Shame on you and your client, Angela G. Loechel.

I just received the word from opposing counsel Angela Loechel that my ex-wife still does not agree with the psychiatrist I chose to evaluate me to see if I am a danger to anyone. My ex-wife believes that the evaluation should be performed by an “unbiased” mental health professional and not anyone with any connections to the Affinity Center, where I have sought treatment for ADHD for over eight years. Apparently, they believe that the people who have the most experience in evaluating and treating me are the least qualified to determine if I “may” present a danger to anyone. They believe that the Affinity Center or anyone connected with the Affinity Center may lie about me not being a danger to anyone just to “hook me up.” Ms. Loechel wrote, “Frankly, I am extremely concerned about Mr. Brewington’s apparent apprehension to obtain an unbiased mental health evaluation in this matter, as the purpose of the evaluation is to determine whether or not he is a danger to my client or the children.”

First it is worthy to mention that Judge James D. Humphrey ruled that I had to undergo a mental health evaluation to determine if I could have supervised visitation with the children in a therapeutic environment. This supervised visitation is to be supervised by another mental health professional. Angela Loechel is extremely concerned that the psychiatrist I chose is not going to be able to accurately determine if it is safe for me to have supervised visitation with my children in the care of another mental health professional. She believes that an “unbiased” evaluator would be better. The last “unbiased” professional Angela Loechel and her client proposed was Dr. Edward J. Connor.

How unbiased was Dr. Connor? Dr. Connor said he would not release the case file from the custody evaluation to me because I was not a lawyer. Dr. Connor sent copies of my correspondence and/or records to Angela G. Loechel but failed to provide me with copies of any of their correspondence and/or Ms. Loechel’s client’s records. Dr. Connor had Ms. Loechel’s client sign a bogus Office Policy Statement which Ms. Loechel submitted to court to obstruct my access to the case file. According to Angela Loechel’s billing statements, Ms. Loechel had phone conversations with Dr. Connor just prior to the final hearing in my divorce and even gave Dr. Connor legal advice to help keep Dr. Connor’s wife and partner, Dr. Sara Jones-Connor, from having to testify in court. Ms. Loechel and her client attacked me for publicizing the unethical conduct of their expert and continued to blame me for their legal expenses even after it was discovered that Ms. Loechel submitted a false document from Dr. Connor’s office nearly a year before the final hearing and it was Ms. Loechel’s expert that continued to communicate with Judge Carl H. Taul outside the presence of the parties which led to Judge Taul removing himself from the case. Ms. Loechel continued to communicate and send information to Dr. Ed Connor after the final divorce decree was issued. Now Ms. Loechel is complaining that I tried to get an evaluation so I can review the results before it could be submitted to court. No, I am just trying to save a little money and use the evaluation that I received after Ms. Loechel’s client had me arrested for trying to maintain a phone relationship with my children.

The following is a statement from Angela Loechel:

“[The psychiatrist’s] association with Mr. Brewington as an evaluator prior to his approval in this action and for the purpose of his defense in the criminal case in Hamilton County, Ohio, is even more problematic. I have no idea why Mr. Brewington would hire a mental health evaluator to defend against a telephone harassment charge, except in an attempt to get a mental health evaluation of which Mr. Brewington would know the results of prior to attempting to submit the same to this Court.”

There was nothing in the final decree of my divorce that prohibited me from maintaining a relationship with my daughters on the phone. My ex-wife “allowed” me to speak to the girls from August 19, 2009 until she stopped all phone conversations between my daughters and me on September 5, 2009. Rather than trying to file a contempt charge against me in the Indiana Court for calling the children on the phone per the Indiana Parenting Guidelines, Ms. Loechel’s client filed criminal charges against me in Hamilton County, Ohio. Not only did I face a criminal record because Ms. Loechel’s client decided to have me arrested in Ohio rather than follow Indiana law, now Ms. Loechel is second guessing my criminal lawyer’s legal strategy to build a defense against her client’s false criminal complaint. The criminal trial was set for a jury hearing and I had no way of defending my credibility because my ex-wife submitted the final decree in my divorce which claimed that I may be a potential danger to my children. Judge Humphrey based his decision on Dr. Connor’s testimony. Since Angela Loechel successfully argued that I should not have a copy of the evidence supporting the testimony against me from her “unbiased” expert, I needed an expert in case there was any question about my mental stability. Fortunately the Hamilton County Prosecutor recommended dismissing the charges because she felt my ex-wife was trying to retaliate against me. Now Angela Loechel is accusing me of taking advantage of being arrested as a result of her client’s irresponsible attempts to keep her children away from their father.

What are they really afraid of? They are afraid of the inevitable. It is only a matter of time before a mental health professional says there is nothing wrong with me and they are appalled that a parent could lose the ability to see his children while being denied the evidence against him. Ms. Loechel and her client want control of who evaluates me so they can have some input in the evaluation. Ms. Loechel and her client argued that my parenting time should be limited because I have ADHD, yet they argue that I should not be evaluated by a professional with a connection with the facility that has treated my ADHD for the better part of a decade. If Ms. Loechel has the ability to contact the professional who evaluates me, she will have the ability to have her own private conversations with the expert just as she did with Dr. Connor. Then Ms. Loechel can argue that I shouldn’t have access to the evidence against me because I may misuse it. I would think Ms. Loechel would have an interest in keeping Dr. Connor’s case file under wraps because it may contain inappropriate contact between Dr. Connor and her.

Ms. Loechel and her client are focused on two things: concealing Dr. Connor’s evaluation case file and arguing over which mental health professional evaluates me; neither of which are going to help expedite the children’s return to their father. Judge Taul told Ms. Loechel that if I release any confidential information about her client, it would be a civil matter. Ms. Loechel and her client worked to deprive my daughters’ right to question why Dr. Connor filed a report that he claimed contained “numerous errors and oversights” and the right to question why Dr. Connor and my ex-wife appear to be the only people in the world that have difficulties understanding me. Ms. Loechel and her client failed to file any motions to modify parenting time during the 2 ½ year divorce where the children were in my care nearly half the time. They did not file any physical restraining orders. The only time Ms. Loechel and her client tried to limit my parenting time was during the final hearing of the divorce. Now, after no testimony or evidence from anyone that my mental health would present an emotional or physical danger to anyone, Ms. Loechel and her client are arguing that I may be able to trick mental health experts into believing that I am not dangerous or that anyone who has previously met with me may lie and say I am not dangerous. If they believe that I am trying to trick a mental health professional into believing me, then it would be a lot less likely that I would be able to fool the people who have been treating my ADHD for 8 ½ years than a new expert. It is ridiculous for them to believe that my expert or treating therapist/doctor would risk their professional career just to lie for me and say that I am not a danger. It’s even more ridiculous for them to insist on me seeing an “unbiased” evaluator to get the most accurate evaluation while refusing to allow the new evaluator to have access to Dr. Connor’s case file which would give the new evaluator all the information necessary to come to an informed conclusion regarding the safety of the children.

It does not matter who I see. Any professional is going to say, “Why are you here?” and I will say, “I’m here because Dr. Connor said I might be dangerous but my ex-wife and her lawyer will not let you see how he came to that conclusion. They claim it may be dangerous to release the information that explains why I may be dangerous.” I’m going to take in all of Dr. Connor’s statements where he lied about the release of the case file and where he lied about his Office Policy Statement during his May 27, 2009 testimony. Then I would direct the evaluator’s attention to my web content and explain how I publicized my experience to help other parents. I would tell them that my ex-wife had me arrested because she did not want me to maintain a relationship with my daughters. I would tell them that my ex-wife told my daughter’s school to call the police if I appeared at the school for any reason despite the absence of a court order prohibiting me from doing so. I would explain how hard people have worked to damage the relationship between a father and his daughters. Then I would tell the expert that I have not broken any laws and I have never threatened or harmed anyone during my efforts to ensure my daughters have the ability to grow up with both parents. It does not matter if it is my own expert or the psychologist appointed by the Hamilton County Court; they are all going to see what a travesty the situation is. That’s what Ms. Loechel and her client fear. If they cannot find anyone to agree with the notion that I am a dangerous father, it will be apparent that all of their efforts have only served to deny two beautiful little girls the ability to see their father for an entire year. If they were truly concerned about my daughters’ well being, Ms. Loechel and her client would allow me to have all of the information possible to help a mental health professional form an accurate opinion of my psychological well-being. Defending Dr. Connor’s actions are more important to them than allowing my children to have a father. Ms. Loechel and her client’s only hope is to find a professional that they can have private conversations with and hope that they can conceal records; just as Ms. Loechel did with Dr. Edward J. Connor Psy D. I love you girls. Daddy will keep fighting to protect your ability to grow up with mommy, daddy, and their families.

(The Affinity Center specializes in diagnosing and treating children and adults with ADD/ADHD as well as behavioral, learning, and mood disorders. Clients of The Affinity Center undergo extensive testing for ADD/ADHD to determine appropriate treatment options. They also perform IQ testing to help develop custom treatment/therapy plans for their clients. Their staff includes both mental health professionals and medical doctors who work closely with clients to manage therapy and/or prescribed medications. The Affinity Center is located in Cincinnati, Ohio. For more information on The Affinity Center please visit www.theaffinitycenter.com.)

Dr. Edward J. Connor Psy D; Gun for Hire

Here is the latest case coming out of the Kentucky Appellate Court that involves Dr. Edward J. Connor Psy D, of Connor and Associates in Erlanger, Kentucky. Seth Smith was convicted of stabbing a man in the chest and the leg. One of the issues Mr. Smith appealed was the trial court's exclusion of a portion of Dr. Connor's psychiatric report. The trial court claimed the specific portion of Dr. Connor's report could not be admitted because “[Dr. Connor] would be testifying as to what was actually in the Defendant’s mind at the time he committed the offense.” Dr. Connor’s report of his findings after treating Seth Smith for more than two years and participating in over forty therapy sessions with Mr. Smith, stated:

"I can only state that in my clinical opinion although Mr. Smith had made significant improvement in psychotherapy, at that moment, he felt frightened that he would be assaulted and acted in a manner which he felt was necessary to defend himself. One can certainly question his judgment at that moment in time and can also consider in hindsight that there would have been a better way to protect himself, such as leaving the car."

Unfortunately for Mr. Smith, the Appellate Court agreed with the trial court's ruling and agreed that Dr. Ed Connor's mind reading abilities should not be admissible as evidence. The Appellate Court did reverse one of Seth Smith's arguments. The Appellate Court ruled that Mr. Smith's prior assault conviction should not have been admitted into the record. Mr. Smith had previously been convicted of stabbing his mother.

I wonder if Dr. Connor felt that Seth Smith was frightened and acted in self defense when he stabbed his mother? This is what makes my head hurt. Dr. Connor testified that he was concerned about my mental stability because I questioned his practices, yet Dr. Connor gave Seth Smith the benefit of the doubt in Mr. Smith's second stabbing. Coincidence and bad luck go out the window when the victim of your first stabbing conviction is your mother.

I find it frightening that judges like James D. Humphrey and Carl H. Taul use Dr. Connor to determine the futures of children of separated parents. How reassuring is it to know that the Children's Home of Northern Kentucky has Dr. Connor educate and oversee their psychological staff? Does Dr. Connor use tarot cards or crystal balls while he is working with courts? Seth Smith was drunk when he stabbed the victim. Did Dr. Connor evaluate Mr. Smith while he was drunk? Even if you accept that Dr. Connor could understand how Mr. Smith may have felt in the past, how could Dr. Connor speculate what emotions were going through Seth Smith's mind when he was drunk and stabbing someone? Who needs the court system when Dr. Connor can read people's minds like a Marvel comic book character? It just goes to show that Dr. Connor will say anything for a buck. For more information on Dr. Edward J Connor go to www.DanHelpsKids.com.

And Dearborn County controls the lives of my children.

Check out my post on the Dearborn County Indiana Public Forum titled "The Backwoods Dearborn County Government." You'll get an understanding of how Dukes of Hazzardish a modern day county government can be. It's the perfect place for a judge like Judge James D. Humphrey to abuse children who are a part of the family court system.

Two letters, On Lie

---Before I go any further with this blog post, I want to clarify that these letters are not going to be sent nor shown to my children. My sometimes satirical and hypothetical writings often find their way to court so I want clear up any misunderstanding before anyone would try to use this to as a reason to further deny my children of their father. I am writing these mock letters to demonstrate how the actions of Dr. Edward J Connor, Judge James D. Humphrey, and others will continue to harm my little girls. The first letter to the girls is what the Court probably wants to tell my daughters. The second letter is the truth. The fact that my children have to be given excuses as to why they still can’t see their dad only brings them more harm.---

LETTER #1

Dear Girls,

Daddy is going to be so happy to see you. Daddy worked very hard to be able to see you again. Sometimes these things just happen when moms and dads get divorced. I know I have not been able to see you for a long time but that is about to change. I am going to have to visit you in a place like a doctor’s office for a while but that is just what happens sometimes. You may not be able to spend the night at my house for a long time but I still love you. Soon you will be able to see Grandma Sue and everyone else. We just have to wait until all of the visits in the doctor’s office go okay. The whole family loves you very much and cannot wait to see you. I am sorry that I have not been able to see you. Sometimes it is better not to ask why I did not come to see you and be a part of your lives. We should just concentrate on the fact that I get to see you a little bit and hopefully we will be able to go fishing, camping, hiking, and playing like we used to do before you could not see me. Like I said, sometimes parents just have to go away after divorce. I love you.

Love,

Daddy

LETTER #2

Dear Girls,

Daddy is going to be so happy to see you. Daddy is working very hard to be able to see you again. Sometimes when moms and dads get divorced, there are people who make mistakes and bad decisions. There are people who think they know what is best for kids, but they do not really know. Sometimes these people make mistakes and get mad if people ask them about their mistakes. If you accidentally broke your sister’s toy, you would say you are sorry because it’s the right thing to do. You would not be mean to your sister because she would already be upset that her toy was broken. The people who were in charge of doing what is best for you made a mistake. When daddy told them that they made a mistake, they got mad. They did not say they were sorry for making mistakes; they got mad at daddy for pointing out their mistakes. Sometimes when people get mad, they do not think right. They thought Daddy was not a good parent because Daddy told them, “You guys made a mistake”. If you broke your sister’s toy, you would not say “You are a bad sister”, you would say, “I’m sorry I broke your toy.” Unfortunately, these people sometimes blame their mistakes on other people. They thought that taking Daddy away for a long time would be best for you girls. Obviously that was not the right decision, but Daddy is doing everything he can to fix it. Daddy will be careful not to make the people mad again so they do not get confused. We do not want them to think that I am not a good dad because they are mad at me for telling them that they made a mistake. That does not have anything to do with how much I love you guys and how much fun we have together.

It has been a long time since I have seen you and I love you very much. When I first get to see you, we will have to see each other in a doctor’s office because they forgot how much we love each other and how much fun we had together. It is like a test to see if we can still have fun together. That sounds like a fun and easy test to me! You will be happy to know that I have been working very hard to see you and I have been working very hard to help other kids and their parents spend time together. There are a lot of people who thank Daddy for helping them but they should be thanking you. You two are the most special things in my life and you have given me the strength and courage to help protect a kid’s ability to grow up with their mommies and daddies. Without my little angels, I would not have been able to help other kids and parents. You two are very special girls. I love you and I can’t wait to take our test together.

Love,

Daddy

Prior to the August 18, 2009 final decree in my divorce, there had been no mention of terminating my parenting time so I was unable to defend myself. Why would I think that my parenting time was at risk? In my ex-wife’s response to my appeal, she did not even make an argument against the termination of my parenting time because it is indefensible. Dr. Connor did not mention anything about terminating my parenting time. People say that it isn’t fair for children to know about the conflict in a divorce. What’s even more unfair is allowing children to believe that a parent did not love them or did something wrong to prevent the parent from being with their children. I did my part, I was a good father. Dr. Connor was the one who claimed his child custody evaluation report contained “numerous errors and oversights.” Judge James D. Humphrey punished me for asking “why?” Now they probably expect me to take responsibility for not being able to be with my daughters. If my ex-wife cannot make an argument to the appellate court that Judge Humphrey’s decision to terminate my parenting time is justified, why should I take responsibility for Judge Humphrey’s actions? The longer they lie to my daughters only increases the chance of long term emotional damage. I’m sorry but I’m not going to lie to my children. For more information go to www.danhelpskids.com.

Dear Family Court Professionals, If you lie, I'm going to write about it.

It’s amazing what lengths people will go to in an effort to win. Why would a lawyer lie in a brief to the appellate court? That is what my ex-wife’s appellate lawyer, Leanna Weissmann, did. Maybe it was necessary given that there really isn’t a logical explanation for ripping a father away from two little girls.

Before I get started, I would like to tell any judge presiding over my case that they should refrain from reading this even though Leanna Weissmann snuck in some ex parte evidence regarding a new website and invited the appellate judges to review the new internet postings in my ex-wife’s brief to the Indiana Court of Appeals. Ms. Weissmann wrote, “Husband continues to post about the court system which now include references to this appeal. As of April 23, 2010, he maintained several sites with derogatory comments about many of the people involved in his case including Judge Humphrey. See e.g. http://Husbandhelpskids.com/index.html; http://Husbandbrewington.blogspot.com/. I am not aware why Ms. Weissmann felt compelled to refer to a website that wasn’t created until 6 months after the final hearing in my divorce but I am sure that she is aware of the appellate rules that forbid the court to review new, ex parte evidence. And I don’t know why she mentioned Judge Humphrey. My statements about Judge Humphrey have nothing to do with the appeal, other than it being just a cheap shot to tattle on me for talking about Judge Humphrey in an effort to gain favoritism with other judges. I felt compelled to write about my ex-wife’s appellee brief in the case that an Appellate Judge would take Leanna Weissmann’s illegal advice and check out the websites and new evidence for themselves. Since my lawyer follows the rules and is unable to offer new evidence, I’m just putting the information on my blog and website to explain why I am fighting for my daughters and how my attorney and I do not resort to dishonest measures that can damage children’s relationships with their parents.

The best place to start is probably near the end of the Appellee’s (my ex-wife’s) brief. Rather than just make a case for her client, Leanna Weissmann strikes out to speculate what my defense against their accusations might be. She wrote, “While husband will likely defend his behavior as aggressive litigating on behalf of his kids, a quick review of the Record should convince this Court otherwise.” This has been the whole song and dance from the very beginning. For some reason, none of these legal professionals seem to grasp that I am only doing this for my children. What I find rather ironic, is the appellate lawyer for my ex-wife is starting the debate of whether or not I am an aggressive litigator. That’s rather flattering considering that Leanna Weissmann wrote that one of the reasons Judge Humphrey justified his decision to terminate my parenting time was “Husband has Attention Deficit Disorder affecting his ability to concentrate.” Given that there are no facts that demonstrate that I am a danger to my children, they tattled on me for questioning judges and made things up.

Leanna Weissmann wrote, “Husband blogged and continued to post confidential information on the web after being ordered not to.” On April 29, 2009, Judge Humphrey held a hearing on my ex-wife’s motion requesting the Court force me to take down my internet content. On May 14, 2009, the orders from the Court were filed DENYING her motion. Ms. Weissmann made the above statement claiming it was justification for the Court ordering “Supervised Visitation.” Just for the record, Judge Humphrey did not order supervised visitation; he ordered NO VISITATION. Ms. Weissmann made up the supervised visitation order because the no visitation order was indefensible. Judge Humphrey only ordered me to take down my internet postings if I wanted UNsupervised visitation. In the final decree Judge Humphrey stated,

“Because of the potential danger to the children, Husband must remove all postings created by him from the internet concerning the children before any UNSUPERVISED visitation may commence and/or continue.”

Ms. Weissmann must have been a little confused about the situation which is understandable. Judge Humphrey’s order states that my web postings are only dangerous if I have UNsupervised visitation and not supervised visitation. I guess Judge Humphrey was concerned that if left unsupervised, I would allow my, now four and six year old, children to go to my website and read my internet postings. That would be a miraculous feat considering my oldest was just learning to read nine months ago.

Another false statement made by Leanna Weissmann was “Husband’s behavior in the courtroom required the presence of a police officer.” The officer was in the courtroom because it was his job. Judge Humphrey was angry with me because I kept questioning why I was not allowed to have Dr. Edward J. Connor’s evaluation case file when the law stated I was entitled to it. Judge Humphrey asked the officer to stand behind me. Actually it was an act of intimidation. If Judge Humphrey used a police officer to stand behind me to keep me from arguing for the rights of my children and me, then that’s an act of intimidation. If I was out of line, Judge Humphrey should have held me in contempt. Instead, he placed the threat of police action behind me for the three day proceeding.

Ms. Weissmann rambled on and on about my numerous pleadings and how I kept trying to obtain my ex-wife’s medical records from Dr. Connor. This is the spin they have put on the release of the case file since I requested it over two years ago. My ex-wife’s legal fees were not due to my numerous pleadings and attempts to get the case file; they were a result of her and Dr. Connor not honoring the agreement that we both signed at the beginning of the custody evaluation. She consented to the release of the case file at the beginning and then successfully fought to not release it. Now their argument is that the court did not release it because the court was afraid that I would post confidential information on the internet. I had requested the file over a year before they submitted any of my web material to court. I first requested Dr. Connor’s case file on March 6, 2008. I did not post anything on the internet until mid-September of 2008. I created a website to tell people about Dr. Connor’s false/conflicting statements. My first blog post came on February 25, 2009; nearly a year after I requested Dr. Connor’s case file. If my ex-wife and Dr. Connor would have honored their part of the bargain and released the file, she wouldn’t have accumulated a high amount of legal fees. The irony in the situation is if Dr. Connor would have released the case file to me per the agreement that my ex-wife and I both signed, my website and this blog would never have existed.

Another thing Ms. Weissmann wrote about was how I inconvenienced Judge Carl H. Taul. Leanna wrote, “Husband then attempted to subpoena Judge Taul to testify, requiring Judge Taul to hire counsel to quash the subpoena.” I am not aware if Judge Taul had to reimburse Deputy Attorney General, Betsy Isenberg, for her legal services because it was never mentioned in court. I do not know why Leanna Weissmann is privy to this new information. What I do know is Judge Taul and Dr. Connor communicated outside the presence of the parties, which is against the rules. In a letter dated February 25, 2008, Dr. Connor stated,

“With this letter please be advised that Hon. Judge Carl Taul contacted me on 2/22/08 to convey his agreement for the review of the above-captioned case.”

If you assume Judge Taul follows the laws, then you have to assume that Dr. Connor is lying because it would be illegal for Judge Taul to contact Dr. Connor and make arrangements for the parties without the parties’ input or knowledge. Since Judge Taul recused himself after participating in ex parte communications with Dr. Connor, the only way to find out if Dr. Connor was telling the truth was to subpoena Judge Taul. Rather than hold Dr. Connor and Judge Taul accountable for doing something illegal, the professionals in the system got mad at me for following the rules in trying to deal with the situation. Ms. Weissmann even tattled on me for picketing my former lawyer’s office. That has absolutely nothing to do with anything.

This is just the tip of the iceberg. I’m going to post more information on www.danhelpskids.com about the situation to expand on some of the ridiculous arguments they made as an argument to keep me away from the children. Some examples include:

-“Husband’s attacks on Dr. Connor revealed by Dr. Connor’s testimony that Husband posted Dr. Connor was involved in a three-way sex triangle with his office manager.” My ex-wife knows Dr. Connor lied about the statement because she submitted my blog to court that contained my actual comments. [Check out the following link to see how they distorted the truth http://danbrewington.blogspot.com/2009/03/to-all-of-people-who-thought-my-story.html. The blog post is about Dr. Connor’s former office manager that pled guilty, after an FBI investigation, to making $126,558 worth of unauthorized purchases with Dr. Connor’s credit card. Just another reason to question the accuracy of Dr. Connor’s records.]

-“Husband allowed the children to watch age inappropriate movies, claiming Disney movies were more detrimental to the children than “Austin Powers.” That’s what you get for making an argument that Shrek and Austin Powers both have crude humor involving flatulents and kicks to the family jewels.

-“Husband has Attention Deficit Disorder affecting his ability to concentrate.” You heard that correct. My ex-wife is arguing that people with attention deficit disorder should have supervised visitation with their children.

-“Husband’s psychometric test results reveal a degree of psychological disturbance.” Dr. Connor graded the tests and then would not give me all the information behind his conclusions.

Here’s a memo to the people in the system who continue to cry about my web postings, “Stop doing illegal and/or unethical things to keep me from my children.” I’m getting tired of lawyers and judges whining about me trying to intimidate them. Last time I checked, they were lawyers and judges. I was going to refrain from posting anything about the specifics of the briefs that were filed with the appellate court, but since Leanna Weissmann provided the appellate court with ex parte evidence and encouraged the court to do their own investigation, I felt compelled to address the matter directly. Maybe if people understand that they will be held publically accountable for their actions, they would conduct themselves in a more professional manner. Check out www.danhelpskids.com for more information.

Maybe the time has come to sue everybody who enables Mr. and Mrs. Dr. Edward J. Connor's abuse of children

Today someone from the Kentucky Government was on this blog and http://www.danhelpskids.com/. Yesterday, someone from the Kenton County School School Sytem was on my website. The day before that, someone from the Pendleton County School System was on my website. Kentucky Attorney General, and U.S. Senate Candidate, Jack Conway knows about Dr. Connor. Kentucky Assistant Attorney General Mark Brengelman is aware that Dr. Connor doesn't release health records to clients but he advised the Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychology not to take action against Dr. Connor. The Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychology is aware that Dr. Edward J Connor committed mail and wire fraud as well. The Children's Home of Northern Kentucky has Dr. Connor oversee their psychological services. They are well aware of Dr. Connor's history of not telling the truth. Dearborn Circuit Court Judge James D. Humphrey listened to Dr. Connor gasp for breath during while I cross-examined Dr. Connor about Dr. Connor's conflicting and false written statements. Judge Humphrey took away my children because of my "irrational behavior and attacks on Dr. Connor." Judge Humphrey wasn't worried about protecting my children or their mother, Judge Humphrey was worried about his expert, Dr. Ed Connor. He denied my request for a GAL to represent my children because Judge Humphrey knew another professional would be appaulled by the conduct of Judge Humphrey's "expert". Dearborn County Prosecutor Aaron Negangard knows that Dr. Connor lied under oath. He knows because he had Detective Mike Kreinhop investigate me because an unidentified person made a complaint about my internet writings. Detective Kreinhop, who is the Republican candidate for Dearborn County Sheriff, interviewed Dr. Connor during the course of his investigation and reviewed Dr. Connor's fraudulent documents. Are any of these entities doing anything to protect children and families from Dr. Edward J. Connor? Not that I am aware of.

Here is what people need to do. If children are harmed by Dr. Edward J. Connor, adults need to focus on the entities that have knowingly allowed Dr. Connor to continue to harm children. If a child is harmed by Dr. Connor during the course of a school related psychology matter; the parents should file a lawsuit against the school. If a child happens to be neglected by the Children's Home of Northern Kentucky, as a result of Dr. Connor's actions; the Children's Home of Northern Kentucky should be held accountable. Dearborn County children that are victims of Dr. Connor's abuse should hold Dearborn County Law Enforcement responsible for turning a blind eye to Dr. Ed Connor's malicious behavior. Democratic Senate Candidate Jack Conway says he protects families, but the Office of the Attorney General only protects families when it is convenient. Jack Conway and the Kentucky Board of Examiners have an interest in protecting Dr. Edward Connor because Dr. Connor testifies in death row trials and often testifies on behalf of the state. Last but not least, we should not forget to hold Dr. Sara Jones-Connor accountable as well. Her name was signed at the bottom of my custody evaluation report that her husband claimed to contain "numerous errors and oversights."

I'm not a person who is out to sue everyone but if everyone is going to turn their backs on the Connor family child neglect ring, maybe it's time that people start suing everyone. I encourage people to start filing lawsuits against anyone connected to Connor and Associates, PLLC, who have looked the other way while enabling Dr. Edward J Connor and his wife, Dr. Sara Jones-Connor, to continue to harm children. Dr. Sara Jones-Connor signed the report so I am sure she was aware of the "numerous errors and oversight" in the evaluation report before the report was filed with the court. If we direct our attention away from the problem, the husband and wife combo of Dr. Edward J Connor and Dr. Sara Jones-Connor, and focus on the entities that have an obligation to report such abuse, people will stop looking the other way. If people start suing attorneys, public officials, psychologist, mental health organizations, school systems, etc... who have a duty to report the illegal actions of the husband and wife team of Ed and Sara Connor, people won't be so quick to look the other way when the Connor family is neglecting children and their families. So stand up, speak out, and sue 'em because we will never be able to stop the Connor family from hurting children unless we can deter people from protecting Mr. and Mrs. Dr. Edward J. Connor. For more information on how Mr. and Mrs. Dr. Edward J. Connor harm children, go to http://www.danhelpskids.com/. If anyone needs my assistance in any legal case involving Dr. Edward J Connor, I would be more than happy to forward evidence of Dr. Connor's fraudulent behavior and I will be happy to testify in any legal proceeding as well. I want to help protect children from being harmed by Dr. Connor by holding people accountable for protecting and enabling Dr. Connor's abusive practices.

You wouldn't lose your children because you criticized a plumber would you?

This past weekend I received emails from two mental health professionals who read my web content. For convenience I will refer to them as Jack and Jill. Jack's memo was relatively short. His message read:

"Hi Dan, thanks for sharing your story. I actually do hear horror stories from some of my clients who are going thru divorces and child custody issues so I know it exists and is heartbreaking. Look forward to your updates."

Jill took a different approach. Some of the things in Jill's message(s) read:

I don't think the approach of your website is the right way to go. I am a child psychologist and I know that fathers often get screwed in custody arrangements. I also think you were probably screwed. and treated unfairly. I do not think your website comes across the way you intend. When I read your website, I could feel your anger, which is justified. I felt a lot of bitterness in your statements and it seemed to me like you were feeling victimized. I don't think that's the tenor you want on a website trying to get your kids back.
__________

Dan as attorney: You don't know who's in "bed" with whom else in family court. You have to play the game and not come across as having a chip on your shoulder and a bone to pick. The whole section reads as anger and sarcasm.

__________

Cross examination- I'm not sure what the purpose of posting this is... the whole section on Dr. Connor sounds like a waste of your energy and like you are going after him-- psychologists generally don't question other psychologists since they weren't in the room at the time of the evaluation. You're more likely to get a diagnosis than support from posting this information.,

__________

This really needs to be about how you are going to prove to the courts that your girls seeing you is in their best interest, not about how the procedure wasn't fair to you. That's what those reading your site will use to as additional "proof" the diagnosis of narcissism, fair or unfair.

Jack just offered a few word of support and wished me luck. Jill provided me with a lot of information in an effort to help me see my girls. Both messages were heartfelt, sincere, and honest, but Jill’s message is based on, as she stated, having “to play the game.”

This is the thinking that needs to be changed if there is ever any chance of reforming the family courts. I don’t want to play games with my children’s lives. I shouldn’t have to “play ball.” I’m not contending for a lucrative government building contract, I’m trying to be a father. She said that the section regarding Dr. Connor is a waste of my time and it sounds like I am going after him. She expressed concerns about my website making me appear paranoid, angry, and/or narcissistic because it could hurt me in court. The sad thing is, all of her concerns are very valid.

Let me give you a scenario. Let’s say that you had a drain line back up into your basement. You call a national drain cleaning service to fix the problem. While at your house, the workers were rude, tracked dirt across your upstairs carpet, and that was after they were four hours late for the scheduled time. When you got the bill for the services, they charged you twice of what they said they were going to charge. A few weeks later the drain backed up again. When you called about the “satisfaction guaranteed” clause of the contract, they said that they were not going to honor it. You decided to post you thoughts on the internet to tell people what happened when you used that particular company. You write things like:

“Those lousy sons of bi#$hes tracked dirt all over my house. They made me so mad I wanted to beat them senseless. The dirty pieces of S*@T would not honor their contract and left me in a worse situation even though they over charged me. Every time I see the stains in my carpet, it makes me want to punch them in the face.”

If you showed that to a social worker, psychologist, and/or judge, they would say, “There’s no way I would ever use that drain service.” But what if the story went like this:

“That lousy son of a bi#$h, Dr. Custody Evaluator, lied in his report. He made me so mad I wanted to beat him/her senseless. The dirty piece of S*@T would not honor his/her contract and left me in a worse situation even though he/she took my money. Every time I think about the evaluation report that contained ‘numerous errors and oversights’, it makes me want to punch Dr. Custody Evaluator in the face.”

Rather than say, “There’s no way I would use Dr. Custody Evaluator”, the social worker, psychologist, and/or judge may begin to think that the person who wrote the review is a danger to their own children because there is a lot of aggression. Dr. Custody Evaluator has been doing this for years so the person who wrote the spiteful web post must suffer from some sort of reality distortion. Feelings of wanting to “punch” or “beat” Dr. Custody Evaluator raise some real concerns about the person possibly posing a danger to his/her own children. I think this person is in need of anger management, an extensive psychological examination, and possible medication to help deal with the observed behavior before the parent can exercise any parenting time with his/her children.

No one has ever lost the ability to see their own children because they wrote an angry review of a plumbing company. Why should someone’s parenting abilities be questioned if they write an angry review of a custody evaluator? That’s what happened to me; except I have never written about any thoughts of causing physical harm to anyone.

This is what has to change in the system. The Indiana Appellate Court ruled

“Thus, although a court may modify a parenting time order when the modification would serve the best interests of the child or children, a parent’s visitation rights shall not be restricted unless the court finds that the parenting time might endanger the child’s physical health or significantly impair the child’s emotional development. Id. (citing Ind. Code § 31-17-4-2). Even though the statute uses the word “might,” this Court has previously interpreted the language to mean that a court may not restrict parenting time unless that parenting time “would” endanger the child’s physical health or emotional development.”

Show me the studies that link negative consumer reviews to child abuse. There aren’t any; so why are so many people in the family court system trained to think this way? It’s because there is a giant snowball barreling down the mountain that doesn’t have any checks and balances. The snowball will run over anyone that stands in its path. The system is trapped in a box with its own methodology and science that it bewilders people on the outside. The first step in reforming the family court system is forcing the system out of its box.

No Mother's Day Cards for Grandma

This is the first year my mom hasn't received Mother's Day cards from her two granddaughters. My girls are four and six and my mom has not been able to see them since August 17, 2009. Judge James D. Humphrey took them away just a few days before mom's birthday. 2009 was my year for Halloween and Thanksgiving. I missed the girls' birthdays. Santa didn't come to my house this past Christmas. I did not receive any handmade cards from the girls on my birthday, last November. No Valentines Day hugs, no Easter kisses. Now there are no cards for Grandma on Mother's Day. Maybe a "mental health professional" instructed my ex-wife not to have my daughters send cards because it may upset the girls to reminisce about all of the love they received from Grandma Sue and her family. My mom never did anything to try to harm the girls' mother; her mom's signature is on the criminal complaint that had the girl's father arrested for trying to maintain phone contact with his children. My ex-wife said my mother wasn't qualified to supervise my visitation with my daughters. Dishonesty and vengeance seems to be advantageous in the family court system. If that's the way it goes, then I will always be at a disadvantage because every time you use hate and deceit to "win" control of your children, you destroy a small part of who they may become. I will never do that to my daughters.

Mom sees her granddaughters every morning when she gets on the Wii Fit. She sees the cartoon profiles my daughters made when they used to exercise. My youngest would say, "I wanna do Wii Bit." I'd say, "You wanna do Wii Bit?" and she would say, "NO, Wii Bit!" It's just one of those cute things kids do when they are little. I'm sure she doesn't do it anymore; we just missed her growing out of it. Grandma Sue knows she will be able to see her granddaughters someday and she doesn't dwell on the lost time because it's more fun to dwell on all of the fun things we will do as a family when the children get to see the other half of their family again. That's the side that wants the children to grow up with both families, because that is truly in the best interest of the children. For more information of how two little girls were stripped of their family, go to www.DanHelpsKids.com. Happy mother's day and give your children an extra hug for me.

I think I can predict the future.

Looking into the future, I can kind of guess how the hearing is going to go on June 14, 2010. On August 18, 2009, Judge James D. Humphrey terminated my parenting time with my three and five-year-old daughters without warning, after I had cared for the girls nearly half of the time during the course of a two and a half year divorce. Judge Humphrey based his decision on the testimony of Dr. Edward J. Connor of Connor and Associates, PLLC. (Dr. Connor also oversees the psychological staff for the Children’s Home of Northern Kentucky and testifies for the Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Services. For information on Dr. Edward J. Connor’s “questionable” conduct, go to www.DanHelpsKids.com.) Judge Humphrey said that before I could even have supervised visitation, I had to undergo an evaluation by a court approved mental health provider. When a mental health provider deems that I am not a danger to anyone, then Judge Humphrey said I could petition the Court to have two, two hour supervised visitation sessions a week with the children in a therapeutic environment that is monitored by another mental health professional. Even though there is no record of me presenting a physical or emotional risk to my children, Judge Humphrey is making me undergo a mental health evaluation with one professional to determine if I am fit to undergo supervised visitation with my daughters, which has to be supervised by another professional. Judge Humphrey felt all this was necessary because he was concerned about “[my] irrational behavior and attacks on Dr. Connor” and Judge Humphrey felt that I “lacked a level of maturity necessary to properly parent.”

In January of this year, I filed a motion to have Dr. Edward J Connor’s evaluation case file sent to a psychiatrist so I could be evaluated in order to see my children. Judge Humphrey denied my motion because he said he didn’t have jurisdiction while my case was in the appellate court. When I retained a lawyer and my lawyer reminded Judge Humphrey that Indiana Appellate rule 39 stated that the trial court still has the ability to enforce the orders, Judge Humphrey decided that he did have jurisdiction and set a hearing for June 14, 2010 to see if the psychiatrist I chose is worthy of his approval. I don’t know how the hearing is going to turn out, but I have a good idea of how it’s going to go.

Since my ex-wife’s lawyer, Angela G. Loechel already said they were not in agreement with my choice of mental health providers, I assume that they are planning on fighting my chosen psychiatrist, who graduated from medical school roughly twelve years before Dr. Connor received his bachelor’s degree in psychology. (Dr. Connor began his collegiate career at Wilmington College (OH) in 1975. Nearly fifteen years later, Dr. Connor received his bachelor’s of psychology from Thomas More College in 1989. Dr. Connor is a psychologist and NOT a medical doctor.) Given that there is hardly an argument to be made that my expert is somehow less qualified, they are going to bring in all of my printed web material in an effort to somehow make an argument that it is harmful to the children. When they do, my attorney may hold up examples of my internet writings and ask questions like, “Did Dr. Connor provide false information to the Court and why is it harmful to the children if Mr. Brewington speaks publically about his story of how he lost the ability to see his children because Dr. Connor submitted the false information?” He may ask something like, “Is it true that you effectively took a 51” television that belonged to your former mother-in-law? Why shouldn’t Mr. Brewington be able to speak publically about Judge Humphrey awarding you property that never belonged to you or Mr. Brewington?” They may use the argument as they did last time where it would be damaging to my daughters if someone read my story and told my daughters, opposed to just allowing my girls to think that daddy did something bad and cannot see them or daddy doesn’t love them anymore. The hidden reason behind my ex-wife wanting to submit my writings to the Court is that they want Judge Humphrey to see that I sometimes do not speak very kindly of him. One time I said Judge Humphrey abused my children. My reasoning behind that is it is emotionally traumatizing for a child to suddenly lose all contact with a parent; if a parent is intentionally removed from a child for no reason, it is child abuse. Judge Humphrey knew Dr. Connor lied and punished me for challenging Dr. Connor’s conduct, which in turn is abusive to my children. Besides, if Judge Humphrey reads and understands my writings, it only further demonstrates that Dr. Connor and my ex-wife did not tell the truth when they claimed that my writings were confusing and difficult to follow.

If that doesn’t work, they will probably go with the intimidation bit and try to say that I tried to intimidate my oldest daughter’s school because I was persistent in obtaining information that I am entitled to by law. That may be a hard argument to make because, in my daughter’s school records, there was a picture of me on my wedding day, with my ex-wife cut out of the picture, and a note that read, “Please call the police if he arrives at the school for any reason.” That’s why I was persistent in viewing the records. I wanted to see if there was any inaccurate information in my daughter’s school record. Considering that the school invited me to attend parent-teacher conferences and there was no restraining order stating I was not allow to be at the children’s school, my ex-wife will have to explain why she gave the school a note instructing them to call the police if I showed up at the school.

The opposing party will probably make an argument that my writings may hinder my ex-wife’s future employment opportunities. No Google search of my ex-wife’s first name will lead to any of my web content and there are plenty of Ms. Brewington’s in the world; my mother and a few cousins and aunts, to name a few. If we get on the subject of jeopardizing future employment, any background check will find, due to Dr. Connor’s false statements mentioned above, that there is a legal document from Dearborn County Circuit Court (IN) Judge James D. Humphrey that states that I am a “potential” danger to my children. Based on Dr. Connor’s conflicting testimony, I am forbidden to see them and I need a mental health evaluation to determine if I am a “danger to my children, their mother, and/or to myself.” If that’s not enough to scare a potential employer away, I’m sure that the telecommunication harassment charge in Hamilton County, Ohio that is on my record won’t help my employment opportunities. Even though the Judge dismissed the charge because it is not a crime to call your children on the phone at reasonable hours, there is still a record of me being charged with the crime. If that does not put a damper on my job outlook, if I go back to being self-employed, it will be hard for me to get a business loan when I currently own my ex-wife a judgment of nearly $170,000. I have to pay her $122,000 for my parent’s farmland that I have never owned, may never own, and have no control of the sale, mortgage, and/or value of the farmland. I also have to pay $40,000 towards her $50,000 of attorney’s fees. She racked up a large amount of legal fees after she and her attorney submitted a bogus document from Dr. Connor’s office in an attempt to obstruct my access to evidence. I did not know that Dr. Connor’s Office Policy statement for individual psychological services, the policy my ex-wife and her attorney submitted to the Court, was not part of the forms given at the beginning of the custody evaluation. On May 27, 2009, Dr. Connor testified that his secretary had inadvertently provided my ex-wife with the document to sign. I was under the impression that Dr. Connor’s office forgot to have me sign Dr. Connor’s Office Policy Statement because on September 9, 2008, Dr. Connor wrote me a letter stating:

“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. Nevertheless, the Office Policy Statement is simply an adjunct document to the Court order in which you and Ms. Brewington agreed to participate fully in a custody evaluation to be conducted at this office.”

My wife incurred substantial legal expenses when I questioned why she and Dr. Connor would enter into an agreement for individual psychological services while he was performing a custody evaluation. When Dr. Connor’s September 9^th letter, which Dr. Connor copied to the Judge, indicated that the Office Policy Statement was “an adjunct document to the court order”, I became even more suspicious and filed more motions to get the case file or to have Dr. Connor removed. I wish Dr. Connor would have told me in his September 9^th letter that his office had mistakenly provided my ex-wife with his Office Policy Statement rather than tell me that it was an “adjunct document to the court order” for the custody evaluation. If Dr. Connor wouldn’t have gone out of his way to not tell the truth on September 9, 2008, I wouldn’t have had to reimburse my ex-wife for her legal fees resulting from her expert’s false statements.

The only strategy left for the opposing party is to isolate some of my writings and take them out of context. For example, one time I wrote, “They are going to have to kill me to stop me.” It was part of a larger written piece where I was making the point that they were going to have to kill me to stop me from fighting to protect my daughters’ rights to be raised by both parents. When they brought it up, they made it sound like I was insinuating that they were going to have to kill me to stop me from driving a Mack Truck through an orphanage full of blind children. So when they go into court on June 14^th, now they can submit this blog post and say, “We’re afraid that if he gets to see his little girls, we are afraid that he might drive a Mack Truck through an orphanage full of blind children.” If I object because I don’t have a Mack Truck, they will probably say they are afraid that I will “Jedi Mind Trick” a Mack Truck driver to do it for me because opposing counsel, Angela G. Loechel, already asked me about a web post where I claimed to “Jedi Mind Trick” Dr. Connor.

The ball will be in the hands of Judge James D. Humphrey on June 14^th. I doubt he will say, “Let’s see, you haven’t done anything dangerous in the past ten months even though the transcripts from the final hearing demonstrate that Dr. Connor maliciously provided false information to the Court and the children’s mother continues to try to have you arrested so we should reinstate your parenting time immediately.” Judge Humphrey will probably tell me that my internet content that details how many that times Dr. Connor provided false information to the Court, is dangerous to my children. He probably will say that I continue to intimidate people because I continue to write about things like being arrested for trying to maintain phone contact with my children and how Dr. Connor does not know what contracts he has parents sign at the beginning of custody evaluations. Judge Humphrey terminated my ability to see my children because I attacked Dr. Connor in my writings, so Judge Humphrey will probably think I am still dangerous because I continue to post Dr. Connor’s conflicting and/or false written statements and testimony. If Judge Humphrey continues to say that I am a danger to anyone, we will probably have to call the court staff to testify because the court staff privately told Judge Humphrey that I tried to intimidate them because no one from Judge Humphrey’s staff ever testified in my divorce. We may have to call Dearborn County Prosecutor Aaron Negangard and Dearborn County Sheriff Candidate Mike Kreinhop to testify to see whom they interviewed when they investigated me. (No charges were ever filed.) If they testify that they questioned Judge Humphrey or anyone in his immediate family, Judge Humphrey will have to recuse himself. If their testimony indicates that Dr. Connor lied in his meeting with Detective Kreinhop, it may serve as a reason to set aside the whole judgment in my case and I would be reunited with my daughters.

I cannot say how the hearing is going to end but I think I have an idea of how it is going to go. My argument is going to be, there has never been any evidence to suggest that my parenting time would put my children in any emotional or physical danger so the children should be able to have a father. The case law precedence in Indiana is the Court may only terminate parenting time if there is evidence that parenting time “WOULD” place the children in emotional or physical danger; not “MIGHT” place the children in danger. (D.B. v M.B.V., Indiana Appellate Court, Oct 2, 2009) Their strategy is going to consist of ignoring case law while nitpicking and grabbing at straws in an attempt to make a case that I “MIGHT” still be a danger to the children. If they do not prove that I am not a danger to my children, my ex-wife, her attorney, Dr. Edward J. Connor, and Judge James D. Humphrey will be responsible for denying two precious little girls the ability to see their father for nearly a whole year. The longer they try to argue that I am dangerous, the more time two little girls will lose with their father and his family. Somehow, I don’t think my little girls are going to be happy to learn that they were kept away from their daddy for a few years because people just wanted to make sure that daddy would not turn into a dangerous person. I guess we will have to wait and see. I will get a copy of the transcripts and let you know if I guessed it right. I’ll keep you posted. For more information go to www.DanHelpsKids.com.

Update on custody dilemma.

I received an email from my lawyer yesterday that said my ex-wife was not in agreement with my choice of the mental health provider to do the court ordered mental health evaluation of yours truly. Dearborn Circuit Judge James D. Humphrey said I had to undergo a mental health evaluation before I can see my children to determine if I am a danger to my children, their mother, and/or myself. The catch is, the evaluator has to be approved by the court. My lawyer filed a motion in March to set the matter for a hearing and Judge Humphrey set the hearing for June 14^th. In an attempt to expedite the matter so I can see my children, my lawyer asked my ex-wife if she would be in agreement with the psychiatrist that I chose. Of course, she did not agree to it, so I have to wait until the June 14^th hearing. I guess we will have to be prepared to argue why a psychiatrist with 30+ years of experience is qualified to evaluate me. My proposed expert is not a psychologist, like Dr. Edward J. Connor, but a psychiatrist which means he is a medical doctor and is more qualified to comment on medications, make pharmaceutical recommendations and he can write prescriptions; unlike Dr. Connor.

The woman who had me arrested for calling my children on the phone is now trying to stall my court ordered mental health evaluation by challenging the psychiatrist that I chose. This is the same woman who had her lawyer submit a bogus document from Dr. Connor’s office to obstruct my access to Dr. Connor’s case file. Maybe the fact that the psychiatrist served on hospital ethics committees was what kept her from agreeing to let him evaluate me. I’ve been accused of scheming, plotting, and smooth-talking people so maybe they thought that I found a psychiatrist that would lie for me and say that I did not present a danger to anyone. Maybe they thought I used my Jedi Mind powers to trick the psychiatrist, as opposing counsel, Angela Loechel, already questioned me about the Jedi Mind Trick while I was on the stand. (That is not a joke. I have the transcripts.) Maybe my psychiatrist does not adhere to the same standards as my ex-wife’s expert, Dr. Connor who facts seem to change like the colors of the leaves in the fall. For example:

“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. Nevertheless, the Office Policy Statement is simply an adjunct document to the Court order in which you and Ms. Brewington agreed to participate fully in a custody evaluation to be conducted at this office.” -Dr. Connor’s letter dated September 9, 2008 which Dr. Connor copied to the court.

Dr. Connor: There are no other forms for a custody evaluation. But there was a form that was incorrectly given to Ms. Brewington from our secretary at the time, who is no longer with us. But the basic custody forms—

Dan Brewington: But that—that form [Office Policy Statement] is an adjunct document to a court order?

Dr. Connor: No.

-A little later, Dr. Connor testified to the following:

Dan Brewington: Yes, but is that office policy statement an adjunct document to the court order?

Dr. Connor: I’m not sure what you mean by this.

Dan Brewington: Well, I’m not sure, either. You wrote it.

Dr. Connor: It’s an adjunct -- it’s not an adjunct to a court order. It’s -- it’s adjacent to what we do when people come it. They fill out the forms for the evaluation to participate in.

-Dr. Connor’s testimony during the final hearing on May 27, 2009. Dr. Connor’s testimony indicates that he either maliciously provided false information to the Court or Dr. Connor’s competency should be questioned because he is unaware of his own policies.

Sooner or later the time is going to come when a professional is going to testify that there is nothing wrong with me and it is a travesty that my children were denied the ability to see their father based on the ever-changing “facts” of Dr. Edward J. Connor and Connor and Associates, PLLC. I find it rather ironic that the people who claim that I have communication problems and claim that my writings are confusing and difficult to follow, are the same people who claim I smooth talk people. They are also the ones who submit my internet writings in an effort to make an argument that making people aware of Dr. Connor’s unethical conduct is dangerous to my children. If my writings are confusing and difficult to follow, who in the hell would take the time to read them?

The longer my children go without a father only serves to expand the void they will carry in their lives. My ex-wife fought to make an argument that I was dangerous and now she is fighting to prevent me from proving that I am not. She did the same when her attorney submitted the bogus document from Dr. Connor’s office in their efforts to obstruct my access to evidence. The longer I go without doing anything dangerous only further demonstrates that I am not dangerous. I have made it 36 years without being a danger to society, why do I need to spend thousands of dollars on mental health professionals to verify that my streak is not in jeopardy of ending anytime soon? I cannot comprehend why some people want to punish my children in an effort to punish me. I do know that the longer I have to fight for my daughters, the more they will love their daddy in the end. I love you girls. Daddy will never give up on you. For more information, go to www.DanHelpsKids.com.