Saturday, December 25, 2010
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
"He wanted to call Ed Connor, a clinical psychologist who often testifies in criminal trials across Northern Kentucky."
Thursday, December 2, 2010
Supreme Court of Indiana
Re: Indiana Supreme Court complaint
To whom it may concern: I am looking for information/insight as to the venue that would be appropriate for filing a complaint against the Indiana Supreme Court. On August 18, 2009, Dearborn Circuit Judge James D. Humphrey terminated my parenting time with my children after I publicly questioned the ethics of the Court’s expert, Dr. Edward J. Connor. Though there were no allegations of abuse or neglect and no party raised the issue of terminating parenting time, Judge Humphrey terminated my parenting time and stated, “The Court is most concerned about Husband’s irrational behavior and attacks on Dr. Connor.” Judge Humphrey terminated my ability to see my children because I created a website and a blog explaining how the Court obstructed my access to the investigator’s file that was used against me. In fact, Judge Humphrey ruled that I could not regain unsupervised visitation unless I removed the internet content, which also dealt with Dr. Connor’s ex parte communication with Ripley Circuit Judge Carl H. Taul and Judge Taul’s subsequent recusal.
Daniel P. Brewington
Dearborn-Ohio County Prosecutor
215 West High Street
Lawrenceburg, IN 47025
Friday, November 26, 2010
On Wednesday I had a court hearing to approve the psychiatrist that I chose to perform a mental health evaluation of me in order to determine if I present a possible danger to my children or their mother. The girls’ mother has been objecting to my choice of psychiatrist because she believes that he may be biased. Of course she and her lawyer are basing my “potential danger” on psychological testing performed by Dr. Edward J. Connor. One of the more interesting things I learned on Wednesday is that while opposing counsel, Angela G. Loechel, was arguing that my mental health expert may be biased, while she continues to correspond with their original “unbiased” expert, Dr. Connor, in an effort to harm my children and keep them fatherless.
A couple weeks ago I was invited to go to a court hearing in Campbell County, Kentucky where Dr. Connor would be testifying. I was curious to hear what kind of “unorthodox” psychological jargon Dr. Connor could come up with in a different hearing. In the hearing Dr. Connor recommended that the parents alternate custody every year; one parent has custody one year and the other parent the next. It truly gave me additional insight into the disturbing practices of Dr. Edward J. Connor. Dr. Connor stated that the parents couldn’t get along well enough to share custody of their child so he suggested that they switch every year. In theory, each parent would have the authority to put the child into a different school every other year. But that’s what Dr. Connor does. He just writes and testifies to whatever he wants and he is never held accountable for his actions. Unfortunately, Dr. Connor was held publicly accountable for his actions that day because I went home and wrote about his ridiculous statements, and Dr. Connor went home and did what he does best; tries to seek revenge on me.
I have invited Dr. Edward J. Connor on numerous occasions to sue me and/or have me arrested if he believes I am guilty of anything. If Dr. Connor felt that I was a threat, he should seek a restraining order against me. If he thinks my writings are slanderous, he should sue me. What did Dr. Connor do after he and I appeared in a Kentucky courtroom at the same time? Dr. Connor tried to get me in trouble by contacting opposing counsel, Angela G. Loechel. Dr. Connor has to resort to tattling on me because he cannot sue me or have me arrested. If Dr. Connor initiated any criminal or civil proceedings against me, Dr. Connor would have to take responsibility for his actions in front of a jury. Any legal action taken against me could lead to criminal action against Dr. Connor. That’s why Dr. Connor lies in the shadows and takes shots at me from afar; he knows that his has conducted himself in an illegal manner.
In Wednesday’s hearing, Ms. Loechel went on and on as if I was the next coming of Charles Manson. She argued that my chosen psychiatrist would be biased. She said her client did a lot of research and came up with her own expert whom she felt was better qualified to perform the evaluation. I can see why she would want to go with her selection. The last “impartial” expert whom she and her attorney suggested was Dr. Connor, and Ms. Loechel is still working with Dr. Connor in an effort to get more information to help keep my children fatherless. Dr. Connor is no longer involved in my case. The fact that I attended a hearing in Campbell County, Kentucky has nothing to do with the safety of my children. It has more to do with the job security of people like Dr. Edward J. Connor and Angela Loechel. Ms. Loechel knows that there is no evidence that I have ever presented a danger to my children yet she continues to protect Dr. Connor despite knowing that Dr. Connor has operated in an illegal manner. Ms. Loechel and her client have spent the last fifteen months fighting to protect Dr. Connor’s case file because they know that the release of the file will demonstrate that my children lost a father due to the corrupt actions of a few professionals.
What it all comes down to is Dr. Edward J. Connor is a disturbed and dangerous psychological “expert” who is protected by people like Angela Loechel because they have the opportunity to obtain custom tailored reports and they have the ability to work with Dr. Connor to suppress evidence. While these people are playing their professional games, my children are suffering. Dr. Connor is a pathetic and cowardly man who knows that he has broken the law. Dr. Connor has contacted judges, lawyers, and prosecutors, in at least two different states in his attempts to harm my children and me. Rather than file civil or criminal action, Dr. Connor has to resort to tattling and interfering with legal hearings. The worst part is that Angela Loechel will continue to present writings like this to the Court in an attempt to demonstrate how my writings, which deal with the illegal conduct of professionals in the family court system, somehow make me dangerous to my children. Keep tattling Dr. Connor because that’s all you can do while you wait until states terminate your ability to continue practicing psychology and harming children. It’s only a matter of time before it is discovered that Ms. Loechel’s professional “expert” is a criminal and it will demonstrate how Ms. Loechel and her client capitalized on Dr. Connor’s illegal conduct to deprive my children of a father. Don’t worry girls, Daddy loves you and will keep fighting to protect your ability to grow up with both parents.
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Lawrenceburg Lawyer Thomas Blondell, sharing his "talents" with Ohio County Indiana. Another bad lawyer working for the government.
The legal community in Southeastern Indiana never ceases to amaze me. It was recently brought to my attention that Lawrenceburg attorney Thomas Blondell is now working on behalf of Ohio County, Indiana. Ohio County is the next county down the Ohio River from Dearborn County. Because of the county’s small size, Judge James D. Humphrey and Prosecutor Aaron Negangard serve Ohio County as well as Dearborn County. I guess s@#T isn’t the only thing that floats downstream.
Some of you whom have been following me for some time may remember that Thomas Blondell, formerly of Wood Lamping and Lehner, served as my second lawyer in my divorce. Mr. Blondell “fired” me after becoming upset with me after I picketed my former lawyer’s office. I retained Mr. Blondell’s services in March 2007 after Amy Streator, of Kellerman Law Offices in Batesville, Indiana, failed to file accurate and complete documents with the Ripley County Court. At the time I had asked Thomas Blondell if there was anything he could do to take action against my former lawyer. Mr. Blondell looked at me as if I just requested him to perform brain surgery on a Burmese Python. “I don’t know. I don’t handle lawyer malpractice.” Then he told me that he didn’t mind if I pursued the issue on my own. He told me that I could contact the bar. Nearly a year later, Mr. Blondell sent me an email stating, “Last Friday I attended Jack Kellerman's bar service in Ripley County and was informed that you have been "picketing" your prior counsel's office. Please confirm whether you are engaging in this practice and send me a copy of the 9 page letter you sent to Ms. Streator demanding payment in the amount of $4,000.00, so I may retain a copy in the file.”
Apparently Thomas Blondell did care if I handled the situation on my own. Lawyers like Thomas Blondell and Amy Streator go through life without any worries about being held accountable for their actions. Mr. Blondell told me that I could contact the Indiana Bar Association about the matter. Somehow Mr. Blondell failed to inform me that the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission was the appropriate place to file a complaint. I questioned why Mr. Blondell and Ms. Streator felt that it was necessary to discuss the matter at the funeral service of Amy Streator’s father, Jack Kellerman. I also questioned why Thomas Blondell would have a problem with someone picketing a law firm. Mr. Blondell responded (in large print),
“You still did not answer my question as to whether you picketed her office or attempted to settle your claim for $4,000.00. And, by the way...I am a card carrying member of an elite group of national attorneys, "The First Amendment Lawyers Association"....a group of @ 150 attorneys who cover and protect First Amendment issues throughout the country and am well aware of your ability to exercise your rights.”
“I have no problem with you trying to settle a claim, but it does cause concern when I discover that you..or someone you know... or maybe no one you know, pickets a law firm. I think that it is important to know and understand my clients and try to assist them any way I can..and their honesty provides me great insight into their thought process and motivation.”
Mr. Blondell, who would not return calls and who never had the nerve to talk about the situation in person, stated that he was well aware of rights to free speech because he was a card carrying member of an elite group of national attorneys, "The First Amendment Lawyers Association”....a group of [about] 150 attorneys who cover and protect First Amendment issues throughout the country.” Mr. Blondell was a member of an “elite” group of national attorneys who protect First Amendment rights across the country; unless those constitutional rights conflicted with the practices of other lawyers.
Mr. Blondell later fired me citing “communication” problems. I get that a lot. When people become backed into corners because of their own actions, they claim that it’s due to my communication deficiencies. What seemed to infuriate Thomas Blondell the most is when I informed Mr. Blondell that it may be a conflict of interest for him to be a member of the “elite” First Amendment Lawyers Association while being a school board member for the St. Lawrence Catholic School because lawyers associated with the Association often protect the rights of groups and speak at conferences associated with “Sex in Video Games”, “The War on Porn, Public Enemy Number 1, You”, “Gentleman’s Club Expo”, “Adult Entertainment Expo”, “The Everything to do with Sex Show”, FetishCon (the largest bondage show on the East Coast) and others. Mr. Blondell was seemed upset that I raised the issue concerning the conflicts between the Catholic Archdiocese of Indianapolis and protecting the rights of sexual bondage trade shows. Less than two weeks after Thomas Blondell informed me that he was a card carrying member of the First Amendment Lawyers Association, Mr. Blondell sent me a letter stating, “As far as my affiliation with the First Amendment Lawyers Association, I don’t believe that you should have any concern regarding what organizations I belong to or what boards I serve upon.” But you brought it up Tom. Mr. Blondell went on to write, “Considering the information and knowledge you obtained surfing the internet, I am certain that you discovered the wide variety of speech, conduct, actions and activities covered under the purview of the First Amendment.”
Blondell didn’t fire me because of communication problems; he fired me because he didn’t want to challenge Dr. Connor. He was also mad because I debunked his bulls#@t by searching the internet. Some lawyers do not like it when their clients question their authority; especially when the lawyer isn’t telling the truth. Dr. Connor released his child custody evaluation on August 29, 2007 and Blondell did everything in his power in not addressing it. Blondell claimed that he didn’t know if the evaluation was bad because he wasn’t a psychologist. Blondell never attempted to get a copy of the case file. Then he spent nearly half of a year “trying” to find another custody evaluator. When Blondell sent me a copy of a proposal to appoint Cincinnati psychologist Stuart Bassman to perform an evaluation, I informed Blondell that Dr. Bassman no longer performed custody evaluations. After charging me for drawing up a legal pleading to appoint a psychologist who did not perform custody evaluations, Blondell charged me for writing a letter to inform me that Stuart Bassman did not perform custody evaluations. Didn’t I just say that?
Blondell was a hard man to find after he fired me. When I went to his office to obtain a copy of my legal file, I was notified that Mr. Blondell was no longer with Wood Lamping and Lehner. The office worker was not aware of my file because Mr. Blondell did not mention my case in his move to, what is now, Zerbe, Garner, Miller, and Blondell. Mr. Blondell never intended to be a partner in the firm because the day that he fired me was the day he registered to run in the Democratic primary for the Dearborn County Superior Court. Some of the members of his new firm were providing financial backing for the election. Fortunately Blondell lost in the primary to Barbara Wyly. Fortunately Barbara Wyly lost to John Cleary. Barbara Wyly once told me that she never had any problems with Dr. Connor. I believe she has a pretty good understanding of how crooked Dr. Connor is; she, like Blondell, just didn’t want to upset the ox cart.
Did Thomas Blondell and I have a bad lawyer/client relationship? Not until I picketed Amy Streator’s office. Less than two weeks before Blondell contacted me about my dealings with Amy Streator, he emailed me a video titled, “dumb ass of the year award”. The video was of a teenager trying to shoot a bottle rocket out of his rectum. One of the boy’s friends was holding his legs while the other lit the rocket sticking out of the boy’s rectum. The rocket was lodged in his rectum far enough that the rocket did not take off; it just release a shower of sparks on the kid’s backside while his friend held his feet and wouldn’t let go. I didn’t really think it was appropriate for Thomas Blondell to send it to a client but it definitely would lend weight to the argument that Mr. Blondell must have felt pretty comfortable with the lawyer/client relationship between the two of us if he believed that it was all right to send a video of a teenager being sodomized by a bottle rocket.
Now Ohio County, Indiana employs Thomas Blondell. I’m trying to figure out what kind of resume that a lawyer has to have to be employed by Dearborn and Ohio Counties. A lawyer probably has to list at least five instances of illegal conduct so the counties know that the lawyer can “play ball.” You have to feel comfortable with going after law abiding citizens if you want to work for the county. Don’t expect Ohio County to do anything to right the situation because I’m sure that they got exactly what they were looking for, in Thomas Blondell. Hell, Negangard probably runs that county as well. What people can do is avoid lawyers like Thomas Blondell (of Zerbe, Garner, Miller, and Blondell) so they are not victims of false billing and vindictive behavior. Don’t get me wrong, Thomas Blondell will fight for your rights; just as long as your rights do not conflict with his friends.
Monday, November 8, 2010
Friday, November 5, 2010
My daughter's preschool threatened to expel her because I requested records per the Federal Educational Rights to Privacy Act
Threatening (adj) - 1) Tending or intended to menace 2) Causing alarm, as by being imminent; ominous; sinister. That’s the definition provided by Dictionary.com. That’s also the word that my youngest daughter’s preschool used in describing my behavior in my request for my daughter's records.
I recently found out that “someone” was trying to hold me in contempt of court and one of the issues was that I contacted my daughters’ schools. The Parent/Student handbook of my oldest daughter’s school states, “The school abides by the provisions of the Buckley Amendment with respect to the rights on non-primary caregiving parents. In the absence of a court order to the contrary, St. XX School will provide the non-primary caregiving parent with access to the academic records and to other school-related information regarding the child. If there is a court order specifying that there is to be no information given, it is the responsibility of the primary caregiver to provide the school with an official copy of that court order.” The Buckley Amendment is the Federal Educational Rights to Privacy Act (FERPA) which states that parents are entitled to their children’s school records unless there is a court order stating otherwise. St. XX School has been providing me with the school records of my oldest daughter. My other daughter’s preschool, XX child care and kindergarten, has failed to respond to my correspondence.
Apparently my daughter’s preschool has threatened to expel my daughter because they do not want “to be involved in domestic disputes and put [their] staff in situations that [they] feel uncomfortable.” The school director went on to state in the letter my ex-wife submitted to Court, “We understand the need for a parent to be involved in the life of their children; however, going about it in a threatening manner seems counterproductive. We are asking for a swift resolution to this situation in order to maintain your children’s enrollment in this center.”
Nothing says “no child left behind” more than “we will expel your children if their parents do not get along.” Over the course of a year, I have sent the school approximately three letters requesting my daughter’s records and an appointment to meet with my daughter’s teacher. After my daughter’s first day of school this year, her mother sent me a pamphlet from my daughter’s teacher that stated, “Education is a partnership between home and school. I value parent involvement at every level and encourage you to partner with me. In order for this partnership to be effective, we need to be able to communicate.” “Please feel free to call the school or write a note if you have concerns or questions about your child. I am available at 12:30 p.m. each day for a phone call or conference.”
I wrote three letters and the school never responded. I phoned the school last year but the director never returned my call. My oldest daughter’s school provided me with copies of her records which included a photo of me and a note from my ex-wife informing the school to please call the police if I appeared at the school for any reason. Since there were no orders preventing me from going to the school and obtaining my daughter’s records, the school could have been liable for damages if I was falsely imprisoned on behalf of my ex-wife’s “orders”. On September 28, 2010, I wrote a letter to my youngest daughter’s school stating, “Please note that there are no protective orders that prevent me from visiting my daughters’ school and any legal action taken against me based on the erroneous claims of the children’s mother, will be grounds for civil action.”
My statement was not menacing. Stating that I would take civil action against the school if the school did something illegal should not cause alarm; unless of course the school did something improper. Either way, there was nothing harassing about it. If the school would have complied with the Federal Educational Rights to Privacy Act and released my daughter’s information as required, there wouldn’t have been any problems. Now the school that didn’t want to get involved has to get involved, because people will have to testify as to what part of my “behavior” was threatening. If the school did find me to be threatening, why didn’t the school file for a protective order to protect the welfare of the children at the school? If the school exaggerated or fabricated their claims and their slanderous statement causes damages, they may be facing legal action.
Now my daughter’s future at that particular preschool hangs in the balance. The school claims that if I tell them that I will seek civil action if they do something illegal; they will expel my daughter. Their refusal to provide me with my daughter’s records is a violation of the Federal Educational Rights to Privacy Act. I guess in a way, it’s a form of extortion. “If you say that you are going to sue us for doing something illegal, then we will kick your daughter out of school and we will tell the Court that you are threatening us.” The people who believe that I may pose an emotional risk to my daughters are the same people who will kick my daughter out of school because I told the school that I will hold them legally accountable for illegal actions. Dr. Connor once claimed that I was the one who couldn’t communicate. Maybe no one else could understand me because I was being too rational. Who knows? I do know that I love my little girls more than anything and I will never stop fighting to protect their ability to grow up with both parents.
Monday, November 1, 2010
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Dear political candidates,
I am a 36 year old male with a college degree with no criminal or violent history and I am writing you and other elected officials to inform you that I probably will not be voting anymore. I have always been a socially conscience person and have participated in politics nearly all of my life. A year before I was born, my parents purchased their home and “inherited” the polling that took place in their basement from the previous owner. I used to get excited about sneaking into the basement on election days because a neighbor working the polls would show me how to vote. In 1981, elections moved out of our basement when my mother decided to run for city council. Even at an early age, I was involved in campaign fundraisers and door to door “lit drops”. I can remember being excited to vote for the first time in a presidential election in 1992. I’ve worked the polls for school levies. Unfortunately I have lost interest in voting. I have found that it doesn’t matter whom I vote for or which party I vote for because no one is interested in protecting my right to be a father. No one is interested in protecting my rights to defend my ability to be a father. I was blamed for dragging out my divorce because I questioned the ex parte communication between the judge and the custody evaluator even after the judge recused himself for violating the Indiana Code of Judicial Conduct relating to ex parte communication. I was punished because I pointed out that the court and its unlicensed psychological expert were breaking the rules. I’ve tried to reach out to both Democrat and Republican elected officials but they say there is nothing that they can do. If elected officials cannot protect my children from judicial abuse, then what’s the point of voting? Education, health care, and the economy are irrelevant issues when compared to the fact that I am not able to see my children.
On August 18, 2009, Dearborn County (IN) Circuit Judge James D. Humphrey (R) terminated all of my visitation time with my three and five year old daughters. Prior to the termination of my parenting time, I had always played an equal role in raising my children. No one accused me of ever neglecting or abusing my children or their mother. There were no reports from the police or social services. I had a spotless parenting record. The custody evaluator, Dr. Edward J. Connor, recommended that the children’s mother have full custody but I should be able to continue to care for my daughters three days a week. It was only after I requested a copy of Dr. Connor’s case file that I became a “potential” hazard to my children’s emotion well being.
If a parent doesn’t have a constitutional right to be a part of their children’s lives, they should have a constitutional right to be able to properly defend their ability to be part of their children’s lives. On August 29, 2007, Dr. Edward J. Connor released his child custody evaluation report. On February 21, 2008, Dr. Connor contacted Ripley County (IN) Circuit Judge Carl H. Taul (D) to inform Judge Taul that Dr. Connor wanted to offer additional evaluation sessions because Dr. Connor claimed that his report contained “numerous errors and oversights”. Dr. Connor also stated that the parties were responsible for paying for the additional sessions to correct Dr. Connor’s “numerous errors and oversights”. When I requested a copy of Dr. Connor’s case file from his evaluation report, per Dr. Connor’s contract and Indiana law, Dr. Connor sent a letter stating that he could not release the file. When I reminded Dr. Connor that his contract stated that I was entitled to the file, Dr. Connor stated that he would be “happy” to release the file to me once he confirmed that I was representing myself. After more ex parte communication with Judge Taul, Dr. Connor stated that he “interpreted” Judge Taul’s ruling to be that I was only entitled to the evaluation report and not the case file. In a letter to Judge Taul, dated April 16, 2008, Dr. Connor stated that his contract did state that the parties were entitled to the case file but he was not going to release the file to me because I did not have a lawyer. When I brought the matter to the Court, Judge Taul stated that the “Order to the Doctor to release was to release that which he was obligated to do under Kentucky law.” Judge Taul stated that he was not going to undertake ordering Dr. Connor to release Dr. Connor’s case file because Judge Taul stated he was not familiar with Kentucky law. On August 4, 2008, Dr. Connor stated in a letter that state and HIPAA laws prevented him from releasing the case file. During a hearing on November 24, 2008, Judge Taul claimed that he ruled that I was not entitled to Dr. Connor’s case file. On December 5, 2008, Judge Taul recused himself from the case.
Judge James D. Humphrey took over as Special Judge after the recusal of Judge Taul. Judge Humphrey denied my ability to review Dr. Connor’s case file. Over two and a half months after the final hearings of my divorce, without warning, Judge Humphrey terminated all of my parenting time with my children based on the testimony of Dr. Edward J Connor. Prior to Judge Humphrey’s order, no one had suggested that my parenting be terminated. Judge Humphrey wrote, “According to Dr. Connor’s testimony, Husband’s writings are similar to those of individuals who have committed horrendous crimes against their families.” None of these alleged writings were submitted as evidence and Judge Humphrey also wrote, “The Court is most concerned about Husband’s irrational behavior and attacks on Dr. Connor.” When Dr. Connor began providing false information as to why he would not release the case file, I developed a website to share the information. There were no reports or testimony that I had ever placed my children in any emotion or physical danger yet Judge Humphrey terminated my parenting time because I publicized the actions of the Court’s expert.
Since the termination of my parenting time, I have run into several obstacles in trying to see my children. Judge Humphrey stated that I had to undergo another mental health evaluation, Dr. Connor’s evaluation report made no mention of me being a dangerous parent, by a mental health professional that first had to be approved by the Court. Judge Humphrey claimed he did not have the jurisdiction over the matter while the case was with the Indiana Court of Appeals. Judge Humphrey decided that he did have jurisdiction after I retained a lawyer. On March 17, 2010, Judge Humphrey set a hearing for June 13, 2010, on the approval of a psychiatrist. Just five days before the June 13, 2010 hearing, Judge Humphrey recused himself. Judge Humphrey informed my lawyer that there was an ongoing investigation that pertained to me.
On October 8, 2009, I was informed by Dearborn County Special Crimes Unit Detective Mike Kreinhop that I was under investigation for my internet writings. On November 2, 2009, Detective Kreinhop, who is currently the Republican candidate for Dearborn County Sheriff, drove to my mother’s house to speak to me. Detective Kreinhop tried to convince me that it was probably better that I did not pursue Dr. Connor because it would be better if I hired a lawyer to challenge Dr. Connor’s unethical and/or illegal practices. Detective Kreinhop refused to tell me any details of the investigation unless I would agree to meet in Dearborn County for questioning. I told Detective Kreinhop that my writings spoke for themselves and people could arrest me or sue me if I did something wrong, but I made sure that Detective Kreinhop was aware that any legal action against me would not go on without a jury of my peers. I did not hear anything about the investigation until Judge Humphrey recused himself. When I sent a request to Dearborn County Prosecutor Aaron Negangard (R) for the records concerning the investigation of my internet writings, Prosecutor Negangard wrote, “Pursuant to Indiana Law, Investigatory records are confidential and are not to be disclosed.” When I notified Prosecutor Negangard and other elected officials about Prosecutor’s less than accurate account of the law, Prosecutor Negangard copied me to the following email:
Please be advised that Dan Brewington is currently under investigation by the Dearborn County Sheriff's department. Once he was advised of this by Judge James Humphrey who had to recuse himself from his case only recently he has attacked me or my office. [sic] I take this an effort to get me not to do my job of prosecuting those who violate the law.[sic] I assure you his efforts will not succeed. If he has violated the law then I will make every effort to prosecute him. However I will point out that this matter is still under investigation and until such time he is convicted he is presumed innocent. He is also incorrect regarding his request. He clearly asked for records pertaining to his investigation that are not to be disclosed under Indiana law. If any of you need any further information regarding this matter. Please do hesitate to contact me.[sic]
Sent from my Verizon Wireless Blackberry
Not only did Aaron Negangard continue to claim that Indiana law prohibited the release of investigatory records, but he accused me of undermining his ability to prosecute people who violate the law and threatened to “make every effort to prosecute” me if I violate the law. All of this came after I sent documentation to Prosecutor Negangard’s office regarding Dr. Connor’s conduct. Detective Kreinhop had previously informed me that Dr. Connor’s conduct violated interstate mail and wire fraud laws.
The Indiana Court of Appeals upheld the trial court’s ruling that I was not entitled to Dr. Connor’s case file. The Appellate Court wrote, “We first note that I.C. § 31-17-2-12(c) does not require that Dr. Connor’s entire case file be provided to Daniel. All items specified by statute were provided.” Not only did the Indiana Court of Appeals state that “the investigator’s file of underlying data and reports” in I.C. § 31-17-2-12(c) did not include Dr. Connor’s case file, the Court went on to state that I was provided with all of the information from Dr. Connor’s case file that were required by statute while knowing that it would be impossible to determine if the requirements of the statute were met without releasing the file, or having a Judge review the contents of the file under camera. The Court went on to write, “During the pendency of the proceedings, Daniel posted information concerning the dissolution on his website and blog, in response to which [Wife] sought a protective order and a temporary restraining order on more than one occasion.” My wife filed only one protective/restraining order, requesting the Court to force me to take down my internet writings. After an hour long hearing, the Court denied her motion because the information was neither harassing nor harmful to her or the children. The Indiana Court of Appeals fabricated the information about the multiple filings. The Court also ruled “panel per curiam” so the names of the judges would not appear on the ruling.
Why should I vote? I talked to Republican Indiana State Senator Johnny Nugent’s office and they said there was nothing that they could do. I sent information to Democratic Indiana State Reprehensive Bob Bischoff and also met Mr. Bischoff in person but Mr. Bischoff never responded to my correspondence. I wrote to both US Senators from Indiana, Richard Luger (R) and Evan Bayh (D). Senator Lugar was kind enough to respond but stated that there was nothing he could do. Evan Bayh didn’t bother to respond. I even contacted President Barack Obama about my situation. President Obama is always preaching the importance of fathers being involved in their children’s lives. He just doesn’t want to deal with hard part of ensuring that fathers have the opportunity to fairly defend their parenting ability in a courtroom in the United States.
Elected officials do not want to get involved with fixing this problem because it is messy. The more you look at the situation, the messier it gets. Judge Humphrey’s wife was one of four advisors on the Ethics and Professionalism Committee for the Indiana Supreme Court. When I instructed people to send letters of concern to the Ethics and Professionalism Committee advisor located in Dearborn County, I became the subject of a secret investigation. Why should Heidi Humphrey be immune from getting letters of concern that pertain to her husband? The Humphrey family should have considered the possibility of a conflict of interest before the wife of a sitting judge took the role as an advisor on the Ethics and Professionalism Committee for the Indiana Supreme Court. It appears that the Committee realized that there was in fact a conflict of interest. Within a month or two of the time I encouraged people to contact the advisor for the Ethics and Professionalism Committee that was located in Dearborn County, Becky Goshorn, Ann Heimann, JoAnn Heimann, and Heidi Humphrey were replaced by a staff attorney from the Indiana Supreme Court. It appears that they were all wives of judges. The next question is did Indiana Appellate Judge Margret G. Robb preside over my appeal because she was on the Ethics and Professionalism Committee when all of the judges’ wives were removed from the committee. Dearborn County has a few ties to the higher courts in Indiana as Former Dearborn County Superior Court Judge Michael Witte was named executive secretary to the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission this past May and Appellate Court Chief Justice John Baker is a native of Dearborn County.
Given the fact that the Indiana Appellate Court provided false information in their decision on my case, the above connections and events may seem a little suspicious. If you combine that with the fact that an IP address registered to the Indiana Supreme Court is responsible for 187 hits and 33 page views on www.danhelpskids.com and has also visited www.danbrewington.blogspot.com, there definitely seems to be something wrong going on. So who do I go to? Do I appeal to the Supreme Court? It appears that they have already conducted their own investigation of my website. Should I contact law enforcement? The last time I did that, Dearborn County Prosecutor Aaron Negangard threatened to make every effort to prosecute me if I violated the law. I contacted members of the state and US congress and I was either ignored or told that there was nothing that could be done. President Barack Obama, whom preaches about fathers stepping up and playing an important role in their children’s lives, never got back with me.
That pretty much sums up why I won’t be voting anytime soon. That does not mean that I am giving up on my children or my responsibility to help other children and parents, it just means that I am giving up on my hopes that elected officials will take action to protect children and families from judicial impropriety and abuse. I will continue to face the threat of the Indiana Courts using my children as a means of extortion to pressure me into removing my web content. I will continue to face threats of prosecution from Dearborn County Prosecutor Aaron Negangard and his year-long ongoing investigation of my internet writings. I can tell you that I have published nearly 100,000 words on the internet and I have yet to be sued or arrested. Judge Humphrey ruled that the writings were not harmful to the children. If I made any threats, I would have been arrested immediately. It appears that the Indiana Courts are upset because I publicly challenged their authority and the courts continue to punish my children for my actions. The Indiana Courts refuse to allow me to have access to the evidence that was used to terminate my parenting time and the elected officials refuse to take any action. It’s always “that’s the judicial branch; I’m in a different branch of government.” I know; I took government class. Child abuse by the judicial system is still child abuse. Unfortunately elected officials turn their heads when judges abuse little children. I cannot bring myself to vote for people who turn their backs on children.
 Judge Taul was the original judge in my case but later recused himself after engaging in numerous ex parte communications with Dr. Connor.
 Quote from the June 13, 2008 hearing on the release of Dr. Connor’s case file. Judge Taul claimed that there was an order from his Indiana court that instructed Dr. Connor to follow Kentucky law. Dr. Connor was not licensed to practice psychology in the state of Indiana. No such order is on the record.
 Indiana Code 31-17-2-12 states that the evaluator’s report may not be dismissed as hearsay if the investigator makes available to counsel and to any party not represented by counsel: the investigator’s file of underlying data and reports; complete texts and diagnostic reports made to the investigator; the names and addresses of all persons whom the investigator has consulted.
 Dr. Connor alleged in his report that he found my writings to be confusing and difficult to follow and Dr. Connor alleged that he had difficulties in understanding me because Dr. Connor claimed I had “severe” ADHD.
 Prosecutor Aaron Negangard also heads the Dearborn County Special Crimes Unit. The Special Crimes Unit was designed to investigate serious crimes such as murder and drug trafficking.
 Prosecutor Negangard refers to IC 5-14-3-4(b) which states that investigatory records of law enforcement agencies are excepted from public release at the discretion of the public agency.
Saturday, October 30, 2010
My daughter Mary turns seven today and I still can't see her and her sister. I still have a long hard battle in front of me because no one will let me see the evidence behind the court's findings that I have the potential to cause harm to my children. How does a father prove that he is not a potential danger to his children? I have a flawless parenting record, I've never been accused of abusing or neglecting my daughters, and during the course of a 2 1/2 year divorce, no one tried to modify or restrict my parenting time.
Judge Humphrey took away my children because he said that I may have the potential to harm them. He referred to Dr. Connor's testimony but wouldn't allow me to see Dr. Connor's records. How can I prove that I won't do something bad in the future; especially when there is no evidence that I did anything wrong in the first place? Dr. Connor testified that he thought that I "may" begin to coach my children against their mother. He was allowed to say these kinds of things and I had no way to dispute them. For some reason the fact that I never did these things was not sufficient to prove that I wouldn't do them in the future.
My ex wanted me out of my daughters' lives so she and Dr. Connor entered into different contracts and then used them to obstruct my access to evidence. When I questioned it, they attacked me. They claimed that the contract was the normal contract that was signed at the beginning of custody evaluations. Dr. Connor claimed that I couldn’t understand his policies no matter how many times he explained it to me. At the last minute, they said, "Oops, it was a mistake. Our bad" and then they claimed that I was paranoid because I felt they conspired against me. Dr. Connor said crazy things like my writings were similar to those of individuals who commit horrendous crimes against their families. My ex claimed that I became so verbally abusive that she had to take the children into the bathroom, lock the door, and run water in the tub and sing songs to the girls to block out the yelling. How do you refute lies like that? Bring in an FBI profiler to study my writings? If my ex was that afraid of me, why didn't she call 911? She didn't have any problems having me arrested for calling the girls on the phone, which was in line with the Indiana Parenting Time Guidelines. Better yet, she told her story as if the locked bathroom door protected her and the children from terrible harm. As responsible parents, we always kept a key for the bathroom door handy in case the girls would lock themselves in. If her story was true, why wouldn’t I have unlocked the door? The better question is, if I was verbally abusive to the children or around the children, why was there no mention of my daughters ever being afraid or uncomfortable with me. In fact, Dr. Connor’s report stated that the girls were very comfortable with me and that I had excellent parenting skills. This is what I have to fight against. First they claimed that I didn't take the children to the doctor and then turned around and said that the only reason I took them to the doctor was to try to act like a primary parent. My ex said that the girls were not safe sleeping on the second floor at my house because I didn't properly block the steps. After I moved both of the girls' beds into my 15' x 25' bedroom and double gated the doorway, she expressed "concerns" about the girls' sleeping arrangements, but no one wanted to elaborate on what the "concerns" consisted of because there could be severe legal ramifications for "those kinds" of false accusations. When my ex claimed that I left firearms lying around the house after she filed for divorce, I bought a gun safe and moved my guns from the locked closet to the safe. Then I was accused of only getting the safe to appease her and she even listed the safe as a marital asset. In 2005, my ex called the police because she said I wouldn't let her leave with our daughter. When the police arrived, they made her leave, alone. When this was brought up in court, she and Dr. Connor claimed that the police officer, who is now the Sheriff of Ripley County, didn't ask her for her side of the story. When I received help from my mother during the divorce, they claimed I dumped my children on my mother. When my ex received help from her parents, they claimed it was necessary in order to help her out during the tough divorce. All of my "problems" were attributed to my "severe" ADHD. All of her problems were attributed to my "severe" ADHD. They said I did not take responsibility for my actions. They claimed that I was responsible for her problems. Now I have to overcome all of this without having access to the evidence that "supports" the allegations against me.
Here's my dilemma, for some reason showing up in court and demonstrating that I have never done any of the things that they say that I might do, is not a valid defense. No one ever claimed that I ever brought harm to my children; they just claimed that I "might" do it in the future. How long do I have to continue not harming or harassing people before a judge will determine that I am not going to begin to do the bad things that people are claiming that I “might” do? I don’t need a psychological evaluation; I need a fortune teller because I need someone who will testify that, in the future, I continue to conduct myself in a responsible and law abiding manner. Maybe by the time my daughters turn 18, people will realize that I have never nor will I ever do anything to hurt my children or anyone else. The people who are hurting my children are the people who are preventing my daughters from spending birthdays and holidays with their father. Happy 7th Birthday Mary. I’m still the kind and loving father that I was before the mean people took your daddy away. For more history on my story, go to www.danhelpskids.com.