How to fix a Grand Jury like Dearborn County Officials

[DAN’S TRIAL BEGINS MONDAY OCTOBER 3^RD AT 9:00AM WITH JURY SELECTION]

Forward

The following post is a bit lengthy yet it represents just a minuscule portion of the irrelevant, exaggerated, and false statements made during the Grand Jury hearings on my case. The transcripts from the hearings include some of the following statements and testimony; Judge Humphrey, Prosecutor Negangard, and Sheriff Kreinhop informed a grand jury that the government has the power to censor some free speech; Negangard informed the grand jury that a felony conviction was one of the only ways the government can legally deny me the right to own firearms; and one “victim” in my case testified that both the Erlanger, KY Police Department and the FBI told the alleged victim to “ignore” my postings and the respective law enforcement agencies refused to arrest me for exercising my constitutionally protect rights, that Dearborn County officials deemed to be illegal. The following demonstrates the malicious and illegal attempts by the Dearborn County government to maliciously deprive me of my civil rights that are protected by the United States Constitution.

How to Fix a Grand Jury like Dearborn County Officials

Knowingly disclosing information from Grand Jury proceedings is a violation of Indiana law unless a Judge allows the information to become public record. For some reason Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard petitioned the Court to release the transcripts from the Grand Jury investigation in my case and Judge Brian Hill granted Negangard’s request. After reviewing the documents, I’m having a difficult time understanding why Prosecutor Negangard would want to give the public access to 340 pages of transcripts that document the incompetent and illegal actions of Dearborn County officials.

Before I get too involved in sharing the released information from the grand Jury hearings, I want to give the taxpayers of Dearborn County an update on how much of your money Prosecutor Negangard is wasting on his personal vendetta. Last time I paid for the transcription of court hearings in Dearborn County, I think the cost to transcribe was around $4.00 a page. Considering the Grand Jury transcripts consist of 340 pages, I can say with some certainty that the Dearborn County tax payers are not going to be very pleased with the result of their $1,360 purchase.

Dearborn County prosecutors want to demonstrate to the world that they may be the most dysfunctional, intellectually challenged, and corrupt prosecutor’s office in the United States, by actually going through with my trial. Although Prosecutor Negangard tries his best to portray me as a potential danger to jurors, it is Negangard who poses the greatest risk to jurors, as his vindictive criminal proceedings insult the intelligence of past and future jurors.

I’ve been sitting in the Dearborn County Law Enforcement Center for nearly seven months and I have finally discovered some of my specific actions that they deemed to be illegal. Prosecutor Negangard, Judge Brian Hill, and/or my public defender, Bryan Barrett, obstructed my ability to review Grand Jury transcripts until 9/23/11; barely a week before my 10/3/11 jury trial. In 340 pages of testimony there was absolutely no evidence or documentation of illegal activity on my part. The transcripts demonstrate how Negangard and his band of villains illegally used a grand jury investigation to assassinate my character in their efforts to trick the jurors into believing there are limits to peaceful and non-violent free speech. Judge James D. Humphrey testified that I went “a little too far” because I posted his address and his wife’s name on the internet. I had encouraged people to contact Heidi Humphrey with any complaints or concerns because she was listed as an advisor on the Ethics and Professionalism Committee on the website of the Indiana Supreme Court. Dr. Edward J. Connor felt that I broke the law when I copied a picture of him that was on a public social networking site and reposted it in a blog post. He also stated that I contacted businesses he was affiliated with and told them that he was a criminal. He also told the grand jury how I wrote on the internet that he lived in an affluent neighborhood named Triple Crown. Heidi Humphrey testified that she felt threatened when she received three letters concerning Judge Humphrey [not from Dan] even though she testified that there was nothing threatening in the letters. Ms. Humphrey testified that she “truly did not remember being on” the committee listed on the Supreme Court website even though the website listed Heidi Humphrey as an advisor. On March 2, 2011, Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard presented ten pages of comments from my internet posting to the Grand Jurors that the Prosecutor’s office “felt was over the top, um, unsubstantiated statements against either Dr. Connor or Judge Humphrey.” Negangard testified that he and his staff felt that my comments “crossed the lines between freedom of speech and intimidation and harassment.” The Dearborn County Prosecutor’s Office indicted me because I posted too much free speech that they did not agree with.

The residents of Dearborn County should sleep well at night knowing that officials like Judge James D. Humphrey have the ability to put limits on free speech. Humphrey explained to the jurors “I understand we have a first amendment folks and that’s reflected in some of my rulings I’ve made but is this conduct something that I consider appropriate? Does it go beyond? You bet it does.” Humphrey’s testimony reflects his greatest concern in his decision to deny me parenting time. In my divorce decree Humphrey wrote, “The Court is most concerned about Husband’s irrational behavior and attacks on Dr. Connor.” Unfortunately Judge Humphrey’s personal views and opinions of what he deems to be appropriate behavior does not supersede the Constitution of the United States of America.

It would probably serve Judge James D. Humphrey and the entire Dearborn County, Indiana Prosecutor’s office well to take a remedial law course. Indiana Code (IC) 35-45-10-2 defines “Harassment” as “conduct toward a victim that includes but is not limited to repeated or continued impermissible contact that would cause a reasonable person to suffer emotional distress and that actually causes the victim to suffer emotional distress.” Negangard, Connor, and the Humphrey’s told jurors that the “victims” felt real fear and distress, but what they failed to tell the jurors was that IC 35-45-10-2 also states, “Harassment does not include statutorily or constitutionally protected activity.” Did I go beyond the “limits” of free speech? Not by a long shot.

“There is a ‘profound national commitment’ to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide open.”, New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. In the case of Organization for a Better Austin v. Keefe, the petitioner had distributed leaflets near the respondent’s home that were critical of the respondent’s business practices as a real estate broker. The petitioner, a racially integrated community organization, did so after respondent refused to sign an agreement that he would not solicit property in their community. A state court enjoined the petitioner from distributing the leaflets; an appellate court affirmed the ruling “on the grounds that the alleged activities were coercive and intimidating, rather than informative and therefore not entitled to First Amendment protection. The US Supreme Court reversed the decision stating, “The claim that the expressions were intended to exercise a coercive impact on respondent does not remove them from the reach of the First Amendment.” The court went on to state, “Petitioners were engaged openly and vigorously in making the public aware of respondent’s real estate practices. Those practices were offensive to them, as the views and practices of petitioners are no doubt offensive to others. But so long as the means are peaceful, the communication need not meet standards of acceptability.” According to the U.S. Supreme Court, I could have distributed the information around Judge Humphrey’s neighborhood so long as the means were peaceful, but I most likely would have been arrested by law enforcement officials in Dearborn County as many of the officials lack the constitutional knowledge necessary for the job.

What does a person do when they feel criminally harassed, intimidated, and/or threatened? The person contacts the appropriate law enforcement agencies. That’s what Dr. Edward J. Connor did. When I failed to stop exercising my right to free speech on the internet, Dr. Connor testified that he contacted the FBI because he felt it was “an interstate type of thing.” Dr. Connor testified that the FBI told him to “ignore it.” Dr. Connor testified that he also contacted the Erlanger Police Department and they also told him to “just ignore it.” When all else fails, go to Dearborn County; they’ll arrest anyone for whatever you want, if you are “important” enough.

I find it rather ironic that the people who have accused me of being paranoid are the same people who are showing pictures of me to their children, warning them that I might harm them. No kidding. Dr. Connor testified, “I remind my children periodically that this is what [Dan] looks like.” The Humphrey’s testified that they contacted their sons’ high school and college to inform the schools that I ”could be a possible treat to [their] family.” Heidi Humphrey testified that Judge Humphrey had a police officer escort her to the state line on her way to work at 4:30AM. Heidi Humphrey testified that she told her employer that her husband had a case dealing with a man that “made threats to him.” She also testified that she told her employer, “if I ever never showed up or never called, immediately contact my husband and Sheriff’s department.” Ms. Humphrey testified that she and her husband even contacted the Lawrenceburg Police Department and the Jefferson county Sheriff’s Department because their sons’ schools fell under their respective jurisdictions. 340 pages of “concerns” of what I might do or may be capable of doing but there isn’t one shred of testimony that I ever threatened illegal activity. There was even testimony that I appeared at the Dearborn County Courthouse, which allegedly caused concerns about the safety of Judge Humphrey. I’m not sure why Dearborn County Officials were surprised about me appearing at the courthouse because I was representing myself in my divorce. If Humphrey was worried about me hanging around the courthouse why did he continue to preside over my family court case? After voicing all of the concerns about me posing a potential risk to the physical safety of his family, Humphrey served as the judge on my case for nearly another year. Prosecutor Negangard initiated a grand jury investigation 18 months AFTER the Humphrey family received police escorts and protection.

So what else was there in the 340 pages of the Dearborn County taxpayers new $1360.00 book?, a lot of psychological jargon from Dr. Connor. He testified that out of all the murders and rapists he had ever evaluated, no one had ever attacked his credibility like me. Detective Kreinhop testified that out of all the murder and rape cases he has seen in his career, no one has filed more legal pleadings than me, as if he was equating motions filed in a civil court to the potential to rape and kill. Everyone kept voicing their concerns that I own a 357 magnum handgun and had a concealed carry permit. Prosecutor Negangard and Sheriff Kreinhop made it clear to the Grand Jury that if I was convicted of a felony, I would never be able to own a firearm. Negangard even told the Grand jury that Indiana has very liberal gun permit laws and stated, “I don’t have a problem with that but that’s why the felony convictions (are) generally (the) only means by which one loses a license to carry a firearm.” Negangard made a less-than-subtle argument that I should be indicted/convicted, not because I committed a crime, but due to the fact that other people did not like my free speech. What everyone failed to mention is that I own several other firearms. They are listed in the property division of my divorce decree. I have a .22 cal rifle, a 12 gauge shotgun, a couple of muzzle loaders, and a .270 cal rifle that will shoot a few hundred yards, but no one ever mentions those because they don’t sound as intimidating as a 357 magnum; it’s like the kid brother of Dirty Harry’s 44 magnum. The fact that I had a concealed carry permit made it even worse because they acted as if the permit was going to make it more likely that I would be hiding in the shadows saying, ”Go ahead, make my day.” Well I am happy to inform everyone that my Indiana concealed carry permit has expired and I have not obtained a permit since I have moved back to Ohio. Does the fact that I no longer have a license to carry a concealed handgun make me any less or more dangerous? No, but it does demonstrate how asinine their contention was that obtaining a legal permit to legally carry a handgun somehow made me more dangerous. As I’ve always said, most criminals usually take the time to wait 6 – 8 weeks to get a concealed carry permit before they commit a crime.

I still can’t believe F. Aaron Negangard felt it was a good idea to make the Grand Jury transcripts part of the official record. What I found to be amusing are the exaggerations and lies that the witnesses thought they would get away with. When Negangard asked my ex-wife about the condition of the house when she came home from work, while we were still married, she testified, “It would be an absolute mess.” I mean, the dishes wouldn’t be done. He was so lazy that if he ate something, he would just throw like the wrappers on the floors. Um, almost like hoarding, like papers would be everywhere.”
Regardless of whether the kids and I could turn our home into a hoarder’s house during my ex-wife’s 12 hour shift as a nurse, I fail to see what it had to do with the grand jury proceedings. Another comical issue deals with the 357 magnum. My ex-wife testified that I bought it after she filed for divorce, which was true and she testified to that during the divorce hearing. Her lawyer, Angela G. Loechel, who also testified before the Grand Jury, testified that the gun was purchased before my ex-wife filed for divorce.

Probably the most disgusting and malicious attempt to mislead the Grand Jury came from Sheriff Kreinhop during the last minute of Grand Jury testimony. Kreinhop stated, “I have 26 criminal investigative years of experience and I’ve never encountered an individual, even on murder cases, where they filed motions for appeal and so forth and never had anybody file this many. I think these were all attempt by [Dan] to delay the process and I don’t think, of course it’s my opinion, but I don’t think he really wanted to be with his children. I think he’s using that as a platform to exercise his First Amendment right to free speech and there is limits as I’m sure you’ll be advised, or told at some point, to free speech and I think he’s went beyond that but that’s my opinion.” Mr. Negangard then said, “I have no further questions.”

That’s how it ended. They put a fictional line on free speech and then convinced a Grand Jury that I crossed it. There were no threats. There was no need for protection. There was no mention of how Judge Humphrey continued to preside over my divorce case for nearly ten months after police escorts and fear that I would abduct his family members, or worse. It was only an all out effort to destroy Dan Brewington, because he said too much. Here’s your tax dollars at work Dearborn County.