Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Monday, January 18, 2010
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Monday, January 11, 2010
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
I wrote this post in response to a post on The Angry Dad, a blog by another father who is trying to bring awareness to the problems of the family court system but it was too long to post as a response.
One of the most frightening things in the world is public scrutiny. If you conduct yourself in an honest and dignified manner, you should not have anything to worry about. Divorce is bad for children. False accusations against parents are even worse. How many parents would rethink false accusations if they knew the public would have the evidence, or lack thereof, to debunk the accusations?
You want to talk public record? Let's talk public record. Final Decrees in divorces are public record. The final decree in my divorce says that I am potentially dangerous to my children so I need seek a psychological evaluation to determine if I am a safe parent. I cared for my children for half the time during a 2.5 year divorce. There were no allegations of abuse, neglect, domestic violence, the children not loving me, etc... My Ex never tried to modify parenting time. Judge James D. Humphrey terminated my parenting time with my children based mainly on the psychological testing and child custody evaluation performed by an unlicensed psychologist. When I requested the case file, which I am entitled to per the evaluator's contract, AND because it's my health record, AND because the evaluation is considered hearsay if the parties are not provided the evaluator's case file per Indiana Code 31-17-2-12. The first Judge, Carl H Taul, said he wasn't going to order the release of the file because he was not aware of Kentucky law. Dr. Edward J Connor Psy D is licensed in Kentucky. After Judge Taul recused himself following several ex parte communications with Dr. Connor, Judge Humphrey would not order the release of the case file citing that he felt that I would release confidential information. They denied my access to the evidence against me because I presented some kind of "potential risk." They did not even seal the file because it would have been an appealable matter. Then they built on the "potential risk" argument in the final hearing to the point that it might be dangerous to the children. Judge Humphrey wrote, "The Court is most concerned about Husband’s irrational behavior and attacks on Dr. Connor." Ironically, there is no evidence of any this "irrational" behavior on record despite all of my correspondence with Dr. Connor being in writing. The language of the state law uses the word "attack" in describing the process of discrediting a witness. If Judge Humphrey felt that I was such a risk, why did he deny my motion for a GAL? Why did he wait 2.5 months after the final hearing to terminate my parenting time?
Judge Humphrey wrote in the Final Decree, "Husband has posted information about the dissolution proceeding on his website, on his blog, and on various other sites, and continued to post information even after the hearing for a temporary restraining order wherein the Court's Order stated that the "Court may also consider evidence presented at this hearing regarding the temporary restraining order in regard to the Court's decision as to visitation and custody and how Respondent's actions my affect the best interest of the children now and in the future." What the Judge fails to mention was my Ex filed a motion for a temporary restraining order to have me take down my internet content because she claimed it was harmful to the children and the Judge denied it. The Court denied her request for the Court to force me to take down my internet content because it was not harmful to the children yet Judge Humphrey used my "non-harmful" actions against me in taking away my children.
The main point that gets lost in the argument is that if the judges would do their jobs, there would be no reason to publicize the issue. I would much rather be spending time with my children than sitting behind a computer but I feel I am setting a positive example for my children. Rather than resigning to being an estranged father, I am taking positive public measures to address the problem.
“The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppose.” -Frederick Douglass. The British Army thought the colonial "rebels" were barbaric because they hid in trees with their coonskin caps and shot at the British Army marching in formation. England was mad because they never face a foe like that before. The Courts cannot fight a battle on the internet; they can only try to keep us away from it. "To Keyboards!" (I would yell "to arms" but someone would make the argument in court that I was encouraging militant action. That's an example of fine line we have to walk.)
Tuesday, January 5, 2010
Sunday, January 3, 2010
“With regard to the Office Policy Statement, we do not have a signed Office Policy Statement for you on file. It appears you were not provided with this document when you initially came to our office, which was an oversight on the part of the office staff.” -Dr. Edward J Connor September 9, 2009.
“There was a form that was incorrectly given to Ms. Brewington from our secretary at the time, who is no longer with us.” -Dr. Edward J Connor’s testimony in the transcripts from the May 27, 2009 hearing.
“The form [Office Policy Statement] that Ms. Brewington signed is -- was incorrectly given to her by my secretary at the time.” -Dr. Edward J Connor’s testimony in the May 27, 2009 hearing.
“I don’t recall. My secretary would have done that.” -Dr. Edward J Connor’s testimony in the May 27, 2009 hearing. This was in response to my question asking Dr. Connor whom he contacted first when he discovered there were “numerous errors and oversights” in his report.
Ed Connor- “I don’t recall that – I – I did not contact her. My secretary may have, at that time. It’s possible that she might have called to see if she wanted an interview time. I don’t recall.”
Dan Brewington- “That’s not in the evaluation, the attempted phone call.”
Ed Connor- “Okay. Then apparently my secretary did not call.” -Dr. Connor claimed my mother was scheduled to be interviewed but never showed up. That may be because he never contacted my mother.
Dr. Connor blamed his office staff for failing to provide me with a copy of the Office Policy Statement. Then Dr. Connor blamed his secretary for having my Ex sign the document. Dr. Connor testified that his secretary was to blame for many of the communication problems during the course of the evaluation yet Dr. Connor still attacked me for questioning his ethics. Another problem Dr. Connor had with his office staff was his office manager was the subject of an FBI investigation for making $126,558.13 of unauthorized credit card charges with Dr. Connor’s corporate credit card. Not only did Dr. Connor fail to oversee his secretary’s practices during the course of conducting evaluations, Dr. Connor failed to notice that his office manager was using his credit cards until the total reached $126,558.13. The following is a press release from the US Department of Justice, dated Friday March 20, 2009:
FLORENCE RESIDENT PLEADS GUILTY TO CREDIT CARD FRAUD
COVINGTON, KY—Catherine Cahill, 47, of Florence, Ky., pleaded guilty today before U.S. District Court Judge David Bunning to an Information which charged her with Unlawful Use of a Credit Card.
Cahill was employed as office manager at Edward Connor & Associates, a general psychological services firm. She was authorized to make necessary purchases with a corporate credit card for the functioning of the business. Cahill used the corporate credit card to make authorized business purchases along with unauthorized personal purchases. These unauthorized personal purchases totaled $126,558.13.
The investigation was conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The United States was represented in the case by Assistant United States Attorney Benjamin G. Dusing.
In a letter to Judge Carl H Taul, dated April 1, 2008, Dr. Connor wrote, “I am concerned as to Mr. Brewington’s intentions regarding this case file.” Dr. Connor testified that his “office staff” was not competent to schedule interviews or to provide documents to participants in custody evaluations and Dr. Connor’s office manager was investigated by the FBI for over a hundred thousand dollars worth of credit card fraud. I believe that is reason enough to question the accuracy of the information behind a report that affects the lives of my children.