Wednesday, August 25, 2010

Here's to playing fair, Indiana.

I went 1 for 25 in my motions being granted by the court. That is the stat of the day. For the past four days, I have been going through all of my legal files; organizing and condensing. Yesterday I organized all of the orders from the court and I figured out that the court only granted one of my motions in over a year and a half. I got slammed by both the trial and appellate courts for filing many "frivolous" and "baseless" motions. The only motion that was granted was my Motion for a Change of Judge. That was probably due to the fact that Judge Taul was required to do so after violating the Indiana Judicial Code of Conduct by engaging in ex parte communications with custody evaluator, Dr. Edward J. Connor.

So that leaves about twenty-four other filings that Dearborn Circuit Judge James D. Humphrey and the Indiana Appellate Court deemed to be frivolous. I wonder if that gives weight to a civil rights suit. Not only were my motions denied, but the Courts displayed a noticeable amount of animosity towards me for filing them. The Courts even accused me of intentionally delaying the trial because I filed a motion for a change of judge as if it were my fault that Judge Carl H. Taul violated the Indiana Judicial Code of Conduct by having private conversations with Dr. Connor. The only means that I had to respond to the ex parte communication was to address the problem in numerous motions.

The courts accused me of trying to intentionally run up my Ex's legal fees by filing frivolous motions. During the course of the divorce, I filed no contempt charges against her, didn't subpoena her or any of her family, didn't accuse her of being a bad parent, and I didn't attack her character. The only thing that I did was try to get a copy of Dr. Connor's case file from his custody evaluation per the law and Dr. Connor’s contract. They refused to provide me with a copy of the file claiming that they were afraid that I would release her medical/psychological information to the world. Dr. Connor, my Ex, and the Courts have convinced themselves that I am some kind of diabolical and evil villain whose only goal in life is to release my ex-wife's health records. It's rather ridiculous to think that the person that they accuse of not being able to focus and stay on track is the same person who they claim to be the mastermind of a two and a half year plan to misuse someone’s health records. Actually, I just want to know what information Dr. Connor used to come to the conclusion that I couldn't communicate and that my writings were confusing and difficult to follow. Dr. Connor refused to look at my health records when I offered them to him. He said I was entitled to the case file; it's not my problem that he put my Ex's health records in the file.

I find it troubling that the Indiana Appellate Court seems to have some kind of animosity towards Dan Brewington. I know it seems ridiculous to think that the Indiana Appellate Court would go after me for some reason but I can't figure out any other reason why the Appellate Court would fabricate information in their ruling. They claimed that my right to take possession of my parent's farmland was fixed and certain. No it isn't; it can be sold at anytime and there is nothing I can do about it. The Court claimed that my internet writings made it necessary for my Ex to file for protective orders (non-violent) on more than one occasion. Check the record. She filed one motion requesting Judge James D. Humphrey to force me to take down my internet content. There was a hearing and Judge Humphrey denied her motion. Why did they make this stuff up? Either they ruled on erroneous information or their bias prohibited them from accurately absorbing the information. My guess is that they were pissed off about my web site.

On July 26, 2010, I posted a blog regarding the Indiana Appellate Court’s decision in my case. I also made mention of quite a few IP addresses that recently visited my website from the Indianapolis/Indiana area. I wrote that if the appellate court didn't rule on my case using fact and law, then I would be subpoenaing the IP addresses that visited my website. For some reason, quite a few IP addresses suddenly stopped visiting my site on that day. I bet there are a few government officials and media personnel that would like to know who the IP addresses belong to. If the public discovered that the Indiana Appellate Judges were conducting their own investigations while they were on a case, it would fracture the integrity and public trust of the entire Indiana Judicial System which serves as the foundation for the judicial branch of government. It would call into question the integrity of all of the rulings by the Indiana Appellate Court. (On a side note, I do have all of those IP addresses and their history backed up)

So now I have to wait on a Petition for Rehearing. One of the best lines from my lawyer's Petition deals with the Courts' accusations that I tried to intimidate the staff of the trial court. My lawyer wrote:

"Absolutely no evidence or testimony from court staff was ever presented at final or other hearing regarding this finding, and Husband never had any chance to refute such an allegation. One can only surmise that such information was obtained ex parte creating grounds for retrial. See Garrard v. Stone, 624 N.E,2d 68 (Ind. App. 1993) where case was remanded for retrial for Judge’s failure to step down after receiving evidence outside the presence of the parties."

Either Judge Humphrey lied, his staff lied, or both. It doesn't even matter who was telling the truth because it is against the law for a judge to gather information outside of the proceedings. Besides, I didn't do anything harassing or menacing and I have proof. I had a recorder going every time that I stepped foot into the Dearborn County Courthouse just in case something like this would come up. Were they intimidated by me? Probably. Not because they felt that I presented a physical danger to them; they probably felt that I was a legal liability because they knew they were doing something illegal and they figured out that they couldn't bully me into submission.

Now we wait. Let the Indiana Appellate Court ponder if they want to punish my children even more because they hate my children's father. While they are pondering whether to continue to abuse my children, let them ponder what information that I have on the Indiana Court System and what contacts that I have gained. I wonder if they will continue to assume that they can continue to stomp on the rights of the little guy and his fatherless little girls. The scary thing for the Indiana Appellate Court is that no judge on the bench can say for sure that the IP address of the person next to them isn't saved on my external hard drive. It only takes one. If the Indiana Appellate Court chastises me for my internet writings while someone from the court has visited my website, it will be worthy of a Mike Wallace story on 60 Minutes. If anyone reading this thinks that I am attempting to intimidate the Indiana Appellate Court by writing this; I'm not. Why would they be intimidated? They aren't supposed to be here anyway. Here's to playing fair, Indiana.


  1. Dan,

    I think you should call 60 Minutes and get an interview. It sounds like you have the perfect kind of story for their show.

    Mary Beth Wisehart
    Kansas City, MO

  2. Thanks for checking out the blog. I appreciate the support! Hopefully I can bring some national attention to the conduct of some of the "professionals" in the system.