IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF HOWARD COUNTY MARYLAND ‘WILLIAM M. SCHMALFELDT, SR. Elkridge, MD 21075 Pro-Se Plaintiff v. Case # WILLIAM JOHN JOSEPH HOGE LL 20 RIDGE RD. WESTMINSTER, MD 21157 Defendant ERIC P. JOHNSO! PARIS, TN 38242 Defendant and ANONYMOUS BLOGGERS aka PAUL KRENDLER (address unknown) HOWARD EARL (address unknown) Defendants COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR DEFAMATION PER SE, MALICIOUS PROSECUTION, HARSSMENT, CONSPIRACY, FALSE LIGHT INVASION OF PRIVACY, AND INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS Plaintiff William M. Schmalfeldt, Sr. (SCHMALFELDT) for his complaint against Defendants William John Joseph Hoge III (HOGE), Bric P. Johnson (JOHNSON) and anonymous bloggers aka Paul Krendler and Howard Earl (KRENDLER/EARL) states the following:NATURE OF THE ACTION 1. This action arises out of a multi-year campaign by Defendants to destroy Plaintiff's online reputation, to accelerate the progression of his Parkinson’s disease symptoms, and imprison Plaintiff by knowingly, maliciously and intentionally filing numerous false, frivolous, defamatory and malicious court filings — including a copyright infringement suit, and criminal charges — and then publishing false, defamatory, and reckless comments about Plaintiff as if the allegations were true.. 2. Defendants used these legal filings to harass Plaintiff, casting a false light on his character, inflicting emotional distress on Plaintiff and his wife. 3. Defendants have invaded Plaintiff privacy by fulsely painting him as a “deranged cyberstaiker” with an “anal rape fetish,” and a creator of child pornography, and as being the Public Relations person (“Mouthpiece”) for Brett Kimberlin, who is currently engaged against Defendant HOGE and others in a civil RICO suit in the US District Court for the District of Maryland. 4, On information and belief, Defendants think that Plaintiff has a “best friend” relationship with Kimberlin that, in truth, does not exist. Plaintiff considers Kimberfin a friend, but they do not consult on a regularbasis and their interactions have been limited to Kimberlin providing transportation to the numerous court hearings made necessary by the malicious prosecutions of Defendant HOGE. 5. The defamatory statements made by Defendants were published on the Internet on various forums, including blogs owned and operated by Defendants HOGE and KRENDLER/EARL, as well as on Twitter and on the blogs of other right wing “true believers”, making them widely accessible to the public directly, through Google searches, and other means that allow these false, defamatory statements to be seen by people around the world, including people who might have otherwise hired Plaintiff as a freelance writer, as well as Plaintiffs friends, acquaintances and family. 6. Defendant HOGE is responsible for filing 368 charges against Plaintiff, 367 of which were deemed nolle prosequi by the Carroll County State’s Attorney, one charge which remains pending. 7. Defendants persist in their smear campaign despite being asked many times by Plaintiff to just be left alone, to remove the false posts and to respect the privacy of Plaintiff and his wife. 8. Defendants HOGE and KRENDLER/EARL have profited by raising funds online by misappropriating Plaintiff's name and likeness ontheir blogs without his permission, using their false narratives, court filings and defamatory comments and blog entries to vilify Plaintiff. 9. Plaintiff has initiated this action to recover compensatory damages of more than $75,000 and punitive damages from Defendants for the substantial injury they have caused to Plaintiff in reputation and health by their intentional infliction of emotional distress, and their ongoing, malicious conspiracy to defame Plaintiff through malicious and outrageous conduct. PARTIES 10. Plaintiff William M. Schmalfeldt, Sr., is a 60-year old living in Elkridge, Maryland, He has suffered from Parkinson’s disease since 2000. In 2011, he retired from his position as a GS-13 writer/editor with the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland. Plaintiff has been an active and atdent supporter of Parkinson’s disease research and underwent a Phase T clinical trial at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville in 2007 and is one of 15 people in the United States to undergo a procedure known as Deep Brain Stimulation in the early stages of PD. Since retiring, Plaintiff has kept himself busy by blogging, freelance writing and reporting, and running online radio stations. He lives with his wife and two dogs ina mobile home in Elkridge, MD.11, Defendant William John Joseph Hoge IIL, resides in Westminster, Maryland. He is an extreme right wing conservative blogger who operates the Hogewash.com blog. He is employed in a sensitive position requiring security clearances at the Goddard Space Center near Ft. Meade, Maryland. 12. Defendant Eric P. Johnson is a 51-year old residing in Paris, TIN. His occupation is unknown. He uses the “Twitter” handle “@Mayberryville” and comments on blogs as “EPWJ” and “BusPassOffice”. 13. Anonymous Defendant Paul Krendier lives in parts unknown, He runs a blog called “The Thinking Man’s Zombie” which is dedicated to smearing Plaintiff. On information and belief, KRENDLER/EARL employs any number of other pseudonyms including “Howard Earl”, which will be revealed during discovery. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 14, This court has personal and subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Maryland Civil Code. 15, Venue is proper because many, if not all of the acts committed by Defendants affected the Plaintiff in Howard County. Plaintiff is a citizenof Maryland and Howard County. His injuries were sustained in Howard County. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 16. In late 2012, Plaintiff became aware of a news story involving the late Andrew Breitbart, non-Party Aaron Walker of Manassas, VA, non- Party Seth Allen of paris unknown, and non-Party Brett Kimberlin of Bethesda, Maryland. Allen and Kimberlin were embroiled in a legal dispute, in which Walker, a member of the Virginia Bar, assisted Allen under the pseudonym “Aaron Worthing,” 17. When Plaintiff wrote about this situation for the website Examiner.com, he ran afoul of several supporters of Breitbart, Defendant HOGE and several non-Party supporters of Andrew Breitbart. 18. As Plaintiff dug deeper into the story, he learned about some allegedly untoward personal characteristics involving an individual member of this pro-Breitbart group. Attempts to interview this person were largely unsuccessful and their interaction devolved into a “flame war.” By this time, Plaintiff was editor of a blog called Breitbart Unmasked. On information and belief, this non-Party called Dallas, Texas, police when something Plaintiff ‘wrote in defense of another blogger was interpreted by the non-Party as a rape threat against himself, his wife and his children. Howard County,Maryland, Police were dispatched to Plaintiff's residence on Sept. 1, 2012, reviewed what Plaintiff had actually written, and determined there was no threat. This increased the level of animus between Plaintiff and all parties affiliated with Andrew Breitbart. 19. Breitbart died of a sudden heart attack in the early morning hours of March 1, 2012. Plaintiff wrote an e-book about Breitbart and his followers that was met with general disfavor among the community of Breitbart supporters. As Plaintiff dug deeper into the story, he became aware that non-Party Ali Akbar, self-described CEO of the Vice and Victory agency and the National Bloggers Club (which was created, ostensibly, to raise money for the defense of Aaron Walker in his battle with Brett Kimberlin), had not made his funders aware of the fact that Akbar was a convicted felon, having been convicted of breaking into a van, stealing and using a debit card in 2007. 20. This revelation angered Akbar, needless to say, and he declared “War” on Plaintiff. He actually used the word and hashtag “#WAR” in his ‘Twitter message to his confederates. #WAR was a favorite rallying cry of Andrew Breitbart, 21. In or about September 2012, Plaintiff became aware of another Breitbart supporter running a blog called Hogewash.com — the eponymousblog of William John Joseph Hoge IIT of Westminster, Maryland. Defendant HOGE wrote several disparaging comments about Plaintiff on his blog, beginning a mostly one-sided “flame war” that continues to this day. 22. In February 2013, Plaintiff was aware of an upcoming news story that would cast an unfavorable light on non-Party Patrick Frey, an assistant district attorney in Los Angeles County, California. The story was set to be made public in the now defunct Boston Phoenix on March 15, In a throwaway remark on his Blog Talk Radio Show, Plaintiff rattled off the names of people he had been doing blog battle with, ending with, “...and Frey? Beware the ides of March.” Defendant HOGE took this to be a direct threat on his life and in February filed the first of what would come to 368 (three hundred sixty eight) charges against Plaintiff. 23. Defendant HOGE knew he had a winner of a story for his blog. Bloggers refer to this kind of story as “click bait.” If you write about a subject your readers want to read more about, and you go out of your way to write defamatory things about a person that your readers have a common. distaste for, that constitutes “click bait.” 24. Defendant HOGE was successful in getting a Maryland Peace Order against Plaintiff in June 2013 from a Carroll County Circuit Court judge who disregarded the settled law in U.S. v. Cassidy (that Twitter is abulletin board that a person can either choose to read or not read), and decided that the simple act of blocking Plaintiff on Twitter was too difficult for HOGE. The peace order was extended for an additional six months in December 2013 by the same judge. 25. Shortly before the final expiration of the first Peace Order, Plaintiff wrote an e-book called “My Slow, Journatistic Death,” where after attempting to learn the true identity of the person behind the website, “The Thinking Man's Zombie”, using the pseudonym “Paul Krendler.” Plaintiff included a significant portion of a post from Defendant KRENDLER/EARL’s blog to show the level of defamation he was enduring from the group of Breitbart supporters. On information and belief, KRENDLER/EARL made contact with Defendant HOGE, who purchased the “world book and e-book” rights to the blog entry, and sued Plaintiff in this court for Copyright Infringement. (Case #2014-cv-01683-ELH). After HOGE filed a motion for preliminary injunction, which Judge Ellen L. Hollander denied in a 31-page memorandum opinion, the case was remanded to a Federal Magistrate Judge for settlement. HOGE demanded removal of all infringing material and a payment of $640,000. Plaintiff in the instant case offered to pay $0 in return, and declared that all material claimed as infringing was used under fair use conditions.26. Before the settlement conference, Defendant HOGE filed for another peace order, but was rejected by the Carroll County District Court as having no statutory basis for relief. He appealed the decision, and a hearing was set in Carroll County Circuit Court for August 27, 2014. 27. At the Copyright Infringement Settlement Hearing, August 14, 2014, Defendant HOGE and Plaintiff agreed that the Plaintiff in the instant case would pay $0 and that he would not admit to having posted infringing material, On the conclusion of the hearing, HOGE shook Plaintiff's hand. and told him that he would not pursue his appeal of the denied peace order. 28. Plaintiff relied on Defendant HOGE’s representation and went to a long-scheduled neurologist appointment on the morning of August 27, 2014. HOGE, without informing Plaintiff that he had changed his mind, went to the Carroll County courthouse and obtained a non-contested peace order against Plaintiff. 29. On Feb, 13, 2015, on learning that Defendant HOGE’s wife was suffering from bone cancer in her spine, Plaintiff was faced with the difficult choice between staying silent and not contacting HOGE, or willingly and for ethical reasons violate the no contact provision of the peace order to share information Plaintiff had at his disposal as a former employee at the National Institutes of Health regarding cancer treatments and clinical 10trials, such information of which the Hoge family might not otherwise be aware, Plaintiff made what he considers to be a moral and ethical choice to violate the no contact portion of HOGE’s peace order and emailed a cordial note to HOGE, offering to provide HOGE and his wife with information that might not be available to the Hoges that Plaintiff, as a former NIH employee, could help them navigate, The note included several links that the Hoges could use without having to contact Plaintiff, although patient offered his services as one who is quite familiar with the bureaucracy at the NIH and as one who knows how to get things done and who to contact. Proving the old saying that “no good deed goes unpunished”, HOGE filed a charge of violation of the peace order against Plaintiff. That charge is pending an April 16, 2015 hearing, 30. Along the way, Plaintiff became familiar with literally dozens ‘of what are kindly referred to as “trolls” online. He was set upon by the Defendants in this case, both named and unnamed, and was humiliated, threatened, had horse feces and a prison ‘uniform mailed to his house, and as recently as Feb. 19, 2015, found a bag of feces sitting next to his garbage bin. These trolls are aware of Plaintiff's address and have made veiled and not-so-veiled death threats to Plaintiff. Law enforcement’s reaction has been a uniform “get off the Internet if you don’t want to be bothered.” But as iPlaintiff is severely hindered by his Parkinson’s disease, the Internet remains his contact with the outside world and he is naturally loath to give it up. The Criminal Charges, Peace Orders and Lawsuit 31. Defendant HOGE filed a Copyright Infringement suit against Plaintiff on May 27, 2014. The case was settled before a Federal Magistrate Judge on August 14, 2014. 32. On February 18, 2013, Defendant HOGE filed three misdemeanor charges against Plaintiff for harassment, electronic mail harassment, and unauthorized access to a computer. All charges were deemed nolle prosequi by the Carroll County State’s Attorney on April 17, 2013. 33. On February 21, 2013, Defendant HOGE sought a peace order against Plaintiff. He was denied by the Carroll County District Court for no clear and convincing evidence of prohibited contact. HOGE appealed the decision to the Circuit Court. 34. On March 22, 2013, while awaiting a decision on the appeal of his first denied peace order, Defendant HOGE was denied yet another attempt at a peace order in the District Court for no statutory basis for relief. 1235. On Jume 14, 2013, the Carroll County Circuit Court granted Defendant HOGE’s request for a Peace Order. The order was extended for an additional six months in December 2013. 36. On March 18, 2013, Defendant HOGE filed a charge of Harassment against Plaintiff. The charge was deemed nolle prosequi by the Carroll County State’s Attorney on April 17, 2013. 37. OnMarch 20, Defendant HOGE filed a charge of failure to comply with the peace order, The charge was deemed nolle prosequi by the Carroll County State’s Attomey on April 17, 2013. 38. On July 8, 2013, Defendant HOGE filed five charges of failure to comply with the peace order, The charges were deemed nolle prosequi by the Carroll County State’s Attorney on Sept. 11, 2013. 39. On August 5, 2013, Defendant HOGE filed three charges of failure to comply with the peace order. The charges were deemed nolle prosequi by the Carroll County State’s Attorney on Sept. 20, 2013. 40. On November 8, 2013, Defendant HOGE filed a charge of Electronic Mail Harassment, a charge of Harassment, and 36 charges of failure to comply with the peace order. The charges were deemed nolle prosequi by the Carroll County State’s Attorney on January 29, 2014. 1341. On November 12, 2013, Defendant HOGE filed 198 charges of failure to comply with the peace order. The charges were deemed nolle prosequi by the Carroll County State’s Attomey on February 7, 2014. 42. On November 15, 2013, Defendant HOGE filed 88 charges of failure to comply with the peace order. The charges were deemed nolle prosequi by the Carroll County State’s Attorney on February 7, 2014. 43. Also on November 15, 2013, Defendant HOGE filed an additional 29 charges of failure to comply with the peace order. The charges were deemed nolle prosequi by the Carroll County State’s Attorney on February 7, 2014, 44, On July 17, 2014, during the Copyright Infringement Lawsuit, Defendant HOGE attempted to secure another peace order. He was denied based on no statutory basis for relief, He appealed 45. _ As described in Paragraphs 22 and 23, Defendant HOGE assured Plaintiff he would not pursue his appeat of the previously denied peace order. He double-crossed Plaintiff and, without warning, got an uncontested peace order on August 27, 2014. 46. On January 30, 2015, Plaintiff was ordered to show cause why he should not be held in contempt of court for linking to Defendant HOGE’s blog from Plaintiff's blog, causing WordPress to automatically send an e- 14mail to HOGE, which he proactively chose to post in his comments. At this hearing, HOGE presented into evidence a letter allegedly written by Plaintiff, allegedly signed by Plainti and allegedly sent by Plaintiff to HOGE’s address, Plaintiff denies writing the letter, denies signing the letter, and demonstrated to the court that the signature was a traced copy of a signature on a previous legal filing of which HOGE is known to have had possession. The Judge took the matter under advisement and as of today has yet to rule. 47. On February 16, 2015, the incident referred to in Paragraph 29 occurred, Plaintiff has a pending charge of failure to comply with a peace order set for hearing on April 16, 2015. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION Harassment, False Light Invasion of Privacy and Defamation Per Se 48, Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporated by reference herein paragraphs 1-47. 49. Defendant HOGE runs a cottage industry of defaming Plaintiff on his blog, Hogwash.com. There are over 1000 posts on Hogewash since September 2012 that refer to Plaintiff by name or nickname (Cabin Boy, CBBS, The Dread Pro-Se Bill Schmalfeldt). Most of the time these posts 15serve as springboards for his commenters to howl with defamatory indignation over the horrible deeds of the Plaintiff. 50. Defendant HOGE realizes the value of defaming Plaintiff on his blog. Over the month of February through this writing, HOGE has logged the following posts on his website, Italicized posts are specifically about Plaintiff. Feb. 1 ~ Quote of the Day (QOD)(1 comment) Feb, | — Team Kimberlin Post of the Day (24 comments) Feb. 1 — Are You Pondering What I’m Pondering? (a daily feature in which HOGE creates a non-sequitur invoking the names of copyrighted Wamer Brothers cartoon characters Pinky and the Brain, henceforth AYPWIP) (1 comment) Feb. 1 — Yellow Balls (his daily NASA post) - (1 comment) Feb. 1 — I'm Not Making This Up, You Know (8 comments) Feb. 1 — AYPWIP (2 of the day) (4 comments) Feb. 1 — Prevarication du Jour (a post about some “lie” Plaintiff has told.) (122 comments) Feb. 2 — Quote of the Day (0 comments) Feb. 2 — Team Kimberlin Post of the Day (TKPOD) ~ (16 Comments) Feb. 2— AYPWIP (0 Comments) Feb. 2— Daily NASA Post (1 comment) Feb. 2— Correction (4 comments) Feb. 2 Correction to the Correction (4 comments) Feb. 2 — Correction to the Correction to the Correction (10 comments) Feb, 2— AYPWIP (3 comments) Feb, 2 - Johnny Atsign (a hamfisted takeoff of the old Johnny Dollar radio show, dealing with events in his various lawsuits and court cases)(40 Comments) Feb. 3 ~ QOD (3 comments) Feb. 3 - TKPOD - (35 comments) Feb. 3 - AYPWIP ~ (2 comments) Feb. 3 - Daily NASA post (1 comment) Feb. 3 - AYPWIP (2 comments) Feb. 4— QOD (0 comments) 16Feb. 4— TKPOD — (21 Comments) Feb. 4— AYPWIP (0 comments) Feb. 4— NASA Post (8 comments) Feb. 4 — Blogging May Be Siow Today (a post about his wife having surgery) (42 comments) Feb. 4 AYPWIP (1 comment) Feb. 4—In Re a LOLsuit (about my previous attempt to sue Hoge in Federal Court) (176 comments) Feb. 5 - QOD (0 comments) Feb, 5—TKPOD (this one about Plaintiff) (167 comments) Feb. 5 —- AYPWIP (3 comments) Feb. 5 NASA post (1 comment) Feb. 5 AYPWIP (0 comments) Feb. 6— QOD (7 comments) Feb. 6 - TKPOD (about Plaintiff) (137 comments) Feb. 6— AYPWIP (3 comments) Feb. 6 — NASA Post — (3 comments) Feb. 6— AYPWIP (0 comments) Feb. 6 — Programming Announcement (17 comments) Feb. 7— QOD (0 comments) Feb. 7 - TKPOD (about Plaintiff) (186 comments) Feb. 7— AYPWIP (0 comments) Feb. 7—NASA Post (2 comments) Feb. 7 — Thanks for the Links (0 comments) Feb. 7— AYPWIP (1 comment) Feb. 7 — An Update on Mrs. Hoge (17 comments) Feb. 8 - QOD (0 comments) Feb. 8- TKPOD (about Plaintiff) (109 comments) Feb. 8— AYPWIP (0 comments) Feb. 8 — NASA Post — (1 comments) Feb. 8— AYPWIP (0 comments) Feb, 8 — Acme Legal Citation Du Jour (about Plaintiff) (25 comments) Feb. 8 — Prevarication Du Jour (About Plaintiff) (124 comments) Feb. 9 QOD (1 comments) Feb. 9— TKPOD (about Plaintiff) (43 comments) Feb. 9— AYPWIP (0 comments) Feb. 9 NASA Post — (4 comments) Feb. 9 AYPWIP (0 comments) Feb, 9 ~ Acme Legal Citation Du Jour (about Plaintiff) (81 comments) Feb. 9 - AYPWIP (3 comments) 17Feb. 9 - Programming Announcement (6 comments) Feb. 10— QOD (1 comments) Feb. 10— TRPOD (about Plaintiff) (71 comments) Feb. 10—- AYPWIP (1 comment) Feb. 10 — NASA Post ~ (2 comments) Feb. 10— AYPWIP (0 comments) Feb. 10—A History of Fakery (a false, defamatory post about Plaintiff) (27 comments) Feb, 10—In Re A LOLSuit (about Plaintiff) (236 comments) Feb. 11 - QOD (0 comments) Feb, 11 — TKPOD (about Plaintiff) (75 comments) Feb, 11 — AYPWIP (11 comments) Feb. 11 — NASA Post — (8 comments) Feb. 11 - AYPWIP (23 comments) Feb. 11 — Peace Order Evidence (About Plaintiff) (186 comments) Feb. 11 — Acme Legal Citation Du Jour (about Plaintiff (50 comments) Feb. 12-- QOD (0 comments) Feb. 12—TKPOD (about Plaintiff) (111 comments) Feb. 12- AYPWIP (6 comments) Feb. 12 — NASA Post - (3 comments) Feb, 12 - AYPWIP (14 comments) Feb. 12 - In Re RICO Madness (146 comments) Feb. 13 - QOD (1 comment) Feb. 13 - TKPOD (about Kimberlin) (20 comments) Feb. 13 - AYPWIP (0 comments) Feb. 13 — Prevarication Du Jour (About Plaintiff) (108 comments) Feb. 13 —NASA Post - (2 comments) Feb. 13 - AYPWIP (1 comments) Feb. 13 — About Mrs. Hoge (This is the post where he announces she has cancer) ( 88 posts) Feb. 14- QOD (0 comments) Feb. 14 — TKPOD (about Kimberlin) (13 comments) Feb. 14— AYPWIP (I comments) Feb. 14 NASA Post — (0 comments) Feb. 14— Thanks for the Links (1 post) Feb. 14~A Year of BS on Twitter (About Plaintiff) (267 comments) Feb. 14 — About That Email (No comments allowed) Feb. 14 - AYPWIP (6 comments) Feb. 15 ~ QOD (0 comments) 18Feb. 15 - TKPOD (about Kimberlin) (34 comments) Feb. 15 — AYPWIP (8 comments) Feb, 15 ~ Who Needs a College Diploma to Be President? (10 comments) Feb. 15 - NASA Post ~ (0 comments) Feb. 15 - AYPWIP (0 comments) Feb. 15 — Panic Setting In at Team Kimberlin? (83) Feb. 16 — QOD (0 comments) Feb. 16 — TKPOD (about Kimberlin) (79 comments) Feb, 16— AYPWIP (1 comments) Feb. 16 — NASA Post ~ (1 comments) Feb. 16 - AYPWIP (0 comments) Feb. 16 — I’m Not Making This Up, You Know (14 comments) Feb. 16 — Johnny Atsign (60 comments) Feb. 16~ In Re a Peace Order Violation (In Which HOGE announces he has filed charges against Plaintiff for offering cancer information assistance to his wife) (118 comments) Feb. 17— QOD (1 comment) Feb. 17- TKPOD (about Kimberlin) (35 comments) Feb. 17— AYPWIP (1 comments) Feb, 17 — Concerning Identity Theft (78 comments) Feb. 17—NASA Post ~ (5 comments) Feb. 17 ~ AYPWIP (4 comments) Feb, 18 — QOD (2 comments) Feb, 18 - TKPOD (about Kimberlin) (19 comments) Feb. 18 - AYPWIP (0 comments) Feb. 18 — Prevarication Du Jour (About Plaintiff) (78 comments) Feb, 18 - NASA Post —(1 comment) Feb. 18 - AYPWIP (2 comments) Feb. 18 — In Re RICO Madness (56 comments) Feb. 18 — In Re an LOL Suit (About Plaintiff) (282 comments) Feb. 19 - QOD (0 comments) Feb, 19~ TKPOD (about Plaintiff) (72 comments) Feb. 19 - AYPWIP (4 comments) Feb, 19 — NASA Post - (4 comments) Feb. 19 - AYPWIP (2 comments) Feb. 19 — In Re RICO Madness (36 comments) Feb. 20 — QOD (0 comments) Feb. 20 — TKPOD (about Kimberlin) (35 comments) Feb. 20 — AYPWIP (9 comments) 19Feb. 20 — NASA Post — (4 comments) Feb, 20 — AYPWIP (3 comments) Feb. 20- Blogsmoke (About Plaintiff) (Latest post, currently 16 comments) 140 posts in 20 days. 24 posts (17% dealing with Plaintiff) 4104 comments as of 8 pm Feb. 20, 2015 Average of 29,3 comments per post 2867 comments about Plaintiff (69.9%) 1237 comments about Everything Else (30.1%) SUMMARY: 17 percent of the posts for the month of February were about the Plaintiff, but the Plaintiff drew nearly 70% of the comments, HOGE is giving his readers what they want, and it doesn’t seem to be his Pinky and the Brain jokes. While HOGE manages (by and large) to skirt actual defamation, his offerings to his readers are red meat to savage beasts, while HOGE considers himself protected by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. 51. Defendant HOGE does not completely avoid false, defamatory comments about Plaintiff. On February 10, 2015, HOGE wrote this about Plaintiff: Bill Schmalfeldt has a long history of faking images and documents. I ‘won’t republish the obscene homoerotic images he created of me that have been placed under court seal, but I will link back to this post which demonstrates one of his forgeries. 20BTW, the Cabin Boy was shrewd enough to use a university yearbook photo for one of those pornographic images, but he wasn’t smart enough to check how old I was when I matriculated. I was 17. This is a defamatory false statement that HOGE either knew or should have known was false. Plaintiff has, as have millions of other Internet users, from time to time “photoshopped” an image for purposes of parody and satire, But never have they been presented as “the real thing.” An examination of Plaintiff's background would not reveal even a miniscule history of “faking images and documents.” The image HOGE refers to as “obscene” does not fit the definition of obscenity as it does not show any actual penetration. And as the picture from the Vanderbilt University Yearbook was from 1967, and HOGE was born on Dec. 31, 1947, he was at the very least 19 years old when the photo was taken. 52. Defendant HOGE has told numerous defamatory lies about Plaintiff. On July 17, 2014, in an attempt to bolster his failed Copyright Infringement case against Plaintiff, HOGE lied to his readers regarding the nature of a DMCA takedown request made by Plaintiff. HOGE claimed Plaintiff had demanded WordPress remove some 70 NASA images from the Hogewash blog. This is a provable lie based on a mistake by WordPress who misunderstood Plaintiff's request and removed the NASA images instead of the images Plaintiff demanded removal. When Plaintiff was made aware of 21the removal of the NASA images, he immediately contacted WordPress and informed them they had removed the incorrect images. WordPress notified Plaintiff and Hoge of the error. HOGE lied to his readers by including a screen cap of WordPress’ apology, which read in relevant part: *Thank you for your notice. We have received notification from the complainant (Plaintiff) that the URLs in question have been wrongly identified as the target of the DMCA Notice. As a result, we will be restoring access to the material shortly.” (Emphasis added) HOGE lied to his readers by intentionally misrepresenting the statement from WordPress on his July 16, 2014 blog entry on the subject. “They say that they restored my material after IDPS (The Dread Pro- Se Schmalfeldt) admitted he had filed an erroneous DMCA Takedown. Notice.” ‘This is not a matter of pure opinion, but an outrageous lie told by HOGE to aggrandize himself to his readership while continuing to do damage to Plaintiff’s reputation, HOGE knew or should have known that Plaintiff made ‘no such “admission” to WordPress or anyone else. HOGE knew or should. have known that Plaintiff copied his complete DMCA takedown request, and his request that WordPress restore the material they wrongfully removed on his blog. HOGE to this day maintains that Plaintiff asked WordPress to remove images that Plaintiff had no legal right to control, compounding the effect of this defamatory lie. 2253. Defendant HOGE continued to willfully spread this defamatory lie in his application for a Peace Order, one of two provable lies told by HOGE in the application. He included “filing a false DMCA Takedown takedown notice resulting in disruption of a commercial website” on his, Petition for a Peace Order, dated July 17, 2014. Not only was the DMCA takedown notice not false but the items removed were replaced within hours at Plaintiff's demand. And if HOGE’s blog is a “commercial website” as he claims, that opens a whole new issue about bis misappropriation of Plaintiff's name and likeness without permission, At any rate, providing false information on a Peace Order Petition is a misdemeanor in Maryland, carrying a 90-day jail sentence, a $1,000 fine or both for a first offense. 54, Defendant HOGE also told a provable lie in the same peace order application when he claimed Plaintiff threatened “to file criminal charges if (Hoge) did not provide information related to a business relationship with a third party.” HOGE does not name the third party in his filing, but does so on his blog on August 27, 2014 in which he includes a sereen cap of comment legally sent to HOGE via his blog comment section, ‘There is no such threat and therefore no extortion in this comment as is defined in Maryland law, CL § 3-706(2). This is not a matter of pure opinion. HOGE knew or should have known when he filed his Peace Order 23petition that Plaintiff's comment contained none of the elements of Maryland’s “extortion by written threat” statute. Once again, providing false information on a Peace Order Petition is a misdemeanor in Maryland, carrying a 90-day jail sentence, a $1,000 fine or both for a first offense. 55. Defendant JOHNSON was an early adopter in the war against Plaintiff, inventing ali manner of wild theories of crimes he maintained were committed by Plaintiff. On April 30, 2014, under his EPWJ handle, Johnson offered this thought on the copyright infringement case in which he alleges that Plaintiff attended an imaginary school of journalism. This is not a protected statement of pure opinion as it can be proven that Plaintiff did attend and graduated with honors from the Journalism Course at the United States Department of Defense Information School in 1982. Bill, Was copyright infringement covered in the imaginary school of journalism? Maybe you should call your advisor? 56. Defendant JOHNSON is under the delusion that two comedy bits recorded by Plaintiff constitute child pomography. In one, an imaginary, satirical character voiced by Plaintiff portrays a preacher discussing the “evil of homosexuality in the Boy Scouts” and presents a brief play in which a gay Boy Scout attempts to seduce a non-gay Scout. There is no depiction of sexual activity, and the voices were all done by Plaintiff who was 40 years 24past the age of majority at the time. No reasonable person could hear that audio and consider it to be “child pornography.” The same with the second comedy bit, in which Plaintiff satirically portrayed adult Texas Governor Rick Perry who discusses his disgust with the idea of allowing gay kids into the Scouts, while reminiscing about such things as “young fellers playin’ with themselves” as being perfectly normal. On November 14, 2014, using his EPWJ handle on the Hogewash biog, Defendant JOHNSON wrote about Plaintiff: As usual, the brave heros who make scout sex tapes, not surprising that they might fail to show at their own hearing that they requested, maybe because the specter of 11-207 (3) and (5) for the very real fear that they can be forced to admit to making audio sex tapes of children, promoting them for resale and distribution under tag lines of “homosexual” and “explicit” Like I said to some total idiot on the phone — I don’t make audio sex tapes of children for criminals and deviants to act out on their fantasies This cannot be claimed as pure opinion as protected by the first amendment as Plaintiff did not offer his audio MP3 and CDs under the label of “homosexual”. “Explicit” is a term used in the recording industry to alert parents to the fact that the content is something they may not wish their children to hear. The claim that Plaintiff made “audio sex tapes of children” is not only ridiculous and wildly defamatory, it is not protected free speech 25in the form of pure opinion as no children were ever involved in one of these audio productions, there was no sex (real or simulated) and the audio he describes is constitutionally-protected parody of a matter that was under controversy at the time, as well as parody of a public official. In a further comment on the same Hogewash.com post, he wrote about Plaintiff: Someone wamed us of the down stroking capabilities ~ think it was a former federal prosecutor that may take notice of 11-207 (3) and (5) and sections of the corresponding federal code as well. It never fails that the people who underestimate their exposure to the regulations protecting children are they type to exhibit extreme and total cowardice in the face of opposition. Not only does this not make sense, it again demonstrates Defendant JOHNSON’s malice in perpetuating his defamation of Plaintiff. 57. Plaintiff has written several books and recorded several comedy albums that are available on Amazon.com as well as other locations. Originally using his EPWJ moniker, which he changed to “Bluelake” when Amazon suspended EPWS for making false reviews, Defendant JOHNSON posted the following false reviews about books and audio that he neither purchased nor read. in the summer of 2014, Plaintiff published a book about the copyright infringement battle called “Animus Nocendi.” Defendant JOHNSON posted the following review: ‘The author's book is under review for twitter comments - reviewing excerpts posted by the author this is a repeat of a long campaign of harassment and was furthered by a loss in Maryland Courts by Mr. 26Schmalfeldt. Read his website for giving you a solid background of the depths of nastiness that has convinced judges to grant peace orders and to uphold them on appeal. 58. This statement cannot be considered as protected pure opinion, as the truth behind the reasons peace orders were issued had nothing to do with the “depth of nastiness” on. Plaintiti’s websites. It had to do with the Plaintiff continuing to use the “@” symbol when writing about Defendant HOGE. Also, the book was not under any sort of review for “twitter comments”. Defendant’s statement about a “long, campaign of harassment” may be pure opinion, but his claim that this alleged harassment was ‘furthered by a loss in Maryland Courts” is not pure opinion because it conveys a fact that can be proven ot disproven. In this ease, Plaintiff's only loss” in a single Maryland Court was the award of a Peace Order. Defendant's claim that the peace order was “upheld on appeal” is false and defamatory, not protected as pure opinion. The Maryland Court of Appeals denied cert. to Plaintiff to hear his appeal. ‘That is not the same thing as the merits of the case being “upheld on appeal.” This is another provable fact that Defendant JOHNSON ignored in his attempt to defame Plaintiff. 59, n2011, shortly after retiring, Plaintiff wrote a book called “Put On Your Parky Face” about his experiences with Parkinson's disease a7and his participation in the aforementioned clinical trial. Defendant JOHNSON wrote the following review on Amazon.com: Ihave read this book months ago on a free preview posted on one of the authors many disappearing blogs. Whatever good he was trying to achieve - you must look at his current behavior - just today the author posted a note from Amazon that they are declining his books - is it because they really are not books - here the author again starts out with very personal struggles - something that many Parkinson patients can relate too, but did it delve into personal attacks? Comments? there are better books, with more technical expertise, more politically and socially neutral and well, coherent content. I didn't give it a one, I think some good comes of it, but with the authors latest tweets about wishing American family men to be beheaded in Syria - its hard to recommend that people expose their loved one's looking for comfort from a terrible disease from such an individual. This person he wanted beheaded was a family man who had no interaction with this man, his crime was to report the news. I would very carefully research this author before opening even the free preview. 60. Once again, Defendant JOHNSON cannot hide behind the claim of protected speech as pure opinion, as Plaintiff never posted any sort of note that Amazon was “declining” my books. It is a provable fact that when one self-publishes a book through Amazon’s “Create Space” service, the book is automatically offered for sale on Amazon.com. Amazon at no time “declined” books self-published through Create Space. Also, Plaintiff at no time tweeted a desire for anybody to be beheaded in Syria or anywhere else. This is purely a fabricated lie meant to stop people from purchasing Plaintiff's product. 23861, Attimes, Defendant JOHNSON’s writing comes off as unfocused and unhinged, but defamatory none the less. On February 10, 2105 in his “BusPassOffice” persona on the Hogewash blog, he wrote: How can someone reconcile the blatant forgery for profit using someone’s name who he later put in a federal lawsuit, and not be held accountable. ‘Why on earth would someone write something like ripping up dead babies in front of a grieving mother? What sick, malevolent violent imagery would come to mind? This Private Citizen has no problem, becoming known to the world with thousands upon tens of thousands of vile pornographic and twisted violent messages, tweets? Remember when you called me - remember the laughing at you? Still am. Remember the written words of Bill schmalfeldt advertising himself: ‘Schmalfeldt tore the dead baby into small pieces and crammed it down the father’s throat and the grieving mother stood there weeping Once again, Defendant JOHNSON relies on his rich imagination to claim as truth something that can be proven false. Plaintiff did not “forge” JOHNSON’s name. He did write a phony review on the dust jacket of a book that he claimed came from “EPWJ.” Defendant’s Johnson's name is not “EPWJ”. Judging by his book sales, Plaintiff is clearly not “known to the world” in any sense. The “violent imagery” he describes is the product of a parody piece Plaintiff wrote where two commenters on a blog discuss the 29“evil that is Bill Schmalfeldt” and create a false scenario in which Schmalfeldt committed the satirical heinous act. Any reasonable person listening would immediately recognize it as satire and parody. Also, Plaintiff never used this parody scenario to “advertise himself,” so that also is a provably false statement by Defendant JOHNSON meant to defame: Plaintiff. 62. Ina Feb. 8, 2015 Hogewash post about Plaintif?’s “right to remain silent,” Defendant JOHNSON wrote about Plaintiff: 3 million words online freely broadcast to the entire world — many laced with pornographic talk and references to homoerotica, misogyny, semen, genitalia, rape, assault etc ~ sure any person like that can stop anytime, before doing irrefutable damage to their reputation in the eyes of a reasonable person(s) Three million words is a lot of words. Each of Plaintiff's books contains, at most 90,000 words. Plaintiff has no idea what Defendant JOHNSON is referring to with his allegations of pornographic talk, references to homeerotica, etc. These are things Defendant JOHNSON created out of thin air for the purpose of furthering his defamation of Plaintiff. 63. Ina January 16, 2015 comment on the Hogewash blog, Defendant JOHNSON wrote the following about Plaintiff: . You mean the teenage copyrighted pictures of Eric’s kids in countrys and states that expressly forbid what Bill is saying to do? Forwarded this to the Howard County Detective, who is researching the audio child rape porn — he wants to know if any pictures of 30underage children were ever posted against their parents wishes — go to the secret place to get his email address........ Defendant is unaware of any “copyrighted pictures” of Defendant JOHNSON’ kids (although now he refers to himself in the third person), Any use of pictures were under the fair use terms of U.S. Copyright law. Plaintiff is not aware of any actual Howard County detective researching any audio created by Plaintiff. This is another statement of fact, not pure opinion that can be proven to be a lie told in furtherance of Defendant JOHNSON’s campaign of defamation against Plaintiff. 64. The “secret place” JOHNSON refers to is a members-only blog maintained by Defendant KRENDLER/EARL. 65. One of the favored memes among this group of trolls is that Plaintiff admitted to having sex onstage with a transvestite in Japan. Plaintiff made no such admission as this “performance” never actually happened. However, one of the characters in a book Plaintiff wrote did receive sexual services from a person who turned out to be a man. Still, hating to waste a good defamatory meme, Defendant JOHNSON wrote on Defendant KRENDLER/EARL’s “Thinking Man’s Zombie” blog on February 6, 2015: The tweet was disparaging a decorated combat marines service — Bill said he was ashore digging bodies out of the rubble, all his tweets are saved — just more admissions against interest. Somebody needs to tell Bill Schmalfeldt that someone named William Schmalfeldt is writing stupid books about his life and departing all sorts of 31unflattering pictures of him on the twitter and on all these websites. Bill should sue that guy who’s also making and doing bad things on audio too. 66. This is not a statement of “pure opinion” protected by the first amendment. This is a lic and it is provable by checking Plaintif?'s military record. Plaintiff never made any such claim about “digging bodies out of the rubble” in Lebanon or anywhere else. That's another meme commonly accepted as doctrine by this group of trolls that Plaintiff “admitted” to being in Lebanon, digging bodies out of ‘rubble, What Plaintiff “admitted” to was, in fact, being part ofa Marine Amphibious Unit as a Hospital Corpsman in 1976 when that unit evacuated American citizens from the US Embassy in Beirut. 67. OnFeb. 1, 2015, Defendant JOHNSON took another opportunity on DOE 1’s blog to defame Plaintiff as a child pornographer when he wrote: Ohi he will be calling some people and leaving strange threatening messages again, maybe make another raping boy scouts audio fantasy tape for sicko’s to titillate to and act out... He's so mainstream average private guy who has an almost religious respect for personal boundaries... Although the majority of this statement could be considered “pure opinion” the claim that PlaintifFis making “another” child pornography audio is 32defamatory as it falsely alleges that Plaintiff ever created a “first” child pomography audio for there to be “another” one. 68. On the same day, in the same post, the trolls decided to play a little game called “Finish this Sentence”. Readers were asked to complete this sentence about Plaintiff, “I am a private, likeable and normal kind of guy, except from time to time I like to...” Defendant JOHNSON added: ...while making child audio porn 69. Onarecent “Episode” of Defendant HOGE’s “Johnny Atsign” radio script on his Hogewash blog, Hoge included an audio snippet that he claimed was left on his answering machine by Plaintiff in violation of the standing Peace Order. Although the script claims to be fiction, HOGE’s readers sure thought it was real. 332 2541 Osaems Thert tam Thats sine ue wren ne saj2" rere Orsems caer agree more, Nea. The staerng was 3 dead ave-cuy, 3, camo do. 153" 0 @rxeTHs ersictenara crovts have i be eo. Iecroer te was Mane rake look en he ogee 200% 7 3 © pattie Yeo. Ba, Dame One, 70. The clip turned out to be from the website Prankdial.com, a website where one can enter a phone number he wants the recipient to believe the call is coming from, and the number of the person being pranked. The website then plays the recorded message for the victim. And for the purpose of identification, that is a picture of Plaintiti’s wife by “Neal N 's” comment. 3471. All Defendants are guilty of Defamation per se for making statements in writing, seen by other parties, such allegations they either knew or should have known were false. In Maryland, a plaintiff who is not a public figure ordinarily must prove four elements to establish a prima facie case of defamation: (1) a defamatory communication; (2) falsity; (3) fault; and (4) harm. See, e.g., Shapiro v. Massengill,- 105 Md. App. 743, 772, 661 A.2d 202,216-17, cert. denied, 341 Md. 28, 668 A.2d 36 (1995). Ifa statement constitutes defamation per se, however, harm to reputation is presumed. See Hearst Corp. v. Hughes, 297 Md 112, 125, 466 A.2d 486,493 (1983). Damages may be awarded on the basis of that presumption when the plaintiff has demonstrated malice by the speaker, See id., 297 Md. at 125-26; Shapiro, 105 Md.App. at 773-74; Gooch v.Maryland Mechanical Systems, 81 Md. App. 376, 393-94, 567 A.2d954, 962 (1990). Defendants are responsible for investigating and determining the truthfulness of a defamatory statement before publishing it. Young 725 A.2d at 574-75. See also Pittman v. Atlantic Realty Co., 732 A.2d 919 n.6 (Md. 1999) (quoting Black’s Law Dictionary 873 (6th ed. 1990) in defining actual knowledge as “knowledge that “embraces those things of which the one sought to be charged has express information and those things which a reasonably diligent inquiry and by exercise of the means of information at hand would 35,have disclosed.”). Allegations made by Defendants are provably false and Defendants cannot evade punitive damages by remaining willfully ignorant of the falsity of their defamatory statements. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION Malicious Prosecution and Civil Conspiracy 72. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporated by reference herein paragraphs 1-71. 73. Areading of the comment section on any post segarding Plaintiff on either the Hogewash or Thinking Man’s Zombie blog demonstrates the clear pattern of conspiracy to defame Plaintiff. 74, The fact of the existence of a Members’ Only website for KRENDLER/EARL’s readers to discuss ways to harass plaintiff is more than enough proof of the existence of a conspiracy to defame Plaintiff. (http://fuiruseparodyproductions. wordpress.com) 75. Defendant KRENDLER/EARL invites like-minded individuals, i.e., people who hate Plaintiff, to join him in a secret website to discuss strategy and provide information for his use in ongoing harassment of plaintiff. 36For the Chosen Posted: Oric0er 2,201 Autor! ied under: New post at Fair Use Parody. Comments disabed on this post. The Major Bleg ated: Saotamber*. 20°. Author Hou! rere af Flea unger §09' Tags Big Le Rw wR O Vote | promsed a Mao” Blog. Ang | promised & vould have rothing to do with mandy (but if you want to Mt the Up jar if ve ever ‘made you: laugh out loud, Mey, ts,ust over thova), ‘Yenat 100d 3 information. ‘Spocial socrol stuff, Anyone who reads ths blog with -ogularty wil nave ne troube figuring out watt moan. ‘Aad lelont want it nore, Tne comments for ths post are dsapieg. Gohere. Make sure you aro logged «witha WordP-oes accourt ff you nond ane, got one) arf you ‘19 701 atendy ited, request access. Be prepared to nave you" bana fides thoroughy vetted and chat enged. Trat log s prvate for a reason, Saloty fst. Nothing porsonal | sil procesa requests as quexly as | ean, and once admitted you wi: be free to comment as por instructions in tre corogpoding 409 post. 76. — This invitation and subsequent acceptance of membership to a “secret blog” to plot and plan and scheme over ways to harass Plaintiff (which is the only thing it could be given the overall timbre of the home biog), satisfies the requirement of this court that, “To state a claim for civil 37conspiracy in Maryland, a plaintiff must allege a clear agreement to conspire because the “[iJndependent acts of two wrongdoers do not make a conspiracy.” Murdaugh Volkswagen, Inc. v. First Nat. Bank of South Carolina, 639 F.2d 1073, 1076 (4th Cir. 1981). See also Cavalier Mobile Homes, Inc. v. Liberty Homes, Inc., 454 A.2d 367, 372 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1983) (holding that a plaintiff must allege that there was a “unity of purpose or a common design and understanding, or a meeting of the minds in an unlawful arrangement.”). 77. The “arrangement” between Defendants HOGE and KRENDLER/BARL for the purchase of the “world book and ebook rights” for a vile, obscene and defamatory depiction of Plaintiff and his wife originally published on KRENDLER’s blog do not demonstrate HOGE’s love of vite, filthy defamatory fiction or any desire to profit from the possession of such rights. The “arrangement” constitutes a conspiracy between HOGE and KRENDLER/EARL to protect KRENDLER’s identity and allow HOGE to sue Plaintiff for copyright infringement for something HOGE did not write. In all of Plaintiff's years as a writer and journalist, he has never heard of a case where a person purchased the rights to a written work for the sole purpose of suing a person for republishing it. 38‘THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION Tortious Interference with Business Expectancy 78. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporated by reference herein paragraphs 1-77. 79. The false negative reviews of Plaintiff's books and audio recordings on Amazon were designed to interfere with sale of these materials. These were not honest negative reviews. These were reviews by someone with a personal axe to grind who never purchased, read or listened to the product. 80, Every time Plaintiff was successful in landing a part-time writing position with an online news agency, he was either hounded from the website by a torrent of spam comments to the editor of the website, or otherwise harangued until the editor finally concluded that keeping Plaintiff on staff was bad for business, 81. Plaintiff has been so successfully Google Bombed by Defendants and others that any prospective employer will see him as a horrible person because of the untrue accusations of right wing strangers. 82. Plaintiff enjoyed a mutually beneficial relationship with the National Parkinson Foundation until Defendants and others spammed the public relations manager at the NPF to the point where she asked Plaintiff to 39remove their organization’s name from Plaintiff's materials, which were being sold to raise money for the NPF. 83. Defendant JOHNSON, especially, seems to derive enjoyment in revisiting Plaintiff's past to tell former coworkers what an evil person Plaintiff is. On February 6, 2015, using his “BusPassOffice” persona on the Hogewash blog, Johnson wrote: He also just admitted on twitter to stealing a Vanderbilt photo and creating child porn — just not as much as south par! ‘Then he has another several dozen admissions against interest 84. It should go without saying that Plaintiff made no such admission and this remark was designed at driving a wedge between Plaintiff and the wonderful people at Vanderbilt University Medical Center who did his experimental Deep Brain Stimulation surgery in a 2007 Clinical Trial. 85, Defendant Johnson claimed on the Hogewash blog on January 31, 2015, that Vanderbilt was “investigating” plaintiff, I was really glad that Vanderbilt followed up that they are watching and investigating him. 86. Defendant Johnson put the whole false information package together for the Hogewash reader on January 19, 2015 when he wrote: 40Was he fired from Liberland? Hmmmmm Was he banned by the National Parkinson’s Foundatoin? Hmmmmm Is he forbidden to use any images of the doctors at Vanderbilt from now on? Ammmm Is he forbidden to contact several people? Emmmmm Has he been ordered to Court to show cause Ob hell yeah..... Are other Law enforcement officials going to be there from several other sates to perhaps question and or take him inte a non extradition Only time will tell. He should be advised that in Louisiana Habeas Corpus has been suspended since KAtrina — he could and will be held for many months before trial the wait is 4 months in Orleans Parish 87. So complete has been this Google Bombing of Plaintiff's reputation that he no longer even receives courtesy replies when he applies for freelance writing positions, FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress coy88. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference herein paragraphs 1-87. 89. The whole reason for this course of harassment by Defendants seems to be to punish Plaintiff for his taking a stand against the Breitbart supporters in 2012. They are aware and have stated as such that they understand that stress on a person with Parkinson’s disease can be lethal. ‘They blame Plaintiff for causing his own stress. In fact, given the Plaintiff's autonomic nervous system dysfunction and his extremely negative reaction to cold weather, Defendants were almost praying for cold weather for January 30 when Plaintiff was forced yet again to travel to Westminster, Maryland to answer a “show cause” hearing. 4° 0 O Rae This ‘You sayin! 8 cold up there or something? ‘Whar'ssne three day “orecast \90k 48? SRPRRERRRRRRR 90. Defendants seemed to take perverse delight in the torment they caused Plaintiff, Defendant KRENDLER/EARLwent so far a3 to host an “Everybody Draw Bill Schmalfeldt Day” event at a website they created a2https://everyonedrawbillschmal feldtday .wordpress.com/2015/02/13/click- here/ 91. Defendants KRENDLER/EARLand HOGE realize that Plaintiff is very loving and protective of his wife. For that reason, KRENDLER/EARLhas actually libeled Plaintiff's wife, causing great emotional distress to Plaintiff and his wife. HOGE has allowed the libeling of Plaintiff's wife on his blog as seen in the comment by “Howard Earl” above that contains a photo of Plaintiff's wife one day after throat cancer surgery in 2013. “Barl” added a black eye and a scar to the forehead to make it appear as if Plaintiff was a domestic abuser. On information and belief, “Howard Earl” is one of many identities used by the pseudonymous Defendant KRENDLER. 92. When Plaintiff's 82-year old mother died in March 2013, Defendants KRENDLER/EARLand HOGE wasted no time in allowing her to be defamed by readers of their blogs. “Howard Earl,” who on information and belief will turn out to be one of KRENDLER’s “sock puppet” accounts, is responsible for many of the foul depictions of Plaintiff's late mother, father and identical twin brother who died in 2004. The more Plaintiff objected to deceased family members being abused by strangers intent on 43harming Plaintiff, the more they engaged in that horrible behavior intended to cause Plaintiff a maximum amount of emotional distress. PRAYER FOR RELIEF Plaintiff seeks the following: A. Jury Trial B. Permission to add defendants as their identities are uncovered C. Permission to otherwise amend complaint D. Anamount of $800,000 in compensatory noneconomic damages from each defendant due to the pain, suffering and inconvenience caused by defendants as set in Maryland’s Courts and Judicial Proceedings Code, Title 11, Subtitle 1, §11-108(b)(2)(i)(ii) E. Punitive damages in an amount deemed appropriate by the court for the actual malice displayed by each defendant in the carrying out of their systematic harassment of Plaintiff. F. Payment to be divided among the named Defendants and others as may be identified to pay for the services of a “reputation manager” to clean up the mess Defendants have made of the Plaintiff's online reputation. G. Removal of all references to Plaintiff by Name, Nickname, Image or Inference from the Hogewash and Thinking Man’s Zombie BlogDated this 23" Day of February, 2015 Respectflly Submitted, William M. Schmalfeldt, Sr. Elkri i MD 21075 I certify that on the 23" day of February 2015, a copy of the foregoing complaint was sent to Defendant William John Joseph Hoge IIL, 20 Rid; , Westminster, MD 21157 and Defendant Bric P. | Paris, Tennessee 38242 by First Class Certified Mail, Restri Delivery, Return Receipt Requested. JW Jn 4d. M. Schmalfeldt, Sr. Certificate of Service 45