Monday, April 20, 2009

My latest attempt to reach out to the Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychology

Dr. Markham, 

      Please see the following attachment.  This is the motion I filed with the Court last week.  I’m contacting you because you are the newest member of the Board and you seem to have an impressive résumé when it comes to helping people.  I’m sure that you are aware that Mr. Brengelman obstructed the Board’s access to a mailed copy of my complaint concerning Agency Case No 08-15.  Mr. Brengelman made a point to ask Julie Jackson if the Board had received a mailed copy of my complaint.  Mr. Brengelman said that because the Board didn’t receive a mailed copy of my complaint, the Complaints Screening Committee was slow to receive a copy of the complaint and couldn’t address the complaint at the April 13, 2009 Board meeting.  Mr. Brengelman later tried to get rid of the May meeting because he didn’t feel that it was necessary. 

      In a letter dated March 16, 2009, Mr. Brengelman wrote: 

Dear Mr. Brewington: 

   Your recent request for the names and addresses of the members of the Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychology is being responded to by the Board staff directly.  As a courtesy to you, please feel free to mail to me, at the address on this letterhead, and Indiana court or legal document you wish to be received by any member of the Board.  I will acknowledge receipt of any such document by U.S. Mail on behalf of any member of the Board to whom you direct such a document. 

Sincerely yours, 

Jack Conway

Attorney General 

Mark Brengelman

Assistant Attorney General 

After Mr. Brengelman instructed me to forward any “Indiana court or legal document” that I wished to be received by the any member of the Board (as a courtesy to me), Mr. Brengelman failed to acknowledge that he received a copy of my mailed complaint.  Mr. Brengelman’s courteous actions seem to conflict with the fact that Mr. Brengelman deleted the following email messages without reading them: 

  To:      Brengelman, Mark (KYOAG); Jackson, Julie G (Finance

Occupations & Professions); Velez, Jan (KYOAG)


  Subject: Public Records Dr. Edward J Connor

  Sent:    Fri, 13 Mar 2009 11:42:25 -0400 

was deleted without being read on Mon, 16 Mar 2009 17:47:54 -0400 


  To:      Jackson, Julie G (Finance Occupations & Professions); Velez,

Jan (KYOAG); Brengelman, Mark (KYOAG)


  Subject: Public records request

  Sent:    Fri, 13 Mar 2009 14:57:08 -0400 

was deleted without being read on Mon, 16 Mar 2009 17:47:54 -0400


  To:      Brengelman, Mark (KYOAG); Jackson, Julie G (Finance

Occupations & Professions); Velez, Jan (KYOAG)


  Subject: New initiating complaint against Edward J. Connor

  Sent:    Wed, 25 Mar 2009 11:46:16 -0400 

was deleted without being read on Thu, 26 Mar 2009 17:08:13 -0400


  To:      Brengelman, Mark (KYOAG)


  Subject: New initiating complaint against Edward J. Connor

  Sent:    Thu, 26 Mar 2009 18:22:58 -0400 

was deleted without being read on Fri, 27 Mar 2009 17:24:42 -0400



  To:      Brengelman, Mark (KYOAG)


  Subject: I thought you wanted me to communicate with your office.

  Sent:    Fri, 27 Mar 2009 17:30:48 -0400 

was deleted without being read on Wed, 1 Apr 2009 16:14:28 -0400 


  To:      Brengelman, Mark (KYOAG); Velez, Jan (KYOAG); Jackson, Julie

G (Finance Occupations & Professions);


  Subject: Request to address Board and additional information against

Dr. Edward J Connor

  Sent:    Fri, 3 Apr 2009 07:49:36 -0400 

was deleted without being read on Tue, 7 Apr 2009 17:22:03 -0400 

      I am well aware of Mr. Brengelman’s tactics in trying to direct any subpoenas to go through his office.  The problem arises when Mr. Brengelman attempts to “protect” the Board from me and then serves as counsel to the Complaints Screening Committee for my complaint.  There are now severe ethical and legal issues to consider now that Mr. Brengelman has conspired to obstruct the Board’s access to a complaint.  This is very concerning since Mr. Applegate provided false information to the Board during the March 2, 2009 meeting when he recommended that the Board not reopen Agency Case No 08-15 because there was no new evidence.  I sent the Board copies of altered health records for the psychologist in question.  I had never addressed this information in previous correspondence with the Board.  I have a copy of the altered health records that the Board stamped “Received February 20, 2009.”  This information could not have been dismissed as the Board didn’t ask for a response from the psychologist in question.  It appears that Mr. Applegate arbitrarily dismissed my new evidence.  It would be illegal for Mr. Applegate to dismiss evidence/a complaint based on Mr. Applegate’s rendered opinion of me, without ever meeting with me. 

      Dr. Markham, I am a father who is fighting for the right to spend equal time with my children.  This whole situation demonstrates how broken the family court system is.  I have been representing myself for over a year and I have been attacked by the “professionals” in the system for questioning the system.  I didn’t set out to represent myself, but I was forced to go at it alone when I couldn’t find a lawyer who wanted to challenge the ethical conduct of the psychologist in question.  The “professionals” would like to portray me as an irrational, out of control, renegade who is just trying to cause trouble.  I’m not irrational or out of control and if someone feels that I am a renegade who is trying to cause trouble then they probably have done something wrong.  I wasn’t the one who was having a hard time answering the question of whether my office received a mailed copy of a complaint.  I have written over 200,000 words during the course of my divorce/custody hearing and no one has been able to find anything that I have done that is illegal or unethical.  You will never find any derogatory statements about my soon to be ex-wife.  The only thing you hear are the petty arguments the “professionals” are using in an attempt to make me seem irrational.  Solving problems in ways that the legal system isn’t familiar with is creative and seemingly effective.  Having an Assistant Attorney General of the State of Kentucky crying foul and resorting to trickery in an attempt to throw off a parent fighting for the right to spend equal time with his children is disappointing.  

      I’m not irrational.  If I really were irrational and/or out of control, do you think Mr. Brengelman would be going to such measures to protect the Board from me?  It wouldn’t be irrational for me to get an attorney to sue the Board and the Office of the Attorney General for conspiring to commit fraud.  I don’t want to do that.  That’s not me.  I want to be able to spend the summer concentrating on having fun with my two daughters, but I refuse to give a free pass to anyone who engages in malicious and illegal conduct to protect a psychologist that brings considerable harm to children.  If the Complaints Screening Committee would have acted in a responsible manner, none of this would have been necessary. 

      I would invite anyone who thinks that my actions are harassing, illegal, etc… to take the appropriate legal action against me.  In his response to Agency Case No 08-15, the psychologist in question wrote “I believe it is Mr. Brewington who is potentially dangerous given his profile and behavior thus far.  As such, I have consulted with an attorney with regard to filing a restraining order against Mr. Brewington and/or filing charges of harassment, defamation of character or slander but have not taken these steps as of yet and would prefer not to do so.”  The Board didn’t even consider the ethical/legal violations of a custody evaluator threatening legal action against a party while serving as an impartial psychological expert.  The psychologist in question isn’t refraining from taking legal action because he’s a nice guy; he’s just making statements like this in an attempt to convince people that I’m a dangerous person.  Whether or not Dr. Connor believes that I am a dangerous person is irrelevant to the complaint.  The Board is in possession of many of this psychologist’s documents and nowhere does it state that I pose a threat to my children or their mother.  He just got caught doing something very bad and for some reason Mr. Brengelman and some of the Board members are trying to protect him.  The problem is this is the first time that a person has tried to hold people accountable for their actions while their divorce was pending.  The problem is that a non-lawyer seems to have infiltrated the system outside of formal legal action.  I have found that it is easy to keep “my story” straight because I always tell the truth and I always try to walk a straight line.  If someone doesn’t play by the rules, they may find themselves stuttering and stammering for words trying to explain why they didn’t provide the Board with a mailed copy of a complaint. 

      If people get offended by the content of this letter they have either done something wrong or they have a hard time accepting responsibility for the actions of the Board and the Office of the Attorney General of Kentucky.  Getting angry because someone is exposing unethical and or illegal conduct by people who are supposed to protect the public is self centered and irresponsible.  Ask Mr. Brengelman and Mr. Applegate why there weren’t any apparent violations of law in a 237 page complaint about a psychologist who said that there were HIPAA laws prohibiting him from releasing a custody evaluation case file to one of the participants of the child custody evaluation because the participant didn’t have a lawyer.  Mr. Brengelman and Mr. Applegate would probably just get mad.  Who’s irrational now? 

Thank you for you time 

Dan Brewington


  1. I am just so embarrassed for your daughters right now. I get what you are trying to do here, and that you are trying to raise awareness, etc. But this is your girls we are talking about, and you are posting a HUGE part of their life here on the internet for everyone to see because you're mad. How dare you do this to them? They don't deserve this.

    What if they see this? What if their TEACHER sees this? You are exercising poor judgment where your daughter's rights are concerned.

    I feel for you... because you are getting screwed, I REALLY do. And I get the whole "I'll do anything to see my kids." It's admirable, but this blog is unnecessary. Instead, do all these things without posting this private and personal information on this blog.

    This is an immature tactic, and your kids deserve better.

  2. You are entitled to your opinion. If my children ever see this, they are 3 and 5 years old now, they will understand that their father did everything he could do to make sure they had equal time with their father. Go to the Courthouse Jamie and take a look at the Court transcript before you make a judgement on me. If the children were to ever see this site, they would see that I not only fought to remain an important part in their lives, but I did it without saying anything negative about their mother. What do you suggest I do? Get another attorney? Get another evaluator? I didn't cause the Judge to recuse himself; he did. I signed an agreement stating that I was entitled to a custody evaluation case file but the evaluator won't give it to me and the Judge wouldn't order it. If you are so wise, tell me how I should handle the situation. I never set out seeking custody; I'm seeking equal time. I looked for the Dummies Guide to dealing with corrupt custody evaluators but it wasn't in stock at Joseph Beth. The same with dealing with Judges that don't tell the truth. If the children's teacher saw this they would probably feel bad for the whole family having to go through this system.

    As for posting "personal information", what personal information are you talking about? I'm holding the Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychology responsible for not telling the truth. How does this negatively affect the children or their mother. Should I turn my back on the situation like everyone else has and let it continue? You are either very uniformed or you have a personal interest in protecting the system. If I let things go and have my time with the children minimized, then I will be expected to say "well girls that's just the way it goes in divorce" because people like you think it is damaging to tell the children, "Daddy fought to protect your right to spend equal time with both parents but Dr. Connor said it would be in your best interest to have you time with your father minimized. You find the personal and private information about the children or their mother that you claim that I have posted on the internet. I didn't file for the divorce; I didn't set out to take on the system. These people I am taking on, not my soon to be ex-wife, are big kids. If I post anything slanderous or defaming, they can sue me. A good measure of how bad the situation is; nobody has taken legal action against me.

    I really hope that you get back with me regarding this "private information" you are talking about. I really really hope I just didn't waste my time responding to someone trying to bait me into doing something irrational because that's not going to happen. I've Jedi mind tricked a crooked evaluator, a judge and the Assistant Attorney General of Kentucky, I'm not going to be baited into saying something dumb on my own blog... Oops, did I just say I Jedi-mind tricked someone? Now the evaluator is going to say that I suffer from personality disorders because I think that I am Luke Skywalker. May the Force be with you Jamie. Please check back soon with a supporting argument. Don't worry, I'll pull the information off the internet before the children can read it (in at least four or five years from now).