Don’t Drink the Kool-Aid Dearborn County, Regarding the Jail Expansion.
I received word that Dearborn County officials have adjusted the figures for the funding of the new jail. This isn’t an effort to save taxpayer dollars; it is another example of how the Dearborn County government is trying to protect the county citizens from the citizens’ own intellectual deficiencies. County officials have gone on record to say the voters lack the necessary education to approve funding for a new jail so the government is taking the decision out of the voter’s hands. The Dearborn County government has so little faith in the intelligence of its citizens, the voters will be lucky if they are allowed to choose the flavor of Kool-Aid.
If the new financing plan is superior to the original, then why wasn’t it presented in the beginning? The fact is, the only reason there is a new funding option is because county officials did not want to chance the voters having a say in the spending of their tax dollars. The government doesn’t feel the voters have the ability to understand jail overcrowding caused by sentencing and bond amounts that exceed any comparable counties in the state. Officials like Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard, Sheriff Michael Kreinhop, and Commissioner/Deputy/Special Crimes Unit Detective Shane McHenry want a new jail so they have the ability to incarcerate anyone they want.
I spent roughly seven months in the custody of the Dearborn County Law Enforcement Center during the course of Prosecutor Negangard’s efforts to desecrate the Constitution of the Untied States of America. During my stay at the DCLEC, I talked to many inmates and read a lot of their paperwork and discovered that it takes very little to become a longtime resident at the DCLEC. A sure-fire way to get a one-way pass to the DCLEC is to have another person, called a snitch, allege that you have been involved in some form of illegal conduct. There doesn’t have to be a controlled drug buy with an undercover cop; no trading of marked money; or video or audio of illegal conduct. The only evidence necessary for Prosecutor Negangard and his Special Crimes Unit (SCU) to issue an arrest warrant is the word of someone looking to evade punishment for breaking the law. All the criminal has to do is point a finger or say his/her name and another person is locked up with an excessively high bond. The new person is stuck in jail listening to a paid attorney advise them that it’s too risky to take the case to trial in Dearborn County so the inmate has the choice of snitching and/or taking a plea deal to get out. The plea deals demonstrate the outrageous charges and bonds of inmates in Dearborn County.
An elderly man that I got to know pretty well just signed a plea deal involving a drug charge that landed him in jail with, at least, a one million dollar bond. To a layman, a one million dollar bond would suggest that he posed an immediate and substantial risk to society. His plea bargain entailed the following: a fifteen year sentence with fourteen years suspended and he only has to serve six months of the one year that wasn’t suspended. The 72 year old man who Negangard alleged was a danger to society is now, or will soon be, back on the streets because he’s already served a six month sentence. The day before he signed the plea deal he was a million dollar risk to society. Somehow this plea deal “alleviated” all of the danger the man posed to society. He was never dangerous; Dearborn County used available jail space to scare an elderly man into accepting a plea deal, while paying a Lawrenceburg lawyer hundreds or thousands of dollars, over the course of six months to walk across the street to “discuss” a potential deal with Prosecutor Negangard. Regardless of the man’s innocence or guilt, it is a prime example of a main contributor to unnecessary jail overcrowding.
One of the ways the DCLEC reduces the inmate population is by freeing snitches. A person has to realize Dearborn County law enforcement doesn’t use snitches in the same manner as credible law enforcement agencies. Normally the purpose of using a snitch or informant is to catch a bigger fish. In my situation, I was already “caught” but Prosecutor Negangard arranged to have the “panty burglar”, Joseph McCaleb, placed in my cell as my new bunkie about 2 ½ months before my trial. McCaleb, having been able to read any of the stuff in my cell for 2 ½ months, including 1368 pages of discoveries provided by the Prosecutor and the entire grand jury transcript, wrote a letter to Prosecutor Negangard on September 25, 2011 stressing everything that Prosecutor Negangard might mention at my trial to emphasize that I was dangerous. A copy of McCaleb’s letter can be found at http://dearborncounty.blogspot.com/2011/11/joseph-mccaleb-letter-from-brewington.html Prosecutor Negangard did not use any of McCaleb’s letter at trial but waited until the sentencing hearing. By then McCaleb testified that he didn’t think I was capable of carrying out anything that he had written about to Prosecutor Negangard. Still he testified against me at my sentencing hearing alleging that I fantasized about an elaborate plot to kill Judge Humphrey. Joseph McCaleb provided this information to Prosecutor Negangard, prior to my trial but Negangard waited until after I was convicted to raise the issue. In his efforts to increase the sentence of a blogger during my sentencing hearing, Negangard used the letter from the “snitch” he placed in my cell. While sharing a cell with McCaleb, he informed me that he was being accused of stealing clothes from houses where he installed Direct TV systems. The kicker is he was accused of returning to the houses, AFTER he did the installation, to steal the clothes. It was only after his court room testimony I discovered he was stealing women’s undergarments, photographing his “loot” and putting it on his computer. In his efforts to lengthen the jail sentence of a blogger, Negangard used a sick perverted stalker who plotted how to break into homes to steal women’s panties in an effort to satisfy some twisted fetish. Rather than protect families from a serial panty burglar, Negangard obviously was not concerned about McCaleb’s victims he was only concerned about Brewington and trying to protect the images of Judge Humphrey and his wife, Heidi Humphrey. Joseph McCaleb was out of jail just a little more than a month after testifying against me because according to Prosecutor Negangard and Judge Humphrey, McCaleb is much less a threat to the women he victimized than the threat I supposedly pose to the Judge and his family, who I have never had any personal contact with. McCaleb, who broke into womens’ houses, stole their panties, and posted pictures on his computer is out on the streets and Brewington who blogged about his experiences in the family courts is in jail with a 5 year sentence.
Dearborn County residents need to question who the new jail is going to house. The answer is whoever Prosecutor Negangard wants to keep incarcerated. People have to realize they may be arrested and detained because they are loosely associated with someone who breaks the law. What happens if one of the “Valley kids” (Hidden Valley is a prominent area in Dearborn County) is busted for selling drugs and decides to place the blame on one of the “peasant’s” children? Who do you think will take the fall? A kid from Judge Humphrey and Prosecutor Negangard’s neighborhood, or the child with a different address? If the new jail is built, I’d advise anyone to steer clear of Hollywood Casino in Dearborn County because the county would increase arrests, bonds, and penalties for disorderly conduct. There is a certain irony to the fact Hollywood Casino is partially responsible for funding a jail that will likely lead to increased harassment of their clientele.
Look how your money has been spent Dearborn County. You should shudder to think about the tens of thousands of dollars Dearborn County law enforcement has squandered to investigate, incarcerate, and convict me for writing on the internet and low and behold, I’m still writing. When someone is convicted of selling crack, they get arrested if they sell it again. Dearborn County cannot order me to stop blogging because blogging is not a crime but somehow I am writing as a felon convicted of blogging. Sheriff Kreinhop testified he never contacted any other law enforcement agency during his investigation of my case. Despite the fact that Prosecutor Negangard alleged I approached two separate inmates, in two different states about plots to assassinate an active judge, I have yet to be named as a target of another investigation. That’s because Negangard knew the allegations were false. But these are the everyday things that occur in Dearborn County that will keep any jail at full capacity.
It doesn’t matter if Dearborn County residents agree with me or not because either way they should use common sense and voice their opinion. If you agree with me contact government officials about your concerns regarding the unnecessary jail expansion. If you are of the opinion that I am a menace to society, I would encourage you to contact Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard and demand an immediate grand jury investigation into Negangard’s allegations that I made two separate inquiries into the assassinating Judge Humphrey. Please demand the grand jury summons of renowned conman and jail house snitch Keith Jones and Joseph McCaleb the perverted serial panty bandit, so Mr. Jones and Mr. McCaleb have the opportunity to further “protect” public safety. Of course it may be difficult to believe Joseph McCaleb since he recanted his thoughts at the sentencing hearing and any investigation involving Keith Jones will include testimony from officials from the Hamilton County(Ohio) Justice Center, who will testify Keith Jones never came in contact with Dan Brewington at the Hamilton County (Ohio) Justice Center. Of course they will have to find Keith Jones who is serving a 10 year sentence, after having his probation revoked from Franklin County, Ohio. (days after he reported the alleged “drive by shooting attempt”).
The choice is yours, Dearborn County residents. Trust your logic, or trust the people who believe you are too ignorant to know what’s good for you. The general consensus I’ve received from officials outside of Dearborn County is the Dearborn County government makes Boss Hogg look like Mother Theresa. If you do not agree with anything I’ve written, please take this one bit of advice; go with the Blue-Raspberry flavor. It’s cool and refreshing.
Be smart Dearborn County.
Monday, December 19, 2011
Saturday, December 17, 2011
Dear Dearborn County, I need the Transcripts
Dear Dearborn County, I need the Transcripts.
One of the things I find a little amusing about the Dearborn County legal system is their inability to transcribe court records in a reasonable time. The county wants to build a new jail yet the Court can’t maintain the staff necessary to complete court transcripts in a timely manner. ( or the person making $4 a page for typing the transcripts doesn’t want to share). Last time I needed court transcripts from Dearborn County it took over 90 days. Judge James D. Humphrey’s court reporter/transcriber claimed her computer crashed and she had to “rebuild” the files. I know a bit about computers yet I’m not sure what that means. Either Dearborn County has a computer genius typing transcripts or Judge Humphrey’s assistant, was lying about why she didn’t complete her job on time.
I know Judge Humphrey and Prosecutor Negangard find it amusing that they succeeded in abusing the criminal legal process leaving me to sit around in jail but it is only a matter of time before everything is overturned. Stalling the preparation of the transcripts is bush league. And just a note to whoever prepares the transcripts; make sure they are accurate as I will eventually cross check the transcripts with the court audio. It appears that there were a few mistakes in the transcripts from the grand jury hearings and some of Prosecutor Negangard’s inappropriate remarks were omitted. The best part about receiving the transcripts is I get to post them on the internet to show everyone how many times Prosecutor Negangard lied throughout the trial. I’ll post Dr. Edward J. Connor’s quotes when he testified how he refused to provide me a copy of his case file in March 2008 because he was afraid I’d post confidential information on my website. When I post Dr. Connor’s testimony, I’ll also post information documenting my website wasn’t created for another 6 months. Will Prosecutor Negangard do anything about Dr. Connor’s false statements? No, but I will be there to remind people how Judge Humphrey and Prosecutor Negangard punish innocent citizens and children for standing up against corruption in the family court system.
One of the things I find a little amusing about the Dearborn County legal system is their inability to transcribe court records in a reasonable time. The county wants to build a new jail yet the Court can’t maintain the staff necessary to complete court transcripts in a timely manner. ( or the person making $4 a page for typing the transcripts doesn’t want to share). Last time I needed court transcripts from Dearborn County it took over 90 days. Judge James D. Humphrey’s court reporter/transcriber claimed her computer crashed and she had to “rebuild” the files. I know a bit about computers yet I’m not sure what that means. Either Dearborn County has a computer genius typing transcripts or Judge Humphrey’s assistant, was lying about why she didn’t complete her job on time.
I know Judge Humphrey and Prosecutor Negangard find it amusing that they succeeded in abusing the criminal legal process leaving me to sit around in jail but it is only a matter of time before everything is overturned. Stalling the preparation of the transcripts is bush league. And just a note to whoever prepares the transcripts; make sure they are accurate as I will eventually cross check the transcripts with the court audio. It appears that there were a few mistakes in the transcripts from the grand jury hearings and some of Prosecutor Negangard’s inappropriate remarks were omitted. The best part about receiving the transcripts is I get to post them on the internet to show everyone how many times Prosecutor Negangard lied throughout the trial. I’ll post Dr. Edward J. Connor’s quotes when he testified how he refused to provide me a copy of his case file in March 2008 because he was afraid I’d post confidential information on my website. When I post Dr. Connor’s testimony, I’ll also post information documenting my website wasn’t created for another 6 months. Will Prosecutor Negangard do anything about Dr. Connor’s false statements? No, but I will be there to remind people how Judge Humphrey and Prosecutor Negangard punish innocent citizens and children for standing up against corruption in the family court system.
I Am a Diabolical Mastermind!!!
I Am a Diabolical Mastermind!!!
That is the opinion of Judge James D. Humphrey, Dr. Edward J. Connor my ex-wife and others. It has been nearly five years since my ex-wife filed for divorce on January 8, 2007 and those few people continue to analyze and dissect my every action as an effort to undermine the peace and security of the world. Rather than accepting the fact I want my children to grow up spending equal time with both parents, even after I’ve missed nearly 2 ½ years with my daughters, they’re paranoid hatred of me has branded yours truly as their own Lex Luther. Branding me as an evil and diabolical menace, their only intention is to instill fear and panic into people and continue to insist my children should be protected from their diabolical father. Rather than concede that I am never going to lash out and I have never lashed out in a violent or illegal manner, they take the “sooner or later he’s gonna blow” mentality. So their contention is the longer I go without a violent eruption, the more dangerous I actually am. How can I be more dangerous by not engaging in illegal dangerous activity? A few days ago a good friend of mine summed up my situation with a perfect analogy. He said people like Humphrey, Connor and my ex-wife treat me like a 55 gallon drum of gasoline by a fire. They keep pushing the drum closer to the fire then go running and screaming “HE’S GONNA BLOW!” They run around telling the locals to fear for their lives because of the potential danger. They share all kinds of worst case scenarios of what may happen when the drum explodes. And then time passes and still no explosion. Soon the locals are caught scratching their heads because the danger did not come as predicted. They question the honesty and logic of those preaching the doomsday scenario. So what happens when there is no explosion? The doomsayers push the 55 gallon drum of gasoline closer to the fire with the hope “He’s gonna blow” to fulfill their twisted thinking and logic.
I’m not a 55 gallon drum of gas. I’m more like a 55 gallon drum of water. They’ve pushed and prodded and the worst they have drawn out of me is a little steam. I’m used to it. Unfortunately it has become a way of life for me. They just underestimated the level of “abuse” I was able to tolerate.
When my wife decided she wanted a divorce, she took our 10 month and 3 year old daughters to stay with her at her parents’ house on the days she determined to be “her” days with the girls. However, she would not allow me to exercise parenting time alone with our daughters because she now claimed I was dangerous. This is the same woman who left the children in my care while she worked nights as a nurse or when she went on three day weekend trips with friends. When she filed for divorce, I suddenly became dangerous. This is a period of time that she claimed she felt threatened by me. Despite her claims of alleged fear she would come home after working a late shift, 12:30AM, block my truck with her car, hide her keys and then spend the next 12 to 24 hours “monitoring” my parenting. She began stepping into feeding the girls, giving them bathes and normal child care/ parenting duties during my time with the girls. I could argue or let it go. I let it go. Then in court she claimed she primarily cared for the children. Then came the gun issue. I always stored two old fashioned style muzzle loaders under the couch with my modern guns locked in a closet. Now she suddenly declared my guns were dangerous and I never locked the closet. So I bought a gun safe. Now my oldest daughter who was 3 at the time took an interest in the big metal box in the house so I had to explain guns to her when previously I had never exposed my children to firearms. When she took an interest, I let her keep a plastic “toy” bb gun in the safe to teach her gun safety. When she was five, “Santa” brought her a pink bbgun. I was later vilified in court for giving “firearms training” to my daughter. If my ex-wife wouldn’t have pushed the issue regarding my guns safely stored in a locked closet, then the subject would never have come up with my daughter.
My life has been filled with “damned if I do, damned if I don’t” scenarios. During the course of this entire criminal trial/investigation (where my ex-wife volunteered to participate without being subpoenaed, she testified to living in fear, “double-checking locked doors”, looking over her shoulder, etc… Despite having no contact with my ex-wife for over two years this was the first time she had ever made any statement like this, even during the course of the divorce. Even though, during the course of my criminal proceedings, she testified that she lived in constant fear of me, I was vilified in both my divorce and my criminal trial for not jointly participating in the children’s activities with their mother. On one side my ex was expressing her horror about having to live life in fear of me gunning her down with a 357 magnum handgun, while at the same time she condemned me for not attending our daughter’s dance practice with her. Rather than questioning her absurd logic, my ex-wife receives praise as a “single mom” who is willing to risk her life in order to have the children’s psychotic gun-toting father present at dance practice. Of course when I did “participate” in my daughters lives. Finally, all my efforts to remain in meaningful contact with my children were described as my feeble attempts to demonstrate that I could be a primary parent and not because I loved them.
I may be the only parent who has ever been criticized for seeking medical attention for a 17 month old child experiencing breathing problems. When my youngest daughter was experiencing breathing problems I called the pediatrician’s office and they told me to bring her in. I called my wife to tell her the situation and she demanded that I wait for her in the doctor’s parking lot. I said I wasn’t going to make our 17 month old daughter wait for treatment just so my wife could walk in at the same time. Dr. Connor’s custody evaluation later stated the only reason I rushed my daughter to the doctor was to demonstrate I could be a primary parent. Never mind mentioning, that Daddy’s instincts were correct. My daughter needed breathing treatments for a few weeks. Do you know who gave the first treatments, unassisted? Daddy.
This has been my life for the past five years. I have been forced to defend the absurd time and time again. When I purchased a 357 magnum handgun I had to fend off “suspicions” that I may have let my five year old daughter shoot it. I applied for an Indiana handgun permit so I could transport a hand gun I was planning to purchase. Fear was expressed that I obtained a license to carry a handgun so I could legally carry the firearm to commit a crime. The ultimate absurdity lies in the fact that Humphrey, Connor, my ex-wife, and Prosecutor Negangard equate my level of dangerousness to the fact I own a 357 magnum. The 357 shouldn’t be the only issue as I own at least a half dozen other firearms. I am already less dangerous now that my Indiana handgun license is expired. If obtaining the permit made me more dangerous then not having the permit makes me less dangerous, right? If you see the ridiculousness of the previous statement, you are truly grasping the purpose of this blog post.
Dearborn County Sheriff Michael Kreinhop told a grand jury that he didn’t believe I even wanted to be with my daughters. He felt I was using my children for my First Amendment cause. Everything is just a part of my diabolical plan, isn’t it Mike. What Sheriff Kreinhop failed to tell the grand jury was that I started providing child care for my children during my 2 ½ year divorce long before any custody evaluations or websites.
My ex, Humphrey, and Connor claimed I only wanted Connor’s case file to harm my ex., actually it was after a meeting with attorney Donald Meyer, a Cincinnati attorney, where I got the idea of obtaining the case file. Mr. Meyer said the first thing a lawyer does in contesting a custody evaluation report is obtain a copy of the case file. During the criminal trial, Dr. Connor testified he feared I wanted the case file to post on my website. Dr. Connor lied at the criminal trial. I didn’t have any websites at the time I initially requested the case file. When I publicized Dr. Connor’s lies they charged me with attempting to obstruct justice in a legal proceeding in a different county. When I criticized Judge Humphrey for his rulings, they determined my intent wasn’t to instill public debate on family court issues, it was to instill fear in the Humphrey family. These people all insist that I am just acting like I love my children throughout the course of my five year diabolical plan to… That’s the problem. They can’t even give a halfway logical explanation as to what my alleged diabolical plan wishes to accomplish.
This situation might be comical if my daughters wouldn’t have had to go nearly 2 ½ years without a father. Whoever heard of a diabolical villain on a five-year plan who suffers from ADHD? My ex-wife testified that I couldn’t even keep the house clean. During the divorce, she claimed my ADHD was the reason for our failed marriage. During my criminal trial, 2 ½ year later, she claimed it was my Ritalin prescription, to treat the ADHD that might have been the problem. During the divorce proceedings, Dr. Connor testified he found my writings “confusing and difficult to follow” and also claimed my writings were “similar to those of individuals who have committed horrendous crimes against their families.” At my sentencing hearing 2 ½ years later, Dr. Connor testified that he found me to be intelligent and a very good writer. I guess that is why Dr. Connor is the high paid psychologist and I am not. I just can’t seem to find the logic in his thinking.
“He’s delusional, disgruntled, crazy, diabolical, etc…” These are all words that are used by people who do not want to address facts. I’ve listed Dr. Connor’s conflicting statements a million times, but all he has to do is come up with a plethora of psychological terms labeling me as delusional or disgruntled without any evidence or conduct to support his thinking. It is psychobabble without substance. Judge Humphrey can deny me of any parenting time with my children based on what he deems to be “irrational behavior and attacks on Dr. Connor” without reviewing the validity of my statements. Why let facts get in the way of protecting Dr. Connor? Prosecutor Negangard attacked me for criticizing the Indiana Court of Appeals when even Dr. Connor’s testimony demonstrated that the Court of Appeals was wrong and I was right. But no one wants to listen to facts because I am a diabolical madman.
Anyone who truly believes that I am going to “explode,” after dealing with what I have over the past five years, is clearly delusional. If these people truly felt I was dangerous they wouldn’t have continued to poke and prod at me for the past five years in the hopes I might harm someone. As I said earlier, my ex-wife would block me from leaving my home, create hostile tension, and then claim that she feared for her life, while also complaining that I did not jointly attend dance practices of my daughter’s. It makes about as much sense as Judge Humphrey allowing me to care for my daughters in the 2 ½ months it took him to decide I was an immediate danger to my children. Who is delusional? Who is attempting to protect the children? Prosecutor Negangard initiated a grand jury investigation of me 1 ½ years after I allegedly threatened Judge James D. Humphrey. Prosecutor Negangard argued the need for my $600,000 bond because I may be dangerous. For those keeping count, I’m heading into the sixth year since my ex-wife filed for divorce and I have yet to act out in a violent manner. Paranoia is an unrealistic fear that something or somebody is out to get you. My ex-wife, Dr. Connor, and Judge Humphrey have claimed I’ve been out to get them for up to five years yet nothing’s happened. Who’s paranoid now?
I’m no Lex Luther. As my ex-wife would claim that I lack the ability to focus long enough to tie my shoes, I find it hard to believe I’m capable of a five year diabolical plan. The only plan I have is to continue to fight to be a father. The only plan “they” have is to continue the lie to justify why they stripped two precious little girls of a loving father. My ex-wife continues to lie about fearing me. A person doesn’t barricade herself and her children inside a home with someone who she fears. People like my ex-wife hoped and prayed that I would lash out so they would have some justification as to why my daughters went so long without their father. I just hope my daughters never fully understand the role that mommy played in keeping me out of their lives. For all I’m concerned, all the blame can be placed on the child abusing Judge James D. Humphrey. Great, I did it again. I just gave the fragile Humphrey family more ammunition in their campaign to convince the world that Dan Brewington is a diabolical villain. Just a reminder, if you do not like the content of this blog, stop visiting.
That is the opinion of Judge James D. Humphrey, Dr. Edward J. Connor my ex-wife and others. It has been nearly five years since my ex-wife filed for divorce on January 8, 2007 and those few people continue to analyze and dissect my every action as an effort to undermine the peace and security of the world. Rather than accepting the fact I want my children to grow up spending equal time with both parents, even after I’ve missed nearly 2 ½ years with my daughters, they’re paranoid hatred of me has branded yours truly as their own Lex Luther. Branding me as an evil and diabolical menace, their only intention is to instill fear and panic into people and continue to insist my children should be protected from their diabolical father. Rather than concede that I am never going to lash out and I have never lashed out in a violent or illegal manner, they take the “sooner or later he’s gonna blow” mentality. So their contention is the longer I go without a violent eruption, the more dangerous I actually am. How can I be more dangerous by not engaging in illegal dangerous activity? A few days ago a good friend of mine summed up my situation with a perfect analogy. He said people like Humphrey, Connor and my ex-wife treat me like a 55 gallon drum of gasoline by a fire. They keep pushing the drum closer to the fire then go running and screaming “HE’S GONNA BLOW!” They run around telling the locals to fear for their lives because of the potential danger. They share all kinds of worst case scenarios of what may happen when the drum explodes. And then time passes and still no explosion. Soon the locals are caught scratching their heads because the danger did not come as predicted. They question the honesty and logic of those preaching the doomsday scenario. So what happens when there is no explosion? The doomsayers push the 55 gallon drum of gasoline closer to the fire with the hope “He’s gonna blow” to fulfill their twisted thinking and logic.
I’m not a 55 gallon drum of gas. I’m more like a 55 gallon drum of water. They’ve pushed and prodded and the worst they have drawn out of me is a little steam. I’m used to it. Unfortunately it has become a way of life for me. They just underestimated the level of “abuse” I was able to tolerate.
When my wife decided she wanted a divorce, she took our 10 month and 3 year old daughters to stay with her at her parents’ house on the days she determined to be “her” days with the girls. However, she would not allow me to exercise parenting time alone with our daughters because she now claimed I was dangerous. This is the same woman who left the children in my care while she worked nights as a nurse or when she went on three day weekend trips with friends. When she filed for divorce, I suddenly became dangerous. This is a period of time that she claimed she felt threatened by me. Despite her claims of alleged fear she would come home after working a late shift, 12:30AM, block my truck with her car, hide her keys and then spend the next 12 to 24 hours “monitoring” my parenting. She began stepping into feeding the girls, giving them bathes and normal child care/ parenting duties during my time with the girls. I could argue or let it go. I let it go. Then in court she claimed she primarily cared for the children. Then came the gun issue. I always stored two old fashioned style muzzle loaders under the couch with my modern guns locked in a closet. Now she suddenly declared my guns were dangerous and I never locked the closet. So I bought a gun safe. Now my oldest daughter who was 3 at the time took an interest in the big metal box in the house so I had to explain guns to her when previously I had never exposed my children to firearms. When she took an interest, I let her keep a plastic “toy” bb gun in the safe to teach her gun safety. When she was five, “Santa” brought her a pink bbgun. I was later vilified in court for giving “firearms training” to my daughter. If my ex-wife wouldn’t have pushed the issue regarding my guns safely stored in a locked closet, then the subject would never have come up with my daughter.
My life has been filled with “damned if I do, damned if I don’t” scenarios. During the course of this entire criminal trial/investigation (where my ex-wife volunteered to participate without being subpoenaed, she testified to living in fear, “double-checking locked doors”, looking over her shoulder, etc… Despite having no contact with my ex-wife for over two years this was the first time she had ever made any statement like this, even during the course of the divorce. Even though, during the course of my criminal proceedings, she testified that she lived in constant fear of me, I was vilified in both my divorce and my criminal trial for not jointly participating in the children’s activities with their mother. On one side my ex was expressing her horror about having to live life in fear of me gunning her down with a 357 magnum handgun, while at the same time she condemned me for not attending our daughter’s dance practice with her. Rather than questioning her absurd logic, my ex-wife receives praise as a “single mom” who is willing to risk her life in order to have the children’s psychotic gun-toting father present at dance practice. Of course when I did “participate” in my daughters lives. Finally, all my efforts to remain in meaningful contact with my children were described as my feeble attempts to demonstrate that I could be a primary parent and not because I loved them.
I may be the only parent who has ever been criticized for seeking medical attention for a 17 month old child experiencing breathing problems. When my youngest daughter was experiencing breathing problems I called the pediatrician’s office and they told me to bring her in. I called my wife to tell her the situation and she demanded that I wait for her in the doctor’s parking lot. I said I wasn’t going to make our 17 month old daughter wait for treatment just so my wife could walk in at the same time. Dr. Connor’s custody evaluation later stated the only reason I rushed my daughter to the doctor was to demonstrate I could be a primary parent. Never mind mentioning, that Daddy’s instincts were correct. My daughter needed breathing treatments for a few weeks. Do you know who gave the first treatments, unassisted? Daddy.
This has been my life for the past five years. I have been forced to defend the absurd time and time again. When I purchased a 357 magnum handgun I had to fend off “suspicions” that I may have let my five year old daughter shoot it. I applied for an Indiana handgun permit so I could transport a hand gun I was planning to purchase. Fear was expressed that I obtained a license to carry a handgun so I could legally carry the firearm to commit a crime. The ultimate absurdity lies in the fact that Humphrey, Connor, my ex-wife, and Prosecutor Negangard equate my level of dangerousness to the fact I own a 357 magnum. The 357 shouldn’t be the only issue as I own at least a half dozen other firearms. I am already less dangerous now that my Indiana handgun license is expired. If obtaining the permit made me more dangerous then not having the permit makes me less dangerous, right? If you see the ridiculousness of the previous statement, you are truly grasping the purpose of this blog post.
Dearborn County Sheriff Michael Kreinhop told a grand jury that he didn’t believe I even wanted to be with my daughters. He felt I was using my children for my First Amendment cause. Everything is just a part of my diabolical plan, isn’t it Mike. What Sheriff Kreinhop failed to tell the grand jury was that I started providing child care for my children during my 2 ½ year divorce long before any custody evaluations or websites.
My ex, Humphrey, and Connor claimed I only wanted Connor’s case file to harm my ex., actually it was after a meeting with attorney Donald Meyer, a Cincinnati attorney, where I got the idea of obtaining the case file. Mr. Meyer said the first thing a lawyer does in contesting a custody evaluation report is obtain a copy of the case file. During the criminal trial, Dr. Connor testified he feared I wanted the case file to post on my website. Dr. Connor lied at the criminal trial. I didn’t have any websites at the time I initially requested the case file. When I publicized Dr. Connor’s lies they charged me with attempting to obstruct justice in a legal proceeding in a different county. When I criticized Judge Humphrey for his rulings, they determined my intent wasn’t to instill public debate on family court issues, it was to instill fear in the Humphrey family. These people all insist that I am just acting like I love my children throughout the course of my five year diabolical plan to… That’s the problem. They can’t even give a halfway logical explanation as to what my alleged diabolical plan wishes to accomplish.
This situation might be comical if my daughters wouldn’t have had to go nearly 2 ½ years without a father. Whoever heard of a diabolical villain on a five-year plan who suffers from ADHD? My ex-wife testified that I couldn’t even keep the house clean. During the divorce, she claimed my ADHD was the reason for our failed marriage. During my criminal trial, 2 ½ year later, she claimed it was my Ritalin prescription, to treat the ADHD that might have been the problem. During the divorce proceedings, Dr. Connor testified he found my writings “confusing and difficult to follow” and also claimed my writings were “similar to those of individuals who have committed horrendous crimes against their families.” At my sentencing hearing 2 ½ years later, Dr. Connor testified that he found me to be intelligent and a very good writer. I guess that is why Dr. Connor is the high paid psychologist and I am not. I just can’t seem to find the logic in his thinking.
“He’s delusional, disgruntled, crazy, diabolical, etc…” These are all words that are used by people who do not want to address facts. I’ve listed Dr. Connor’s conflicting statements a million times, but all he has to do is come up with a plethora of psychological terms labeling me as delusional or disgruntled without any evidence or conduct to support his thinking. It is psychobabble without substance. Judge Humphrey can deny me of any parenting time with my children based on what he deems to be “irrational behavior and attacks on Dr. Connor” without reviewing the validity of my statements. Why let facts get in the way of protecting Dr. Connor? Prosecutor Negangard attacked me for criticizing the Indiana Court of Appeals when even Dr. Connor’s testimony demonstrated that the Court of Appeals was wrong and I was right. But no one wants to listen to facts because I am a diabolical madman.
Anyone who truly believes that I am going to “explode,” after dealing with what I have over the past five years, is clearly delusional. If these people truly felt I was dangerous they wouldn’t have continued to poke and prod at me for the past five years in the hopes I might harm someone. As I said earlier, my ex-wife would block me from leaving my home, create hostile tension, and then claim that she feared for her life, while also complaining that I did not jointly attend dance practices of my daughter’s. It makes about as much sense as Judge Humphrey allowing me to care for my daughters in the 2 ½ months it took him to decide I was an immediate danger to my children. Who is delusional? Who is attempting to protect the children? Prosecutor Negangard initiated a grand jury investigation of me 1 ½ years after I allegedly threatened Judge James D. Humphrey. Prosecutor Negangard argued the need for my $600,000 bond because I may be dangerous. For those keeping count, I’m heading into the sixth year since my ex-wife filed for divorce and I have yet to act out in a violent manner. Paranoia is an unrealistic fear that something or somebody is out to get you. My ex-wife, Dr. Connor, and Judge Humphrey have claimed I’ve been out to get them for up to five years yet nothing’s happened. Who’s paranoid now?
I’m no Lex Luther. As my ex-wife would claim that I lack the ability to focus long enough to tie my shoes, I find it hard to believe I’m capable of a five year diabolical plan. The only plan I have is to continue to fight to be a father. The only plan “they” have is to continue the lie to justify why they stripped two precious little girls of a loving father. My ex-wife continues to lie about fearing me. A person doesn’t barricade herself and her children inside a home with someone who she fears. People like my ex-wife hoped and prayed that I would lash out so they would have some justification as to why my daughters went so long without their father. I just hope my daughters never fully understand the role that mommy played in keeping me out of their lives. For all I’m concerned, all the blame can be placed on the child abusing Judge James D. Humphrey. Great, I did it again. I just gave the fragile Humphrey family more ammunition in their campaign to convince the world that Dan Brewington is a diabolical villain. Just a reminder, if you do not like the content of this blog, stop visiting.
Judge Brian Hill; Another Black Eye for the Indiana Judicial System
Judge Brian Hill; Another Black Eye for the Indiana Judicial System.
My family and I breathed a small sigh of relief when Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard appointed Rush County Superior Court Judge Brian Hill to preside over my criminal trial. The appointment of Judge Hill seemed to be much better than the previous appointment of Decatur County Circuit Judge John Westhafer, who admitted to being a good friend of Judge Humphrey’s for 25 years. A little internet research demonstrated that Judge Hill was a relatively young family man that still worked the family farm who also took an interest in history. It appeared that I finally had a judge that possessed the constitutional intellectualism necessary to handle my case. It turned out Judge Brian Hill had the constitutional intellectualism of a turnip.
When Judge Hill handed me a five year sentence for my non-violent blogging about public officials, he said I was not a good candidate for probation because I would blog about the probation department as well. Judge Brian Hill denied my ability to serve any of my five year sentence on probation because he felt I would exercise my First Amendment right and blog about another government agency. He didn’t deny probation to protect the alleged victims in the case or to ensure the safety of the general public; Judge Brian Hill denied probation to protect a government agency from any potential, fair or unfair, public criticism. Judge Hill deprived me of many constitutional rights during my trial because he was afraid I would continue to exercise my right to free speech. He denied me a reasonable bond based partly on the likelihood of me continuing to exercise my First Amendment rights. Judge Hill ordered the jurors’ names in my case to remain confidential because he worried I would exercise my right to free speech to comment on the jury. (To put this in perspective, jurors’ names in the Casey Anthony murder trial were kept confidential during the trial to protect the integrity of the criminal proceedings but were released at the conclusion of the trial). The benefit of the jurors’ names remaining anonymous in the nation’s most publicized and controversial murder trial of 2011 did not outweigh the rights of the prosecution or the defense to be able to determine if there was any jury misconduct. All of the jury members on my case realized who the powerful people in their community were and what they were asking the jurors to do. The prosecutor’s office used the case of to defend their request for a confidential jury. In that case the appellate court had ruled that having a confidential jury in a 3 count murder trial was wrong but was considered harmless error and the guilty party’s sentence of 175 years was appropriate. The only way I can find out who was on the jury is by initiating another legal action, from prison, to have the identities of the jurors revealed. During my sentencing hearing, Judge Hill was upset that I continued to write about public officials while I was in jail even though the writings, in Judge Hill’s words, were “not criminal.” So why didn’t Judge Hill issue a gag order preventing me from writing about these things? Because it would be considered prior restraint to free speech and would be in violation of the First Amendment of the United State Constitution. Judge Brian Hill could not order me to stop writing about the same subjects that led to my conviction because the writings are protected by the Constitution of the United States of America. So how in the hell did I get convicted of engaging in constitutionally protected activity?
Judge Brian Hill’s actions have less to do with constitutional intellectualism and more to do with having the integrity and morality of an Illinois Nazi. (and as Jake Blues said in the Blues Brothers,”I hate Illinois Nazis.”) Judge Hill maliciously disregarded my constitutional rights, not to protect the public but to protect the “integrity” of public and government officials. One of the reasons Judge Humphrey gave for terminating my parenting time was I suffered from severe ADHD. During the course of my criminal trial I was accused of being delusional and psychologically disturbed. Rather than question my ability to stand trial, Judge Hill refused to ensure that I was given my proper medication for ADHD so my mind would operate normally at trial. Judge Hill’s only concern was to assist Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard protect the reputation of Judge James D. Humphrey.
Rush County Circuit Judge Brian Hill deprived me of my right to competent counsel as he was aware that my public defender, Rush County public defender Bryan Barrett (appointed by Judge Hill) never met with me nor spoke with me about trial preparation. Barrett never subpoenaed any witnesses or evidence and never took the depositions of any of the alleged victims or state witnesses. Judge Hill knew I did not receive a copy of the 350+ pages of grand jury transcripts until less than two weeks before trial and he was also aware that I never received some of the prosecution’s evidence at all. Before the trial, I tried to explain how I did not know what actions led to my charges. Judge Hill said if I didn’t like it, I could represent myself. During my sentencing hearing I questioned the validity of the indictments as Prosecutor Negangard was never able to produce any evidence during trial that I ever released information from the grand jury proceedings. I questioned how a grand jury could indict me for releasing grand jury information in the absence of ANY supporting evidence. Judge Brian Hill simply told me that I had a remarkable ability to manipulate information to make me appear to be a victim. No Judge Hill, I just have a tendency to challenge government officials who fail to follow the provisions set forth in the Bill of Right s of the U.S. Constitution.
If I am truly guilty of the crimes alleged by Prosecutor Negangard, I now run the risk of being convicted of the same crimes in Rush County if I criticize Judge Hill too much. Dearborn County had jurisdiction to prosecute me for criticizing Judge Humphrey as a special judge for a Ripley County Court so Rush County has the same ability to prosecute me for criticizing Rush County Superior Court Judge Brian Hill while he was serving as a special judge for a Dearborn County court.
Judge Brian Hill doesn’t lack intelligence; he lacks honesty and moral fortitude. He chose the good ol’ boys over the founding fathers. He thought Judge Humphrey’s reputation was more important than the blood of the fallen soldier who made it possible to ink the Constitution of the United States of America. This is exactly why it is crucial to fight to protect First Amendment rights; so we have the ability to speak out against the Nazi-esque approach of officials like Prosecutor Negangard, Judge Humphrey, and Judge Hill, who seek to squash the voices of people that have the nerve to question authority.
Thanks for the support.
You can contact the family at contactdanbrewington@gmail.com
My family and I breathed a small sigh of relief when Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard appointed Rush County Superior Court Judge Brian Hill to preside over my criminal trial. The appointment of Judge Hill seemed to be much better than the previous appointment of Decatur County Circuit Judge John Westhafer, who admitted to being a good friend of Judge Humphrey’s for 25 years. A little internet research demonstrated that Judge Hill was a relatively young family man that still worked the family farm who also took an interest in history. It appeared that I finally had a judge that possessed the constitutional intellectualism necessary to handle my case. It turned out Judge Brian Hill had the constitutional intellectualism of a turnip.
When Judge Hill handed me a five year sentence for my non-violent blogging about public officials, he said I was not a good candidate for probation because I would blog about the probation department as well. Judge Brian Hill denied my ability to serve any of my five year sentence on probation because he felt I would exercise my First Amendment right and blog about another government agency. He didn’t deny probation to protect the alleged victims in the case or to ensure the safety of the general public; Judge Brian Hill denied probation to protect a government agency from any potential, fair or unfair, public criticism. Judge Hill deprived me of many constitutional rights during my trial because he was afraid I would continue to exercise my right to free speech. He denied me a reasonable bond based partly on the likelihood of me continuing to exercise my First Amendment rights. Judge Hill ordered the jurors’ names in my case to remain confidential because he worried I would exercise my right to free speech to comment on the jury. (To put this in perspective, jurors’ names in the Casey Anthony murder trial were kept confidential during the trial to protect the integrity of the criminal proceedings but were released at the conclusion of the trial). The benefit of the jurors’ names remaining anonymous in the nation’s most publicized and controversial murder trial of 2011 did not outweigh the rights of the prosecution or the defense to be able to determine if there was any jury misconduct. All of the jury members on my case realized who the powerful people in their community were and what they were asking the jurors to do. The prosecutor’s office used the case of to defend their request for a confidential jury. In that case the appellate court had ruled that having a confidential jury in a 3 count murder trial was wrong but was considered harmless error and the guilty party’s sentence of 175 years was appropriate. The only way I can find out who was on the jury is by initiating another legal action, from prison, to have the identities of the jurors revealed. During my sentencing hearing, Judge Hill was upset that I continued to write about public officials while I was in jail even though the writings, in Judge Hill’s words, were “not criminal.” So why didn’t Judge Hill issue a gag order preventing me from writing about these things? Because it would be considered prior restraint to free speech and would be in violation of the First Amendment of the United State Constitution. Judge Brian Hill could not order me to stop writing about the same subjects that led to my conviction because the writings are protected by the Constitution of the United States of America. So how in the hell did I get convicted of engaging in constitutionally protected activity?
Judge Brian Hill’s actions have less to do with constitutional intellectualism and more to do with having the integrity and morality of an Illinois Nazi. (and as Jake Blues said in the Blues Brothers,”I hate Illinois Nazis.”) Judge Hill maliciously disregarded my constitutional rights, not to protect the public but to protect the “integrity” of public and government officials. One of the reasons Judge Humphrey gave for terminating my parenting time was I suffered from severe ADHD. During the course of my criminal trial I was accused of being delusional and psychologically disturbed. Rather than question my ability to stand trial, Judge Hill refused to ensure that I was given my proper medication for ADHD so my mind would operate normally at trial. Judge Hill’s only concern was to assist Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard protect the reputation of Judge James D. Humphrey.
Rush County Circuit Judge Brian Hill deprived me of my right to competent counsel as he was aware that my public defender, Rush County public defender Bryan Barrett (appointed by Judge Hill) never met with me nor spoke with me about trial preparation. Barrett never subpoenaed any witnesses or evidence and never took the depositions of any of the alleged victims or state witnesses. Judge Hill knew I did not receive a copy of the 350+ pages of grand jury transcripts until less than two weeks before trial and he was also aware that I never received some of the prosecution’s evidence at all. Before the trial, I tried to explain how I did not know what actions led to my charges. Judge Hill said if I didn’t like it, I could represent myself. During my sentencing hearing I questioned the validity of the indictments as Prosecutor Negangard was never able to produce any evidence during trial that I ever released information from the grand jury proceedings. I questioned how a grand jury could indict me for releasing grand jury information in the absence of ANY supporting evidence. Judge Brian Hill simply told me that I had a remarkable ability to manipulate information to make me appear to be a victim. No Judge Hill, I just have a tendency to challenge government officials who fail to follow the provisions set forth in the Bill of Right s of the U.S. Constitution.
If I am truly guilty of the crimes alleged by Prosecutor Negangard, I now run the risk of being convicted of the same crimes in Rush County if I criticize Judge Hill too much. Dearborn County had jurisdiction to prosecute me for criticizing Judge Humphrey as a special judge for a Ripley County Court so Rush County has the same ability to prosecute me for criticizing Rush County Superior Court Judge Brian Hill while he was serving as a special judge for a Dearborn County court.
Judge Brian Hill doesn’t lack intelligence; he lacks honesty and moral fortitude. He chose the good ol’ boys over the founding fathers. He thought Judge Humphrey’s reputation was more important than the blood of the fallen soldier who made it possible to ink the Constitution of the United States of America. This is exactly why it is crucial to fight to protect First Amendment rights; so we have the ability to speak out against the Nazi-esque approach of officials like Prosecutor Negangard, Judge Humphrey, and Judge Hill, who seek to squash the voices of people that have the nerve to question authority.
Thanks for the support.
You can contact the family at contactdanbrewington@gmail.com
Judge James D. Humphrey's Own Holocaust
Dan wrote his first blog since leaving Dearborn County on October 27, 2011. That has already been posted. He continued to write as his journey took him to the RDC for over 4 weeks. This is a collection of the blogs that he wrote, during November, 2011, while at the RDC. That is where everyone in the prison system starts out to be classified for their permanent placement.
Judge James. D. Humphrey’s Own Holocaust – Written around 11/4/11
Ironically, one of the first books I read in prison was The First Amendment, The Tumultuous History of Free Speech in America by Nat Hentoff. In reading the book, I discovered that it appears Judge James D. Humphrey believes his family’s emotions, which were allegedly upset due to my verbose blogging about the family court system containing already public information, have a much greater entitlement to protection than the survivors of Adolf Hitler’s Holocaust. As a judge, he was well aware of the First Amendment, is required to uphold it, and most certainly knew about one of the most controversial First Amendment cases in U.S. history, the Village of Skokie v. the National Socialist Party of America.
In 1977, the Chicago-based National Socialist Party of America focused on organizing demonstrations in areas with high Jewish populations. The Nazis set their sights on a village on the outskirts of Chicago named Skokie. The village, whose population of 70,000 people consisted of 45,500 Jews, 7,000 of which were Holocaust survivors, obtained a circuit court injunction prohibiting the Nazi demonstration. The village also passed an ordinance requiring that public assemblies consisting of over 50 people were required to purchase a $350,000 insurance policy to cover any potential public liability and damages. The cost of such a policy would be up to $900 depending on the risk. It was up to the prospective demonstrators to find an underwriter willing to insure the groups and even then the village council had the power to deny a permit for a demonstration if they felt the proposed assembly might create a “breach of the peace.” The village also banned public demonstrations by members of political parties wearing military-style uniforms. In addition, the village banned demonstrations that “incite violence, hatred, abuse, or hostility toward a person or group of persons by reason or reference to religious, racial, ethnic, national, or religious affiliation.” Though not named directly in the ordinance, the ordinance was aimed at prohibiting any future Nazi demonstrations.
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes’ definition of the most basic principle of the Constitution was the protection of all free thought, including thought we hate. In a controversial decision, the ACLU represented the Nazis because they agreed with the opinion of Justice Holmes and found the actions of the Village of Skokie to be unconstitutional. The decision of the ACLU to represent the Nazi organization caused a 15% - 20% drop in the ACLU’s national membership but the decision was one that the ACLU and its executive director, Aryeh Neier, felt was necessary to protect the rights of all citizens.
“As a Jew, and a refugee from Nazi Germany, I have strong personal reasons for finding Nazis repugnant. Freedom of speech protects my right to denounce Nazis with all the vehemence I think proper. Despite my hatred of their doctrine, I realize that it is in my best interest to defend their right to preach it.” Those were the sentiments of ACLU executive director Aryeh Neier. Neier felt passionately about protecting the rights of a Nazi organization that applauded Adolf Hitler’s efforts to exterminate Neier’s own people.
The Illinois Supreme Court tackled the issues pertaining to the Nazis’ right to demonstrate. The Court stated, “It is firmly settled that under our constitution the public expression of ideas may not be prohibited merely because the ideas are themselves offensive to some of their hearers.” As for the argument that the public display of the swastika represents “fighting words” the Court ruled, we do not doubt that the sight of this symbol is abhorrent to the Jewish citizens of Skoki and that the survivors of the Nazi persecutions, tormented by their recollections, may have strong feelings regarding its display. Yet…courts have consistently refused to ban speech on the possibility of unlawful conduct by those opposed to the speaker’s philosophy… It has become patent that a hostile audience is not a basis for restraining otherwise legal First Amendment activity.”
In February 1978, Federal District Judge Bernard M. Decker of Chicago struck down Skokie’s assembly ordinance as unconstitutional. Judge Decker stated the village of Skokie has “no power to prevent [the Nationalist Socialist Party] from stating [its] political philosophy including [its] opinions of black and Jewish people, however obnoxious and reprehensible that philosophy may be.” Judge Decker went on to say, “In resolving this case in favor of the plaintiffs, the court is acutely aware of doctrines of racial and religious hatred.” In terms of the First Amendment, “it is better to allow those who preach racial hate to expend their venom in rhetoric rather than [for us to] be panicked into embarking on the dangerous course of permitting the government to decide what its citizens may say and hear…The ability of American society to tolerate the advocacy even of the hateful doctrines espoused by the plaintiffs without abandoning its commitment to freedom of speech and assembly is perhaps the best protection we have against the establishment of any Nazi-type regime in this country.”
The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals sustained Judge Decker’s findings while taking troubling note of the many survivors of the Holocaust in Skokie, people with memories of family members being thrown into trains on the way to death camps. One Skokie resident had told of seeing his mother hurled on top of a mass of bodies in a hole in the ground and buried alive. The Court of Appeals stated it would be “grossly insensitive to deny, as we do not, that the proposed demonstration would seriously disturb, emotionally and mentally, at least some and probably many of the village’s residents.” But if the First Amendment rights “are to remain vital to all, they must protect not only those society deems acceptable, but also those whose ideas it quite justifiable rejects and despises.” The United States Supreme Court refused to hear the case. A few years later and a couple hundred miles away, a young James D. Humphrey would study First Amendment law at Indiana University in the early eighties where I’m certain he learned about one of the most controversial First Amendment cases in U.S. history.
Judge James D. Humphrey and Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard are well aware that the First Amendment protects a person’s ability, as horrific as it may be, to publicly praise the practices of Adolf Hitler in Hitler’s quest to exterminate all people of the Jewish faith from the face of the earth; however they claimed the First Amendment did not protect my harsh criticisms of Judge Humphrey. Prosecutor Negangard told the jury I used “fighting words.” In Gooding v. Wilson, U.S. Supreme Court Justice William J. Brenan defined “fighting words: as words that “have a direct tendency to cause acts of violence by the person to whom, individually the remark is addressed.” Put simply, Prosecutor Negangard accused me of typing words from my laptop that would “have a direct tendency to cause acts of violence by” Judge James D. Humphrey. But Judge Humphrey wasn’t tormented by memories of death camps, of family members being buried alive; he suffered emotional hardships because I blogged about public officials, which was sufficient to jail me for my speech. Judge Humphrey was worried about his home address being on my website. Unfortunately Judge Humphries home address is a public record because he lacks the legal acumen to place his home in a trust.
Unfortunately this isn’t a joke and my situation is as unbelievable and outrageous as it appears. The First Freedom makes no mention of anyone ever being jailed for non-threatening writings that were not in violation of any specific law or act. Now it’s time for the appellate process and I have very little faith in the high courts of the State of Indiana. To rule against Negangard and Humphrey would also be a condemnation of the duo’s malicious desecration of the law and the United States Constitution. It would be a move that Judge Brian Hill was unwilling to do or lacked the backbone to do as he gave me a five year prison sentence for peacefully voicing my concerns about the family court system from a computer, while Nazis are free to march into Jewish communities and praise Hitler for trying to exterminate an entire ethnic group. If or when the high courts of Indiana rule against me, my case will go through the same court that protected the rights of Nazi demonstrators and it will demonstrate the repressive and ignorant practices of the Indiana Court System. And just a reminder to the taxpayers of Dearborn County, Indiana, as long as the State of Indiana continues to argue that my speech presents a much greater danger than a Nazi rally in a village full of Holocaust survivors it will only add to the tens of thousands of Dearborn County tax dollars that have been wasted on the witch hunt of Dan Brewington’s internet writings.
Finally, love me or hate me, I am far from finished concerning my blogging and my refusal to submit to the authority of elected criminals.
Thanks for the ongoing support and keep checking back for updates.
Feel free to contact the Brewington family at contactdanbrewington@gmail.com
Judge James. D. Humphrey’s Own Holocaust – Written around 11/4/11
Ironically, one of the first books I read in prison was The First Amendment, The Tumultuous History of Free Speech in America by Nat Hentoff. In reading the book, I discovered that it appears Judge James D. Humphrey believes his family’s emotions, which were allegedly upset due to my verbose blogging about the family court system containing already public information, have a much greater entitlement to protection than the survivors of Adolf Hitler’s Holocaust. As a judge, he was well aware of the First Amendment, is required to uphold it, and most certainly knew about one of the most controversial First Amendment cases in U.S. history, the Village of Skokie v. the National Socialist Party of America.
In 1977, the Chicago-based National Socialist Party of America focused on organizing demonstrations in areas with high Jewish populations. The Nazis set their sights on a village on the outskirts of Chicago named Skokie. The village, whose population of 70,000 people consisted of 45,500 Jews, 7,000 of which were Holocaust survivors, obtained a circuit court injunction prohibiting the Nazi demonstration. The village also passed an ordinance requiring that public assemblies consisting of over 50 people were required to purchase a $350,000 insurance policy to cover any potential public liability and damages. The cost of such a policy would be up to $900 depending on the risk. It was up to the prospective demonstrators to find an underwriter willing to insure the groups and even then the village council had the power to deny a permit for a demonstration if they felt the proposed assembly might create a “breach of the peace.” The village also banned public demonstrations by members of political parties wearing military-style uniforms. In addition, the village banned demonstrations that “incite violence, hatred, abuse, or hostility toward a person or group of persons by reason or reference to religious, racial, ethnic, national, or religious affiliation.” Though not named directly in the ordinance, the ordinance was aimed at prohibiting any future Nazi demonstrations.
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes’ definition of the most basic principle of the Constitution was the protection of all free thought, including thought we hate. In a controversial decision, the ACLU represented the Nazis because they agreed with the opinion of Justice Holmes and found the actions of the Village of Skokie to be unconstitutional. The decision of the ACLU to represent the Nazi organization caused a 15% - 20% drop in the ACLU’s national membership but the decision was one that the ACLU and its executive director, Aryeh Neier, felt was necessary to protect the rights of all citizens.
“As a Jew, and a refugee from Nazi Germany, I have strong personal reasons for finding Nazis repugnant. Freedom of speech protects my right to denounce Nazis with all the vehemence I think proper. Despite my hatred of their doctrine, I realize that it is in my best interest to defend their right to preach it.” Those were the sentiments of ACLU executive director Aryeh Neier. Neier felt passionately about protecting the rights of a Nazi organization that applauded Adolf Hitler’s efforts to exterminate Neier’s own people.
The Illinois Supreme Court tackled the issues pertaining to the Nazis’ right to demonstrate. The Court stated, “It is firmly settled that under our constitution the public expression of ideas may not be prohibited merely because the ideas are themselves offensive to some of their hearers.” As for the argument that the public display of the swastika represents “fighting words” the Court ruled, we do not doubt that the sight of this symbol is abhorrent to the Jewish citizens of Skoki and that the survivors of the Nazi persecutions, tormented by their recollections, may have strong feelings regarding its display. Yet…courts have consistently refused to ban speech on the possibility of unlawful conduct by those opposed to the speaker’s philosophy… It has become patent that a hostile audience is not a basis for restraining otherwise legal First Amendment activity.”
In February 1978, Federal District Judge Bernard M. Decker of Chicago struck down Skokie’s assembly ordinance as unconstitutional. Judge Decker stated the village of Skokie has “no power to prevent [the Nationalist Socialist Party] from stating [its] political philosophy including [its] opinions of black and Jewish people, however obnoxious and reprehensible that philosophy may be.” Judge Decker went on to say, “In resolving this case in favor of the plaintiffs, the court is acutely aware of doctrines of racial and religious hatred.” In terms of the First Amendment, “it is better to allow those who preach racial hate to expend their venom in rhetoric rather than [for us to] be panicked into embarking on the dangerous course of permitting the government to decide what its citizens may say and hear…The ability of American society to tolerate the advocacy even of the hateful doctrines espoused by the plaintiffs without abandoning its commitment to freedom of speech and assembly is perhaps the best protection we have against the establishment of any Nazi-type regime in this country.”
The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals sustained Judge Decker’s findings while taking troubling note of the many survivors of the Holocaust in Skokie, people with memories of family members being thrown into trains on the way to death camps. One Skokie resident had told of seeing his mother hurled on top of a mass of bodies in a hole in the ground and buried alive. The Court of Appeals stated it would be “grossly insensitive to deny, as we do not, that the proposed demonstration would seriously disturb, emotionally and mentally, at least some and probably many of the village’s residents.” But if the First Amendment rights “are to remain vital to all, they must protect not only those society deems acceptable, but also those whose ideas it quite justifiable rejects and despises.” The United States Supreme Court refused to hear the case. A few years later and a couple hundred miles away, a young James D. Humphrey would study First Amendment law at Indiana University in the early eighties where I’m certain he learned about one of the most controversial First Amendment cases in U.S. history.
Judge James D. Humphrey and Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard are well aware that the First Amendment protects a person’s ability, as horrific as it may be, to publicly praise the practices of Adolf Hitler in Hitler’s quest to exterminate all people of the Jewish faith from the face of the earth; however they claimed the First Amendment did not protect my harsh criticisms of Judge Humphrey. Prosecutor Negangard told the jury I used “fighting words.” In Gooding v. Wilson, U.S. Supreme Court Justice William J. Brenan defined “fighting words: as words that “have a direct tendency to cause acts of violence by the person to whom, individually the remark is addressed.” Put simply, Prosecutor Negangard accused me of typing words from my laptop that would “have a direct tendency to cause acts of violence by” Judge James D. Humphrey. But Judge Humphrey wasn’t tormented by memories of death camps, of family members being buried alive; he suffered emotional hardships because I blogged about public officials, which was sufficient to jail me for my speech. Judge Humphrey was worried about his home address being on my website. Unfortunately Judge Humphries home address is a public record because he lacks the legal acumen to place his home in a trust.
Unfortunately this isn’t a joke and my situation is as unbelievable and outrageous as it appears. The First Freedom makes no mention of anyone ever being jailed for non-threatening writings that were not in violation of any specific law or act. Now it’s time for the appellate process and I have very little faith in the high courts of the State of Indiana. To rule against Negangard and Humphrey would also be a condemnation of the duo’s malicious desecration of the law and the United States Constitution. It would be a move that Judge Brian Hill was unwilling to do or lacked the backbone to do as he gave me a five year prison sentence for peacefully voicing my concerns about the family court system from a computer, while Nazis are free to march into Jewish communities and praise Hitler for trying to exterminate an entire ethnic group. If or when the high courts of Indiana rule against me, my case will go through the same court that protected the rights of Nazi demonstrators and it will demonstrate the repressive and ignorant practices of the Indiana Court System. And just a reminder to the taxpayers of Dearborn County, Indiana, as long as the State of Indiana continues to argue that my speech presents a much greater danger than a Nazi rally in a village full of Holocaust survivors it will only add to the tens of thousands of Dearborn County tax dollars that have been wasted on the witch hunt of Dan Brewington’s internet writings.
Finally, love me or hate me, I am far from finished concerning my blogging and my refusal to submit to the authority of elected criminals.
Thanks for the ongoing support and keep checking back for updates.
Feel free to contact the Brewington family at contactdanbrewington@gmail.com
Friday, December 16, 2011
Dan's new address
Reporting in. Dan is doing fine. When he left Lawrenceburg on October 25, 2011 he was sent to Plainfield, Indiana to a facility known as the RDC. Everyone goes there to find their permanent placement. They are supposed to be there 2 to 4 weeks. Dan was there for over 4 weeks. While he was there he could have no visits and no phone contact. His attorney could visit. His new address is:
Putnamville Correctional Facility
Daniel Brewington DOC # 223028 Dorm 11N
1946 W US Hwy 40
Greencastle, IN 46135
I wasn't able to talk to him until he called Saturday, December 10, 2011. I am now on the visitors list and will be able to see him soon. During this time we have been working feverishly on devising a plan for the next step. Things seem to be falling into place. Thanks to everyone for all of your thoughts and prayers. The appeal process is the next step. If anyone wants to contact us please write contactdanbrewington@gmail.com . If anyone wants to donate to the Dan Brewington Legal Defense Fund we have a paypal account set up on the blog. I am the administrator.
http://danbrewington.blogspot.com/2011/11/dan-brewington-legal-defense-fund_6727.html
Once more. Thanks to everyone for all of their support. We have a plan and will be moving forward.
Sue Brewington
Putnamville Correctional Facility
Daniel Brewington DOC # 223028 Dorm 11N
1946 W US Hwy 40
Greencastle, IN 46135
I wasn't able to talk to him until he called Saturday, December 10, 2011. I am now on the visitors list and will be able to see him soon. During this time we have been working feverishly on devising a plan for the next step. Things seem to be falling into place. Thanks to everyone for all of your thoughts and prayers. The appeal process is the next step. If anyone wants to contact us please write contactdanbrewington@gmail.com . If anyone wants to donate to the Dan Brewington Legal Defense Fund we have a paypal account set up on the blog. I am the administrator.
http://danbrewington.blogspot.com/2011/11/dan-brewington-legal-defense-fund_6727.html
Once more. Thanks to everyone for all of their support. We have a plan and will be moving forward.
Sue Brewington