Thursday, September 29, 2011

How to fix a Grand Jury like Dearborn County Officials

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

Forward

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

How to Fix a Grand Jury like Dearborn County Officials

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Wednesday, September 28, 2011

Am I going to be allowed to wear a suit and tie to court? 9/27/11

My public defender, Bryan Barrett, must be mad at me because I write about the lack of communication between the two of us. In the time since his appointment on 6/20/11 to the writing of this post, 9/26/11, Mr. Barrett’s only meeting with me came on 7/18/11 and, at the time, Mr. Barrett had yet to review over 1,700 pages of documents that the prosecution said they may use against me. Mr. Barrett got angry with me because I repeatedly called the Rush County Public Defender’s Office in an effort to speak to him. Since the office would not accept my calls to take a message for Mr. Barrett, the only way I could reach him was to keep calling in the hopes that he would be in the office and accept my calls. Now it is a week before my jury trial and I don’t even know if Mr. Barrett is going to file the appropriate motion to prevent me from having to appear in front of a jury wearing orange jail clothes.

My mother raised this issue with Mr. Barrett’s assistant on 8/4/11 via email. She informed Justin Kerr that a DCLEC correction officer told me my attorney would have to file a motion to permit me to wear street clothes at trial. Mr. Barrett assigned Kerr, who is not a lawyer, to work on my case in Barrett’s absence. Mr. Kerr replied, “Whoever the alleged corrections officer happens to be, he is he either A) imaginary or B) doesn’t know what he or she is talking about” and claimed Indiana law prohibits jurors from seeing inmates in anything other than street clothes. Section 5.2 of the DCLEC handbook states the inmate’s attorney must request permission from the Court for an inmate to wear the inmate’s own clothes. As for the correction officer who told me this, I talked to Officer Turner yesterday so he definitely is not imaginary.

This is yet another troubling situation during the course of my criminal proceedings. If Bryan Barrett files the appropriate paperwork to allow me to wear a suit and tie, it will demonstrate how non-attorney Kerr not only gave me legal advice, but gave me bad legal advice. I tried to explain to Judge Brian Hill that Barrett’s assistant was acting as a lawyer in Barrett’s absence. Judge Hill assured me that Justin Kerr had only relayed communication and had not participated in any duties requiring an Indiana law license. How would he know? He didn’t. Rather than question me about my allegations or ask for evidence, Rush County Judge Brian Hill assumed that I was either mistaken or lying about Kerr giving legal advice without a law license. Either Judge Hill did not believe or did not care that Justin Kerr, who is an investigator out of the Rush County Public Defender’s Office, was giving bad legal advice.

Bryan Barrett has never asked me about potential evidence or witnesses. He didn’t object to the anonymous jury. Barrett waived my right to raise issues concerning my medical treatment, while incarcerated in the DCLEC. He refused to contact my family and/or my Ohio attorney for information and evidence. Following a hearing on Monday July 18, 2011, he told me that he would meet with me later in the week. He never returned. Barrett refused to subpoena and/or depose any witnesses. He won’t even take the proper measures that would allow me to wear a suit and tie during my jury trial. I have absolutely no knowledge of the strategy for my legal defense. Who knows? Maybe my public defender will fly into the courtroom on October 3rd wearing a cape. Maybe he has a strategy that is infallible. Maybe he already made the arrangements for me to wear my street clothes. For anyone facing prison time, who has spent nearly 7 months in jail, it is a tough pill to swallow. Lawyers usually do not neglect their clients because the news is too good.

It amazes me how such a small group of people can exercise such public incompetence and/or corruption without batting an eye. I was arrested because I made too many negative remarks about public officials; Negangard and McHenry knowingly presented false information/evidence to the court; and I do not have the ability to address it with the Court because Bryan Barrett refused to contact me. My trial will probably be held in the basement of the courthouse so no one can witness the civil right violations. I guess I’ll start ironing my county oranges.

Dear Prosecutor Negangard, When are you going to just mail it in? 9 27 11

The longer Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard allows his criminal prosecution/persecution of me to spiral out of control, the easier it is for me to demonstrate the high level of corruption and ignorance in the Dearborn County, Indiana legal system. Negangard serving as a county prosecutor is equivalent to appointing Bernie Madoff to head the SEC. They both know the rules and regulations of their respective trades, and they both know how to break them.

I recently found out what I did to get arrested. First of all, Negangard and Judge James D. Humphrey claimed I communicated a threat to Humphrey and his family because I posted his wife’s name and their address on the internet; however Negangard failed to arrest my “accomplices” in the crime, the entities that maintain the internet sites of the Dearborn County Tax Assessor and the Indiana Supreme Court because they posted the information first. (At the time, Humphrey's wife served as an advisor on the Supreme Court Ethics and Professionalism Committee.) I simply copied the already public information and pasted it in my posts. Dr. Edward J. Connor claims that I communicated a threat to him by copying a public photo of Dr. Connor dancing, which was on a public social networking site, and then re-posting it in a blog post. Judge Humphrey, Dr. Connor, Prosecutor Negangard, and Sheriff Kreinhop believe that I communicated threats to the alleged “victims” when I publicly stated that Judge Humphrey and Dr. Connor were criminals, abusers of children and families, tyrants, dangers to society etc… Sheriff Kreinhop believes that I crossed the lines between freedom of speech and intimidation and harassment. Judge Humphrey said I went too far. Prosecutor Negangard said my internet postings were not protected by the First Amendment because they were unsubstantiated… you heard that right. Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard insists that I should be a convicted felon because I made unsubstantiated comments about public officials on the internet.

In NAACP v. Claiborn Hardware Co., the United States Supreme Court wrote, “so long as the means are peaceful, the communication need not meet the standards of acceptability.” I want to clarify this for officials like Judge Humphrey, Prosecutor Negangard, and Sheriff Kreinhop; I peacefully posted the information on the internet so it doesn’t matter if you find my speech to be acceptable. But this is why prosecutor Negangard has resorted to cheating after I refused a plea deal; he knows he and his band of tyrants are lying. He just counted on me not being able to sit it out in jail.

There it is; I just summed up the simplicity of the argument against the prosecution in my shortest blog post ever. All Negangard can do now is add to the damage he’s already caused.

Tuesday, September 27, 2011

THE COWARDS, INCOMPETENTS, AND DESPOTS OF DEARBORN COUNTY

Guest Blogger

I have watched from afar the situation involving Mr. Brewington and it is truly appalling the level of indifference of the attorneys, citizens, and elected officials in Dearborn County to the actions of the Prosecutor in this case and the Judges involved.

It is hard to understand there is not one attorney in Dearborn County who will stand up and support the Constitution and protect an individual’s First Amendment rights. Is the fear of the Prosecutor and the Judges so great within the legal community that it will permit an innocent man to be subjected to malicious prosecution without a word? Do the pocketbooks of the attorneys in Dearborn County override their oath as attorneys? Rest assured when the Prosecutor comes for the attorneys, I hope they all receive the same level of indifference to their plight as Mr. Brewington

Let’s discuss the level of legal representation and justice Mr. Brewington has received to date on the pending charges. Judge Blankenship, who sits on the same bench with Judge Humphrey, handled the arraignment of Mr. Brewington on the charges brought by the Prosecutor. Does anyone see a possible conflict of interest? Does anyone in Dearborn County write a letter to the Indiana Supreme Court concerning the issue of the obvious conflict of interest involving Judge Blankenship? Where is the legal community? Where are the citizens who permit this to occur?

Let’s discuss the bond for Mr. Brewington set at $600,000 by Judge Blankenship and someone makes the case that it is a reasonable bond. The bond is set by a Judge who has a conflict on the case and Mr. Brewington is unrepresented at the arraignment by counsel. Not only is Mr. Brewington not represented at the arraignment, the Dearborn County courts do not have a policy or procedure to appoint counsel for Brewington in advance of his arraignment. It is no wonder Dearborn County needs a bigger jail when the judges are setting bonds at astronomical levels for defendants who challenge the justice system in Dearborn County. Soon the jail advocates can simply erect a fence around Dearborn County!

If you want to discuss the public defenders assigned to Brewington’s case take careful note that the first public defender was appointed by Judge Blankenship, the conflict judge. There is nothing critical of the public defenders on the blog sites assigned to Brewington’s case until the point their representation was so pathetic, it cried out to be disclosed to the public. The first public defender withdrew when Brewington did not accept a plea deal. It would benefit the public to view the motion to reduce bond filed by the public defender which lists in the body of the motion the name of a different defendant and different crimes. Sometimes an attorney should at least proofread what is filed with the Court.

The first public defender withdrew because he alleged a conflict of interest because Judge Humphrey was a witness and the public defender had other cases before Judge Humphrey. Judge Hill, the current trial Judge for Brewington, permitted the first public defender to withdraw because of the alleged conflict. The Prosecutor has more cases before Judge Humphrey than the first public defender, so it seems obvious the Prosecutor should get off the case. If Judge Hill made a determination the first public defender had a conflict, why not the Prosecutor?

The second public defender has seen Mr. Brewington on how many occasions? Look at the docket sheet for Mr. Brewington’s case and attempt to determine how many witnesses were subpoenaed to testify on behalf of Mr. Brewington. There are no witnesses subpoenaed as of September 22, 2011. Check and see what witnesses were disclosed by Mr. Brewington’s second public defender through September 22, 2011 on the docket sheet and there are none. Check and see what records were disclosed by Mr. Brewington’s second public defender to be used at trial and there are none. The assignment of an attorney masquerading in a warm body to represent Mr. Brewington is hardly “effective assistance of counsel.” Is this what the court system has become in Dearborn County? Is there an obligation on the part of the Judge, the Prosecutor, or the attorneys in Dearborn County to report such lax representation for a defendant? If history proves right, the Judges, Prosecutor, and the local attorneys will follow the path of see no evil, hear no evil, and speak no evil since their dog is not in the fight. What a conundrum for the Judges, Prosecutor, and the local attorneys – do what is right or simply look the other way! Not only are the Judges, Prosecutor, and local attorneys looking the other way, they are greasing the skids of injustice for Mr. Brewington. Who is next? You, me, your family my family?

Is there any truth in the Dearborn County system? It is obvious the Prosecutor and McHenry wouldn’t know the truth or search for the truth after the allegations concerning the information about the drive by hit. No investigation and no verification of the information submitted to the Court by either the Prosecutor or McHenry. It is presented to the Court as truthful by the Prosecutor and McHenry, yet never by them. The Judge simply accepts the information as truthful based on the testimony of McHenry and the statements of the Prosecutor. The second public defender does nothing to investigate or determine the accuracy of the information presented to the Court or investigate the allegations in advance of the bond hearing. It becomes painfully obvious why a public defender is selected when so little is done to protect a client. The warm body selected by Judge Hill to defend Brewington is a joke. Hopefully at some point in the future, Judge Hill will have the opportunity to appoint the same individual to represent someone Judge Hill cares for and loves and the public defender goes about his job in the same manner. Would Judge Hill howl or what?

Finally, it seems painfully obvious that whether you like Brewington or hate Brewington, he has done a service to the citizens of Dearborn County to inform the citizens of the quality of the individuals elected to serve the citizens. Do you get that warm fuzzy feeling about the truthfulness of your elected officials? Do you believe your elected officials are truthful and honest? Do you believe they adequately investigate anything? Do you believe that Judge Blankenship and Judge Humphrey are fair and impartial? Do you believe it is worthwhile for Dearborn County to spend a minimum of $7,500 for the round the clock protection of Judge Humphrey when there was no threat? Do you believe that Judge Humphrey is worried about his address being on the internet when it can be accessed on the tax assessor’s website? If Judge Humphrey is so worried about his address being on a website, then he has the wrong job! There are any number of attorneys who could take over for Judge Humphrey and dispense justice in an even-handed manner without his histrionics. If we don’t check out the individuals elected to office, we are destined to have more of the same timid and lying officeholders we have at the present time.

Brewington only opened our eyes to the problem. The problem remains, not because of Brewington but because Brewington shined the light on individuals with no respect for the law and in turn no respect for our rights. I say kudos for Brewington in much the same manner as I do for anyone who chases from office individuals who do not respect the law or our rights as citizens.

Guest Blogger

Friday, September 23, 2011

The Smoking Gun That Proves Prosecutor Negangard’s Criminal Activity! 9/23/11

“Where do I even start?” This is the question I found myself pondering when I sat down to write this post. How about this;”Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard and Special Crimes Unit Detective Shane McHenry conspired to commit fraud upon the court during my bond reduction hearing.” I could go with, “Prosecutor Negangard wasted thousands of dollars of Dearborn County taxpayers’ money on bogus 7 day, 24 hour surveillance outside the home of Judge James D. Humphrey in an effort to illegally build a phony case against Dan Brewington.” Or I could just begin here, ”The Inmate Movement History from the Hamilton County (Ohio) Jail Management System proves that Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard and Detective/County Commissioner Shane McHenry were fully aware that Hamilton County Jail inmate Keith Jones lied about Dan Brewington inquiring about someone performing a “drive-by shooting” on Judge James D. Humphrey, when Negangard and McHenry tried to convince the public and the court that Dan Brewington presented a physical danger to Dearborn County residents.” How do I know Negangard and McHenry are defrauding the courts and taxpayers of Dearborn County, Indiana? Because the Inmate Movement History at the Hamilton County Justice Center proves that Keith Jones and Dan Brewington never crossed paths while at the Justice Center.

The extent of the corruption in the Dearborn County government will never surprise me because I have been the subject of ongoing efforts, by people like Judge Humphrey and Prosecutor Negangard, to illegally deprive me of my children, my free speech, and my personal freedom. What I find to be amazing is the reckless, arrogant stupidity in making up a lie that could be easily disproved. During my bond reduction hearing on August 17, 2011, Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard called Detective Shane McHenry to testify about McHenry’s “investigation” of a report that I approached Keith Jones in the Hamilton County Justice Center, and asked him if he knew anyone that would do a drive-by shooting on Judge James D. Humphrey. Judge Brian Hill denied my request for a bond reduction stating, “The State also presented evidence that since his arrest, the Defendant may have contemplated violence towards at least one alleged victim in this case.” What Negangard and McHenry failed to mention was that they knew Keith Jones and I were never even in the same building at the Hamilton County jail but they ran with it anyway, in a malicious and vindictive attempt to prosecute me for publicly criticizing the Dearborn County Government.Hamilton County Jail Management Movement History

Prosecutor Negangard is a sick and twisted individual. “Evil” fits in as well. He not only knowingly used Keith Jones’ false statements against me in Court, but Negangard also used Jones’ statements in a quest to build public fear of Dan Brewington. Negangard took a page out of Adolf Hitler’s playbook as Negangard attempted to propagate false fears to the public because he felt that I posed a risk to the ongoing corruption in Dearborn County. Negangard and McHenry pulled in the “military” to perform a 7 day, 24 hour surveillance on Judge Humphrey’s home to bolster their fictional criminal case against me. They knew I had never met Keith Jones yet they wasted thousands of dollars of taxpayer money and dozens of hours of law enforcement manpower when they set up the unnecessary surveillance on Humphrey’s home… but they got caught.

“He is just trying to sabotage his own defense.” That was Prosecutor Negangard’s reasoning as to why I shouldn’t be able to postpone my October 3, 2011 trial to a later date. Why would Negangard care if I was trying to sabotage my own case? He wasn’t concerned; he just didn’t have a valid excuse. I told Judge Hill that my public defender had made no effort to defend me from the Keith Jones allegations. Negangard knew that any inquiry into Negangard and McHenry’s Keith Jones propaganda would not only seal the fate of the case against me, but could seal the fate of their professional careers as well. Negangard probably felt like he was in the clear after Judge Hill denied my request to continue my jury trial, but Negangard never counted on my Ohio Lawyer, who is also representing me in a civil case in the Indian Southern District Federal Court, coming up with a key piece of evidence that would shatter Negangard’s fa├žade.

Now the question is, “Who else knew about this?” Did Judge Sally Blankenship know about Negangard and McHenry’s bogus allegations when she set my bond at $600,000? If she did, who told her because it wasn’t presented to the Court? I find it hard to believe that Judge Blankenship would not be notified about an alleged death threat on a fellow Dearborn County Judge and/or the 7 day, 24 hour police surveillance on Judge Humphrey’s home. Why did she even rule on my case if she was aware of the alleged threat? Could this be the reason neither one of my public defenders wanted anything to do with my Ohio attorney. Maybe they felt more comfortable in allowing me to be convicted rather than tipping the ox cart. And who else was aware that Negangard and McHenry were knowingly using the false accounts of Keith Jones in an effort to destroy me? Did Sheriff Mike Kreinhop know? What about Judge Humphrey? How about Deputies David Lusby and Terry Van Winkle? They were involved in setting up the costly surveillance outside of Humphrey’s home. I wonder if my public defenders were aware of the bogus Jones story. It wouldn’t even surprise me if Judge Brian Hill is aware of Negangard’s shenanigans. Judge Hill met privately with Negangard and my public defender, Bryan Barrett for nearly a half hour before my pretrial hearing on September 19, 2011 and Judge Hill promptly denied my request to continue my trial. Judge Hill denied my request to continue my trial because he said I was adamant about not continuing my trial back in August. I’m still having a hard time figuring out where Judge Hill and Negangard came up with that information because there is no mention in the court record of me being adamant about anything. The fact is that all of the mentioned legal and law enforcement officials were going to allow me to march off to slaughter without questioning Negangard’s fictional threat, while at the same time doing everything in their power to prohibit me from challenging Negangard’s preposterous allegations.

I have no idea how many people knew about the lie of Prosecutor Negangard and Detective/Deputy/Commissioner McHenry. I do know that by posting this information, many people will be aware of their illegal actions. It will be interesting to see if anyone does anything about it. Public internet posts like these are exactly the reason why tyrants like Judge James D. Humphrey and Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard have fought tooth and nail to deprive me of everything that is precious in my life. They have taken my children and my freedom but they could never strip me of my dedication to be a father and they could never detract from the many friends and family who have supported me along the way. Negangard was fully aware of the two precious little girls who were without a father when Negangard did everything in his power to destroy my credibility in order to salvage his own credibility. Negangard coldly and maliciously stomped on the hearts of my 5 and 7 year old daughters by trying to eliminate any hopes that they would be reunited with their father. Negangard’s disingenuous Keith Jones scheme came as a last resort when I refused to take a plea deal that would ensure my release. The prosecutor’s overall strategy has always been to do whatever is necessary to prevent me from damaging the credibility of Negangard and his cronies. Tyrants like Negangard are angered when they discover that respect is a virtue that is earned, not forced. Unfortunately for Negangard, respect is a virtue that will elude him for years to come.

As always, I want to thank everyone for the ongoing support. I also would encourage everyone to contact local, state, and federal authorities to inform them of the illegal actions of Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard and Dearborn County Commissioner/Special Crimes Unit Detective Shane McHenry. Dearborn County residents should call for the immediate resignation of these officials and should demand that the taxpayers be reimbursed for any monies that Prosecutor Negangard has squandered for his personal vendettas. Maybe finally Prosecutor Negangard will understand the power and importance of our constitutional right to free speech. I hope to see everyone on the outside soon. Thanks again.

Thursday, September 22, 2011

Medical Conditions at the DCLEC, Update 9/22/11

The Doctor at the Dearborn County law Enforcement Center, Dr. Nadir Al-Shami, is either one of the most highly trained and medically diverse physicians in the world, or he is conspiring with Sheriff Michael Kreinhop and Captain Dave Hall to deny proper medical care to DCLEC inmates. I have written how Dr. Al-Shami and the DCLEC altered my Ritalin prescription without contacting my prescribing physician, which is a violation of 201 IAC 3-1-11(k). The DCLEC contends that Dr. Al-Shami is as qualified, if not more qualified, than my treating physician and experts at Harvard Medical School in determining proper prescription dosages for adults diagnosed with ADHD. The DCLEC and Dr. Al-Shami believe that Dr. Al-Shami is more than qualified to overrule the prescription orders of a liver specialist, as Dr. Al-Shami altered the prescription of a man, who receives disability due to problems with his liver, without consulting the liver specialist and without performing any medical testing. As Dr. Al-Shami is a medical “expert” who wears many hats, Sheriff Kreinhop and Captain Dave Hall crowned Dr. Al-Shami as the DCLEC expert in an entirely different specialized medical field; dentistry.

Unfortunately this isn’t an attempt by me to create some kind of satirical metaphor to emphasize the inadequacies of the health care available to inmates in the DCLEC. This is another example of how Sheriff Kreinhop, Captain Dave Hall and Dr. Nadir Al-Shami, of Advanced Correctional Healthcare, are maliciously denying medical treatment to DCLEC inmates. The latest medical policy of the DCLEC requires inmates to first meet with the jail doctor before seeing the jail dentist. If Dr. Al-Shami determines that the dental issue is a medical emergency then the inmate is permitted to see the dentist. I learned about this new policy on 9/19/11, when an inmate informed me that he was prohibited from seeing the dentist for an abscessed, decayed tooth because Dr. Al-Shami concluded that the dental issue was not a medical emergency. This is coming from the same doctor who tells inmates to meditate rather than allowing the inmates to take medications that were prescribed prior to the inmates’ incarceration. This is the same doctor who had to consult with a prescription reference book to determine what average Ritalin dosages actually were before he altered the dose of my prescribing physician, who specializes in treating adults diagnosed with ADHD. I’ve known the inmate with the dental problem for five months. I’ve spent a good part of my jail time talking to him and getting to know him. I know that every few weeks the man is holding the right side of his jaw because his decayed tooth has developed an abscess. My cheap jail dictionary defines an abscess as “An infected place in the body which becomes sore and swollen and contains pus”. I’m neither a general practice doctor, nor am I a doctor of dentistry but I can say with certainty that the man’s tooth is dark gray, on its way to turning black. Judging from his swollen gum and the appearance of a boil just below the tooth, I’d say it meets the definition of “abscess.” Is the condition a medical emergency? Not by DCLEC standards. In my six months in the DCLEC I’ve concluded that there are two factors in determining whether a situation is a medical emergency: 1) Is the inmate going to die within the next fifteen minutes; and 2) Can the DCLEC be sued if they fail to provide medical treatment. Those are the DCLEC tests for “medical emergency.”

The inmate with the bad tooth is approximately 6’ 3” and probably weighs close to 320 pounds. He used to exercise regularly by walking stairs but is now unable to do so because of foot and ankle problems due to the fact that DCLEC foot ware offers little support for a man of his size. (Note: The inmate did see the DCLEC doctor about his foot problems, but Dr. Al-Shami, who also serves as the DCLEC podiatrist, concluded that the inmate did not have any problems with his feet.) So now the DCLEC is acknowledging the inmate has mobility problems, is very overweight and has reoccurring infections in his mouth that the DCLEC will not treat. Why, because he probably won’t die on the watches of Sheriff Kreinhop and Captain Dave Hall.

The DCLEC denies medical treatment to inmates out of convenience and/or to save money. The DCLEC dentist is only available once a month. This is to maintain the dental health of inmates as required by law. Sheriff Kreinhop and Captain Dave Hall use Dr. Nadir Al-Shami and Advanced Correctional Healthcare as a “buffer” to keep medical expenses low. The DCLEC did not drastically reduce my Ritalin prescription to protect my health. If the DCLEC was concerned about my health, the medical staff would have contacted my prescribing doctor before reducing my dose to less than a third of my original prescription. Dr. Al-Shami’s latest dental diagnosis is an oxymoron of monumental proportions. Dr. Al-Shami concluded that the inmate’s dental problem was not a medical emergency so it was not necessary for the inmate to see the dentist the next time the dentist arrived at the DCLEC. If the dental problem would have been a medical emergency (emergency – A sudden and unexpected situation requiring prompt action), the inmate would have been forced to wait up to several weeks until the jail dentist would be available to address the “sudden and unexpected” dental “situation requiring prompt action.” Dr. Al-Shami’s findings also demonstrate another troubling problem; either the DCLEC staff is incapable of detecting medical emergencies that require “prompt” medical action, or the DCLEC staff is willfully and maliciously subjecting an overweight inmate’s heart and body to unnecessary infections on a regular basis because treatment is inconvenient and/or costly. By the way, did I mention that the inmate was only requesting that the decayed tooth by pulled? Unfortunately, the new dental policy requires an inmate’s tooth to become infected to the point the infection subsequently leads to life threatening blood poisoning, which, by Dr. Al-Shami’s account, will require the inmate to wait until Dr. Al-Shami is scheduled to be in the DCLEC because the DCLEC staff is not capable of detecting medical emergencies and/or qualified to handle the “sudden and unexpected” medical “situation requiring prompt actions.”

Feel free to contact Dearborn County Sheriff Mike Kreinhop and/or DCLEC Captain Dave Hall with any questions or concerns about the negligent medical practices of the DCLEC. Feel free to contact local and state officials to express your opinions regarding the malicious and dangerous medical practices of Dr. Nadir Al-Shami and Advanced Correctional Healthcare. I will be providing Sheriff Kreinhop and Captain Hall hard copies of this post so there will be no question of whether they are aware of the matter.

Wednesday, September 21, 2011

My Emotional Scars and Subconscious. Written 9/12/11

Last night I had a dream that I was reunited with my daughters. I found out at the last minute that they would be with me over a Fourth of July weekend. In my dream, where time and travel often have no boundaries, we decided to go to a beach in Florida. The timing of my dream was a bit off because I didn’t meet up with my daughters until I arrived at the hotel room. I can only say that I hope the real thing will be as good as my dream. My girls, who had visibly grown since the last time I’d seen them, yelled “Daddy!” and attacked me with hugs. After the heartfelt reunion, we decide to hit the water so we suited up. My mind was racing about safety issues. How bad was the undertow in the ocean? Are the girls, strong swimmers? Did I have the maximum SPF sunblock? I knew I had to have every safety issue nailed down because I could lose them again if there was one oversight or accident. After I covered all of the bases, I was confident that we would have a trouble free day of fun in the sun. The girls and I were only outside for a little while before we noticed lightening far out in the ocean. Not wanting to take any chances we went back to the hotel room to watch a movie. It was truly a wonderful moment. I was lounging in a big recliner with both of my daughters sitting on the armrests, snuggling up next to dad. There was no place in the world I would have rather been than holding on to my precious angels.

A short time later we decided to go grocery shopping, as we always liked to do, for supplies for dinner. The date was July 5th because I received a text message from the girls’ mother stating that she had scheduled doctor appointments for the girls on July 4th but I never took them. My mind started racing. Did I forget? Did she tell me about the appointment? Why would the pediatrician schedule appointments on Fourth of July weekend? It was then that I received the gut wrenching news. My ex-wife sent another text that she was going to tell the court. I was scared that I would have to go back to jail and would lose my daughters forever. Then I woke up.

The only reoccurring dream that I have on any regular basis is a dream that I somehow lose my teeth. I’ve always attributed it to the hellish years I wore metal contraptions to straighten my teeth and to correct an overbite. Dreams about jail and losing my daughters are becoming more common. I’ve had dreams that my little girls found a new father. I’ve had dreams where I have appeared in public wearing my orange jail clothes. I tell people that I have to go back to jail before the guards notice that I am gone. These dreams are becoming more common. They are subconscious fears that I may have to deal with for the rest of my life.

This is another aspect of the damage that people like Judge James D. Humphrey and Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard have inflicted on me. Am I going to get out of jail? Yes. Will I get to see my daughters again? Most definitely. Will I carry emotional scars that will haunt me from time to time throughout the rest of my life? Probably. I just hope that my daughters are young enough to escape most of the permanent scars and damage. But that’s why I remain on the path I’m currently walking. No child, mother, or father should fall victim to evil people like Judge Humphrey and Prosecutor Negangard. The harder they work to destroy me only makes me stronger. At least my daughters will someday understand how their daddy’s love is boundless and unfaltering.

Tuesday, September 13, 2011

Prosecutor Negangard’s Conflicting Interest in my Case is the Reason Why the Prosecutor Cannot Step Down

Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard is doing everything in his power to prosecute me despite the fact that Prosecutor Negangard appears to have an unbelievable conflict of interest with my case. The problem that Prosecutor Negangard faces is no special prosecutor would take my case to trial so Negangard has no choice but to ignore his conflicts and special interests that are directly and indirectly tied to my criminal trial. Negangard is turning a blind eye to all laws and regulations pertaining to bias, prejudice, and impropriety in legal proceedings in a last ditch effort to save his reputation, his job, and to possible save him from being criminally charged for maliciously violating civil rights laws.

On March 17, 2011, Judge Sally A. Blankenship disqualified herself from my case and stated, “No judicial officer in Dearborn County is able to hear this matter.” The second judge in my case, Decatur Circuit Judge John A. Westhafer was appointed by the Indiana Supreme Court, but later recused himself because he had known one of the alleged “victims” in my case, Judge James D. Humphrey, for 25 years and considered Judge Humphrey to be a “good friend.” On June 17, 2011, the third judge in my case, Rush County Circuit Judge Brian D. Hill granted my first public defender’s motion to withdraw because Mr. Watson stated that he had multiple cases in Judge Humphrey’s court and claimed the “situation at minimum creates an appearance of impropriety.” Prosecutor Negangard is an officer of the Dearborn County courts, a friend of Judge James D. Humphrey, and has many cases in Judge Humphrey’s court, yet for some reason the prosecutor does not believe that the issues present the appearance of impropriety. Please note that the above situations are not the only matters that should be subjected to the impropriety test. Please read the following and decide for yourselves whether you believe that Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard has a conflict of interest in prosecuting my case. [Impropriety-The quality or state of being improper, an improper act or remark. Please also note that the test for impropriety in law is not determining whether an act, remark, situation, etc., is improper; the test for impropriety is determining whether a reasonable minded person would determine that the act, remark, situation, etc, appears to be improper.] Assuming that the readers of this post are reasonable minded individuals, ascertain whether you believe the following potential conflicts give the appearance that it would be improper for F. Aaron Negangard to serve as the prosecutor in my criminal trial.

1) Negangard tries cases in Humphrey’s court

2) Negangard is friends with Humphrey family.

3) Negangard worked under Humphrey in prosecutor’s office prior to Humphrey becoming judge.

4) July 12, 2010 Negangard sent email to Dan and County Officials stating he would “make every effort to prosecute” Dan

5) July 7, 2010, Negangard lied about Indiana laws regarding investigatory records to obstruct Dan’s access to public records.

6) Negangard claimed Indiana law prohibited the release of investigatory records.

7) Negangard reinforced his misconception to County Officials in 7/12/10 email.

8) Negangard claims that Dan threatened Humphrey in August 2009 but did not initiate grand jury investigation until 2/15/2011.

9) Five days prior to initiating grand jury investigation, Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard dismissed Dan’s complaint against Negangard, a complaint filed June 16, 2010.

10) No evidence of new “threats”, only web writings.

11) Unconstitutional to force person to defend 150,000 words of internet writings over the course of 18 months to support an alleged threat that occurred 18 months prior to grand jury investigation.

12) Negangard’s 7/12/10 email to county officials stated Dan “attacked” his office.

13) Negangard is being sued by Dan.

14) Negangard interviewed Connor on 10/20/11 and thus should be available to testify.

15) Negangard heads the Dearborn County Special Crimes Unit and actively participated in investigation.

16) Negangard heads both the investigation of Dan Brewington and the prosecution of Dan Brewington.

17) Special Crimes Unit detectives, such as Shane McHenry, operate under Negangard’s control and then testify on behalf of Negangard/Prosecution.

18) Negangard has influence over who may be dismissed from SCU and/or power to dismiss detectives from SCU if Negangard is not “pleased” with detectives’ performance.

19) Negangard has been the subject of Dan’s internet writings criticizing Dearborn County officials for nearly two years.

20) Negangard claims Dan’s writings threaten, intimidate, and/or attack the Humphreys, Connor, Blondell, Melissa Brewington, Loechel, Indiana Supreme and Appellate Courts, the current court, as well as himself.

21) Negangard represents the alleged “victims” on behalf of the state while claiming to be a victim of Dan’s “attacks” well over a year ago.

22) Negangard submitted Dan’s Connor complaint filed with the Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychology as evidence to support illegal conduct yet continues to prosecute the case despite Dan filling a complaint and amended complaint against Negangard on 6/16/10 & 7/16/10, respectively.

23) Connor is a witness used by both the Dearborn Co. Courts and Negangard.

24) Both know Connor was appointed as a psychological expert to Indiana courts while not being licensed in Indiana.

25) Simple impropriety test would suggest Negangard has an interest in protecting his expert (Connor) as any findings of illegal and/or unethical conduct on the part of the County’s witness(Connor) could have negative consequences for current and past legal proceedings.

Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard has to be the king of the hypocrites. Prosecutor Negangard is picking and choosing words and phrases from over 2000 pages of “evidence” in his efforts to demonstrate that the totality of my free speech content somehow constitutes threats against public officials. At the same time he is trying to assemble random sections of my writings to rationalize my prosecution, Prosecutor Negangard is disassembling and dismissing an array of potential conflicts in an effort to rationalize why he should remain the prosecutor in my case. Why? It probably has something to do with public comments on websites such as the Dearborn County Public Forum, where comments read, “Negangard’s political reputation is resting on this one. He’s got to win.” And “I think win or lose Negangard’s reputation is already in the toilet.” It appears that Prosecutor Negangard’s only hope in salvaging his reputation is to ignore all conflicts and improprieties and do everything in his power to prosecute Dan Brewington. Feel free to contact me or my family at contactdanbrewington@gmail.com If you feel that the actions of Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard have violated state and/or federal laws, feel free to contact local, state, and or federal authorities to report his actions. Thanks for the support.

The Medical Policies of the Dearborn County Law Enforcement Center Can Be Deadly

The medical policies under Sheriff Mike Kreinhop and Captain Dave Hall could have deadly ramifications for inmates who are regularly under the care of doctors and medical specialists. 210 IAC 3-1-11(k) of the Indiana Administrative Code states “Jail officials shall use their best efforts to obtain any medication prescribed by a physician. All medications shall be administered in the dosage and with the frequency prescribed. No substitutions of medications shall be made without the prescribing physician’s approval.” One would assume that the prescribing physician refers to the physician that prescribed medication to a person prior to their incarceration in the DCLEC. Not so, says Captain Dave Hall.

Prior to my arrest on March 7, 2011, I sought treatment for ADHD at the Affinity Center in Cincinnati, Ohio. The Affinity Center specializes in diagnosing and treating children and adults who have ADD/ADHD. M y doctor, Dr. Doug Logan MD, prescribed 50mgs of Ritalin, which I took 3-4 times a day. Initially the DCLEC refused to allow me to take my medication. When I raised the constitutional issue of depriving me of my mental health at trial, Captain Hall recognized my Ritalin prescription that was prescribed by Dr. Logan and stated that I would be allowed to take my prescriptions. I soon discovered there was a hitch; I was not permitted to take the Ritalin as prescribed by my physician. The medical staff changed my prescription and only allowed me to take 30 mgs, 2 times a day, without even consulting with Dr. Logan, my prescribing physician. How can DCLEC officials get away with altering my medication without consulting with my prescribing physician per 201 IAC 3-1-11(k)? Easy, they just changed my prescribing physician without my knowledge.

Last week I submitted an Inmate Request Form requesting the name of the doctor that prescribes my Ritalin. The Ritalin bottle that was filled by CVS Pharmacy read, “Dr. Doug Logan.” The pharmacist that listed Dr. Logan as the prescribing physician did so because Dr. Logan wrote the prescription. Captain Dave Hall acknowledged Dr. Logan’s prescription because Captain Hall stated I was allowed to take the prescription. Following Captain Hall’s approval, the DCLEC dismissed Dr. Logan as my prescribing doctor and now claims that my prescribing doctors are Dr. Nadir Al-Shami and two other doctors who I’ve never met. Captain Hall and the DCLEC dismissed my specialist and replaced my prescribing doctor with three doctors who have never written a prescription for Ritalin for me. Captain Hall and the DCLEC medical staff arbitrarily changed my prescribing physician just so they could deprive me of my medication. Am I going to die because of it? No. I will be at a disadvantage during trial without having the ability to focus and concentrate as well as before my arrest. The DCLEC’s medical policies can jeopardize the lives of inmates with serious health conditions as Captain Hall and Sheriff Kreinhop allow the medical staff to disregard the prescription orders from the inmates regular physician by naming doctors who are contracting for the DCLEC as the inmate’s new prescribing physician.

If you have heart problems, you go to a physician who specializes in treating heart problems. When someone develops kidney problems they see a kidney specialist. A person who is diagnosed with cancer doesn’t go to his/her family practitioner for treatment; the person goes to an oncologist. When someone is arrested in Dearborn County, Indiana, medical contractors for the DCLEC become the inmate’s treating specialist. You think I’m exaggerating? One inmate, who has trusted me with his medical and contact information, receives disability because of a serious liver condition. Prior to his arrest in Dearborn County, his liver specialist and family doctor prescribed multiple medications based on extensive examinations and blood work. Upon his arrival at the DCLEC, medical contractor Dr. Nadir Al-Shami arbitrarily decided that the man did not need all of the medications prescribed by his liver specialist and family doctor. The man filed numerous requests and grievances requesting his normal prescriptions, but to no avail. It was only after the man wrote his liver specialist and after the specialist contacted the DCLEC, did the DCLEC give the man his required medications per the orders of the prescribing specialist. Unfortunately, the only way that the DCLEC will recognize a prescribing physician outside of the DCLEC is when the prescribing physician contacts the DCLEC to explain that without the proper medication, the inmate may die.

Most people would probably find the policies of the DCLEC to be despicable and inhumane. No one knows what kind of damage the man with the liver problems may have sustained while the DCLEC refused his necessary treatment. DCLEC officials are not concerned with the man’s health they are only concerned with the liability of an untreated inmate dying in their jail. The officials responsible for implementing the policies are Sheriff Mike Kreinhop and Captain Dave Hall. They simply sit back and wash their hands clean by saying, “it’s up to the jail doctor.” It will take the death of an inmate to call attention to this atrocity. The sad state of the DCLEC’s medical policies is just another example of the corruption and incompetence that plagues the Dearborn County government.

Thursday, September 8, 2011

TIMELINE PART II

On July 19, 2011 I published TIMELINE PART I, this is TIMELINE PART II published on August 29, 2011.

27. A Bond Reduction hearing was scheduled for August 3, 2011.

a. Dan had only talked to Mr. Barrett 1 time since July 18, 2011 and that was because Dan kept calling the public defender’s office until Barrett picked up. A rational call from Mr. Barrett to explain that he had a family emergency would have been a courtesy. But we were left to guess with the bond hearing approaching, as well as the trial.

b. On August 1, 2011 after not hearing from Mr. Barrett since seeing him at the July 18, 2011 hearing, I emailed him. I told him Dan did not want a continuance, that Dan had a lot of information and people that could be subpoenaed to testify as character and medical witnesses. I told him that Dan needed to talk to him that day and sent him my cell phone number, again. Dan had signed papers so Mr. Barrett could discuss his case with his Ohio attorney Robert G. Kelly or with me, Sue Brewington.

c. On August 2, 2011 I got a call from Mr. Barrett’s investigator, Justin Kerr, and he told me there would be no bond hearing because of Mr. Barrett’s family emergency.

d. He wanted Dan to continue his trial and he said that Dan had to decide today, Aug. 2, 2011.

e. If Dan were to continue his trial he could be in jail indefinitely because he would be giving up his right to a speedy trial and there would be all kinds of continuances, no bond reduction hearings…

f. Dan got information that was incorrect from Mr. Kerr

(1) Dan asked, through me, about filing a motion for him to be able to wear street clothes at trial. He responded with an email that explained that the CO that gave Dan the information about wearing street clothes to trial was either imaginary or didn’t know what he was talking about. I checked with Judges’ Cleary and Blankenship’s offices and was told that you did need something in writing to the court, from your attorney. In section 5.2 of the inmate handbook it says something in writing has to be submitted.

(2) Mr. Kerr told Dan that the state had 1 year to try someone but left out that they could only be kept in jail 6 months without trial if they did not file for any continuances. He tried to get Dan to file a continuance. There are 3 exceptions to this, see below.

28. I was reporting our story on the internet and Mr. Kerr didn’t like it so he wrote to say he couldn’t communicate with me anymore.

29. The trial was scheduled for Tuesday, August 16, 2011 at 8:30. Jury selection would be first.

a. Next – Dan’s counsel had to file a Motion to Vacate the Bond Reduction Hearing that was scheduled for August 3, 2011.

b. The judge ordered this because the public defender was out of town on a personal matter and since the trial is set for August 16, 2011 there is no need for a bond reduction hearing.

c. An order vacating the August 3, 2011 Bond Reduction Hearing was filed on August 4, 2011.

30. Judge Brian D. Hill filed a Voir Dire Order on August 4, 2011. That is to convene a jury.

31. On Monday August 8, 2011, Norwood, Ohio Attorney Robert G. Kelly became licensed to practice before the United States District Court Southern District of Indiana. He took his oath of office in Indianapolis and went straight to Dearborn County Law Enforcement Center to see Dan. After almost 5 months Mr. Kelly could finally see Dan under attorney-client privilege.

32. On Tuesday, August 9, 2011 Mr. Kelly filed a Writ of Habeas Corpus with the United States District Court Southern District of Indiana, in Indianapolis.

33. On August 9, 2011 Deputy Prosecutor, M. Joseph Kisor filed a Motion for Confidentiality of Juror’s Names and Identities.

a. Once again Prosecutor Negangard’s office uses the charges as fact when asking for this motion.

(1) The defendant has previously attempted to interfere with the judicial process, including continuous and long-term harassment of witnesses, judges, and attorneys involved.

(2) The defendant has previously made threats against witnesses, judges, and attorneys involved in the current court proceedings.

(3) Juror’s safety would be jeopardized…

(4) To support his argument Prosecutor Negangard’s office uses the case of Carl A. Major Appellant-Defendant vs. State of Indiana, Appellee- Plaintiff. This case involved the shooting of 5 people, 3 died and they were executed, 3 shots to the back of the head. The court ruled that the trial court erred in impaneling an anonymous jury but that such error was harmless, and that Major’s sentence of 175 years was not inappropriate.

(5) The Appellate Court ruled that the even considering the horrendous nature of the crime impaneling an anonymous jury was wrong in this case but it was a harmless error. How could it possibly be appropriate in Dan’s case?

34. On August 10, 2011 Deputy Prosecutor M. Joseph Kisor filed a Motion to Release Grand Jury Exhibits to the Prosecuting Attorney for Dan’s trial. We don’t even know what that means because we can’t talk to Dan’s attorney.

35. On August 11, 2011 there is an Order Vacating Jury Trial because the public defender had a family emergency, which he truly did, and Judge Brian D. Hill wanted to make sure the Defendant would get his right of effective assistance of counsel at trial.

36. As part of the above order, Judge Brian D. Hill also set a Bond Reduction Hearing for Wednesday, August 17, 2011 at 10:00AM.

37. On Friday, August 12, 2011 Bryan E. Barrett called me in a 1 minute 17 second phone conversation to tell me that the trial had been vacated and that a bond reduction hearing was to be set for August 17, 2011 and he would be there.

38. There was not going to be any attempt to call character or medical witnesses for Dan.

39. No communication with the attorney until August 17, 2011

40. Bond Hearing – Wednesday, August 17, 2011

a. Dan came in with help from a CO trying to carry all of his documents because he didn’t know what counsel would want or what he intended to do. He was wearing pink handcuffs that would rub his wrists red because he had to constantly go through his 1400 pages of discoveries with no help and not being able to take off the handcuffs. No one even asked if that was possible.

b. Barrett never talked to Dan. Barrett sat in the spectator seats until the judge was ready to come in and then Mr. Barrett moved to his spot next to Dan.

c. Barrett had no witnesses to call for Dan. No character or mental health witnesses. They would have been available if there had been time to call them.

d. Negangard calls Det. Shane McHenry to the stand.

(1). He testified that they have a recorded interview with someone who was in Hamilton County Justice Center when Dan was there. The man’s name is Keith L Jones. The Cincinnati Police got a crimestopper’s call (they are all anonymous) with a story that someone in jail was trying to hire a person to do a drive by on a judge.

(2). That someone was “allegedly” Dan.

(3). The man supposedly had details so you would know that he talked to Dan, or overhead Dan talking to someone.

(4). Keith L. Jones supposedly said he knew someone and supposedly gave Dan 2 phone numbers.

(5). The police checked only one number and the person (the informant’s daughter) had never heard of Dan Brewington.

(6). Prosecutor Negangard gave the recording to the judge.

(7). Keith L. Jones has a criminal record pages long covering 2 counties in Ohio; Hamilton and Franklin and the Federal Government. Charges consist of taking the identity of another, forgery, insurance fraud, falsification, receiving stolen property, possession of criminal tools, multiple felony thefts, and probation violation.

(8). Keith L. Jones has been an informant for the police but is now serving a ten-year prison sentence.

(9). Cincinnati Police didn’t pursue this further.

(10). The ATF officer didn’t pursue this further.

(11). The Hamilton County Prosecutor didn’t file charges nor did the Dearborn County Prosecutor file charges.

(12). The Dearborn County Sheriff formed a protective unit around the clock for Judge Humphrey from March 11, 2011 through March 18, 2011.

(13). During this time Dan was in custody in their Jail but they didn’t interrogate him. They just listened in to all of his conversations for a week. They didn’t hear anything about a drive by.

(14). F. Aaron Negangard offered Dan a plea bargain in May through public defender #1, John Watson. Mr. Watson conveyed this information to Norwood attorney Robert G. Kelly. It was time served. Would Negangard offer time served to a person who tried to hire someone to do a drive by on a judge?????

(15). He used it at the Bond Hearing to try to promote his argument that Dan is dangerous.

(16). For unofficial transcribed minutes to this hearing see

http://dearborncounty.blogspot.com/2011/08/17-august-2011-dan-brewington-bond.html

41. On Friday, August 19, 2011 at 3:23PM Dan filed a complaint and jury demand(lawsuit), by his Norwood, Ohio Attorney Robert G. Kelly, in the United States District Court Southern District of Indiana naming:

a. Judge James D. Humphrey – Family Court Judge Dearborn County, Indiana

b. Edward J. Connor – Child Custody Evaluator from Erlanger, Kentucky working in Indiana without a license.

c. F. Aaron Negangard – Prosecutor of Dearborn County, Indiana

d. Michael Kreinhop – Sheriff of Dearborn County, Indiana

e. Heidi Humphrey – former member of the Indiana Supreme Court Ethics and Professionalism Committee in September,2009.

f. Angela Loechel – divorce attorney, Lawrenceburg, Indiana.

g. Dearborn County, Indiana

John Does 1-25 For a complete copy of the complaint and jury demand (lawsuit) go to

http://dearborncounty.blogspot.com/2011/08/brewington-federal-lawsuit-filed-august.html

42. Order Denying Bond Reduction – filed August 23, 2011.

a. State presented evidence the Defendant has a history of refusing to follow court orders and disdain for authority of the court.

(1). Negangard made a point that Dan didn’t have the court ordered mental health exam and Dan’s attorney made no attempt to be able to ask Dan what he had done.

(2). Negangard made a point that Dan had not paid his ex $122,000 that he was ordered to pay to her immediately. Note: Dan has a public defender because he has no money.

(3). Dan has not paid Angela Loechel the $40,000 the court ruled he owed her.

(4). The first 3 all pertain to Dan’s divorce decree, filed August 18, 2009.

(5). He is current with child support payments and has never missed a payment.

(6). Disdain for the court is subjective. As far as bond goes, showing disdain for the court matters only if that disdain suggests that a defendant wouldn’t show for trial. It is ridiculous to suggest that someone, who doesn’t take a plea for time served and states that he wants to go to trial to proclaim his innocence, would run from trial.

(7). The state also presented evidence that since his arrest; the defendant may have contemplated violence towards at least one alleged victim in this case. See testimony of Det. Shane McHenry.

(8). The court concurs with Judge Sally Blankenship’s Bond. If she knew about the “alleged” drive by she didn’t mention it.

(9) What happened to Dan’s right to be released on or about September 11, 2011 because he has been in jail for 6 months and had not asked for a continuance? Judge Hill solved that issue by ruling that this case fell under the category of emergency so he invoked the emergency clause and Dan wasn’t going to get out in the 6 months the law demands through no fault of Dan’s.

43. Order to Release Grand Jury Exhibits – Filed August 23, 2011 – We still don’t know what that means.

44. There is an order that sets the Jury Trial for October 3, 2011 and the pretrial for September 19,

2011. There is a deadline for witness lists and subpoenas and Dan has only talked briefly to his attorney, who still hasn’t subpoenaed any witnesses, either character or medical. The attorney is supposed to visit this week, we will report later on this.

45. Judge Ted Todd, in Jefferson County, denied my motion to set aside the divorce decree even though it violates my right to due process regarding the money and the farmland so my finances are still frozen. It was filed with the Ripley County Clerk’s office on 9/6/11. I can’t sell land or borrow money because of the lien that was placed on my husband’s trust because of the divorce. For more information on this issue please see the blog post “When a Trust Becomes A Nightmare”. Judge Todd took over 6 months to rule on this.

Submitted by Sue Brewington 9/8/11

Monday, September 5, 2011

Prosecutor Negangard’s Big Lie 9/5/11

During my bond reduction hearing on August 17, 2011, Prosecutor Negangard asked me if I had undergone a mental health evaluation by a court approved mental health professional per my divorce decree. When I started to explain, Negangard exclaimed, “It’s a yes or no question.” When I began to explain that I was evaluated by a psychiatrist in October 2009, Negangard again interrupted me and stated it was a yes or no question. I answered no because I hadn’t been evaluated by a court approved mental health expert, per the August 18, 2009 orders of Judge James D. Humphrey. Prosecutor Negangard presented to the Court that I didn’t follow through with Judge Humphrey’s orders. Actually, Prosecutor Negangard didn’t lie; he just told a convenient truth.

For some reason there are still a few people who harp on me for not following Judge Humphrey’s orders to undergo a mental health examination by a court approved mental health evaluator so I can see my children. Prosecutor Negangard pummels me every chance that he gets for not seeing a court approved evaluator. What Prosecutor Negangard failed to mention to Judge Brian Hill was how the family court obstructed my ability to seek the court’s approval of a mental health provider. Prosecutor Negangard is well aware of the court’s obstruction. Why doesn’t Prosecutor Negangard acknowledge it? Because he will have to acknowledge misconduct on the part of Judge James D. Humphrey.

I’ve been through this a million times but I’m going to explain it again for the sake of Prosecutor Negangard and the few others that shield themselves from reality. (There is a high probability that Negangard will be asked if he reviewed this blog during testimony in a federal suit. Then he will be asked why he continued to bend the truth during his mission of prosecuting me for exercising my 1st Amendment Rights.) After Judge Humphrey terminated my parenting time, pending a mental health evaluation, Judge Humphrey ruled that he did not have jurisdiction of custody matters while the case was in appeal. In September/October 2009, I underwent an evaluation with Cincinnati psychiatrist, Dr. Henry Waite. When I petitioned the court to release Dr. Connor’s records to Dr. Waite, Judge Humphrey stated that he still did not have jurisdiction of the matter and stated that I had to seek permission from the Appellate Court for him to hear the matter. In March 2010, I hired Indianapolis lawyer Ryan P. Ray and on March 19, 2010, he filed a motion to approve Dr. Waite as an evaluator. Once I retained a lawyer, Judge Humphrey no longer required that I seek permission from the Appellate Court and promptly set a hearing for June 14, 2010. (The hearing wouldn’t have been necessary except my ex-wife argued that Dr. Waite would lie for me so she objected to his approval.) On June 9, 2010, Judge Humphrey withdrew from my case citing some investigation of me that pertained to him and vacated the June 14, 2010 hearing. To make a long story short, the courts delayed my lawyer’s attempts to get a hearing until November 24, 2010. Judge Ted Todd listened to arguments during the hearing on November 24, but did not make a final ruling on an evaluator until January 24, 2011. I first contacted the court appointed evaluator the first week of February. On February 15, 2011, I was made the target of a grand jury investigation by Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard. “This was just five days after Supreme Court Justice Randall T. Sheperd dismissed the complaint that I filed against Prosecutor Negangard with the State of Indiana. On March 7, 20ll, I was arrested in Norwood, Ohio on a warrant from Dearborn County, Indiana. I bonded out of the Hamilton County Justice Center on March 9 and voluntarily reported to the Dearborn County Law Enforcement Center at 6:00am on March 11, 2011, as arranged by my Ohio lawyer and Prosecutor Negangard. I have been detained in the DCLEC ever since; unable to seek an evaluation from a court approved expert.

Prosecutor Negangard is aware of everything mentioned in this post because I’ve posted blogs about it on numerous occasions and Prosecutor Negangard has provided the posts as evidence that he plans to use against me. Negangard refuses to acknowledge the facts because he will have to acknowledge the fact that Judge Humphrey presided over my case for ten months after Humphrey made a criminal complaint about my writing. Negangard knows that Judge Humphrey is either lying about being intimidated by my writings or Judge Humphrey violated the Indiana Judicial Code of Conduct by presiding over a legal proceeding for nearly a year while claiming to be “afraid” of one of the parties to the legal action.

This is how the Dearborn County Prosecutor’s Office operates. The ultimate goal is to bend the truth rather than to present the facts in order to seek a conviction. Don’t get me wrong, Negangard will mix in an undeniable falsehood such as when he stated that I picketed my former lawyer’s office for a week, when it was actually a little over an hour on a cold 5 degree day. These are all things that appear on the official record and will be used to demonstrate the damage that Prosecutor Negangard continues to maliciously inflict on me. The longer Negangard refuses to acknowledge the absolute truth, the more damage I will incur at the hands of Dearborn County, Indiana.

As far as I’m concerned, Prosecutor Negangard can make up all the “truths” he wants. It appears the Prosecutor is quite proficient in conjuring up his own “truths” and it is not a skill that is acquired overnight. The difference between the current case and the previous cases where Prosecutor Negangard has manufactured his own facts is that Negangard will eventually have to take the stand in a separate legal action and explain why his “facts” are different from reality. What should really frighten Negangard is information coming from state officials. In the meantime, Prosecutor Negangard is going to keep rationalizing why it is not a conflict of interest for the Dearborn County Prosecutor’s Office to prosecute my case even though Negangard is a friend, political ally, and former co-worker of Judge Humphrey; Negangard initiated a grand jury investigation just five days after the State dismissed my complaint against him; Negangard tries cases in Humphrey’s court; and the fact that Negangard is being sued by the Defendant for conspiring with others to deprive the Defendant of his civil rights. Prosecutor Negangard cannot relinquish his prosecutorial “duties” to an outside prosecutor because no prosecutor in their right mind would try a case like this.

As always, I wish to thank everyone for their ongoing prayers and support and I encourage people to check back as I will continue to document how Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard and other Dearborn County officials continue to conspire to deprive me of my civil rights that are guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States of America.