- On September 10, 2008, Dr. Connor sent a letter to the Court stating that his office staff forgot to have me sign Dr. Connor's Office Policy Statement. Dr. Connor went on to attack me while claiming that I suffered from reality distortion because I had difficulties accepting that it didn't matter that Dr. Connor's office did not allow me to review or sign the contract because the Office Policy Statement was "simply an adjunct document to the Court Order."
- Ten months later, Dr. Connor testified in Judge Humphrey's Court that the Office Policy Statement was NOT an "adjunct document to the Court Order," and his office staff mistakenly had the mother sign the contract.
Thursday, February 24, 2011
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
It appears that Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels is trying to distance himself from the Republican legislators in Indiana. Governor Daniels isn’t the radical type who would declare martial law and have the State Police round up any MIA Democratic legislators like Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker has threatened to do. Governor Daniels seems to have a much cooler and rational demeanor. Many are expecting Governor Daniels to announce, in the coming weeks, whether or not he will make a run at the White House in 2012. This may be the first presidential candidate where my vote would hinge on Governor Daniel’s ability to nominate judges.
I’m usually not a person who votes for presidential candidates based on hypothetical future Federal and Supreme Court appointments, but Mitch is a little different. I consider myself to be a fairly independent voter with a tendency to lean to the left, but I voted for Governor Daniels in the last election. He secured a Honda Plant about 30 miles from my family’s farm in Milan, Indiana and his political views seem to be closer to the middle than to the far right. (Please note that it is impossible for the far right and the far left to be right 100% of the time. That’s why I believe that standing on the fence is rational, not cowardly.) I like the fact that Daniels refrains from bragging to big money political bankrollers like David Koch about devious plans to trick Democrats into coming out of hiding, like Governor Walker so proudly boasted. (Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker didn’t really share his devious plan with David Koch; Governor Walker shared his devious plan with the editor of the Buffalo Beast, Ian Murphy, who was just pretending to be David Koch.)
So what are my current reservations about Governor Daniels’ ability to pick Supreme Court Justices? My greatest concern is the fact that the Indiana Court of Appeals and the Indiana Supreme Court have run amuck during Daniels’ term as governor of Indiana. Before all of the social studies teachers and constitutionalists jump in to attack me, I understand the separation of powers between branches. I just want to know what happens when the high courts begin doing their own investigative work while reviewing appeals. That’s what appears to be happening with the Indiana Supreme and Appellate Courts. IP addresses registered to the Indiana Supreme Court have been racking up frequent flyer miles on the internet. It would be terrifying to think of the ramifications of what would happen if the Court’s internet browser history would be released to the public. How many cases would be overturned? Mine probably would because two Indiana Supreme Court IP addresses accounted for 227 hits on 43 pages on my website during the course of my appeal. My website did not appear in the court record so the Indiana Supreme Court had to go searching for it.
I know that Governor Daniels just can’t pick up the phone and fix the problem but there hasn’t been any attempt by anyone to even address it. On February 10, 2011, Indiana Supreme Court Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard sent me a letter stating that he concurred with the dismissal of the complaint against Dearborn County Prosecutor Aaron Negangard that I filed with the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission. On December 17, 2010, Chief Justice Shepard denied my petition to transfer my appeal to the Indiana Supreme Court. Justice Shepard ruled against me on my appeal, and then he ruled against me on my complaint against the prosecutor; or visa-versa. Either way he should have recused himself in whichever case came second.
This is my biggest concern about Mitch Daniels making a run for United States President in 2012. Rather than look at the judicial histories of potential U.S. Supreme Court Justices, the Senate committee should look at the browsing histories from the prospective judges in an effort to see if justice was delivered blindly. Browsing the internet looking for answers is not the way the United States Judicial System was designed to work, but that’s how it works in Indiana. I’d really like to hear Mitch Daniels’ opinion on the matter. Maybe he could provide some insight into how his judicial appointments would differ from the members of the high courts in Indiana. If Governor Daniels decides to return my correspondence, I’ll let you know. For more information, go to www.danhelpskids.com.
Monday, February 21, 2011
Five days after the state of Indiana dismissed my complaint against Dearborn County Prosecutor Aaron Negangard, Aaron Negangard sent me a notice that he was seeking indictments against me for Harassment and Intimidation. The Judge that is supposed to preside over the case is Dearborn Superior Court II Judge Sally Blankenship. My case will involve subpoenaing IP addresses, emails, browser histories, etc., and anything else related to protecting my First Amendment Rights from being infringed upon by the Dearborn County "Justice" System. Now it looks like I may face an obstacle in obtaining necessary evidence. Honorable Sally Blankenship publicly endorses the services that Midwest Data provides to the Dearborn County Court System and the Dearborn County Prosecutor's Office.
The Honorable Judge Blankenship wrote, "The Prosecutor's Office along with the Court systems have been pleased with the service we have been receiving from Midwest Data." How can I expect to have a fair hearing when the prosecutor's office and the court system actively endorse the company that I would be subject to subpoenas? If Midwest Data were to file a motion to quash a subpoena of mine, I would be going up against a company whose website has a testimonial from the judge presiding over the hearing. I'll be going against a prosecutor whose office endorses the services from Midwest Data. This doesn't even account for the fact that the Dearborn County Courts and the Dearborn County Prosecutor's Office have previous discussed their satisfaction with the services of Midwest Data. (click the above image for large view) Now, the entities that employ and endorse Midwest Data are going to be responsible for deciding what information I may subpoena from Midwest Data.
This is just another advantage that Dearborn County uses to restrict free speech and the people's right to a fair trial. If you believe in free speech, feel free to contact Dearborn County Officials to voice your concerns. You can also post comments/concerns on Dearborn Prosecutor Aaron Negangard's Facebook Page.
I am in no way suggesting that the good people of Midwest Data have engaged in any sort of unprofessional conduct. They come highly recommended by members of the community. Midwest Data offers a multitude of technical services/sales and is very gracious in giving back to the community. I am not challenging the validity of Judge Blankenship's endorsement of Midwest Data; I just question why Judge Blankenship did not inform Midwest Data that Canon 2(B) of the Indiana Rules of Judicial Conduct prohibits judges from "lend[ing] the prestige of judicial office to advance the private interest of the judge or others."
Saturday, February 19, 2011
Today I received a summons from Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard. (click link for copy of Negangard's correspondence.) Negangard stated the following in his accompanying letter dated February 15, 2011:
"Dearborn County Grand Jury is presently investigating allegations of Intimidation and Harassment that allegedly occurred in 2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010 in Dearborn County, Indiana.”
I guess Negangard felt some pressure to seek an indictment from a grand jury to rationalize the use of Dearborn County resources in using the Dearborn County Special Crimes Unit to investigate my writings. Of course Negangard really seems to be stretching the information because Negangard is alleging my alleged “Intimidation and Harassment” in Dearborn County dates all the way back to 2007. Prior to 2009, my case was before Ripley Circuit Court Judge Carl H. Taul so there are obviously some jurisdictional issues in Negangard’s claims. I’ve never lived in Dearborn County and I never initiated any internet transmissions from Dearborn County. The better question is, if my "string" of alleged harassment dated all the way back to 2007, what prompted people to wait over four years to raise the issue? Dearborn County will probably have to allege some kind of conspiracy to keep the statute of limitations alive.
Negangard put himself in a tough situation when he thought he could intimidate me long ago by sending Detective Mike Kreinhop to Cincinnati, alleging that there was an investigation of my “writings.” Detective Kreinhop, who is now the Sheriff of Dearborn County, told me that I should not fight the system on my own and advised me to hire an attorney. This is the real issue. I’m not being prosecuted for allegedly harassing and intimidating Dearborn County public officials; Dearborn County is trying to prosecute me because I publicized how Dearborn County has continuously tried to intimidate and harass me. Just check out my Dearborn County Police Harassment video on YouTube.com. Dearborn Circuit Judge James D. Humphrey’s office tried to have two Dearborn County Officers scare me away from requesting public records. The officers were unaware that I recorded the video. If I wouldn’t have documented the incident, it would have just been another case of their “word” against mine. Now the video has over 6,100 views. Rather than address the problems that I have raised in many blog posts and other written web material, Prosecutor Negangard is trying to hang the messenger. Humphrey terminated my parenting time with my three and five year old daughters because I criticized Dr. Edward J. Connor. Humphrey stated that I could not have unsupervised visitation with my daughters until I removed the internet writings. Negangard sent Mike Kreinhop to Cincinnati, Ohio to intimidate me. After I filed a complaint with the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission against Negangard, on July 12, 2010, Negangard sent me an email stating that he was going to "make every effort to prosecute [me]." On February 10, 2011, my complaint against Negangard was dismissed. Negangard did not waste any time in seeking an indictment because it was only a couple business days after the dismissal of my complaint against Negangard that Negangard continued his quest to prosecute me for my writings.
The biggest loser in the situation is the Dearborn County Taxpayers as Negangard is willing to subpoena judges, lawyers, and psychologists to testify in Negangard’s quest to silence my First Amendment Speech. The costs of deposing and/or subpoenaing a professional can be as much as $10,000 or more. Dearborn County taxpayers should ask Aaron Negangard why he is willing to spend tens of thousands of tax payer dollars to silence Dan Brewington. My guess is that Negangard is trying to throw up a smokescreen so people do not notice that Dearborn County paid Aaron Negangard’s legal fees in defending another complaint against Negangard that was filed with the state. Now Dearborn County Commissioner Shane McHenry is asking if the County can reclaim the $25,000 appropriated to Aaron Negangard’s “defense fund” because Negangard is not a county employee, but a state employee. Negangard wants to punish me because I publicized how the Dearborn County Judicial System retained the services of an unlicensed psychologist in both civil and criminal proceedings. It seems hard to believe that the Dearborn County Court System did not know that Dr. Edward J. Connor was not licensed by the state of Indiana when they were appointing Connor as an expert to the Court. Now Negangard is punishing me because I told people how the Dearborn County Court System relied on the opinion of an unlicensed mental health professional. But that’s what people like Aaron Negangard do; rather than address their own conduct, they go after the people who question the conduct. It is government accountability at its worst.
Stay tuned as I plan to keep everyone posted during any legal proceedings because people have a right to know about corruption in government. Feel free to contact state and county officials to tell them how you support the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. Too many people have fought, protested, and died to protect our rights to freedom of speech. I’m not going to allow Dearborn County Prosecutor Aaron Negangard to take that right from me.
Thursday, February 17, 2011
In 1974, my mom and dad began buying farmland where my dad was born and raised just outside of Milan, Indiana. Over the years they purchased 241 acres of farmland and two houses. They didn't inherit the property; they purchased the property with their hard earned money. When my father was dying of cancer, they put the property in a trust so all the assets could be used to take care of my mother and then be passed on to their sons when she died. The only problem is Judge Humphrey and the state of Indiana has prevented the trust from being able to care for my mother.
This is no joke. Judge Humphrey included the trust as a marital asset in my divorce. My mom wasn't a party in the legal action so she couldn't even defend her interest. Humphrey also failed to give the Trust/Trustee the opportunity to defend their interests as well. Humphrey proceeded to tear into the trust and assign a portion of the trust to the marital assets in my divorce. Then the Indiana Appellate Court went out of their way to enforce the order. Now there is a judgment lien on the property that was set aside to care for my mother. Now the property cannot be sold, transferred, or mortgaged; even to maintain the trust itself. As it stands, Indiana is forcing my mother's property into foreclosure and/or bankruptcy because the Indiana courts hate her son.
To get an idea of the lengths that some Indiana Judges will go to punish people who oppose them; check out the motions my mom and brother were forced to file because Humphrey took their rights without giving them the ability to defend themselves. Click here to see my mother's motion to vacate order. Click here to see my brother's motion to vacate order. If you live in Indiana and you have a trust and also have married children, you need to bolt to your lawyer because you can lose your rights to your own property. If you did not believe that Humphrey was an evil and vindictive man for what he did to my children, just click the above links to see how Dearborn Circuit Court Judge James D. Humphrey and Appellate Justices Margret Robb, John Baker and the rest of the Indiana Court of Appeals made every effort possible to bring financial harm to my entire family because I publicized the criminal behavior of the Court and the Court's expert, Dr. Edward J. Connor. The judges chose to ignore the fact that a person's rights cannot be infringed upon by a legal proceeding, the person is not a party. Laws and rules do not matter to people like Judge James D. Humphrey and Chief Justice Margaret Robb; as they will abuse the rules just as they will abuse children. Unfortunately for the unethical judges like Humphrey and Robb, my family doesn't hide from or cower to corruption.
Sunday, February 6, 2011
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Many of my friends on Facebook are encouraging people to cast a vote for St. Nicholas Academy in the Cincinnati Catholic School Spirit contest. I thought telling people where your children went to school was dangerous. At least that's what my ex-wife would claim. She testified that posting pictures of my daughters on my Facebook page could jeopardize their safety. Now the Cincinnati Catholic Archdiocese is encouraging people to say, "Hey vote for my kid's school; St. ***."
- "A picture of our (2) minor children taken from the back in the 'Home' section."
- "Dan's name, the town where he resides, and the fact that I filed for the divorce in the "My Story" section."
- A quote from our custody evaluation in the 'Edward J. Connor Psy. D. Child Custody Evaluator, Connor and Associates PLLC' section stating that 'Mr. Brewington can certainly provide child care for the children, but we believe that maximizing the time that he has with the children, will in fact, sustain their existing bond.'"
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
Well here he is; Dr. Edward J. Connor, Psy D. People who read or hear about my story are always asking, “What does this guy look like?” I think people expect to see more of an evil looking person. This is what helps make Dr. Edward J. Connor one of the most dangerous psychologists in the OH/IN/KY area. By just looking at him, you may not think that he would actively work to hurt children and parents; but he does. But the dance floor isn’t the only place that Dr. Connor likes to show off his moves; he also does a lot of dancing in the courtroom. Here’s an example of how Dr. Connor dances around in his courtroom testimony:
Dan: Were the children around when you interviewed the maternal grandparents?
Connor: I believe they were out in the yard. I remember one occasion where, I believe, [daughter] came into the kitchen where we were sitting in the house on one occasion, but then went back out there. It was warm outside.
Dan: But did you interview them at the home visit?
Dan: Did you interview them at the home visit or at the office?
Connor: No. not at the home visit.
Dan: So, you conducted -- you interviewed the maternal grandparents in your office?
Within just a few statements, Dr. Ed Connor went from providing a descriptive account of interviewing the maternal grandparents at their home to testifying to NOT interviewing the maternal grandparents at their home. Dr. Connor did the same thing with his Office Policy Statement for individual psychological services that he had my ex-wife sign. I wasn’t aware of the contract until a year after it was signed. When I asked Dr. Connor about the contract, he wrote me a letter dated September 9, 2008 stating:
“With regards to the Office Policy Statement, we do not have a signed Office Policy Statement for you on file. It appears that you were not provided with this document when you initially came into our office, which was an oversight on the part of the office staff. Nevertheless, the Office Policy Statement is simply an adjunct document to the Court order in which you and Ms. Brewington agreed to participate fully in a custody evaluation to be conducted at this office.”
The following day, Dr. Connor wrote a letter to the court attacking me for not understanding his policies pertaining to confidentiality and included a copy of the letter that explained how the Office Policy Statement was “an adjunct document to the Court order.” Somehow Dr. Connor’s policies changed between his September 9, 2008 letter and his May 27, 2009 testimony because Dr. Connor gave the following testimony:
Dan: [Is the Office Policy Statement] an adjunct document to a court order?
Dan: [September 9th] letter says, ‘it appears you were not provided with this document when you initially came into our office, which was an oversight of the part of the office staff.’
Connor: That they provided it to the mother, yes.
Dan: Well, it says up here, ‘you were not provided with it when you initially…’ then you wrote, ‘never the less, the office policy statement is simply an adjunct document to the court order in which you and Ms. Brewington agreed to participate fully in a custody evaluation to be conducted at this office.’
Connor: There was an agreed order signed for a custody evaluation --
Dan: Yes, but is that office policy statement an adjunct document to the court order?
Connor: I’m not sure what you mean by this.
Dan: Well, I’m not sure, either. You wrote it.
Connor: (exact testimony) It’s an adjunct -- it’s not an adjunct to a court order. It’s -- it’s adjacent to what we do when people come in. They fill out the forms for the evaluation to participate in it.
This is why I lost the ability to see my children. In the final decree of my divorce, Judge James D. Humphrey wrote, “The Court is most concerned about Husband’s irrational behavior and attacks on Dr. Connor.” Two little girls lost their father because Judge Humphrey was angry that their dad made Dr. Connor dance around in Judge Humphrey’s courtroom. Judge James D. Humphrey punished my children in order to protect his expert.
So I guess this is the perfect photo that captures everything that Dr. Connor represents. Dr. Connor is free to dance from court to court, knowing that no judge will hold him accountable for his actions. He can continue to abuse children and their families, and he can do it with a smile; because that’s what he enjoys and Dr. Connor is immune from negative consequences. He can continue to ask inappropriate sexual questions during custody evaluations pertaining to the shaving of pubic hair (as reported by Eric Deters on 700 WLW). He can continue to hurt people by spying on their private lives, outside of his official duties. Why, because he is Dr. Edward J. Connor of Connor and Associates, in Erlanger, Kentucky.
So if you happen to see this man out in public; keep your distance. The best thing a person can do is forward this photo to as many people as possible to make sure that everyone stays clear of the very dangerous, Dr. Edward J. Connor. For more information on Dr. Connor's unethical and illegal activities, go to www.danhelpskids.com