#BrettKimberlin Watch: Freedom Burning

See yesterday's post about the Brett Kimberlin v Aaron Walker (Worthing) fiasco.  Since I posted that, we have some updates.  The best (with links to others) is via Patterico.

I'm not sure what to say to this other than Judges- especially retired judges should recuse themselves from cases when they don't understand something at the core of the case.  By all accounts, the judge in this case lacks the most basic understanding of how the internet works.  As soon as he saw that, he should have had the good grace to say, "I don't understand how this works, can we get someone in here to explain it?" and then not accepted the word of either party (though, certainly, they should have been able to provide documentation or witnesses).

Brett Kimberlin, it is said, has set up a Google Alert so that he receives an email any time something mentioning him is posted (Hi, Brett!).  According to eye witness accounts, Mr. Kimberlin then used those emails as proof that Mr. Walker was sending him those emails.

Now, anyone passingly familiar with the technology would have told him not to be stupid, and present some real emails directly from Mr. Walker, or to get out.  Unfortunately for Mr. Walker, who is partially responsible here as he should have known to retain council, the judge was not passingly familiar with the technology and accepted Mr. Kimberlin's word.

Now, as bad as Mr. Kimberlin's "lawfare" tactics may be, it is far worse that he is aided and abetted by the legal system though a combination of apparent indifference on the part of public prosecutors and apparent ignorance on the part of judges.

If this reporting is correct, moreover, then the ruling was also in blatant disregard of Supreme Court precedent as well as the First Amendment itself.  This is nothing short of a miscarriage of justice- one which would not have even been possible if the State had taken the attempted framing of Mr. Walker seriously in the first place.

So I am left with the question: why does the  justice system seem to be geared toward helping the most aggressive, most trivial litigants instead of actually seeing to justice?