To whom it may concern,
Andrew Conley is the 18 year old male who pleaded guilty, in an Ohio County, Indiana courtroom, to killing his 10 year old brother. Reports in the news state that the prosecutors were stunned by Andrew Conley’s admission of guilt as they were expecting Conley to plead guilty by insanity. A report on Cincinnati.com stated that Dearborn/Ohio County Prosecutor Aaron Negangard claimed that he was “surprised by Conley’s change from a plea of guilty by insanity.” Negangard should not have been surprised because Negangard was aware that one of the experts appointed by Judge James D. Humphrey, Dr. Edward J Connor, has a record of engaging in ex parte communications with judges, giving false statements to courts and law enforcement, and interfering with legal hearings. This is the same Dr. Edward J. Connor that was a topic of conversation on Eric Deters’ radio show that aired on August 4, 2010, on Cincinnati’s 700 WLW. Eric Deters talked about how Dr. Connor misled clients and judges and talked about how Dr. Connor asked women perverted questions about sexual role playing and shaving pubic hair. (The 8/4/10 podcast of Eric Deters’ show can be heard on WLW’s website.)
I am a 36 year old male who has not seen his children since August 19, 2009 because of the actions of Dr. Edward J Connor, of Erlanger, Kentucky, and Judge James D. Humphrey. In January 2007, my wife filed for divorce and in the summer of 2007, Dr. Edward J Connor performed a child custody evaluation for the court. Dr. Connor release his findings on August 29, 2007 and recommended that my wife be given custody of the children and that I continue to exercise parenting time with my 1 and 3 year old daughters three days a week and equal weekends. Dr. Connor made no mention of parental deficiencies in the evaluation and the evaluation report made statements like the following:
“Dan completed the Child History Questionnaire for both children. He seemed to have a good awareness of the children’s overall development milestones and attainments and also a good awareness of the children’s interests, desires and individual differences. He also showed a good awareness of various parenting strategies and techniques. In general, there are no significant deficits noted in Dan’s overall understanding of the children.”
Dr. Connor’s evaluation also stated:
“[Dan Brewington] also appeared nurturing such as when [18 month old daughter] accidentally hit her head on something and Dan kissed her head and asked if she was okay.”
Dr. Connor made the following recommendations:
“We again believe that [Wife] should be the primary residential parent and that the children should have time with their father during the times that their mother works. If Dan can arrange his schedule accordingly, then we believe that this would be a benefit to the children.”
“Currently, Dan has the children every Wednesday, Friday during the day and overnight and every third Monday during the day and overnight and equal weekend time. This schedule is reportedly based on the days that [Wife] works. Dan currently returns [daughters] to [Wife] at 8:00pm on the Sundays of his weekend time. Therefore, if our calculations are correct, [Wife] generally cares for the children four days a week. We see no reason why this schedule should not remain intact at this time.”
“We strongly believe that the children need to have adequate time with their father to maintain the bond that they have with him.”
Judge James D. Humphrey, who serves as Circuit Court Judge for both Dearborn and Ohio Counties in Indiana, was the second judge in my case. My divorce originated in Ripley County, Indiana but Ripley Circuit Judge Carl H. Taul recused himself because of the ex parte communication and evidence he received from Dr. Connor. The ex parte communications began on February 21, 2008, when Dr. Connor contacted Judge Taul to inform Judge Taul that Dr. Connor’s child custody evaluation contained “numerous errors and oversights.” Upon hearing that Dr. Connor told the Court that he released a report involving the welfare of my children that contained “numerous errors and oversights”, I requested a copy of the case file from Dr. Connor’s custody evaluation report per Indiana and Kentucky law and Dr. Connor’s contract, Provisions to Serve as an Impartial Expert in a Custody Evaluation. When I requested Dr. Connor’s case file, on March 11, 2008, Dr. Connor stated the following:
“We cannot release a copy of the case to you without [Wife’s] consent, as it contains confidential information about her as well as the children in addition to yourself.”
After sending a letter to Dr. Connor informing him that I was representing myself and that his contract stated that the parties were entitled to the case file, on March 26, 2008, Dr. Connor wrote:
“A letter was sent to Judge Taul today requesting his response as soon as possible. If I receive verification from the Court of your pro-se status, I would be happy to release the chart records to you. However, given the large amount of documentation and extra staff time required for copying, I cannot guarantee that the records will be ready for you in advance or our 3/31/08 appointment.”
On March 27, 2008, Dr. Connor wrote:
“Our correspondence with Judge Taul indicates that you have a right to the ‘evaluation’ at this time. As such, we do not interpret this as you having a right to the entire file but, but simply the ‘evaluation’ report.”
There were no protective orders prohibiting Dr. Connor from releasing his case file per Dr. Connor’s contract and Judge Taul could not have ruled on a matter outside the presence of the parties. Despite Dr. Connor’s evaluation report having no mention of any concerns that I may harass or harm the children or their mother, on April 1, 2008, Dr. Connor wrote a letter to Judge Taul stating:
On 3/31/08, Mr. Brewington, also stated that he wants a copy of the case file. Based on your letter dated 3/26/08 stating that Mr. Brewington is entitled to the evaluation only, we will not be releasing the case file to him. Furthermore, I am concerned as to Mr. Brewington’s intentions regarding this case file considering that it holds not only his confidential information, but also [Wife’s].”
On April 16, 2008, Dr. Connor told Judge Taul that he was not going to give me a copy of the case file because I was representing myself. Dr. Connor wrote:
“Mr. Brewington is correct in stating that our contract indicates we would provide the file to the representing attorney; however, given the circumstances, we believe that a Court order is necessary to release the file to Mr. Brewington, given that he is representing himself pro se.”
On August 4, 2008, Dr. Connor changed his story and claimed that there were laws that prevented him from releasing the file. Dr. Connor’s letter dated August 4, 2008, which was copied to Judge Taul, stated:
“Without [Wife’s] consent or a Court order from Judge Taul, I am prohibited from releasing the confidential information contained within the file per state and HIPAA laws and regulations. Please refer to the attached copy of the Provisions to Serve as an Impartial Expert in a Custody Evaluation, which you signed on 6/18/07.”
During a hearing on June 13, 2008 on my motion to release Dr. Connor’s case file, Judge Taul stated:
“…the Order to the Doctor to release was to release that which he was obligated to do under Kentucky law. [sic]”
Dr. Connor was not licensed to practice psychology in the state of Indiana so Judge Taul claimed that he issued an order to Dr. Connor to follow Kentucky laws regarding the release of information. Of course there was never any such order filed because it would require Indiana lawyers to know Kentucky law if they wanted to represent their clients in Indiana. During the June 13, 2008 hearing, I discovered that Dr. Connor entered into a separate agreement for individual psychological services to make it harder for me to obtain the case file from the custody evaluation. When I requested a copy of Dr. Connor’s Office Policy Statement bearing my signature, Dr. Connor did not respond until nearly a month and a half later. In Dr. Connor’s September 9, 2008 letter [attached hereto], which was also copied to Judge Taul, Dr. Connor wrote:
“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 our office staff. Nevertheless, the Office Policy Statement is simply an adjunct document to the Court order in which you and [Wife] agreed to participate fully in a custody evaluation to be conducted at this office.”
The following day (September 10, 2008), Dr. Connor attacked me in a letter [attached hereto] to Judge Taul stating:
“With this letter, I am expressing my concerns about regarding Mr. Daniel Brewington’s blatant disregard for the Court’s ruling in the above captioned case. As recently as 9/8/08, Mr. Brewington continues to send letters to me requesting that I release the case file to him, including [Wife’s] raw test data, despite the Court’s rulings that he be provided only with the evaluation report.”
“I have patiently and repeatedly responded to Mr. Brewington’s concerns to this point; however, it is clear that he disregards any information that does not serve his agenda. It is very perplexing that he is unable to understand or accept the basic premise of confidentiality that protects Ms. Brewington’s records from being released without her consent or a Court order. I have repeatedly explained this to him in our correspondence, but he continues to claim I have not given him a valid reason for withholding the file.”
“As a custody evaluator per an Agreed Order and thereby an extension of the Court, I believe Mr. Brewington’s behavior shows a blatant disrespect for the Court.” [Note: In a letter to Dr. Connor dated 9/16/08, Judge Taul told Dr. Connor that he would have to “respectfully disagree with [Dr. Connor’s] contention that as a custody evaluator [Dr. Connor] is an ‘extension of the Court’.” On December 5, 2008, Judge Carl H. Taul recused himself from the case because of the ex parte communication between Judge Taul and Dr. Connor.]
First it is important to note that none of the above letters appear on the Court record. After Dr. Connor claimed that his Office Policy Statement, which I was not provided with, was an “adjunct document” to the court order and after Dr. Connor attacked me for not understanding “the basic premise of confidentiality” and disregarding “any information that does not serve [my] agenda”, Dr. Connor gave the following court testimony regarding the Office Policy Statement during my cross examination of Dr. Connor on May 27, 2009 [Copies of Dr. Connor’s below testimony attached hereto. The transcripts of my full cross-examination of Dr. Connor can be found on www.danhelpskids.com]:
Dr. Connor (A): [Participants in custody evaluations] normally sign that document that you signed, yes.
Dan (Q): The Office Policy Statement?
Dr. Connor (A): That, I believe, is a document that was inaccurately or incorrectly given to [Wife].
Judge James D. Humphrey terminated my ability to see my 3 and 5 year old daughters on August 18, 2009. During the course of the 2 ½ year divorce, I cared for my girls every Wednesday, Friday, and ever third Monday from 6:25 AM until 8 AM the following day and I cared for my daughters half of the weekends in a year. During the course of my marriage and divorce, there were no allegations of abuse, neglect, drug or alcohol abuse, adultery, domestic violence, etc… There were no investigations performed by law enforcement or social services. At no point did Dr. Connor, the Court, my daughters’ mother, or anyone else attempt to modify or restrict my parenting time during the course of the 2 ½ year divorce. Despite the fact that no one mentioned terminating my parenting time, Judge Humphrey terminated my parenting time with my 3 and 5 year old daughters 2 ½ months after the final hearing of the divorce. Without warning, my little girls were stripped of a father that they had never gone more than four days without seeing. What was Judge Humphrey’s main concern in terminating two little girls’ ability to have a daddy? In the final decree Judge Humphrey wrote:
“The Court is most concerned about Husband’s irrational behavior and attacks on Dr. Connor. Frankly it appears that these attacks have been an attempt at revenge for taking a position regarding custody contrary to Husband.”
Judge Humphrey wasn’t concerned about my children. He was concerned about Dr. Edward J. Connor. Dr. Connor claimed that there Court ruled that I was not entitled to Dr. Connor’s case file yet Dr. Connor continued to claim that he could release the file if he received the mother’s consent. If there was truly a Court order prohibiting me from obtaining a copy of Dr. Connor’s case file, Dr. Connor wouldn’t be able to release the file even with the mother’s consent without permission from the Court. When I determined that the Court was not going to protect my children from Dr. Connor’s false statements and fraudulent conduct, in September of 2008 I created a website and began warning people about Dr. Connor and the family courts in Southeastern Indiana. I never wrote anything harassing about my ex-wife or any information damaging to my children. My ex-wife even filed a petition for a protective order requesting Judge Humphrey to force me to take down my internet content because she claimed it was harmful to her and the children. Judge Humphrey had to deny it because the web material did not deal with her or my children, it dealt with the conduct of Dr. Connor, Judge Taul and Judge Humphrey. Since Judge Humphrey could not force me to take down my internet content regarding the illegal conduct of his expert, Dr. Edward J. Connor, Judge Humphrey punished me for exercising my First Amendment Rights to free speech by taking away my children because Judge Humphrey was “most concerned” about the welfare of Dr. Connor.
I still haven’t seen my two little girls since August 19, 2009. Judge Humphrey wrote in the final decree:
“[Dan Brewington] shall not be entitled to visitation until he undergoes a mental health evaluation with a Mental Health Care Provider approved by the Court. The purpose of this evaluation is to determine if he is a possible danger to the children, Wife, and/or himself. Further, Husband shall follow all recommendations made by the Mental Health Care Provider.”
Despite having a flawless parenting record throughout the life of my children and no mention of “possible danger” in the evaluation performed by Dr. Edward J Connor, Judge Humphrey denied my children of a father while forcing me to undergo further evaluations to determine if I “may” be a danger to anyone in the future. I haven’t been able to present an evaluation to the Court because Judge Humphrey stated that the mental health professional must be first approved by the Court. Judge Humphrey claimed that he did not have jurisdiction of the matter because the case was being appealed. When I retained a lawyer, Judge Humphrey determined that he did have jurisdiction of the case and on March 17, 2010, Judge Humphrey set a hearing to approve a psychiatrist for June 13, 2010. Just five days before the June 13th hearing, Judge Humphrey recused himself claiming that there was a pending investigation of me that pertained to Judge Humphrey.
Neither I nor my ex-wife lived in Dearborn County. The case landed in Dearborn County because Ripley Circuit Court Judge Carl H. Taul recused himself because he engaged in several ex parte communications with Dr. Edward J. Connor. On October 8, 2009, I received a voicemail from Dearborn County Special Crimes Unit Detective Mike Kreinhop stating the following:
“Mr. Brewington my name is Mike Kreinhop. I’m a detective assigned to the Special Crimes Unit located in Dearborn County, Indiana. And uh, I was calling to see if I could meet with you sometime, uh, concerning um… a complaint that’s been made against you con… on some writings that you have um… made, and uh… I wanted to get your side of the story if you will. And the best way to reach me is on my cell phone that number’s 812-221-0797. Again, that’s area code 812-221-0797. If I’m not available, please leave your name and number that I can reach you or the time I can call you back, and uh… see if you would be available to meet with me. Thank you very much. Bye.”
The Dearborn County Special Crimes Unit is a special task force, headed by Prosecutor Aaron Negangard that was created to help fight drugs, violent crimes, etc… When I returned Mr. Kreinhop’s call, he informed me that he wanted me to meet with him in Dearborn County but Detective Kreinhop refused to tell me who filed the complaint or what the alleged complaint was about. Detective Kreinhop would only tell me that it involved my writings. Considering that neither I, my ex-wife, nor Dr. Edward J. Connor, lived in Dearborn County, the only person falling under the jurisdiction of the Dearborn County Special Crimes Unit was Judge Humphrey. When I had a lawyer try to contact Detective Kreinhop, Detective Kreinhop did not respond to my lawyers calls for two weeks and then refused to tell my lawyer what the investigation was about and refused to meet with my lawyer unless I was present. My lawyer told Detective Kreinhop that I would not be speaking with him if the Dearborn County Special Crimes Unit was not willing to give an explanation as to why they wanted to question me in Dearborn County. Despite knowing that my lawyer said that I was not going to speak with them, on November 2, 2009, Prosecutor Negangard had Detective Kreinhop drive from Dearborn County, Indiana to my mother’s house in Norwood, Ohio to speak to me. Detective Kreinhop did not inform the Norwood Police Department of his trip. Detective Kreinhop claimed that he was just there to “verify” what my lawyer said about me not agreeing to meet with Detective Kreinhop in Dearborn County. Detective Kreinhop stayed for over three hours. Near the end of the conversation, I told Detective Kreinhop to tell Prosecutor Negangard to file charges against me if Prosecutor Negangard felt that I broke any laws and I told Detective Kreinhop that any trial would include a jury and I would be calling Dr. Connor and Judge Humphrey as my first witnesses. That was the last I heard about the alleged investigation until Judge Humphrey recused himself.
After Judge Humphrey recused himself, I sent a public records request to Prosecutor Aaron Negangard asking him for the information regarding the Dearborn County Special Crimes Unit’s investigation of my writings. In a letter dated July 7, 2010, Prosecutor Negangard denied my records request stating, “Pursuant to Indiana Law, Investigatory records are confidential and are not to be disclosed.” Upon review of the law, not only did I find that Prosecutor Negangard’s statements were false, Indiana law states that all investigatory records (except for those containing medical information, social security numbers, etc…) are subject to release at the discretion of the agency. I sent a response to Mr. Negangard’s denial and copied to other elected officials in Dearborn County to make them aware of Mr. Negangard’s false statements and to let them know that it could negatively impact future state and federal funding for law enforcement. On Monday, July 12, 2010, Prosecutor Negangard copied me to the following email to Dearborn County Officials:
To all county officials:
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
Prosecutor Negangard accuses me of trying to undermine the Dearborn County criminal justice system with my writings. The irony of the situation is that Dr. Connor claimed that my writings were confusing and difficult to follow. Dr. Connor also claimed that my writings were “similar to those of individuals who have committed horrendous crimes against their families.” People like Dr. Edward J. Connor, Judge James D. Humphrey, and Prosecutor Aaron Negangard have put a tremendous amount of effort into trying to convince people that I present a risk or danger to society despite the fact that I have absolutely no history of violent and/or criminally menacing behavior. Dr. Connor, Judge Humphrey, and Prosecutor Negangard are very familiar with the court system and know that they can take criminal and/or civil action against me if they feel that I have done something wrong. They aren’t protecting the public from me; Dr. Connor, Judge Humphrey, and Prosecutor Negangard are protecting themselves from me. They figured out that they could not bully or trick me into doing something illegal so they could tell people that they were right about me. Unfortunately for my two little girls, Dr. Connor, Judge Humphrey, and Prosecutor Negangard feel that protecting their own self interest is more important than my daughters having a father in their lives.
I am not professing to claim that I know whether or not Andrew Conley is sane and I can’t even begin to comprehend what the Conley family has endured. I do find it troubling that a “professional” like Dr. Edward J. Connor is continually appointed by Judge Humphrey. Dr. Connor testified that he had extreme difficulties communicating with me because I had ADHD, yet Judge Humphrey appoints Dr. Connor to evaluate someone who claimed that a TV show motivated them to murder another human being. What is even more troubling are the lengths that Judge Humphrey, Dr. Connor, and Prosecutor Aaron Negangard will go to protect the criminal conduct of the Court’s expert. How can any justice be served when the first priority of the Court and the Prosecution is to protect the reputation of the Court appointed expert? How can justice be served when Dr. Connor has established a pattern of communicating with judges like Judge Carl H. Taul and Judge James D. Humphrey outside the presence of the parties to the trial? Judge Humphrey punished my children by taking away their father because their dad wrote about Dr. Connor’s misconduct. Rather than appoint another professional to evaluate Andrew Conley, Judge Humphrey went with his go to guy, Dr. Edward J. Connor. Judge Humphrey and Prosecutor Negangard are aware that Dr. Connor doesn’t tell the truth. They know that there isn’t a legitimate reason to investigate me. Dearborn County Law Enforcement has been investigating “my writings” for nearly a year. They haven’t even contacted the law enforcement agencies of the last two places that I have resided. Prosecutor Aaron Negangard and Dearborn County Law Enforcement are conducting a perpetual investigation of me because if the investigation is concluded, it is likely that they will have to tell me who filed the complaint. If Dr. Connor made the complaint, then Prosecutor Aaron Negangard will have to explain why he is wasting county resources on a yearlong investigation of a matter that is out of his jurisdiction. If Judge Humphrey made the complaint and initiated the “secret” investigation, Judge Humphrey will have to answer to why he continued to preside over my case and obstruct my ability to get back to my children. Regardless of who made the complaint, Judge James D. Humphrey, Dr. Edward J. Connor, and Prosecutor Aaron Negangard have demonstrated how they are willing to sacrifice the ideals and principles of the United States legal system to keep a lid on internal misconduct. While Lady Justice stands blindfolded with a scale in her hand, Judge Humphrey, Dr. Connor, and Prosecutor Negangard tip the scale when they feel that no one is watching.
I am sending a copy of this letter to different people to make people aware of the abuse of power and the lack of justice in South Eastern Indiana. While there is no doubt that Andrew Conley committed this unthinkable act, Dearborn County casts the same group of characters in legal matters where everyone is considered innocent until proven guilty. In Aaron Negangard’s letter to the county officials he stated:
“If [Dan Brewington] 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.”
While Prosecutor Negangard was preoccupied in trying to convince people that I presented a threat to the Dearborn County Criminal Justice System, he forgot to mention that I have to be charged with something before Prosecutor Negangard can even speculate about convicting me. It’s that kind of preoccupation with self-preservation that treads on the rights of citizens in the courts. Hopefully this letter will help bring blind justice to the Dearborn and Ohio County Courts. For more information, go to www.danhelpskids.com and www.danbrewington.blogspot.com. Feel free to contact me with any questions.