if y ou8

have any questions.9

BY MR. ALLEN:10

Q Were you convicted of setting bombs?11

THE WITNESS: Objection.12

THE COURT: Overruled.13

THE WITNESS: Yes, I was convicted.14

BY MR. ALLEN:15

Q Did, what, what did you supply to this Court in te rms16

of your criminal background history?17

A Nothing.18

Q You didn’t mention drug dealing?19

A (No audible response.)20

THE COURT: Is that a question?21

MR. ALLEN: I don’t know if it’s pertinent or not. 22

I, I would just like to -- okay. 23

BY MR. ALLEN:24

Q What I’m, I’m trying to establish that --25

pfa 28

A He’s trying to establish that 32 years ago, I was1

convicted of something.2

Q What --3

A 32 years ago.4

Q Well, what I’m trying to ask is, what did, is ther e5

anything that I posted that haden’t been posted bef ore in, in6

mainstream media? And what would that have include d, such as,7

that you were a murder suspect in the death of Juli a Scyphers.8

THE COURT: Is that a question, whether there was - -9

MR. ALLEN: How --10

THE COURT: -- prior posting of --11

MR. ALLEN: Is --12

THE COURT: -- allegations? Is that your question?13

BY MR. ALLEN:14

Q Is there anything -- yes.15

THE COURT: Okay.16

THE WITNESS: That’s never, that’s never been poste d17

before to my knowledge.18

THE COURT: Okay.19

BY MR. ALLEN:20

Q It was written about by Mark Singer of the New21

Yorker?22

A Never heard of that.23

Q And, you never heard of Mark Singer?24

A I said I never, I never heard that.25

pfa 29

Q You never, you never knew that you were --1

A I was not.2

Q You’re saying you weren’t a suspect in the, in the3

murder of Julia Scyphers?4

A I was never a suspect, no.5

Q You were never a suspect?6

A (Unintelligible).7

Q You contend that, that I, I damaged, some of the8

reasons that I damaged your, your revenue strain fo r your 9

nonprofits, was because I called you a bomber, for example?10

A That’s true.11

Q Were you convicted of setting bombs, and has that12

been highlighted, highlighted by mainstream media?13

A It was reported 32 years ago.14

Q Are you a private individual or a public figure?15

A Private individual.16

Q Have you posted videos of yourself as a musician?17

A (No audible response.)18

Q Did you, have you been on radio talk shows, the L. A.19

Steel Show?20

A Have I appeared on radio shows?21

Q How many radio shows have you appeared on, do, wou ld22

you estimate?23

A Very few.24

Q Very few. But you have been on them?25

pfa 30

A Yes.1

Q And how many videos have you put together with2

colleagues such as Cliff Arnebeck, Brad Friedman, p erhaps, that3

you have posted on YouTube for, on behalf of the Ve lvet4

Revolution?5

A Hundreds.6

Q Did you or did you not water board yourself as, as a7

publicity stunt, or for some type of, to make a pol itical8

statement to the public on a controversial issue?9

A I didn’t water board myself.10

Q You didn’t water board yourself?11

A No.12

Q What did I write to Lori Grace that was untrue or13

haven’t been published before by mainstream media?14

A (No audible response.)15

Q I guess Mike Jesse of the Indy Star, I guess, on t he16

Connell case, but -- I’m sorry.17

THE COURT: Your question was, what did, what on th e18

Lori Grace communication was not true?19

MR. ALLEN: Yes.20

THE WITNESS: That I was a con man, that I was a21

fraudster.22

BY MR. ALLEN:23

Q Have you ever been characterized as a con man by, by24

journalists such as Mark Singer?25

pfa 31

A Not that I know of.1

Q Not that you know of. Let’s see, I separated thes e,2

these documents by yellow sheet --3

THE COURT: Why don’t we mark your papers as4

exhibits? Are those extra copies?5

THE WITNESS: (Unintelligible) --6

THE COURT: Or I guess I.7

MR. ALLEN: How -- 8

THE WITNESS: You can have those. I gave them to9

you. Didn’t I give them to you?10

THE COURT: No. I think I gave them back to you.11

THE WITNESS: Oh, yeah. Sorry.12

BY MR. ALLEN:13

Q Why, why were you sent back to prison -- all right . 14

You’re, you’re contending that my posting of things of, of15

information, you’re contending that things that I p osted were16

false and malicious, were false?17

THE WITNESS: We’re not, we’re not, I’m objecting. 18

We’re not, we’re not getting into the, the case any more. 19

Default judgment has been issued against him.20

THE COURT: Okay.21

THE WITNESS: We’re on damages.22

MR. ALLEN: Well, --23

THE COURT: Well, a critical part of damages are24

issues of damage to reputation.25

pfa 32

THE WITNESS: Uh-huh.1

THE COURT: So, therefore, in two statements, are n ot2

compensable. So certainly, the truth or falsity of a statement3

would be relevant to the Court’s consideration --4

THE WITNESS: What’s the --5

THE COURT: -- on damages.6

THE WITNESS: What’s the question again?7

THE COURT: Your question was something about8

contending something was false.9

MR. ALLEN: I’m sorry, I lost my train of thought. I10

don’t know if it’s possible that --11

THE WITNESS: Here was one of them. (Unintelligibl e)12

find the other one.13

THE COURT: You said something about, what do you14

contend was false about what you said.15

BY MR. ALLEN:16

Q All right. Is there anything that I -- okay.17

A Yes. You’ve, you’ve accused me of being a pedophi le. 18

You have accused me of being fraudster and a con ma n. 19

Q I, I would like to, is there evidence that I calle d20

you a pedophile?21

A (No audible response.)22

Q I know we’re not going back to the default being23

reversed, but --24

THE COURT: Just ask him, where did he, where did y ou25

pfa 33

call him a pedophile?1

THE WITNESS: You, you place, you, you posted that on2

your, on your site.3

BY MR. ALLEN:4

Q Where is the proof?5

A (No audible response.)6

Q How can I cause damage to your ventures by calling7

you a pedophile, if I didn’t call you a pedophile?8

A (No audible response.)9

Q How did I --10

THE COURT: Do you have a, do you have a copy of th e11

statement where that is --12

THE WITNESS: I don’t. I didn’t bring notes. You13

know, I mean, he’s posted hundreds of postings on m e, --14

THE COURT: Yes.15

THE WITNESS: -- literally.16

THE COURT: Is that in your complaint?17

THE WITNESS: Yes.18

THE COURT: That specific one?19

THE WITNESS: I believe so, uh-huh.20

BY MR. ALLEN:21

Q Do you -- do you want me to wait?22

THE COURT: No, go ahead.23

BY MR. ALLEN:24

Q Do you contend that I wrote a parody site with, wi th25

pfa 34

your image on it? Is that part of the damages? I know, I1

believe you entered that in, into this -- do you be lieve that I2

-- did I write that parody site, or who did? Who w rote that3

parody site? You, did Google get back to you?4

THE WITNESS: Judge, he’s asking, he’s asking --5

THE COURT: Yes. What are you asking about? A6

parody site?7

THE WITNESS: He’s asking about --8

MR. ALLEN: Well, I --9

THE WITNESS: -- another, another, I filed a motion10

to disclose who wrote a parody site --11

THE COURT: Yes.12

THE WITNESS: -- with my image on it. It’s pending in13

Court, it’s pending before the Court.14

THE COURT: Okay. Is that part of your claim here?15

THE WITNESS: No. It’s --16

THE COURT: Okay. All right.17

MR. ALLEN: He dropped, he’s dropping that?18

THE WITNESS: No, --19

THE COURT: Then --20

THE WITNESS: -- I’m not dropping it. I’m just 21

saying, I filed that motion --22

MR. ALLEN: Well, if he’s not dropping it --23

THE COURT: Well, wait a second. Don’t talk --24

THE WITNESS: I filed that motion about a month ago25

pfa 35

and haven’t heard back from the Court on it.1

THE COURT: In this case?2

THE WITNESS: Yeah. And Google said that they woul d3

comply with the Court’s order as soon as they got i t, to tell4

me who, who, who put up that image.5

THE COURT: Okay. But the parody site is not part of6

your claim for --7

THE WITNESS: It’s not part --8

THE COURT: -- damages?9

THE WITNESS: It’s not, it’s not his specific site as10

far as I know, yet.11

THE COURT: Okay.12

MR. ALLEN: Okay.13

THE COURT: All right. You know what, I’m going to14

take a very quick break. I’ve got two detectives t hat just15

need to return a search warrant.16

Deputy, I appreciate you being here. If you can ha ng17

with us. Mr. Allen is subject to a protective orde r with18

respect to Mr. Kimberline. And that’s, in large pa rt, why19

we’ve asked for you to be here.20

THE CLERK: All rise. The Court stands in recess.21

(Recess)22

THE CLERK: All rise.23

THE COURT: Please have a seat. I’m sorry for the24

interruption. There might be more, because I’m doi ng two25

pfa 36

things today. I’m doing Court and I’m doing in cha mbers,1

what’s called, duty review. So there’s search warr ants or2

things like that, that need to get signed. I have to do that. 3

Go ahead, Mr. Allen.4

MR. ALLEN: I appreciate that the Court is trying t o5

figure out causation. I’m not allowed to make a st atement?6

THE COURT: You can make a statement when it’s your7

turn to testify. Right now, --8

MR. ALLEN: Okay. I, --9

THE COURT: -- you’re limited to --10

MR. ALLEN: -- I follow, sir.11

THE COURT: You watch TV, cross-examination, --12

MR. ALLEN: Uh-huh.13

THE COURT: -- this is a witness for you to ask14

questions on cross-examination, --15

MR. ALLEN: Thank you.16

THE COURT: -- if you want.17

MR. ALLEN: I, I understand.18

CROSS-EXAMINATION (Resumed)19

BY MR. ALLEN:20

Q Did I cause, so you’re contending that my blogging21

about you being a perjurer, being, having been conv icted of a22

perjurer, I caused you financial damage?23

A I’m saying, I’m saying that your three year 24

campaign --25

pfa 37

Q I, I want that question answered --1

THE COURT: Well, no.2

THE WITNESS: No.3

THE COURT: Hold on.4

THE WITNESS: I’m saying that your three year5

campaign against me, posting stuff all over the Int ernet on6

scores of blogs, or many blogs, and, and calling me everything7

under the book, and, and regurgitating stuff that h appened --8

MR. ALLEN: We’re going to, let’s go to --9

THE WITNESS: -- 32 years ago, --10

THE COURT: Wait a second. Let him finish.11

THE WITNESS: -- 32 years ago, is, is an unwarrante d12

harassment and defamation. You harassed me. You h ave harassed13

me continuously for three years until I just expose d you, and14

then you continued to harass me, and you’re continu ing to15

harass me now. And you’re trying to get stuff in t he record so16

that you can post it online. I know what you’re up to Mr.17

Allen.18

MR. ALLEN: I object. He’s making psychoanalysis o f19

me --20

THE WITNESS: No. I’m just saying --21

THE COURT: Don’t argue --22

MR. ALLEN: -- that’s, that’s --23

THE COURT: -- back and forth.24

THE WITNESS: Okay.25

pfa 38

THE COURT: Overruled. Next question.1

BY MR. ALLEN:2

Q I, I’m, I would like us to get into specific detai ls. 3

You mentioned certain key phrases that, I mean, I’m not, look,4

I don’t want a general picture. We get it. You th ink -- all5

right, I’m making a statement.6

Well, I, I won’t continue with the certain train of ,7

train of thing, because I do, I do need a ruling fr om, from8

Your Honor about whether he is, Brett Kimberline is a public or9

private figure, because, in my opinion, humbly. Wh at --10

THE COURT: I haven’t heard enough to make that11

determination.12

THE WITNESS: Well, it’s, I, I object anyway. It,13

that’s not an issue here. It’s not an issue in dam ages.14

THE COURT: It would be an issue in damages, becaus e15

it goes to reputation.16

THE WITNESS: I don’t even post, --17

MR. ALLEN: How --18

THE WITNESS: I don’t even post on my blogs. I, I, I19

have a family. I work behind the scenes.20

THE COURT: Okay.21

THE WITNESS: This man has, has taken an organizati on22

that involves many people, many people, and taken s omething23

that happened 32 years ago in my past and tried to destroy my24

business and my organization, and all these other p eople that25

pfa 39

are associated with me, by, by targeting me. And i t’s a hit1

job. It’s a hit, it’s a harassment hit job that th is guy is,2

is conducting on me, --3

THE COURT: Okay.4

THE WITNESS: -- you know.5

THE COURT: Next question.6

BY MR. ALLEN:7

Q So you, you don’t think it’s relevant what you wer e8

convicted of in the past, and that’s why you didn’t include it9

in this lawsuit?10

THE COURT: I think he’s made it clear, --11

MR. ALLEN: Okay.12

THE COURT: -- 32 years ago.13

BY MR. ALLEN:14

Q 32 years ago. More recently than 32 years ago, we re15

you sent back to prison for a parole violation?16

A No. I’m not on parole. You keep telling me, --17

Q No.18

THE COURT: Wait a second.19

THE WITNESS: -- I’m on parole.20

THE COURT: Next question.21

THE WITNESS: You keep telling people I’m on --22

MR. ALLEN: He’s --23

THE WITNESS: -- parole. I’m not on parole.24

MR. ALLEN: I, I don’t know if he’s on parole. I - -25

pfa 40

THE COURT: You can’t --1

MR. ALLEN: -- apologize.2

THE COURT: You can’t talk over each other.3

THE WITNESS: Well, that, that’s --4

THE COURT: Next question.5

BY MR. ALLEN:6

Q More recently than 32 years ago, from your origina l7

trial, if that’s the date you’re getting to, were y ou --8

A I am not --9

Q -- released?10

A -- on parole.11

Q Were you released and then sent back to prison for a12

parole violation, for failure to pay compensation t o the, Ms.13

Delong (phonetic sp.), the wife of Carl Delong, who took his14

own life after those bombs --15

A No.16

Q -- tore up half his body?17

A No, I wasn’t.18

THE COURT: Okay.19

MR. ALLEN: I believe, I’d have to check --20

THE COURT: That’s your question. Get to the next21

question.22

MR. ALLEN: Yes, sir.23

BY MR. ALLEN:24

Q Do you think private individuals get mentioned, ar e25

pfa 41

you aware of the Wizard of Odd article from Time Ma gazine on1

yourself?2

A Yes.3

Q Do you think this is the type of thing that a4

private, that’s done, type of article that’s writte n about5

private individuals?6

A Private individuals get written about all the time .7

Q Uh-huh.8

A It doesn’t matter if you have an article written9

about you that you’re not, that you’re a public fig ure. I’m10

not a public figure.11

Q Have, have you, have you emerged as a public playe r12

in controversial issues, --13

A No.14

Q -- such as election fraud?15

A No.16

Q Haven’t you posted video, haven’t you been on vide os17

of yourself discussing election fraud issues with, for example,18

Cliff Arnebeck, and posted, those were posted on Yo u Tube?19

THE WITNESS: Judge, I think he’s asking if I’ve ev er20

interviewed anyone?21

THE COURT: Yes.22

THE WITNESS: Okay. I, I assume, I, I have23

interviewed people and those interviews are online.24

THE COURT: Okay.25

pfa 42

THE WITNESS: But they’re not, there’s never a1

picture of me and I’m just a voice interviewing a C ongress2

member, or a lawyer, or a --3

THE COURT: Are you identified on them --4

THE WITNESS: No.5

THE COURT: -- by name or anything?6

THE WITNESS: Never.7

THE COURT: Okay.8

MR. ALLEN: I think that needs to be verified.9

THE COURT: You’re conducting cross-examination.10

MR. ALLEN: Yes, sir.11

THE COURT: You keep asking questions.12

MR. ALLEN: I’m just trying my best.13

BY MR. ALLEN:14

Q Okay. We’ll skip ahead to, I, I’m having trouble15

with my eyesight. The printout is kind of small. I’m looking16

at the Exhibit K, Chamber of Commerce raises securi ty concerns17

after group puts penalty on CEO. Have you been pub licly18

involved in a campaign against the Chamber of Comme rce?19

A Have I? Not my, not me. I, my organization has,20

has, has a campaign called, StopTheChamber.com, and it, it 21

exposes --22

Q How is that not you then, involved --23

THE COURT: Don’t interrupt him.24

THE WITNESS: It’s not me. It’s, it’s my25

pfa 43

organization or it’s an organization in which I am involved1

with. That’s it. It’s, the organization is not me . There’s a2

lot of people involved with these organizations.3

MR. ALLEN: Your Honor, can I ask you a legal4

question?5

THE COURT: You’re conducting cross-examination.6

MR. ALLEN: Okay.7

THE COURT: I mean, if you need clarification for8

something, you can. But --9

MR. ALLEN: Okay. So --10

THE COURT: -- I can’t give you legal advice.11

BY MR. ALLEN:12

Q Here, here’s an exhibit that I, I was able to13

include. I wasn’t --14

THE COURT: You’ll have a chance --15

MR. ALLEN: Do you, do you --16

THE COURT: You will have a chance to testify.17

BY MR. ALLEN:18

Q Do you contend that, from the (unintelligible)blog19

that you submitted to the Court, are you, are you c laiming that20

I was all those user names?21

A I --22

THE COURT: That’s not going to damages. Let’s --23

THE WITNESS: Yeah.24

THE COURT: -- stick to -- there’s a very real issu e25

pfa 44

about defamation, interference with business, et ce tera, and1

connecting those torts to damages.2

MR. ALLEN: (Unintelligible) --3

THE COURT: That’s fair game. But we’re not going to4

go into --5

MR. ALLEN: Does, does --6

THE COURT: -- the background.7

MR. ALLEN: -- Lori -- understood, sir.8

BY MR. ALLEN:9

Q Does, does Lori Grace have a public Web site?10

A I don’t know what Lori Grace has.11

Q You don’t know that Lori Grace has a Web site?12

A I have no idea.13

Q Are you aware that she has something called, The14

Sunshine?15

A I have no idea.16

Q You have no idea what she does?17

A No.18

Q Do you, are you aware that she wrote an article on19

her Web site about putting together, bringing toget her yourself20

and Cliff Arnebeck, and, concerning issues on elect ion fraud,21

that, that’s been posted on her Web site?22

A I have no idea.23

Q Okay. I don’t have the proof of that Your Honor, 24

but --25

pfa 45

THE COURT: Okay.1

MR. ALLEN: -- I can, by penalty -- I know, I’m2

sorry.3

THE COURT: You’ll have a chance to testify. Let’s4

move on.5

MR. ALLEN: I’ll be -- okay. Yes, sir. I’d like t o6

get, I’d like, I understand, sir.7

BY MR. ALLEN:8

Q Which, which, which user names are you contending, so9

we can focus in on the causation, which user names of mine are10

you contending caused you damages? We’ve already r uled out the11

parody Web site. I guess you, that’s to the side12

(unintelligible), you -- what, what user names on t his long13

list you, you supplied to the Court, do you contend I wrote as? 14

And for each one, what did I, what did I write that was false15

and caused you anxiety, and, and caused you to lose money?16

A Socrates/Prepostericity.17

Q Anything else? Any of the other ones?18

A Those are the two main ones.19

Q Then why did you supply this long list of all thes e20

user names? What was the purpose of that?21

THE WITNESS: Objection.22

THE COURT: Yes, sustained.23

MR. ALLEN: Your Honor, I’m just --24

THE COURT: It’s not going to causation or damages.25

pfa 46

MR. ALLEN: I just looked, I can’t (unintelligible)1

up. All right.2

THE COURT: You’ll get a chance to testify --3

MR. ALLEN: Okay.4

THE COURT: -- on relevant issues.5

BY MR. ALLEN: 6

Q Are we done with that scourge of the, of the -- wh at7

did, what are you contending I said about the Jews? They’re8

the scourge of the people, and that caused you, --9

THE WITNESS: Objection.10

MR. ALLEN: -- that’s the type of thing that caused11

you financial damage, --12

THE COURT: Okay.13

MR. ALLEN: -- that I, that I wrote that?14

THE COURT: Okay. 15

MR. ALLEN: I --16

THE COURT: The part of the question about whether17

that statement --18

THE WITNESS: I’m just --19

THE COURT: -- caused damages, --20

THE WITNESS: I’m --21

THE COURT: -- is appropriate.22

THE WITNESS: That, that, that statement did not23

cause damages.24

BY MR. ALLEN:25

pfa 47

Q That statement did not cause damage. You’re remov ing1

that from this case?2

THE COURT: Okay. That’s --3

THE WITNESS: (Unintelligible) part of this case.4

THE COURT: Move on.5

BY MR. ALLEN:6

Q You’re contending that I blog, I blogged about, th at7

you’re a pedophile, and that caused you damage?8

A Any, any, yes.9

Q Do you have proof of, of that statement so we can see10

the causation is, is actually true?11

A It’s, it’s defamation, per se.12

Q But do you have the actual words that I allegedly13

wrote that called you a pedophile, so the Court can see that,14

that what you’re alleging is true, if it, you know, if it’s15

true?16

A I, I --17

Q How can something cause something, if it’s not tru e?18

A Yeah. I don’t have that in the --19

Q So you’re, you’re going to take that away?20

A I’m not taking anything away.21

Q You’re not --22

THE COURT: I think the question was whether, where23

that, is your question, where that was posted or --24

THE WITNESS: It was posted on his blog, I believe.25

pfa 48

THE COURT: Okay.1

MR. ALLEN: I’m contending that it’s immaterial,2

because he supplied no proof that I wrote that, and I didn’t. 3

I’m, I’m sorry. I, I know. I’m sorry for that las t statement.4

THE COURT: Okay.5

BY MR. ALLEN:6

Q What other statements have I made, specific7

statements, and let, and do you have proof of those statements8

to supply, so we can see this causation?9

A Like I said, it’s not just the defamation, which w as10

extreme in, to the nth degree, but it’s, it’s the h arassment,11

continuous. I mean, he, he doesn’t let up. He, he , he doesn’t12

listen to anybody. He doesn’t follow Court orders. He doesn’t13

remove stuff when he’s asked --14

MR. ALLEN: Objection.15

THE WITNESS: -- to. And I don’t --16

THE COURT: Overruled.17

THE WITNESS: -- know where he’s coming, where, whe re18

the next thing is coming from. I mean, he’s, you k now, he, he19

writes an e-mail saying that he wants to, to murder me to four20

people who are, are also bloggers, and then, and, y ou know, one21

of those bloggers felt concern enough to contact th e police,22

and then the FBI got involved. And, you know, it’s , it’s23

turned into a, a nightmare. 24

I’ve been contacted by Montgomery County Police, th e25

pfa 49

Southeastern Police, the FBI about this guy. You k now, they’ve1

sent me his, his picture, his, his car license plat e numbers,2

everything, so that I, I, you know, --3

BY MR. ALLEN:4

Q Did you --5

A -- so I’m aware of it from the police department, all6

right.7

THE COURT: So he’s saying it’s a continuous --8

THE WITNESS: FBI --9

THE COURT: -- process --10

THE WITNESS: Right there. I got that from the FBI .11

THE COURT: -- in the general sense, --12

THE WITNESS: You know, --13

THE COURT: -- rather than --14

MR. ALLEN: It’s --15

THE COURT: -- the specifics.16

BY MR. ALLEN:17

Q That, I don’t know how I’m, --18

A Here’s, here’s --19

Q -- I’m able to rebut that because --20

A Here’s (unintelligible) murder --21

THE COURT: Okay.22

MR. ALLEN: I don’t know how I’m able to go,23

objection --24

THE COURT: The murder statement is not part of thi s25

pfa 50

case.1

MR. ALLEN: I don’t know how I’m allowed --2

THE COURT: Go to your next question, Mr. Allen,3

please.4

MR. ALLEN: There’s been no proof that I, that I ma de5

a death threat.6

THE COURT: You can make that argument later on.7

MR. ALLEN: I’ll try to remember.8

THE COURT: You’re here, only right now, --9

MR. ALLEN: Okay.10

THE COURT: -- to ask questions of --11

MR. ALLEN: I --12

THE COURT: -- Mr. Kimberline.13

BY MR. ALLEN:14

Q All right. So you’re saying that there are variou s,15

are the two things, defamation and -- all right. I would like16

us to try to stick with one item at a time and try to focus in17

on the causation.18

So let’s go with stalking, how, did I, did I recent ly19

contact you?20

A Yes.21

Q By, by e-mail?22

A By mail.23

Q What about by e-mail?24

A No.25

pfa 51

Q I, I didn’t recently write you an e-mail?1

A Never.2

Q Did you recently write me an e-mail after I had as ked3

you not to?4

A No.5

Q No?6

THE COURT: He answered no. Just --7

MR. ALLEN: I would like to --8

THE COURT: You can testify when you have a, when9

it’s your turn to testify. Just ask the questions.10

MR. ALLEN: I just, he just perjured, I contend tha t11

he perjured himself.12

THE COURT: Just ask questions.13

MR. ALLEN: I don’t -- Yes, sir.14

BY MR. ALLEN:15

Q And I, I contacted you by answering the16

interrogatories, correct?17

A (No audible response.)18

Q That’s the, that’s the only way I contacted you?19

A Yes.20

Q And wasn’t it my obligation to respond to those21

interrogatories?22

A Yes.23

Q Do you strike most, you, you’ve already stricken - -24

so now, you’re saying that we’re only focusing in o n, my user25

pfa 52

names of Prepostericity and Socrates?1

A I’m not striking anything. You asked me a questio n,2

I answered the question.3

Q So you’re contending that from the Kid Camona4

(phonetic sp.) blog, do you believe that I wrote as Anonymous5

Army?6

A I don’t, I didn’t even bring up the Kid Camona blo g7

in my complaint. I, I mentioned Socrates --8

Q What --9

A -- and Prepostericity, that’s it.10

Q Can, can you, for the Court, so you’re contending11

that when we’re looking for causation, that you’re going to,12

we’re only going to stick to Socrates and Preposter icity as my13

user names?14

THE WITNESS: Judge, I’m, I’m going to object. I15

mean, he’s got a list of 40 names that he’s used, o r not used,16

and he wants to --17

MR. ALLEN: Or not --18

THE WITNESS: -- go through them all.19

THE COURT: Yes. All right. Let’s, I’m going to20

sustain the objection. We’re not going to get into , if you21

want to get into statements, okay. But if you want to talk22

about who’s blogging what, --23

MR. ALLEN: I’m, I’m just saying --24

THE COURT: -- that’s --25

pfa 53

MR. ALLEN: -- there’s a, there’s a pattern. I 1

know --2

THE COURT: What I’m saying to you is, who’s bloggi ng3

what, is not at issue. You have a default judgment entered4

against you on the claims that have been brought by the5

plaintiff. We’re only here to talk about damages. If you want6

to ask about specific statements and how --7

MR. ALLEN: I --8

THE COURT: -- they caused damage or didn’t, you ca n9

do that.10

MR. ALLEN: Sir, I’ve asked him about two of them. 11

I, and I’ve asked for as many as he can offer to th e Court with12

proof, so that you can decide whether what I wrote caused it.13

THE COURT: Just ask him the question, then. How d id14

statement X cause you damage?15

BY MR. ALLEN: 16

Q But we don’t have any that, can you please provide to17

the Court, some statements that I made with proof t hat I made18

those statements, and how they caused you, and, and whether19

they were false.20

A It’s not just the statement. If, if he had writte n21

one article about me or something, that would have been one22

thing. This was a continuous pattern of harassment --23

MR. ALLEN: Objection.24

THE WITNESS: -- over three years.25

pfa 54

THE COURT: Overruled.1

THE WITNESS: Over three years, most of it done2

anonymously, attacking me, my organizations, my par tners, my3

business, my reputation, and, and it, and it was, i t was4

persistent. It, it included false accusations. He , he went5

out and dug up, gathered information and, and confl ated it6

with, with other false information, and made it sou nd like I7

was a, a monster. And he did this, he, he, he aske d other8

people to, to do the same thing. He, he posted thi s stuff on9

blogs and, and, and tried to get an army of, of --10

BY MR. ALLEN:11

Q Can you supply proof of that?12

A -- people to, to, to come after me. I’m testifyin g. 13

And this was done to, to harass me. And that’s, th at’s the14

point. That’s where it comes, that’s where it come s down to15

stalking. You know, it’s not an isolated incident of somebody16

writing a single article, but rather a pattern of s talking and17

harassment. It’s online stalking. That’s what it’ s called.18

THE COURT: Okay.19

THE WITNESS: And, you know, so --20

THE COURT: That’s enough. Next question.21

MR. ALLEN: Yes, sir.22

THE COURT: It’s a pattern of harassment is what he ’s23

saying.24

BY MR. ALLEN: 25

pfa 55

Q Okay. That, how many lawsuits have you filed over1

your lifetime?2

A I have none.3

THE COURT: That’s not relevant.4

MR. ALLEN: Not relevant. 5

BY MR. ALLEN:6

Q And just, just so we’re clear on this, you, you’re7

contending you were never sent back to prison for p arole8

violations?9

THE COURT: He’s already answered that.10

MR. ALLEN: And he said, no?11

THE COURT: He’s already answered that. Next12

question.13

MR. ALLEN: Okay. I’ll order a, a copy of the, oka y.14

BY MR. ALLEN:15

Q What statements have you brought to the Court that16

you contend were part of the causation that I, that I wrote? 17

Can you please share that with the Court, so we --18

A Again, again, --19

Q You don’t have any?20

A -- stalking and harassment is, --21

Q Do you have any statements?22

A -- you know, --23

THE COURT: Don’t interrupt him.24

THE WITNESS: Each, each --25

pfa 56

MR. ALLEN: But --1

THE WITNESS: -- individual statement or act, could2

be completely legal, but it’s the pattern of unwant ed series of3

actions by someone. You know, getting, repeatedly, unwanted,4

unwantingly (phonetic sp.) disrupting my life. Eve ry single5

day when I would wake up and there would be a Googl e alert from6

Mr. Socrates, Mr. Preostericity, Mr. Seth Allen, sa ying7

something about a murder, or pedophilia, or fraud, or, or8

terrorism, or --9

BY MR. ALLEN:10

Q What did I write about --11

A -- whatever.12

THE COURT: Don’t interrupt him.13

THE WITNESS: It was, it was, you know, over and ov er14

and over and over and over, and this is what, this is what it15

comes down to, you know. This is what stalking is, and this is16

what this man has done to me and he continues to do it right17

now. He’s harassing me right now, bringing up 32 y ear old18

things, cases, you know.19

THE COURT: That’s not harassment. It’s directly20

related to --21

THE WITNESS: Well, okay.22

THE COURT: -- reputation.23

THE WITNESS: Okay.24

THE COURT: Next question.25

pfa 57

MR. ALLEN: I guess I should try to wrap up.1

THE COURT: That will be good.2

MR. ALLEN: And, could you, am I only allowed to as k3

yes, no questions?4

THE COURT: No.5

BY MR. ALLEN:6

Q Could you share with the Court what you thought mi ght7

have happened to Michael Connell and Karl Rove’s --8

THE COURT: I don’t --9

MR. ALLEN: -- involvement --10

THE WITNESS: Objection.11

THE COURT: How does that have something to do with12

damages?13

MR. ALLEN: Well, if he’s contending that by my14

calling him a, a conspiracy bunk, supplying conspir acy bunk,15

yet it can be shown that he has been a supplier of conspiracy16

bunk, then I don’t see how there’s any causation. I don’t see17

how telling the truth about someone becoming a publ ic figure on18

a controversial issue --19

THE COURT: You can explore, but, I mean --20

MR. ALLEN: Did you --21

THE COURT: Wait a second.22

MR. ALLEN: Uh-huh.23

THE COURT: From what I’m hearing, it sounds like w e24

could have a full day trial on whether something is true or not25

pfa 58

true in one given act. 1

I’ll give you a little bit of leeway if you want to2

explore an area where you think what was stated was the truth3

and, therefore, should not be compensable in damage s. But you4

might want to ask if Mr. Kimberline is even making any claim --5

MR. ALLEN: Uh-huh.6

THE COURT: -- for damages based upon a certain set7

of facts. And if he’s not, then --8

MR. ALLEN: Uh-huh.9

THE COURT: -- it doesn’t matter if they’re true or10

not.11

MR. ALLEN: Uh-huh. Like those user names.12

BY MR. ALLEN:13

Q Do you believe my blogging on your alleging to hav e14

sold marijuana to vice presidential candidate Dan Q uayle,15

caused you financial distress and/or emotional, fin ancial16

problems and/or emotional distress?17

THE WITNESS: Judge, I --18

THE COURT: He’s asking if that’s part of your clai m?19

THE WITNESS: That’s not part of my claim, --20

THE COURT: Okay.21

THE WITNESS: -- first of all.22

THE COURT: It’s not part of his claim.23

THE WITNESS: And, and second, second of all, you24

know, I have an excellent reputation in this commun ity. I work25

pfa 59

with kids all the time. I work with Congress membe rs all the1

time. I work with community leaders all the time. You know,2

this is the issue, not what happened 32 years ago. And my, you3

know, I have a, a wonderful reputation with my kids ’ school,4

in, in my very nice community in Bethesda. 5

And, you know, what happens to somebody when they’r e6

a kid and they redeem themselves, and they come out and they,7

they have a nice job and they’re doing something fo r the8

community, I think is, is, is important. 9

And to be constantly dragged down by somebody10

harassing me after, you know, after I’ve done all t hese, these11

terrific things with the, with young people and kid s, and, and12

showing that, that people should get involved with the world,13

and, and engage, and, and not, and get, and not do violent acts14

and things like that. 15

I mean, one of my campaigns is to stop domestic16

terrorism. It’s all about not engaging in violent acts.17

Now, one of my campaigns on my, of, of my nonprofit ,18

is to have, have these, these protestors in Mideast countries19

come out and, and speak out against their dictators . And these20

are the kinds of things that I do. This is the rep utation that21

I have, you know, of bringing people together and s peaking out22

against injustice. This is what, what I devote my life to.23

I made some mistakes when I was a kid, I admit that . 24

I’ve never said I didn’t. I apologized for it. Yo u know, some25

pfa 60

of those things have been put aside. I’m not on pa role. That1

stuff was all dealt with through the Department of Justice, and2

it’s, it’s over. You know, I had a 50 year sentenc e for3

something I didn’t do and it was, it’s been resolve d. They,4

they, they don’t have me on parole. I have no comm itment at5

all to that old case.6

But the point is, you know, he wants to, to keep7

pounding it and pounding it, and, and bringing up o ld stuff,8

you know, accusations of, of all these terrible thi ngs that,9

that I was never even charged with, and even that I was charged10

with and then have since been resolved. And, and h e wants to11

ruin my reputation now. 12

It’s like I don’t have any chance to redeem myself in13

a person’s eyes like his. I just have to constantl y deal with14

stuff that happened 32 years ago, and I have to, yo u know, I15

can’t ever get ahead. I can’t ever push my nonprof it to get16

any extra, any, any extra cash --17

THE COURT: Okay. I got you.18

THE WITNESS: -- because of him.19

THE COURT: I got you.20

THE WITNESS: You know, that’s it.21

THE COURT: Okay. Anything else, Mr. Allen?22

BY MR. ALLEN: 23

Q So part of the damage that I have caused you, you24

believe is because, are you claiming because I blog ged about25

pfa 61

you, claiming you were an exonerated -- did you eve r claim that1

you were an exonerated political prisoner?2

A I’ve never claimed that publicly.3

Q You, you, you deny setting the bombs that you were4

convicted of?5

A Absolutely. 6

Q And --7

A Absolutely. I --8

Q -- you admit you weren’t exonerated?9

THE WITNESS: Judge, Mr. Allen --10

THE COURT: Just answer the question, because --11

THE WITNESS: Mr., Mr. Allen is trying to get into a12

lawsuit that was, was filed against the Department of Justice. 13

It was settled on a confidentiality agreement. And I, and I’m14

not going to discuss it.15

THE COURT: Okay.16

THE WITNESS: I’m going to object.17

THE COURT: What was your question? Whether he18

contended he was a political prisoner?19

MR. ALLEN: Well, I don’t know how I can speak20

without getting into me testifying.21

THE COURT: Okay. And --22

MR. ALLEN: But it, there is something that I wante d23

to, that I’m trying to get at. I would like to jus t do like a24

few examples. I don’t want to over burden --25

pfa 62

THE COURT: It sounds like you’re asking him about a1

case that is subject to a confidentiality agreement . So why2

don’t you move on to something else. I don’t think it’s really3

related to the damage issue.4

BY MR. ALLEN:5

Q But do you claim that my posting about you having6

been a convicted bomber, has caused you financial d ifficulties?7

A Yes.8

Q What did I write about you being a convicted bombe r9

that, having been published in mainstream media --10

A You have harassed me. You’ve done it continuously .11

Q What did --12

A You never stop.13

Q I --14

A You go from blog to blog.15

Q I understand, sir.16

THE COURT: Okay.17

THE WITNESS: You get, you get --18

THE COURT: I’m not going to have you --19

THE WITNESS: -- kicked off of one --20

THE COURT: -- arguing back and forth.21

THE WITNESS: -- blog. 22

MR. ALLEN: No. No. No.23

THE WITNESS: He gets kicked off of one blog, he ge ts24

banned from a blog, then he goes and starts another blog, or25

pfa 63

starts posting --1

THE COURT: Okay. You’ve made it clear.2

THE WITNESS: -- on another blog.3

THE COURT: It’s a continuing pattern. I got it.4

THE WITNESS: You know.5

MR. ALLEN: I’m not a lawyer, but I believe that th e6

witness is acting hostile.7

THE COURT: Well, I’ll step in if I need to. I don ’t8

right now.9

MR. ALLEN: I just believe I’m not being able to, - -10

THE COURT: Just ask your next question.11

MR. ALLEN: -- to.12

BY MR. ALLEN:13

Q Okay. I guess, there’s nothing to ask you about14

specific comments that I’ve written, because they’r e not15

presented to the Court to debate or, or to (unintel ligible)16

over the causation. 17

Let’s go to stalking, then. I mean, there’s got to18

be a finite set of ways that I’ve, you allege I’ve damaged your19

life. So let’s go to stalking, I guess. Have I ev er called20

you at your house?21

A No.22

Q Have I ever e-mailed you --23

THE COURT: Excuse me. Let’s just, on the stalking24

issue, just say, what do you contend your damages a re from the25

pfa 64

stalking claim?1

THE WITNESS: Well, like I said, it’s, it’s a patte rn2

of harassment. It’s a, it’s a form of, of mental a ssault, in3

which I was repeatedly and unwantedly attacked.4

THE COURT: So it’s the repeated postings?5

THE WITNESS: And it, yeah, it’s repeated postings. 6

I mean, this is, this is, this new phenomenon of on line7

stalking, you don’t have to call somebody at home. You don’t8

have to --9

THE COURT: Okay. I don’t need you arguing the cas e.10

THE WITNESS: Okay.11

THE COURT: Go ahead. Let’s move on to something12

else.13

BY MR. ALLEN:14

Q Are, are --15

THE COURT: We’re repeating --16

MR. ALLEN: Okay.17

THE COURT: -- facts at this point.18

BY MR. ALLEN:19

Q Why did you ask about Lewis (phonetic sp.) Abersha wn20

(phonetic sp.) in the interrogatories?21

THE WITNESS: Objection.22

THE COURT: Okay. Sustained.23

MR. ALLEN: Or it doesn’t make it irrelevant?24

THE COURT: Sustained. Yes.25

pfa 65

MR. ALLEN: Okay.1

BY MR. ALLEN:2

Q Okay. Can, can you tell me anything specific I3

wrote? I’ll just ask this one last time, can you, can you give4

me anything substantial, specific, a quote that I’v e written --5

A Yeah.6

Q -- that we can look at?7

A You, you called me scum of the earth, or pond scum . 8

Do you remember that?9

THE COURT: Don’t ask him questions.10

MR. ALLEN: I believe it was --11

THE COURT: Just tell him what --12

THE WITNESS: You, you, you called me a --13

THE COURT: Wait a second. 14

THE WITNESS: -- (unintelligible) --15

THE COURT: Just tell him the specifics. 16

THE WITNESS: Okay.17

THE COURT: It’s a fair question.18

THE WITNESS: Pondscum, scum of the earth. You sai d19

I should be in jail forever.20

BY MR. ALLEN:21

Q Do you have proof of that?22

A Yes.23

Q Have you supplied it to the Court?24

THE COURT: Were you finished with the last answer,25

pfa 66

on specifics?1

THE WITNESS: Are you asking me?2

THE COURT: Yes.3

THE WITNESS: Oh. Well, he called me a con man. H e4

called me a, a pedophile, a murderer.5

THE COURT: Where did he call you a pedophile? Do6

you have that statement?7

THE WITNESS: A murder suspect. I, I don’t have th at8

statement, but it was in my, I believe, in my origi nal9

complaint.10

THE COURT: Okay.11

THE WITNESS: In, in his, again, in his, in his12

murder e-mail, you know, he, he continues to, he re peatedly13

said that he wanted to contact my parole officers a nd have me14

thrown in jail. And that --15

MR. ALLEN: Can we read that back --16

THE WITNESS: Sure.17

MR. ALLEN: -- and take his specific statement and18

see if, that he just made, and see if they line up?19

THE COURT: No.20

MR. ALLEN: Okay, sir.21

THE WITNESS: And, I mean, in that e-mail, he says,22

“Brett Kimberline is lying. It sounds like perjury and I want23

his parole officers to find out that he has perjure d himself. 24

And that means Kimberline should go back to jail,” that’s what25

pfa 67

he says. I mean, that’s what, that’s what, these k ind of posts1

that he made all the time.2

BY MR. ALLEN:3

Q Was there an, if?4

A Kimberline --5

Q Did I say, was there a condition?6

A Kimberline should be in jail. That’s what he alwa ys7

wanted, you know, they should be charged with fraud . There8

should be investigations. He’s asked people to inv estigate me.9

THE COURT: Next question, if you’ve got any more.10

BY MR. ALLEN:11

Q Well, do you think it’s wrong for people to post12

about others who have committed crimes in the past?13

THE WITNESS: Objection.14

THE COURT: Sustained.15

MR. ALLEN: Okay. I guess I’m done. I asked for16

evidence and I’m, I’m not, I’m not getting anything to work17

with here.18

THE COURT: Okay. All right. You can step down, M r.19

Kimberline.20

(Witness excused.)21

THE COURT: Do you want to testify, Mr. Allen?22

MR. ALLEN: Yes, please.23

THE COURT: Okay. Come on up here and we’ll swear24

you in.25

pfa 68

MR. ALLEN: Do I leave my, I have to leave my1

documents?2

THE COURT: You can bring them up if you want.3

MR. ALLEN: I don’t know if they’ll do me any good,4

but --5

THE CLERK: Sir, remain standing and raise your rig ht6

hand, please.7

SETH ALLEN,8

the defendant, having been first duly sworn, was ex amined and9

testified as follows:10

THE CLERK: You may have a seat.11

DIRECT EXAMINATION12

BY THE COURT:13

Q Okay. State your name for the record, please?14

A My name is Seth Lewis (phonetic sp.) Allen.15

Q Okay. Okay. Mr. Allen, what do you have to say?16

A I’m not sure what I’m allowed to say.17

Q All right. I --18

A And if you want to set me some guidelines, I’ll tr y19

to abide.20

Q Keep in mind that the determination is whether21

certain statements by you led to, were, led to dama ges to Mr.22

Kimberline.23

A I’ll, I’ll say this, I, I apologize for delivering24

this brief today. I tried to get it in before toda y. It’s25

pfa 69

only, it’s about six pages and it pretty much wraps up, it1

makes in a concise way, my argument that I did not cause, cause2

any financial or, any financial things.3

I contend --4

Q Are you talking about this packet?5

A Yes.6

Q Okay. I’ll mark this as Defendant’s Exhibit 1.7

(The document referred to was marked 8

as Defendant’s Exhibit No. 1 for 9

identification.)10

THE WITNESS: I contend that re-posting things that11

have been written by mainstream journalists, things that are in12

public court doc records about Mr. Kimberline’s pas t, that,13

that does not constitute stalking or harassment.14

I was under the impression that stalking or cyber - -15

I wasn’t, forget about stalking. That’s, that’s ph ysical,16

going to someone’s house, I was under the impressio n.17

Cyber-stalking, I am very aware of. I have been18

getting cyberstalked and it has really picked up th e last half19

a year. And I mention this because what Mr. Kimber line has20

supplied to the Court, has, almost to a tee, mirror ed actual21

cybersmearing and slander against me.22

BY THE COURT:23

Q That’s not why we’re here.24

A Okay. Yes, sir. I, I apologize. All right. I’l l25

pfa 70

just, I’ll just take a few, a few minutes, if I’m a llowed. 1

I contend that no evidence has been supplied to the2

Court that I wrote anything that was false. I have heard3

things alleged about me that I wrote, that I never wrote. 4

For the record, I am 100 hundred percent Jewish. S o5

when I hear something about the scourge, Jews being the scourge6

of the earth, I, I want to know where he’s coming u p with that,7

and why I have to sit through and hear that. I kno w it doesn’t8

have to do with the case, but that’s how I’m feelin g.9

Things that’s, I want to get to the causation. I10

want to know, I, I, I swear under penalties of perj ure,11

perjury, that I never called him a pedophile. I to ok very good12

care to phrase things as best, to the best of my ab ility. I,13

there was information written about Mr. Kimberline, possibly14

having an awkward relationship with Julia Scyphers’15

granddaughter. I did not make that up. 16

I’m just trying to defend myself for the, for the17

specifics that he’s claiming that I, that I lied ab out him,18

harassed him about, a perjurer. I, I have seen, he , he, if19

he’s been convicted of perjury, then how is it hara ssing on my20

part to, to post that he’s a, a perjurer?21

If he was, if he’s actually, was a murder suspect, I,22

I seem to recall him denying that. Maybe he didn’t deny it. 23

I, if I make a mistake, I apologize. If I, I’m not , I24

understand perjury is not a good thing. And if I d o mess up, I25

pfa 71

apologize and I’ll, what --1

Q What was the basis for you to say that he was a2

perjurer? Well, first of all, did you say that? D id you state3

that?4

A I, I read in Mark -- yes, I, I’ve written that he was5

convicted of perjury. I believe he was. I read ab out it in6

Mark Singer, Mark Singer’s book, Citizen K.7

Q What does that have to do with this case?8

A Well, that’s, that’s another way that, that’s anot her9

exhibit that shows that Brett Kimberline has, indee d, been a10

public figure. He went into a book deal with Mark Singer of11

the, of the New Yorker, based on his -- I believe t he impetus12

was Mr., Mr. Kimberline’s claims that he had sold m arijuana to13

Dan Quayle, which was never substantiated.14

From what I read from Mr. Singer’s book, he poured15

over documents. Apparently, there was a list of, t here was16

like a, what is it? The, the Federal Drug and, Dru g -- one of17

those federal groups, like a drug agency. I believ e they have18

a list of suspected high profile individuals who ma y be19

involved in drugs. And I believe that Mr. Kimberli ne somehow20

got access to that list and, and since he grew up i n Indiana,21

Indiana, that he used that. 22

So if he’s claiming that I’ve been smearing him wit h,23

with blog posts about a public situation which was blasted,24

which was all over the news, I, I remembered it bac k then. I25

pfa 72

was kind of too young to really follow it, but I re member there1

was someone in a prison claiming he had sold mariju ana to Dan2

Quayle. And if he, if he was doing, I don’t know i f he was3

doing that. If he was doing that to influence the, the race,4

the election, then that’s, then you’re a public fig ure.5

I’m not, I’m unsure about public figures in regards6

to people, high profile criminals. But I, I, I do see his, his7

name, his name is all over the Internet, beyond wha t I have8

written. I, I --9

Q Did you read the book, Citizen K?10

A Yes.11

Q Does the “K” refer to Kimberline?12

A Yes. It is by Mark Singer of the New Yorker. 13

There’s a, there’s a small blurb in, in one of the sheets I put14

in, that were, that was put in.15

Q Okay. Is that your Exhibit 1 we’re talking about?16

A Yeah. Like somewhere in, in some of these yellow, I,17

I corresponded the, the letter so that the first on e would be18

A.19

Q Is that something you’re offering as evidence?20

A Yes. I’m, I’m offering all this as evidence for y ou21

to consider that there, there, that he’s a public, that he’s a22

public figure, and that he has not proven that I wr ote anything23

that was false, or that hadn’t been written before by other24

people. 25

pfa 73

In, in that, because he has, he is involved in thes e1

high public cases, and he is, I mean, he’s listed i n the, just2

recently, he’s got this campaign to, against the, h e’s got,3

he’s got this campaign against Andrew Brightbart (p honetic sp.)4

of, he’s a gentleman who helped Arianna Huffington start the5

Huffington Post. 6

And, I mean, I know it’s your, it’s not, I know it’ s7

your job to, and I, I feel for, I’m sorry. I’m not trying to8

be funny. But it’s, it’s in, it’s in some of these , in these9

documents where he’s contending that I was in some, some type10

of, that I’m working for Andrew Bright, Brightbart, or it’s a11

possibility. 12

I just believe that, there is just so much untrue13

about this lawsuit against me that, the only thing holding it14

together is the, the default judgment. So I’m, I, I need to15

just go after the causation as you have directed me . 16

Q Yes.17

A And the, and I, it may seem like I’m, I’m dredging up18

a, a, I’m trying to sneak in a retrial, but I’m not . It’s my,19

it’s my amateur status. But, I mean, it’s only lik e five20

pages. I don’t, I don’t know if you have to decide this case21

today, but these are just like, these are just exam ples to, to22

back, my attempt to back up points made about him b eing a23

public figure, that things I wrote, none of it was false. 24

And I would just like you to consider all, that the re25

pfa 74

have been a lot of things said, alleged about me, t hat even Mr.1

Kimberline has had to conveniently erase from your, your2

adjudiciating, your, whatever the word is for, deli berating. 3

It, it, that, that there’s all -- so I’m wondering what’s left4

with the causation. Yes, I wrote --5

Q I just want to make it clear, because you used the6

term, these, are you talking about Defendant’s Exhi bit 1, this7

packet?8

A The --9

Q Is this what you’re talking?10

A Yes.11

Q All right.12

A That, I’m just saying, like --13

Q That’s what you’re offering as evidence?14

A That’s my evidence that I didn’t, I was, that I ha d. 15

I didn’t smear him, because I was just posting on a public16

figure about things that have already been written about in17

mainstream magazines, I, in, in newspapers, and on television,18

and in Courts, for his various criminal hearings. 19

I’m not looking to, I, I’m not, I’m, and I -- that’ s20

why I asked him, like what specifically have I writ ten. So I21

hear like, “scourge of the Jews, Jews are the scour ge,” or that22

I called him a pedophile. 23

I didn’t call him the pedophile. I didn’t even cal l24

him the murderer. I called him a murder suspect of Julia25

pfa 75

Scyphers and I did, and I have written that his, hi s action,1

his setting down those bombs in Speedway, Indiana, event, did2

eventually, and Carl Delong taking his life. 3

And that his parole, from what I read in the Indy4

Star from a recent article, he was in the news in a recent5

article. It, it appears that his parole had, he wa s let out,6

but then his parole was revoked because he failed t o make7

restitution. In one, made restitution to the wife of Carl8

Delong.9

And one of the documents in here is from a, from a10

Court case where I believe he, he sued the wrong pe rson. He,11

and the, and the Court officer, or, I, I, I’m not a n expert on12

this specific story, but I’m, I know there are two Court13

documents in here. In one of them, he, he, and I’m not trying14

to give you extra work, but -- I mean, I, I, I, to wrap this15

up, I apologize for not coming in sooner. I, I bel ieve if I16

did come in sooner, then I could have, we could hav e nipped,17

but I, I’m not even allowed to say that.18

So I’m just saying, I want to see causation. Lori19

Grace is probably, I guess Lori Grace could, might be his best20

piece of, of, of, his best, his best item for debat e, like21

whether I caused him some financial problems.22

I do not, I do not believe I should have to pay for23

any of his, that, whatever his Court costs have bee n, because24

I, I haven’t seen anything from his, from his, I ha ve seen no25

pfa 76

proof from him, according to my defense.1

But on the Lori Grace, like, like I tried to say, I2

messed up by testifying when I was not supposed to. But Lori3

Grace, she has her own public Web site and she cont ends that4

she brought together, I wish I had brought that to show you as5

evidence. But she is, by penalties of perjury, Lor i Grace has,6

has her own Web site. She’s the granddaughter of O liver Grace. 7

I mean, I forget, what he, he was like a, he’s a fa mous8

American, who’s, who’s type person. And, so she ha s a lot of9

money. 10

And I, I, I notice things about, I, I wasn’t trying11

to destroy Ms., I’ve never tried to destroy Mr. Kim berline. 12

It’s just a fascinating story that, it’s not me alo ne who’s13

fascinated by this. The, it’s been written on by, recently,14

the Indy Star.15

And as for Lori Grace, I did write her an e-mail, b ut16

she has her own Web site. She, she lists her e-mai l address. 17

And she wrote in a public figure kind of way, that she was the18

one who brought together Brett Kimberline with Clif f Arnebeck. 19

And I’d have to see the article that she wrote to, to better20

describe it. But my, my point is that, in the blog ging world21

as bloggers, it’s not stalking to interact with wha t people22

write.23

Cyberstalking is to, to follow people around the24

Internet and cause them distress, and I never did t hat. I25

pfa 77

never followed Mr. Kimberline around the Internet. I haven’t1

posted on him. 2

So I, I contend Lori Grace opened herself up to the3

e-mail, because she left her e-mail address. And t here’s a lot4

of, the Michael, the Michael Connell case, I wanted her to know5

that they were, that there’s a, a theory being circ ulated, Mr.6

Kimberline was involved in Cliff Arnebeck’s, and it ’s in the7

Ohio Courts, and this can all be verified, unlike o ther things8

that have been tried to be put into this courtroom, where it’s9

been alleged that Carl Rhodes (phonetic sp.) threat ened Michael10

Connell because he was, he was about to spill the b eans on, on11

the 2004 election being stolen, and I noticed that. 12

I’m, I’m what’s considered a, a troll buster, or an13

amateur Internet cybersleuth. We’re not malicious. We don’t,14

we don’t go after people like this Kid Camona that’ s been going15

after me, or Lewis Abersham that’s been going after me. And I16

reported that to the Eastern Police Department, tha t I’ve been17

getting cyberstalked.18

I had recently e-mailed, I probably broke that peac e19

order, because I had to write Mr. Kimberline a seco nd time to20

stop contacting me --21

Q I don’t think you want to go there right now.22

A Okay. Yes, sir.23

Q If he got an attorney, since you could be subjecte d24

to criminal prosecution.25

pfa 78

A I, I, I definitely do not want to be arrested, and1

I’m not from Maryland. I don’t even know where, I don’t know,2

I don’t care where he live, I want him, I don’t wan t to hurt3

him. I don’t, I’m, I pose no threat, for the publi c record.4

In my defense for that, for that alleged murder5

threat, it was a bad piece --6

Q I don’t know that you want to go there.7

A All right.8

Q He has, Mr. Kimberline has already testified, murd er9

threat alleged is not part of this case. And --10

A Okay.11

Q -- that’s my recollection.12

A Oh, all right.13

Q My recollection is that you may have criminal char ges14

pending based on that, so.15

A There’s something scheduled for the, in a few days .16

Q Okay. Do you have an attorney in that case?17

A I, I’m not really sure what’s, what’s on with that . 18

I --19

Q It’s not part of this case, because it’s not part of20

Mr. Kimberline’s claim. And --21

A I, I appreciate --22

Q -- it doesn’t make sense for you to go there and m ake23

statements about something that might be pending on a criminal24

matter involving you.25

pfa 79

A I appreciate that, sir. So I’m just, to wrap up,1

it’s not stalking to, I’ve been, I, us bloggers get accused of2

stalking when, because we, we keep responding to in dividuals. 3

And --4

Q Okay.5

A -- I, I did not, I mean, I was writing on my priva te6

blog, which, which has public comments. Mr. Kimber line and no7

one else ever wrote anything. I mean, it was right there. He8

never left a comment. I would have, I would have o kayed it. I9

would have debated with it. You know, like he had every10

opportunity to interact with me on my blog. But wh at he did11

was, instead, I believe he left comments about this criminal12

case on my blog, which I wasn’t sure was true or no t until,13

until recently. Like, I knew it was real, but I di dn’t realize14

the, the, how important it was. And I thought it, I was just15

going to lose, maybe get, get my entries deleted an d my real16

name found out. I didn’t know there, I didn’t know someone17

could actually, you know, be awarded --18

Q $6,000,000?19

A Huh? 2.8, what is it? 2.8 million he, he wants?20

Q There are claims for actual and punitive damages,21

both exceeding a million.22

A Yes. My, my contention --23

Q Excuse me.24

A -- is that he, it’s not really the money he’s afte r. 25

pfa 80

He’s trying to, he, I mean, I, I came up with, I ca me up with1

damaging cybersleuthing of open source materials. Like, in2

response to him saying about one of my recent comme nts that one3

of my ideas was, and if I’m not allowed to, I won’t do it. But4

I was thinking, what if I just posted open source i nformation5

with the links, without any commentary by myself? How would6

that, you know, if I’m not allowed to do that then, I mean,7

you, you, you can say that and I’m like, I will be in contempt8

of Your, Your Honor. But I, that’s, that’s all I w rote about9

one of the things he was mentioning. 10

I was, I was curious, like, what if I just wrote, y ou11

know, within copyright laws, you know, I’m not goin g to copy12

Mr. Singer’s whole book, like just to keep my comme ntary out of13

it, and that’s basically what it is. I, I apologiz e for, for a14

few nasty comments I made, the personification of s cum. I’ve15

admitted I, I shouldn’t have written that.16

But I, I contend nothing I wrote was, was false and17

thus, there is, there is no causation of damages. There’s no,18

if, if he’s having, if he’s having emotional damage s,19

psychological damages because of what he contends, I don’t20

understand that either, because I haven’t written a nything that21

was false. He had every opportunity to respond to my blog. He22

could have written like, well, are you finished? W hy don’t you23

stop? I’m trying to get on with my life. If he ha d done that,24

I might have stopped. But instead, I got sued.25

pfa 81

Nothing I wrote was false. Nothing I wrote was1

false. If, if, and, and, I mean, private individua ls do not,2

this is only like an inkling of how public a figure he is. And3

so that’s basically it. 4

I put in my argument the, much better than me going5

on and on. It’s, it’s in here, and it links up wit h the, the6

exhibits. And that’s, that’s my, I guess, that’s m y two7

contentions, that he’s a public figure and that the re’s no8

causation. And the only other thing I can think of is that, I9

shouldn’t have to pay his, his Court costs. If any thing, I10

would like him to pay, if there are no damages, I w ould like11

him to pay me for the gas mileage and the, the wear and tear on12

the car.13

Q Yes. Well, that’s not before me. Okay. So that’ s14

your summary?15

A I, I, I, I would like to see where the damages are ? 16

I, I didn’t hear any, I didn’t see any causation.17

Q Okay.18

A If there were damages based on true facts, I don’t19

know how, that just doesn’t seem to make sense --20

Q Okay. All right.21

A -- to me that someone can be liable for posting tr ue22

things.23

Q Okay.24

A And that’s, that’s it.25

pfa 82

Q You’ve made your point. All right.1

A I’m --2

Q I’m going to admit into evidence, Defendant’s Exhi bit3

No. 1 and, as well as the plaintiff’s exhibits, inc luding the4

plaintiff’s statement on damages, which is Exhibit 2 for the5

plaintiff.6

(The document marked for 7

identification as Defendant’s Exhibit 8

No. 1 was received in evidence.)9

(The documents marked for 10

identification as Plaintiff’s Exhibit 11

Nos. 1 and 2 were received in 12

evidence.)13

THE COURT: And I need to take another quick break. 14

If you folks need to use the restroom or something, fine. But15

please, be back here in a few minutes, and no inter action16

between the two of you.17

MR. ALLEN: I would like --18

THE COURT: Okay.19

MR. ALLEN: Thank you.20

THE CLERK: All rise. The Court stands in recess.21

(Recess)22

THE COURT: Okay. Have a seat. Is that all you wa nt23

to say on direct examination, direct testimony? Yo u don’t need24

to repeat yourself. I mean, I think I’ve got your points. But25

pfa 83

I’m about to turn you over to Mr. Kimberline for an y questions1

that he’s got.2

MR. ALLEN: Just, I got to respond, I think, I’m3

fairly sure I responded to each one. I don’t know if it, if4

it, if I, I’m not sure if there’s anything I missed to respond5

to.6

THE COURT: Okay.7

MR. ALLEN: So I guess I’m done.8

THE COURT: All right. Mr. Kimberline, do you have9

any questions?10

MR. KIMBERLINE: Yes, sir.11

CROSS-EXAMINATION12

BY MR. KIMBERLINE:13

Q How many blog posts have you, have you made about me14

on any forum or blog over the last five years?15

A A lot.16

Q How many?17

A Five years, I don’t have the exact number.18

Q How many do you think, approximate?19

A Do you mean, like entries?20

Q Entries, blogs, comments, posts, whatever?21

A I don’t know. A, a lot.22

Q How many, how many blogs have you posted about me on?23

A I don’t have the exact number, maybe, I don’t know . 24

I’m not trying to hedge. I have posted a lot on yo u. I have25

pfa 84

found it fascinating.1

Q Have you talked to other bloggers by phone or by 2

e-mail, asking them to also post about me, your, yo ur, to3

follow up your posts about me?4

A No.5

Q Have you talked to --6

A I, I was, I e-mailed, it was when Mandy (phonetic7

sp.) Nagy (phonetic sp.) came out. She’s the one w ho, who, who8

shared that unfortunate e-mail with the Court. I’m friends9

with, I’m friendly with her. And I haven’t spoken to Assistant10

District Attorney, Patrick Fray (phonetic sp.) in a while, but11

we used to e-mail and discuss this story. And I to ld him I, I12

liked Mr. Singer’s book and, and I think Patrick Fr ye (phonetic13

sp.) picked up a copy.14

Q Did you talk to --15

A I gave Patrick Frye, Frye some links that I though t16

he would be interested in, like, I uncovered a, an interesting17

Court document from the, the, I’m not sure what it was, but you18

had like a, you put some type of, you need some typ e of19

affidavit or, it was just, I found it fascinating, the Connell20

story, concerning these, these, I don’t know if the y were21

allegations, or if they were theories about whether Carl22

(phonetic sp.) Robe (phonetic sp.) might have kille d Mike23

O’Connell (phonetic sp.) because of the, because Mi ke O’Connell24

was going to, maybe, he’s your, your associate,25

pfa 85

(unintelligible), who said that you said you were e xonerated,1

but, and won a huge settlement for the bombing.2

That’s kind of one of the reasons why I, I wrote a3

lot about you, because I didn’t understand why you just didn’t4

own up to sending the bombs. I mean, sending the b ombs and the5

guy died --6

MR. KIMBERLINE: Objection. Objection, Your Honor.7

THE COURT: Yes. It’s beyond the scope of the8

question. Sustained. Why don’t you go on to the n ext9

question.10

THE WITNESS: What was the -- yeah, yeah. 11

THE COURT: The question was just the number of 12

blogs --13

THE WITNESS: (Unintelligible) --14

THE COURT: And you went on and on. Just --15

THE WITNESS: Sir, --16

THE COURT: -- do us a favor, --17

THE WITNESS: Yeah. I’m sorry.18

THE COURT: -- try to listen to the question and tr y19

to just answer the question.20

THE WITNESS: There might have been one other, but I21

don’t get along with him. He was on the list. We might have,22

we might have had a few private messages about it. There was,23

weren’t you, I think, I believe I saw you --24

THE COURT: The question was the number of blogs, a nd25

pfa 86

you said, you basically didn’t know.1

THE WITNESS: Oh. I thought we were on to my2

interactions with bloggers, encouraging them or, to blog on3

him. 4

There might have been one time, one of the names on5

that list that, it wasn’t me. He was a moderator a t a, another6

blog I had. He, he posted, I think Mr. Kimberline did a photo,7

he somehow was shaking hands with Carl Robe, is tha t correct? 8

I mean, I -- all right. It’s not cross testimony. I’m done. 9

I, I have nothing to hide.10

THE COURT: Next question, please.11

BY MR. KIMBERLINE:12

Q Sir, have you ever called me the personification o f13

scum on a blog post?14

A Well, of course. I even mentioned it earlier toda y.15

Q Have you, have you ever stated on a blog post, tha t16

you think I should go to jail for defrauding people ?17

A I wrote that I thought you should be investigated for18

fraud. And I did write that if you had -- well, I’ m not sure. 19

I know I wrote, I wrote in the private e-mails that were, I20

wasn’t expecting would be for public consumption, t hat if you,21

if you had committed perjury in, in, somehow in thi s trial,22

that you, that your parole should be revoked. But you said23

you’re not on parole, so I, you know, I, I, I apolo gize for24

thinking you were still on parole.25

pfa 87

Q Have you ever stated that you wanted to, that you,1

you hoped or wanted my nonprofits to be dead or be killed, or2

some such word?3

A No. I’d, I’d have to see, I’d have to see, like - -4

Q Or have --5

A -- what you’re talking about and in its context.6

Q Have you ever indicated that you, that you wanted to,7

to stop the funding sources from, into, to the nonp rofits that8

I’m involved with?9

A Are you, if you provide something from a blog --10

Q It’s a --11

A -- then I can say --12

Q It’s a --13

A -- whether I think --14

Q It’s a simple --15

A -- I wrote it.16

Q It’s a simple --17

A I don’t --18

Q -- question, have you ever asked people not to, no t19

to fund us, or --20

A Well, you read, you, I did write the letter, the e -21

mail to Lori Grace.22

Q Yeah. But I’m --23

A So if that --24

Q -- talking about a blog post. Did you ask people not25

pfa 88

to send money to us, not to --1

A I, I don’t think anyone should send you five, 102

bucks. And I, I don’t, I don’t think anyone should send you3

any money, to be honest.4

Q Have you ever said that though, on a blog post?5

A As a blogger, I, I, I can’t remember specifics. I6

wasn’t, it wasn’t you personally. The only thing t hat would7

have been personal about it, would be because I fel t it was8

wrong, it was wrong for someone to not just own up to their9

crimes. I mean, that’s the only thing where I migh t have had a10

bit of animosity toward you. And I, I really didn’ t think that11

Michael Connell, the Michael, like the domestic ter rorism12

campaign. 13

You have a, you’re looking for donations, for,14

against domestic terrorism, which is a worthy cause . But here15

you are, convicted of, of a, horrendous bombings in Speedway,16

and why you’re known as the Speedway bomber. And l ike, unless17

you can show this, you’re saying it’s, you were exo nerated, but18

it’s closed. I mean, I’m sorry, that wasn’t good e nough for19

me. It seemed like you were spreading some type of lie that20

you were some political prisoner, when you’re just making,21

when, when you’re just spinning things, such as tha t Jew, that22

I’m a Jew --23

Q So you don’t know what --24

A The Jews are the scourge. It’s like, you, it’s li ke25

pfa 89

the Wizard of Odd article that, as an exhibit, the guy writes,1

like, you do put in some good stuff, but then it’s mixed in2

with a lot of other stuff that’s unsubstantiated th at, and, and3

then you miss, you omit things. 4

Like, you omitted to tell this Court that you were,5

from what I hear, I didn’t see the file. But I, fr om what I,6

from what I’m, I’m under the impression that the, t hat you made7

it appear to this Court that you were a private ind ividual who8

had, maybe dealt in some marijuana. But as I, as I provided9

in, in the first page of the, of my defense against damages,10

and, and with the, the exhibits that, there’s a lon g list of11

things, like impersonating a Department of, of Defe nse12

insignia. What? You’re saying that the, the peopl e who caught13

you doing that were lying?14

THE COURT: I think we’ve gone beyond the question.15

THE WITNESS: Sorry.16

THE COURT: Next question.17

BY MR. KIMBERLINE:18

Q So for three, for two or three years, you have pos ted19

scores, if not hundreds of posts about me, or comme nts, or20

something on, on various blogs, using various names , including21

Socrates, and Prepostericity, and so on. Is that t rue?22

A No, not so, and so on, the way you’re --23

Q Okay.24

A -- putting it.25

pfa 90

Q Okay. Prepostericity --1

A I need you to be specific.2

Q Okay. Prepostericity and Socrates, --3

A Sorry for that.4

Q -- right?5

A Yes. I, those are my two user names.6

Q Have you been --7

A If anyone --8

Q Have you been banned from blogs for, for posting9

false, or defamatory, or inappropriate, or otherwis e not, --10

A Not for those, --11

Q -- not following, --12

A -- not for those --13

Q -- not following the service?14

THE COURT: Let him finish the question.15

BY MR. KIMBERLINE:16

Q Have you banned, been banned from any blogs?17

A Yes.18

Q How many?19

A I don’t know.20

Q Have you been accused of harassing other people?21

THE COURT: It’s not really relevant.22

MR. KIMBERLINE: No, it’s not.23

BY MR. KIMBERLINE:24

Q Have you, what is your end game in coming, in, in, in25

pfa 91

targeting me? What was your --1

A Mark Singer wrote --2

Q What was your end game? What was your, what did y ou3

want to accomplish?4

A It’s a, it’s the, what’s, I, I forget the, the res t5

of the title from Mark Singer’s book, the incredibl e -- it’s6

just something so fascinating about it. I remember you from7

when you were on the TV and you were saying you sol d pot to Dan8

Quayle, and then, and then, all of a sudden, I was, I was9

blogging for Brad Friedman, and I’m going off on a tangent. 10

The end game, there’s no end game. This is, it’s11

obviously the, you want to know what the end game i s, that’s12

probably irrelevant to your, --13

Q No. I, I --14

A -- the Judge.15

Q I mean, I know what the end game is, but, but I wa nt16

you to admit what the end game is.17

A You, yet again, I find that the, the plaintiff, he18

did this at the beginning of this, of our, of our 9 :30, the19

session, or when we started, and he’s been doing it throughout. 20

He’s been --21

THE COURT: I don’t --22

THE WITNESS: -- making comments about --23

THE COURT: I don’t need your commentary. I just24

need you to answer his question, and it does go to the issue of25

pfa 92

whether it was done maliciously or --1

THE WITNESS: The, the --2

THE COURT: -- (unintelligible).3

BY MR. KIMBERLINE:4

Q Have you done this out of malice?5

A No. It’s a, I find your story fascinating, utterl y6

fascinating. I did then, it’s still fascinating.7

Q Have you, have you used blogs to try to call me ou t,8

to say something like, come on, Brett, answer me, a fter making9

some scurrilous allegation?10

A I, I didn’t make scurrilous allegations about you.11

Q Okay. After making any allegation of, of criminal12

conduct, or fraud, or, or misconduct, or anything l ike that?13

A Can you repeat that, please?14

Q Have I ever responded to you on a blog in any of15

your, any of your (unintelligible) posts?16

A I think you sent copies of Court papers --17

Q Okay.18

A -- and that was it. You never actually, you never19

responded to any of the content.20

Q Right.21

A We’ve never interacted on a blog, I don’t believe.22

Q Exactly. Every time that you’ve blogged about the23

Velvet Revolution, or Justice Through Music, or Bra d Blog at,24

has it always included some comment about criminal activity by25

pfa 93

me?1

A No.2

Q Or, or --3

A No.4

Q -- have, have most of them been, have you tainted5

almost every post you’ve made about Velvet Revoluti on or6

Bradblog, with some reference to me or my past?7

A No. I, I have an extensive blogging history. You ’re8

just, my, my, my blogging on Brett Kimberline was, it, it’s,9

it’s, it’s not, it’s just that small part of what I , what I10

blogged on. It just happened to be in one of the, the, the,11

the ones that --12

Q Did you ever --13

A -- got more --14

Q Did you ever consider the possibility that this co uld15

harm, harm my reputation, or the reputation of my f amily, or --16

A I don’t think --17

Q -- kids?18

A -- your reputation, I don’t think your reputation19

could be harmed any worse than it, it is. I mean, it’s on the20

public record.21

Q How about my kids?22

A I don’t, I don’t even know if you --23

Q Okay.24

A -- have kids. I --25

pfa 94

Q Okay. Well, I do. I have two. And how about my1

wife?2

A Congratulations.3

Q How about my wife?4

A I don’t know your wife, and I don’t, I don’t need to5

know your family.6

Q No. Well, did you ever --7

A And I’ve never written about your --8

Q Did you ever consider the fact that, you know, by you9

saying these things, that it could harm their reput ation as10

well, because they’re, they’re, they’re my family?11

A I just wrote the truth. I, I see nothing wrong wi th12

writing the truth about a public figure.13

Q Writing the truth over and over, and when you get14

banned by a blog for, for, for, --15

A That’s the --16

Q -- for that type of --17

A We already decided that’s irrelevant, because we, we18

would have to go through a trial of what happened o n that Web19

site.20

Q I realize that. But I’m saying, people asked you to21

stop writing --22

A People like Larissa (phonetic sp.) (unintelligible ),23

your associate.24

Q Asked you to stop. The Court asked you to stop. The25

pfa 95

police asked you to stop. 1

A No.2

Q You never stopped. You continued --3

A No, wait. No. I, I, I say, no. I don’t agree on4

all that. It’s too quick. You need, I need to hea r one --5

Q Did anyone --6

A -- thing.7

Q -- ever ask you to stop blogging about me?8

A Well, do you mean like the Court and Court orders?9

Q Anyone.10

A Yeah. The Court, this Court wanted me, the, I11

believe the (unintelligible), preliminary injunctio n was for me12

to cease all blogging on, on Brett Kimberline. So I, I, I13

stopped. I mean, I’m sorry if I somehow crossed th e line by14

saying, by giving one of those, those search tips a bout how to15

search something in cat (phonetic sp.), Google cach e.16

But Larissa (unintelligible), she told me to stop. 17

She called me a stalker on Daily Cause (phonetic sp .) with, by18

Marcus (phonetic sp.) (unintelligible)’s blog. She called me a19

stalker for my articles, those couple of articles I wrote on20

Daily Cause.21

Q Were you blocked, were you banned from Daily Cause ?22

A A lot of people, I was.23

Q Were you banned from Democratic Underground?24

A Yes. But --25

pfa 96

Q Were you banned from Brad Blog?1

A Yes, I was. But I believe those three, those thre e2

have been shown to have a close association and, I mean, I,3

unless, unless we get into specific, like what happ ened, I4

don’t believe that the, the Judge, I mean, it’s, it ’s, we’re5

basically speaking to the Judge. So unless the Jud ge has6

blogged, I mean, blogging in his private, private t ime, I don’t7

think he knows what we’re talking about.8

Q Judge, I have no further questions.9

THE COURT: I don’t what you’re talking about. Oka y. 10

You can step down, Mr. Allen.11

MR. ALLEN: Thanks.12

(Witness excused.)13

THE COURT: Do you have any other evidence, Mr.14

Allen? I don’t mean more statements, because you’v e had your15

chance. You can have a seat over there. Do you ha ve any other16

documents? I’ve got your Exhibit 1.17

MR. ALLEN: I would only be able to add them after18

and, but I’m going to say, I’m not --19

THE COURT: Okay.20

MR. ALLEN: I mean, I could, I just want to emphasi ze21

that I, if I’m unable to, to add any more docs, sen d in any22

more documents, that I’m just saying for the public record,23

that, to check into that Michael Connell story, che ck into what24

I blogged. And I stand by what I wrote. And he, a nd if I, I,25

pfa 97

I just, I stand by what I wrote. 1

I didn’t, it was a fascinating story in my opinion. 2

I wasn’t, I, like many people, I don’t, I don’t lik e people not3

owning up to what they did, or if he, or if he want s to say he4

didn’t, he didn’t do that, then, then tell us why, give us,5

either, either -- I don’t know. It’s fascinating. I, I don’t6

know what to say. I’m, I’m pretty much, I don’t kn ow if7

there’s anything more to (unintelligible), to cover with Mr.8

Kimberline. 9

So, I mean, I’m not really, if you think he’s a10

private individual, I mean, it’s not, there’s no en d game, sir,11

to, I’m being sincere. There’s no end game.12

THE COURT: Okay. So that’s all your evidence? I’ m13

not saying there’s more. I’m just, you know, closi ng down your14

part of the case, unless you’ve got something else.15

MR. ALLEN: No. Just more, more of my babblings.16

THE COURT: Okay.17

MR. ALLEN: So I’m done.18

THE COURT: All right. I’ve heard the evidence, bu t19

if either of you want to sum things up in two or th ree minutes,20

I’ll hear you.21

CLOSING ARGUMENT BY BRETT KIMBERLINE22

ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF23

All right. Judge, like I said, I’ve been involved24

with this nonprofit for 10 years, roughly. And, an d dealt with25

pfa 98

thousands of people, and no one has ever done what he’s done to1

me. I mean, it’s been constant. It’s, it’s, it’s been brutal. 2

You know, I, I have a thing called, Google, Google3

Alerts that alert me if my name does happen to come up on4

anything, anywhere in the whole country. Really, t he only5

alerts I usually ever get are about him. And so, y ou know, for6

him to say, he’s just telling the truth, I mean, if , if7

somebody writes an article about me or my past, it’ s one8

article and it’s, that’s it. It’s done. And it, y ou know,9

people move on the next day. There’s no moving on with this10

guy. It’s like a constant barrage every single wee k, every11

day, every, you know, whatever. You think he’s gon e, then12

boom, it’s like, you know, whack them all. 13

I mean, he’s back up again, you know, blogging. 14

And then he, you know, he, he, he posted some stuff15

last year, and, and then he bragged about, that he’ s now part16

of the (unintelligible) guys, because he’s exposed Brett17

Kimberline’s past, you know, from 32 years ago. 18

And now, you know, all these right wing bloggers kn ow19

about it, and, and all this. And he’s, you know, h e’s got20

this, this huge head about him over this. And, and then, and21

then, you know, he goes on and he’s, you know, talk ed about22

this over and over for, for the last year about how he’s the23

(unintelligible) guys, because he exposed Brett Kim berline, and24

Brett Kimberline is involved with these nonprofits and, and25

pfa 99

everybody should stop, you know, giving money to th ese1

nonprofits because of Brett Kimberline did somethin g 32 years2

ago, you know. 3

And, and he talks about, you know, I haven’t been4

exonerated. Well, he doesn’t know what happened wi th the5

Justice Department lawsuit. He doesn’t know. And, but he goes6

out and says, I know that he’s never been exonerate d and all7

this stuff. Well, I’m not getting into that here, you know. 8

But I can tell you for a fact, and everybody here, I’m not on9

parole. I had a 50 year sentence. 10

I’m no longer serving that sentence. So something11

happened, and that’s as far as I’m going to go with that.12

But, but at the same time, you know, for him to kee p13

pouring this stuff out day after day after day when I have to14

deal with kids, and I have to deal with Congress me mbers, and I15

have to deal with community leaders, and I have to deal with16

nonprofits, and all this, you know, every day. And they, I get17

people Google searching me, (unintelligible) “How i s this Brett18

Kimberline doing?” Oh, you know, they want to find out19

something good that I’ve done, you know, helping th e, the green20

part of the, the (unintelligible), or some, some ki ds that got21

hurt here in Bethesda, or something like that, they don’t find22

that out. 23

They see his garbage, you know, 32 years ago,24

murderers, and bombings, and pedophilia, and fraud, and all25

pfa 100

this other stuff. I mean, it’s constant, constant, constant.1

He doesn’t want to give me a leg up to get, to get,2

you know, there’s no redemption. I have no redempt ion. It’s3

like a ball and chain. This guy is my ball and cha in. You4

know, it’s like constant and, and, and that’s why I sued. You5

know, he was asked many times, over and over, under this6

assumed names, stop this attack on Brett Kimberline . 7

You know, he hasn’t done anything to you. He’s doi ng8

great stuff now. He’s working, doing, with, with c hildren,9

and, and, you know, has a family and stuff like tha t, leave him10

alone. He would not stop. He wouldn’t stop when t he Court11

asked him to stop. He wouldn’t stop when the, when the police12

asked him to stop. You know, and even after the Ju dge found13

against him on default judgment, and then ruled tha t he has to14

pull the blogs, he wouldn’t pull the blogs. 15

He, he had a Court order, pull those posts. He16

wouldn’t do it, Google had to do it. Google had to step in and17

pull the posts. 18

And then, even after that, he’s telling people, go to19

the Google cache and find these articles that I’ve written20

about him. This is the truth. You need to know th is about21

this guy. He is something terrible. He’s a monste r. You22

know, this is what I’ve been dealing with every sin gle day for23

years. And, you know, I finally had enough, you kn ow. 24

And I’m, and I’m sorry that I had to bring it in to25

pfa 101

the Court and all that, you know, but I didn’t know where it1

was coming from. I didn’t know who he was, you kno w. And I2

have a right to live my life, so, to redeem myself, to be an3

outstanding member of society, which I am. 4

And, and, and I don’t need this guy, you know,5

throwing all this garbage at me constantly, you kno w, for6

whatever reason. You know, whether it’s fascinatin g, whether7

it’s the truth, or whatever, I don’t, you know, tha t’s not the8

point. You know, it’s harassment, and it’s stalkin g, and it’s9

defamation. And he, he, you know, he throws in thi s stuff,10

the, a little bit about the truth from my past, and he, and he11

makes it out to be something terrible. And, and, a nd, you12

know, I, I, I think he should be held accountable, you know,13

with the full amount of damages. Thank you.14

THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Allen.15

CLOSING ARGUMENT BY SETH ALLEN16

ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT17

Okay. In that, the main thing here, is that Mr.18

Kimberline has shown no causation. He, this whole lawsuit of19

his, has been a total slander and smear job on me. 20

This guy is a total public figure, who has an21

extensive criminal, criminal past. He, he even den ies what has22

been proven, and lied. He brings up some fictitiou s23

exoneration, yet doesn’t share it, even though that may be24

relevant to this case. He’s a public figure. 25

pfa 102

THE COURT: Why don’t you, why don’t you just let1

him, leave him alone?2

MR. ALLEN: Well, yeah.3

THE COURT: Why don’t you let him overcome his past ? 4

He’s --5

MR. ALLEN: I’m not his, I’m not his --6

THE COURT: -- involved --7

MR. ALLEN: I’m not his --8

THE COURT: He’s involved in stuff right now that9

sounds very positive. Why don’t you --10

MR. ALLEN: No. He’s, the, the Michael -- I’m pret ty11

much done. I mean, we’re here in Court. I’m not, I’m done. 12

But this guy, you should look into it, really look into it, and13

if you give this a fair shake, I believe you, you’l l start to14

see that he’s a public figure and that I have not b een stalking15

him. 16

He came out with a video, can I sit --17

THE COURT: What, do you need to sit?18

MR. ALLEN: -- or am I supposed to stand?19

THE COURT: You’re supposed to stand. 20

MR. ALLEN: All right. Sorry about that.21

THE COURT: If you need to sit for physical reasons ,22

you can.23

MR. ALLEN: No, I’m fine. I --24

THE COURT: My question is, why don’t you leave him25

pfa 103

alone?1

MR. ALLEN: I have left him alone. He sent me an 2

e-mail --3

THE COURT: When was the last time you blogged abou t4

him?5

MR. ALLEN: I, I don’t count those, what he said I,6

I, I’m still blogging on him. I’m not, I haven’t b logged on7

him, like since, since that, that injunction. Mayb e, you know,8

I slipped in, like a mysterious, like, we’ll see wh at happens,9

and maybe I can talk about it, but I can’t really s ay anything,10

type of thing, or, or, you know, I admit, like I pu t in like a11

sentence or two. You know, if you do, if you write site and12

then the colon, and then, and no space, and then yo u put in the13

Web site, not the http, but the, the Web site and t he dot com14

or net, and then if you put in your search phrases, then you15

can get to the Google cache. 16

I didn’t mention him by name. I did mention, you17

know, I admit to that. I mean, I wasn’t trying to be18

malicious. And he’s, he was searching that out. 19

But he, he came out, he’s contending that he’s a20

private individual. He put out a video, it was a r emake of the21

John Lennon song, War is, his war song. And that g ot an22

incredible amount of YouTube hits. It’s just prepo sterous to23

think, to call him anything but a public figure. I ’m done. 24

I’m not a stalker. I never stalked him. There’s n othing,25

pfa 104

nothing has been proven. There have been so many s mear jobs on1

me, that I don’t know what you can believe from him .2

And I’m not, I’m not a stalker. And I, and I refus e3

to be turned into a prisoner or a convict, when I’v e done4

nothing wrong. I blogged on a public figure, sir. And I’m5

sorry I’m getting emotional, but I mean, I didn’t d o anything6

wrong. 7

He didn’t show, he didn’t show, the only things he8

mentioned, turned out, he had to admit he doesn’t h ave any9

proof of. So what is up with this? He’s, he’s, he ’s, he’s10

just going with the default judgment. So, so fine. You won,11

he won the default because I was an idiot, not to s how up on12

time because I have no money, and no real way to ge t down here. 13

And I didn’t think, I, I didn’t, I messed up. I ha ve no one to14

blame but myself for the default. 15

But, I mean, I don’t see the causation, I, I really16

don’t. I, I didn’t write any lies. He hasn’t show n that I17

wrote anything, any untruths that led to him losing money. 18

Maybe he has shown that he lost some money because of my19

blogging, but it wasn’t just me, there were other p eople. And20

it was his, it was his response, he could have writ ten on my21

blog. He could have said like, you know, that’s no t true. I22

mean, he’s saying I called him a pedophile, when I didn’t. And23

that, to me, appears to be slander, but I’m not a l awyer and24

I’m not going to go on for hours here.25

pfa 105

It’s really out of my hands, this whole thing. I1

don’t see what else I can say. I’m done. You don’ t have to2

worry about me. I don’t want to go to prison. I’v e never been3

in jail before, except for like a, a DUI, but never convicted. 4

I mean, I’m not a criminal. I’m not violent and I’ m not going5

to do anything to him. And I’m pretty much done bl ogging on6

him, especially if you say, you may never blog on h im again. 7

Whatever that means, I won’t do it because, but I d on’t think I8

should pay him a cent. I don’t see what the thing is there,9

where I should pay him money.10

It’s not my fault if truthful things written about11

him has caused him emotional distress. It’s not, i t’s not my,12

I’m not saying he’s Adolf Hitler, but pick someone who’s done13

something similar to what he did. And it’s not, it ’s not the14

public’s responsibility to, to give him a leg up an d to forgive15

him, especially when he’s still denying it. 16

And, I mean, your Court even puts these things in t he17

public record, like people can go to the web, the M aryland case18

research, I think that’s what it’s called, they can plug it in19

and they can see it. 20

So, and I mean, I showed you right here, it’s like21

all these documents from, from his past, you got th e Dan Quayle22

thing. I mean, I don’t know what else I have to do to show23

he’s a public figure. And with a public figure, th ere’s a24

much, it’s just different for, for the causation. 25

pfa 106

I, I asked him to tell, to show the Court what I sa id1

that was either a lie, or that hadn’t been written before that2

was the truth, that caused him to lose money. I’m done. He3

could have, I don’t know. I’m sorry. I just, I, I ’m sorry. 4

I, I don’t, I’m not really, I’m sorry that I’m, I’m sorry that5

I’m not a lawyer. I’m sorry I don’t have a lawyer. I’m,6

that’s it, sir. That is the bottom line here.7

I am sorry that I couldn’t afford a lawyer and I’m8

sorry that I came down here without a lawyer, becau se I,9

because in civil cases, poor people have no rights. 10

(Unintelligible), I don’t mean to offend you. It’s my opinion,11

that poor people in civil cases have next to no rig hts, and,12

and freedom of speech is about who has the most mon ey. 13

And that, and, I, I just, that’s it. I think I’ve14

said it all. He hasn’t proven one thing that I wro te. I mean,15

if my calling him the personification of scum cause d him such16

mental distress, then, I mean, did he provide his c ounseling17

sessions where the, the actual, like an actual tort evidence on18

that? I mean, I mean, I, I’m pretty sure a blogger calling19

some, a public figure, the personification of scum, is not20

going to cause them to lose their money.21

What did I write to Lori Grace that wasn’t true? A nd22

Lori Grace had her own Web site. She supplies her e-mail. 23

What do bloggers do? Why would they put their e-ma il up if24

they’re not saying, e-mail me? Did it, did she tel l me to stop25

pfa 107

e-mailing her? And I, did I e-mail her more than o nce? No.1

What did I, what did I write to her that was false, or that was2

wrong to do? And if you look at her Web site, if y ou, if you3

investigate it, you’ll see that she was writing abo ut her4

involvement with Brett Kimberline, and Cliff Arnebe ck, and5

Stephen Spoonamore, that’s the guy. There was anot her, there’s6

another individual I forgot about.7

And then if you look into the Michael Connell8

(unintelligible) written by Karl Rove, if you look into what I9

actually wrote, what, there’s nothing, there’s no l ies in that. 10

I mean, I can uncover it for you. I’m jeopardizing myself with11

perjury if I’m going to make things up. I’m not th e one12

calling, saying someone said something about -- I m ean, I’m13

Jewish. I, I’m not going to, I’m not going to, I’m done. I’m14

done. That was --15

JUDGE’S RULING16

THE COURT: It’s unfortunate that this matter didn’ t17

go to trial, because it does complicate the damage issue, 18

but --19

Mr. Kimberline, the plaintiff has the burden of pro of20

to show actual damages. There is a concept called defamation,21

per se, but Maryland law still requires a showing o f actual22

damages and I’ve got to find actual damages by a pr eponderance23

of the evidence in order to award damages.24

There are very, what is before the Court, in all25

pfa 108

honesty, are generalized statements. And on the sp ecific1

quotes, there are words that you reference not in c ontext. And2

I don’t have the actual statement, so and so did th is or that3

on a certain date and is, therefore, guilty of some offense,4

and that, that is an untrue statement.5

So the concern I have is that the statements that6

I’ve got before me, are very generalized as opposed to specific7

statements directed to your person. 8

The major concern I have, and the difficulty I have9

in awarding actual damages, is that the causal conn ection10

between whatever statements were made that were def amatory and11

the financial impact on you, is not proven by a pre ponderance12

of the evidence.13

You can say, “Well, this grant’s money has dropped14

down, you know. A U.S., a United States grant that might have15

gone through, that was looking good and then it fel l through. I16

mean, that is some circumstantial evidence, but I d on’t find it17

to be sufficient evidence to prove actual damages.18

And this is, I also can’t turn, I also can’t be bli nd19

to First Amendment issues, and whether statements t hat were20

contained in blogs were statements of truth, and wh ether they21

did have an impact on your reputation. 22

I am going to order the permanent injunction that M r.23

Allen not defame Mr. Kimberline, or interfere with his24

business. I cannot, under the First Amendment, ord er that25

pfa 109

there be nothing said about Mr. Kimberline ever aga in. 1

But I will say to you, Mr. Allen, it’s, it might be2

the legal ruling, but morally, get off this guy’s b ack. Let3

him get on with his life. Let him get on with his business. 4

He’s doing productive, positive things. You may no t agree with5

what he’s doing, but he’s contributing to society i n a positive6

way. Let him get away from his past. 7

Thirty-two years is a long time. And even though y ou8

say you’re, you know, “propounding the truth,” what for? I9

mean, you made some points. They’re out there. Th at10

information was past. It’s, Mr. Kimberline should be allowed11

to get on with his life.12

I’m going to, because there was a default on the13

claims themselves, I’m going to award what is consi dered really14

nominal damages of $100. But a final injunction th at you are15

ordered not to defame, not to interfere with his bu siness. And16

if you write about him, then you write at your peri l, of17

whether, what you’re writing falls into those categ ories. And18

you can be in front of the Court on contempt of Cou rt. You19

obviously can be subject to a future lawsuit.20

You know, this is something that’s caused you, I21

would assume, some angst. And, you know, in differ ent22

circumstances, maybe even a different judge, you en d up with,23

you know, a huge dollar judgment against you, so.24

MR. KIMBERLINE: One question, --25

pfa 110

THE COURT: Mr. Kimberline.1

MR. KIMBERLINE: -- can I get costs?2

THE COURT: Court costs --3

MR. KIMBERLINE: Yeah. 4

THE COURT: -- is what you’re asking for?5

MR. KIMBERLINE: I mean, it just, the cost of, yeah ,6

filing and subpoenas and all that. I think it was about 8007

bucks.8

THE COURT: I will award Court costs. Now, what th e9

clerk considers to be Court costs, I don’t know if it is that10

amount or not, --11

MR. KIMBERLINE: Okay.12

THE COURT: -- you know, because that’s sort of a13

term of art in the Court.14

MR. KIMBERLINE: So how does, how is that determine d?15

THE COURT: I’ll have a written order that will16

issue, that will award costs, that the defendant is to pay17

costs, --18

MR. KIMBERLINE: Okay.19

THE COURT: -- Court costs. Okay. 20

MR. KIMBERLINE: Judge, I want to thank you for you r21

time. I really appreciate it.22

THE COURT: Well, I mean, I’m sure you’re not exact ly23

thrilled with the outcome. But, --24

MR. KIMBERLINE: Well, you know, --25

pfa 111

THE COURT: -- you know, defamation, interference1

with business, they are very difficult matters to p rove and to2

tie together.3

MR. KIMBERLINE: I mean, the, the injunction, I4

think, is good, and the default judgment is good, a nd I’m happy5

with that.6

THE COURT: All right. Well, I’m --7

MR. ALLEN: Thanks, --8

THE COURT: -- glad you are.9

MR. ALLEN: Thanks for letting me continue to blog as10

long as I don’t defame.11

THE COURT: And I would just say, just use --12

MR. ALLEN: I never did.13

THE COURT: Be human about it. You know, Mr.14

Kimberline shouldn’t have to --15

MR. ALLEN: Was he, was he human about me?16

THE COURT: I don’t want you talking to me. I’m17

talking to you.18

MR. ALLEN: Okay.19

THE COURT: Let him go on with his life. Don’t, he20

doesn’t need to have his kids and his wife reading stuff about21

him on the Internet. I’m just saying from a moral standpoint,22

give him a break. Okay. Thank you, very much. Ha ve a good23

day.24

MR. KIMBERLINE: Thank you. Thank you. 25

pfa 112

THE COURT: Mr. Kimberline, why don’t you give, I’m1

going to give you about a five minute head start. I don’t want2

you guys bumping into each other in the elevator, g iven the3

fact that there’s a protective order.4

MR. KIMBERLINE: Thank you, so much. Appreciate it .5

THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Allen, if you6

don’t mind just having a seat in the courtroom unti l 25 of one,7

five minutes.8

MR. ALLEN: As long as I can go and don’t get9

arrested, I’ll be happy.10

THE COURT: You’re not going to get arrested.11

MR. ALLEN: They didn’t, they --12

THE COURT: We can call the next case.13

MR. ALLEN: I was --14

THE COURT: I got to deal with another matter. 15

Deputy, I am very much --16

MR. ALLEN: Life is --17

THE COURT: -- grateful for your being here. I kno w18

it was maybe not the most exciting use of your time . But --19

MR. ALLEN: Oh, come on. This was gold. 20

(The proceedings were concluded.)21

22

23

24

25

pfa 113

/ Digitally signed by Patricia F. Acors

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. 339254

BRETT KIMBERLINE

v.

SETH ALLEN

By:

______________________Patricia F. AcorsTranscriber