Wednesday, October 26, 2011

Dan's update 10/26/11

Dan has been sentenced to 5 years in the Indiana State Prison System. For right now we are directing people to the following links.
Eagle Country News (The local radio station also has a website with news)
The unofficial minutes are recorded on the Dearborn County Blog.
To follow public discussion of Dan's case you can visit
We will be providing a lot more information in time. As always, thanks to our many wonderful friends and supporters. Please keep thinking of us.

Sue Brewington

Saturday, October 22, 2011

I’ll Always Hold My Head Up High 10/22/11

With just a few days before my sentencing hearing on Monday, October 24, 2011 I feel there is little for me to fear. I could be released on a time-served sentence or Judge Hill could sentence me to several years in prison. I’ve never been one to worry about situations beyond my control because they are beyond my control. Rather than ruminate on the possibilities of the unknown, my time has always been better spent gathering resources and information so I can be prepared to hit the ground running when adversity presents itself. I cannot do anything more than my best. As long as I feel I have given my all, I can always hold my head up high.

“I love it when a plan comes together,” is a favorite phrase of Hannibal from the television series and movie “The A-Team.” The leader of the under appreciated quartet of misfit, former military heroes usually delivered his trademark quote after the A-Team narrowly prevailed in another death defying plight to save the little guy. The humor in Hannibal’s quote is found in the fact that the “plan,” if an actual plan even exited, rarely worked as planned because there are too many uncontrollable variables in complex situations. The A-Team “plan” always consisted of gathering and processing as much information as possible, drawing up the best strategies(including plan B and plan C), utilizing the strengths of those around you, and being prepared to improvise when nothing goes as planned. But just as there are often many unknown variables within a complex problem, sometimes the goal of a mission is a mystery in itself.

During my criminal trial, Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard pretty much indicated that my every action in life was a direct attempt to defy authority and incite fear into the officials within the family court system. He claimed my sole purpose in representing myself in my divorce was to obstruct the court process. Negangard explained to the jury that my only intention in writing about my divorce experience was to bring harm to others. He even claimed that during the course of my 2 ½ year divorce, I exercised parenting time with my little girls instead sending them to daycare, for every negative reason other than the fact I just wanted to be a dad. In the process of trying to villainize me, Prosecutor Negangard, inadvertently turned the spotlight on the questionable conduct of others.

“He attacked Dr. Connor because he was upset that Dr. Connor recommended the mother have sole custody of the children.” Why does everyone keep saying that? Prosecutor Negangard, Dr. Edward Connor, Judge James D. Humphrey, the entire Appellate Court of the State of Indiana. I’ve been accused of being long-winded, verbose, voluminous, etc… I was found guilty of obstructing justice partially based on my numerous legal pleading. Prosecutor Negangard kept telling the jury to look at the stack of several hundred documents consisting of my writing. In all of my writings, blogs, legal pleadings, etc. there is absolutely no mention of me disagreeing with Dr. Connor’s custody decision. They all dealt with Dr. Connor’s conflicting statements regarding the release of Dr. Connor’s case file.

“You’re not allowed to lie,” was a popular phrase by Prosecutor Negangard during my trial. Here are a few examples of lies told during my trial:”He refused to get a mental health evaluation so he could see his children.” Negangard kept making this claim despite the fact the Judge Humphrey set a hearing to approve a mental health evaluator and vacated the hearing just days before the hearing claiming there was an investigation of me that pertained to him. “I can’t recall if I set a hearing,” was Judge Humphrey’s claim when asked about the hearing on the approval of a mental health evaluator. Despite Judge Humphrey’s remarkable memory of the events in my divorce, he forgot about the last two rulings; the last of which was the order to vacate the hearing due to an investigation Judge Humphrey had been aware of for nearly a year. One of my favorite lies came from Dr. Edward J. Connor. “I was concerned about releasing the case file to Mr. Brewington because I was afraid that he would post the mother’s confidential information on his website.”Sorry Dr. Connor. My website was created six months after Dr. Connor denied my request for the case file.

“I love it when a plan comes together.” I never had a solid vision of what my actions would produce. Many are wondering how I could conceive success on any level when I am facing lengthy prison time. I still have dignity. I’ve stood for something my children can be proud of. Most of all, I’ve further demonstrated the high level of corruption that exists in Dearborn County, Indiana.

“You can call a judge a son-of-a-bitch but you can’t call him a child abuser.” I’m sure Prosecutor Negangard’s statement will stand strong in my appeal, which will focus on First Amendment Rights. I would hope the higher courts of Indiana would chose not to side with Negangard’s contention as the state would be the laughing stock of the entire United States Court System when my case reaches the Federal Courts and/or the Supreme Court of the United sates. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in favor of radical religious groups being able to picket the funerals of fallen members of the U.S. military. The Court overruled state laws banning all cross burnings. It has protected the right of anti-abortionists to be able to picket planned parenthood clinics. A person is allowed to call a President of the United States a “baby killer” because he is pro-choice. People are free to call a President a “baby killer” because of his war policies. I don’t recall any Presidents in my lifetime killing any babies. The Supreme Court even protected Larry Flynt’s right to say Jerry Falwell had sex with his mother in an outhouse. I find it hard to imagine Negangard’s argument will make it past the high courts.

Prosecutor Negangard was angry because I would not take a plea deal to get out of jail five months ago. I refused to deal because I was adamant about standing up for what is right. Negangard wasted tens of thousands of Dearborn County taxpayer dollars in his efforts to conceal the wrongs of Dearborn County officials. Was he successful? At the end of the day my conviction will be overturned. Until then, all that is left for Negangard to do is to argue how the guy he was willing to release on May 13, 2011 is now deserving of a lengthy sentence. Regardless of the outcome of my sentencing hearing, I will be able to sleep at night knowing I stood for something. Prosecutor Negangard and other Dearborn County Officials will have to deal with the looks, whispers, and shouts from members of the public who are disgusted with Negangard’s wasteful spending of tax dollars in his crusade to stifle free speech. Whether in a cell or safe at home, I will take comfort in knowing I stood for something and I will always cherish the love and support I have received from so many along the way. Be sure to check back soon.

Wednesday, October 19, 2011

Still Looking for Fairness 10/19/11

I finally received a copy of the list of additional evidence that Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard may use against me in my criminal trial which began October 3, 2011. The Prosecutor’s “Supplemental Discovery Answer” lists fifty-one documents; none of which I have yet reviewed with my public defender, Bryan Barrett. Did I mention today is Sunday, October 16, 2011? My trial concluded on October 6, 2011.

I feel like I am drowning in a kiddie pool in the middle of a lifeguard convention. First, there is no reason why a healthy adult should be gasping for air in a children’s pool. Second, there is no excuse for a gathering of professionals, who uphold their responsibilities to water rescue, to stand idly by while an adult is drowning in a couple feet of water at arm’s length of a lifeguard. I’ve found myself drowning in the Dearborn County Legal System while lawyers, judges, and law enforcement officials either ignore me, or further complicate my situation by throwing buckets of water at me. It’s like the Dearborn County legal community is at the helm of a Carnival Cruise ship; cruising past the sinking Titanic without stopping because it would interrupt the midnight shuffle board tournaments. It just doesn’t make sense.

I know, I know; I already hear my detractors yelling “Dan’s mentally ill.’ Fine, we’ll go with that. Last time I checked, mentally ill people still have a right to a fair trial. In fact, they are often entitled to additional legal assistance to help participate in the criminal proceedings. All right detractors; I’m looking for consistency. If, I am as mentally ill as you claim, did I receive an appropriate amount of legal assistance necessary for a proper defense? As my public defender, Bryan Barrett failed to review with me, any of the roughly 2,000 pages of potential evidence provided by the prosecution, my guess would be no. It wouldn’t have mattered if I were the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court; it is impossible for a lawyer to properly prepare for a four-day trial without subpoenaing documents and witnesses, taking depositions, and most importantly, meeting with the defendant. By the way, if you think four days is a long trial for a few D felony charges, just think how long it may have lasted if Bryan Barrett would have actually called a witness or submitted ANY evidence in my defense.

So who knows about all of this? I know Rush County Circuit Judge Brian Hill is aware of the injustices in my trial because he has presided over my case since June 1, 2011. Judge Hill is well aware that Bryan Barrett did not file an appearance to represent me until July 18, 2011, even though Judge Hill appointed him June 20, 2011. It was at the July 18, 2011 hearing when Judge Hill postponed my bond reduction hearing because Dearborn County Special Crimes Unit Detective Shane McHenry was not available to testify for the prosecution. Judge Hill acknowledged that he was aware that my public defender was on a leave of absence for a couple weeks, due to a family emergency, by continuing my trial and my already continued bond reduction hearing. During my August 17th bond reduction hearing Detective McHenry, who is also a Dearborn County Commissioner testified he investigated a report that I approached an inmate at the Hamilton County Justice Center about performing a “drive-by shooting” on Judge Humphrey. Judge Hill never heard any testimony about the alleged “drive-by” during my trial. It was probably due to the fact that the alleged request never happened. Records from the Hamilton County Justice Center movement logs demonstrated that the inmate, who accused me of trying to arrange a drive-by shooting, and I never crossed paths. I was unable to present the evidence to the court because my public defender refused to meet with me.

During the pre-trial hearing on September 19, 2011, I informed Judge Hill that my public defender had not subpoenaed any witnesses or evidence and had not deposed any of the state’s witnesses. I told Judge Hill, Bryan Barrett, who is a Rush County public defender appointed by Judge Hill, had not provided me with any evidence. Judge Hill denied my request to continue the October 3rd jury trial even though he knew I was not able to review the evidence against me. Judge Hill didn’t even care when I told him that neither one of my public defenders gave me an explanation of the crimes I allegedly committed that prompted the charges. Completing my trial was more important than protecting my rights.

“Do you want to represent yourself?” That was Judge Hill’s response to my motion to dismiss for ineffective assistance of counsel, filed just prior to the start of the October 3rd trial. My motion explained how Barrett never met with me to prepare for trial. As my mental health has always been a hot topic of debate, I explained how Bryan Barrett refused to contact my treating therapist or doctor, who I see for ADHD. Judge Hill reviewed the letter sent to Barrett listing character witnesses and medical/mental health witnesses. The letter also contained a list of witnesses whose testimony would demonstrate how Detective McHenry and Prosecutor Negangard were aware of the falsity of the “drive-by shooting” allegations before Negangard called McHenry to testify. Judge Hill just kept asking if I wanted to represent myself and I kept telling him I wanted a public defender who would, at least, discuss my case with me prior to the day of the trial. Judge Hill made me go through with my criminal trial knowing that Bryan Barrett never reviewed any evidence with me. He knew Barrett didn’t provide me with evidence. Despite the prosecutions’ numerous remarks questioning my mental health, Judge Hill refused to address the fact that I was being refused my ADHD prescription by Sheriff Mike Kreinhop, who was the only investigator in my case and a witness in my trial, and Judge Hill deprived me of a competent public defender who would call a professional mental health expert to testify on my behalf. This is the same judge who has control over whether I spend several years in prison for making too many negative public statements about Judge Humphrey and Dr. Edward J. Connor.

“Negangard told Eagle 99.3 after the trial that he is not certain what maximum penalty Brewington would be eligible for,” is a quote from a story on the website of Eagle 99.3. This is just another example of Prosecutor Negangard’s web of lies. A D Felony in Indiana carries a maximum of three years; an A misdemeanor carries a maximum of one year. Add them all together and you get a total of eleven years. Indiana gives two years credit for every year served. Subtract the seven months I’ve already served, I’m facing a maximum of four years and 11 months of actual prison time. Does anyone actually believe that the two-term Dearborn County Prosecutor did not know this? He was probably a little leery about telling the public that people can serve many years in prison if they make negative statements about Dearborn County Officials.

I’m expecting the worst and why not? They can get away with these things in Dearborn County. Dearborn County lawyers look the other way and plead ignorance to the situation. Some attorneys sat in on my trial and witnessed the carnage first hand. One Dearborn County lawyer told me he was sure that I would prevail in my case. He just wasn’t sure if I could win in the state courts. He was certain that the Federal Courts would dismiss the case.

So I guess I’m at the “mercy” of the Court. I don’t want mercy; I want justice. Ordering me to serve five years in prison is just as offensive as letting me walk after my sentencing hearing on October 24th. Of course I prefer freedom over prison as I long to see my children but the damage has been done. Due to the vindictive actions of people like Prosecutor Negangard, I am a convicted felon until my case is overturned which will make it more difficult to find a job and get back with my girls. Whatever Judge Hill decides on October 24th he will know that he denied me any opportunity to a fair trial. This sort of thing can happen in Dearborn County because those who bear the power to bring positive change are coward and/or corrupt. The little guys who speak up are thrown in jail and prosecuted/persecuted. That’s why I’m treading water in a room full of lifeguards. Someone has to take a stand. Please keep me in your thoughts on October 24th. Thanks for your support.

Sunday, October 16, 2011

An apology to all of the brave men and women who have ever served in the United States Military

I want to apologize to all of the people who have bravely served our country, for the insensitive and disgraceful comments made by Dearborn County Deputy Prosecutor Joseph Kisor.

“Soldiers did not die” to give Dan Brewington the ability to threaten Judge James D. Humphrey. This is an approximate statement made by Deputy Prosecutor Kisor during the prosecutions closing arguments in my criminal trial. Deputy Prosecutor Kisor, along with Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard, spent the majority of the trial trying to convince a jury that my internet writings were not protected by the First Amendment of the United States of America. Deputy Prosecutor Kisor claimed my speech was criminal because it wasn’t “appropriate.” He claimed that my speech wasn’t free because the “victims,” who were the subject of my speech, “paid the price” for my actions. Though there were absolutely no threats of illegal conduct in any of my writings Kisor pled to the jury that the “totality” of my writings constituted a threat. In his premeditated and dramatic theatrical presentation, Dearborn County Deputy Prosecutor Joseph Kisor emphatically communicated to the jury that the only reason I took on the judicial system was because I didn’t like the results of my divorce. Apparently Deputy Prosecutor Kisor believes that US citizens lose the right to question the judiciary if the court rules against them. Deputy Prosecutor Joseph Kisor either has no understanding of the First Amendment of the Constitution or he is using the blood of fallen military people as a soul-less metaphor in an attempt to deprive the public of the most fundamental freedom that our soldiers died to protect. John Adams once stated, “[The people] have a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible divine right to the most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge, I mean of the characters and conduct of their rulers.” Patriots have not fought and died to protect the rights of rulers to have the people kneel down and worship the authority of the ruler; they fought and died to protect the people’s ability to seek out and publicly criticize the character and conduct of the ruler. If the rulers have the ability to censor public opinion of their character and conduct, all freedom may be lost.

Dearborn County, Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard ranted about how the internet has somehow been damaging to the United States Judicial System because it gives people easy access to a venue where they have the ability to criticize judges. Negangard portrayed judges, like Judge James D. Humphrey, as precious, delicate orchid that may wilt and crumble in the face of even the slightest adverse conditions. He and Deputy Prosecutor Kisor continuously referred to the John Adams quote on the stained glass window in the courtroom. They kept reciting “we are a nation of laws and not of men,” and acting as if they were present when John Adams penned his Thoughts on Government. They used the quote, which Adams borrowed from the writings of the seventeenth-century philosopher James Harrington, to make themselves appear noble and patriotic. What they failed to mention was that Adams did not enjoy the right to free speech until after the Revolutionary War. On September 11, 1776 John Adams accompanied Edward Rutledge and Benjamin Franklin to a conference requested by British Admiral Richard Lord Howe to discuss giving up the Declaration of Independence as Lord Howe claimed “it might possible effect the King’s purposes to restore peace and grant pardons” the committee of three obviously rejected Lord Howe’s proposal. Years later, Adams discovered Lord Howe had been given a list of American rebels who were granted pardons. John Adams was not on the list and was to hang. In the eyes of King George III, Adams was at traitor to Great Britain. He had been one of the most vocal proponents in favor of declaring independence from England. John Adams’ outspoken patriotism would have been his death sentence if the Colonial Army would have been defeated. John Adams rolled over in his grave this past week when Dearborn County convicted a man for making “false” public statements about government officials and agents of the courts. The founding father would abhor the notion that he was quoted by prosecutors Negangard and Kisor in an effort to criminalize protected speech.

“You cannot be, I know, nor do I wish to see you, an inactive spectator… We have too many high sounding words and too few actions that correspond with them.” –Abigail Adams to John Adams. Rather than build on the words and wisdom of one of the greatest governmental minds in the history of human kind, F. Aaron Negangard and Joseph Kisor use the quotes of John Adams as a punch line to bolster their false pretense that they are protecting the public from rogue public speech. Kisor uses the name of our fallen soldier in vain in Kisor’s quest to deprive the public of the rights that the soldier died protecting.

“I cannot but wish I were better qualified.” – John Adams. It would much better serve people like F. Aaron Negangard and Joseph Kisor to take a more humble approach when interpreting constitutional law and the history of the United States of America. Patriots and Presidents like George Washington, John Adams, and Thomas Jefferson risked their lives to construct a government that ensured protected freedoms. For over two hundred years, our military has fought and died to protect those freedoms. Contrary to Mr. Kisor’s contention, our fallen solder has protected our right to speak our minds and challenge leaders in government. The fallen soldier is so selfless that he/she protects the rights of the few individuals who choose to protect the soldier himself. So once again on behalf of Dearborn County officials like Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard and Deputy Prosecutor Joseph Kisor, I want to offer my sincerest apologies to the men and women who have served and are serving in our armed forces for the shallow patronizing of your services to our country.

Thank you for your support.

Quotes and historical information provided by John Adams, by David McCullough.

Contact Dan/family at:

Tuesday, October 11, 2011

Dear NRA Members, Get rid of you Guns. 10/11/11

On October 6, 2011 a Dearborn County, Indiana jury found me guilty of three counts of intimidation because I criticized public officials via the internet. There were no threats of violence or illegal activity. My public speech that was peacefully transmitted from my computer did not incite panic nor was it a call for lawless action. My public speech consisted of my views, opinions, and experiences with/of the family court system. Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard convinced a jury that I said too much and used the wrong words in my public speech. But in the process of stripping me of my First Amendment rights, Prosecutor Negangard deprived me of my Second Amendment right as well.

“He’s got a gun” is a phrase that, if taken out of context, can incite fear. If you use the phrase at an NRA function someone will probably inform you of the fact that everyone at the function probably owns a gun. Rather than respect my Second Amendment right to own a firearm, Prosecutor Negangard used my gun ownership to instill fear in the members of the grand jury and trial jury in my case. If you yell “shark” at the beach, people will swim for their lives to get out of the water regardless of whether a shark is present. This was the tactic of Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard. He yelled “Gun!” just to bring fear to the jurors.

I’ve never been accused of committing a gun-related crime. I’ve never been accused of having a gun related accident. It seems I am constantly being accused of owning firearms and people continue to punish me for it. During my divorce, my wife testified that I purchased a 357 Magnum after she filed for divorce. She testified that she wanted the handgun in the property settlement because she felt the gun was dangerous and should be destroyed. Despite the fact I purchased the gun after she filed for divorce and the fact that there were no reports of the gun being used improperly, Judge James D. Humphrey awarded a 357 Magnum handgun to someone who had never even fired a gun. Humphrey’s orders came out on August 18, 2009 and I have yet to turn over the handgun. Why? Because it may be against Indiana law.

Indiana law prohibits someone from transferring ownership of a firearm to someone they believe may be mentally ill. At the very least, my ex-wife wanted possession of my 357 magnum just to punish me. That’s not a very compelling reason to give someone a dangerous handgun especially a person with absolutely no experience in handling firearms. She wasn’t concerned about safety or violence because there were several other guns of mine that were listed in the property distribution that she had no interest in. Her hatred for me was so great that she wanted ownership of a handgun, which I purchased after she filed for divorce, just to punish me. I just don’t feel comfortable with turning over a handgun to someone whose only purpose in acquiring the gun was to, at the very least, cause me emotional harm.

“He’s got a 357 Magnum handgun and nobody knows where it is.” This was part of Prosecutor Negangard’s closing argument. Number one, the issue was irrelevant because it had nothing to do with the charges. Number two; he wouldn’t have raised the issue if it were kitchen utensils that I failed to return, rather than a 357 Magnum handgun. I feel comfortable in knowing that my ex-wife does not have the gun especially after listening to/reviewing her testimony to the court and grand jury in my criminal trial. She told the grand jury that I threatened her with physical violence on several occasions. She never made any such accusations during the custody evaluation and the 2 ½ year divorce. She never contacted the police about the alleged threats. I have not had any contact with her for over two years. These alleged threats never occurred. If she truly believes these things then she has some serious psychological issues. If she lied to the grand jury about the alleged threats of violence in the hopes of sending me to prison and further alienating her own daughters from their father, then her venomous and vindictive hatred for me has no boundaries. Neither of the above scenarios are characterizations of someone who I would deem to be psychologically fit to possess a firearm; especially around my daughters.

“You can’t go into a crowed room and yell fire.” Negangard used this analogy in an effort to portray my peaceful writings as an attempt to incite panic. It was Negangard who yelled “fire” except he used the word “gun.” Members of the NRA and gun owners across the United States should be very concerned about this situation. The government may not be able to take you guns, but Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negnagard is trying to set a precedence of using legal and constitutionally protected gun ownership as a means to scare juries into returning guilty verdicts. This sort of thing goes on in a county that has a state senator who is also on the Board of Directors of the NRA. Contact NRA Board Member Senator Johnny Nugent and other NRA officials and tell them to put pressure on prosecutors like F. Aaron Negangard who criminalized legal gun ownership. Please help prevent government officials like Prosecutor Negangard from desecrating the Constitution of the United States of America.

Contact Dan/family at:

Monday, October 10, 2011

Be Afraid, Citizens of Indiana; Be Very Afraid. 10/9/11

I am now a convicted felon as a result of my actions and events dating back to March 6, 2008. That’s when I first requested the case file from the child custody evaluation prepared by Dr. Edward J. Connor. Little did I know that my simple request, while acting as my own lawyer, would snowball into being a convicted felon?

I’ve covered the many reasons Dr. Connor has given as to why he would or would not release the case file a million times by now. [To review examples of Dr. Connor’s conflicting excuses please visit] Actually, during his testimony in my criminal trial, Dr. Connor gave yet another reason as to why he denied me access to the case file. During his testimony on October 4, 2011, Dr. Connor testified that he denied my request for the case file because he was concerned that I would post my wife’s confidential information on my website. The flaw in Dr. Connor’s testimony is that I did not have a website at the time. My first website was not created until September 2008; six months after Dr. Connor denied my request for the case file.

This is where it gets hairy. I was convicted of intimidating Dr. Connor because Prosecutor Negangard claimed that Indiana law criminalizes false public speech. If the high Courts of Indiana uphold the rulings in my case, it would mark the end of free speech in the State of Indiana; at least until someone challenges the holdings of the higher courts of Indiana in a federal court or the United States Supreme Court. Among other things, I labeled Dr. Edward J. Connor as a liar and a criminal. One of the reasons I referred to Dr. Connor as a liar and a criminal is due to the fact that Dr. Connor lied during his May 27, 2009 testimony in my divorce hearings. Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard arbitrarily determined my statements to be false and unlawful. As someone who has been convicted of perjury, I know it is a criminal offense to lie while under oath before a grand jury or in a court of law. I called Dr. Connor a criminal because he lied in documents he sent the court and he lied while under oath, just as he did during his testimony in my criminal trial. Dr. Connor testified that he did not provide me with a copy of the case file due to concerns I would post the information on my website, which did not exist at the time. Now can I publicly state that Dr. Connor is a liar and a criminal? I don’t know. It all depends on whether Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard determines the statements to be true or false and the only way to verify if public statements pass the Negangard fact checking test is to make the public statement and wait to see if Negangard issues a warrant for your arrest. As unbelievable as this may seem it’s far less frightening than the next scenario.

I was convicted of a Class D felony, Attempt to Obstruct Justice based on my actions during my divorce while serving as my own attorney. It is important to note that my divorce was out of a Ripley County (IN) court and was finalized on August 18, 2009. Dearborn County Circuit Judge James D. Humphrey served as special judge following the withdrawal of Ripley Circuit Judge Carl H. Taul. I was convicted of attempting to obstruct justice in a Ripley County legal proceeding by a Dearborn County Court. None of the allegations of obstruction ever occurred in Dearborn County. Here’s the frightening thing though; if the Indiana Appellate Court and/or Supreme Court uphold the Attempt to Obstruct Justice charge, it will set a precedent that would allow prosecutors and judges to work together to criminally charge participants in a divorce with Obstruction of Justice if a person does not cooperate with the court or if the person delays the divorce proceedings. One of the explanations Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard gave as a reason why I should be found guilty of Obstruction of Justice was that I filed too many motions during my divorce, while representing myself. Not only did Prosecutor Negangard put a limit on free speech, he made it a crime for a self-represented litigant in a divorce to file too many motions. How many is too many? The only way to find out is to file the motions and then wait to see if Prosecutor Negangard believes the number of motions “cross the line.” Dearborn County Prosecutor Negangard also alleged that I attempted to obstruct justice in a Ripley County Court proceeding by filing a complaint against Dr. Edward J. Connor with the Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychology. Negangard told the jury that I contacted the office of the Kentucky Attorney General when my complaint was dismissed. I was punished because I did not prevail in my complaint against Dr. Connor.

This isn’t a joke or exaggeration. I often use metaphors and/or sarcasm on this blog to draw a laugh or to prove a point, but this is real. If the high courts’ of Indiana affirm the ruling in my case, a domestic relations judge would only have to contact the county prosecutor if the judge is dealing with a “stubborn” parent in a divorce. If you’ve ever had a problem with the Indiana Family Court system, it may have just gotten a lot worse. If you want to help keep the Indiana government from restricting and/or eliminating what little rights people currently have in divorces, and to help prevent the Indiana government from criminalizing a person’s ability to criticize domestic court judges; please contact your local and state officials immediately. Please help bring legislative change in Indiana by contacting State Senator Johnny Nugent and State Representative Judd Mc Mullin who represent the Dearborn County area as they should bear the responsibility of preventing the injustices of the Dearborn County legal system from bleeding across the State of Indiana. The contact information for the representatives both Federal and State are listed below.

Whether you consider me to be a diligent father or a radical wacko, the fact still remains that I was just found guilty on two Class A Misdemeanors and three Class D Felonies because I aggressively represented myself in my divorce and I publicly criticized the court officials involved. No threat; no phone calls; just opinions that were sent to the internet from my keyboard. For more information on the events of my divorce, visit Help protect you rights Indiana. Speak up now. You can find your representative by using your zip code. Search for Dick Lugar and Dan Coates.

Contact Dan/family at:

Sunday, October 9, 2011

Recap of my Criminal Trial. October 8, 2011.

My criminal trial began on Monday, October 3, 2011 and wrapped up on Thursday, October 6, 2011. The jury of six returned five “guilty” verdicts and one “not guilty.” The “guilty” verdicts are as follows: Intimidation of a Judge (James Humphrey), Class D felony; Intimidation of Dr. Edward J. Connor and Heidi Humphrey, both Class A misdemeanors; Obstruction of Justice and Perjury both Class D Felonies. The most important event of the trial came during the prosecution’s closing argument, when Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard explained to the jury the exact boundaries of free speech.

“You can call a judge a son-of-a-bitch but you cannot call him a child abuser.” That was the jury instruction from Prosecutor Negangard; honest to God. Prosecutor Negangard, in his greatness has summed up in one sentence, what the United States Supreme Court has debated since the days of John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. Prosecutor Negangard also informed the members of the jury that it was a criminal offense to lie about people like Judge Humphrey. As I am sure Prosecutor Negangard would never break the law by publicly lying about someone, I can draw from Negangard’s infinite wisdom and conclude that Judge James D. Humphrey is a son-of-a-bitch.

I was convicted of felony intimidation because I called that son-of-a bitch Humphrey a child abuser. Another reason for my guilty verdict was due to the fact that I instructed people to address concerns about the Dearborn County family court system to the Indiana Supreme Court Ethics and Professionalism advisor that was located in Dearborn County. I looked up the advisor’s address on the Dearborn County Tax Assessor’s website to determine where to have people send comments and/or concerns. When I looked up the address, I found one listing for Heidi Humphrey. The owners listed were James D. Humphrey and Heidi Humphrey. I was found guilty of lying to a grand jury because I stated that I did not know that Heidi was the wife of the son-of-a-bitch James Humphrey but it could be a possibility. The son-of-a-bitch is also the judge in Ohio County, Indiana so he could reside in that county as well. There is a Humphrey funeral home in Rising Sun (Ohio County) so I knew the Humphrey name existed there but I’m not aware if those Humphreys are related to the son-of-a-bitch Humphrey. Negangard accused me of lying about not knowing that Heidi Humphrey was married to the son-of-a-bitch, but I did not know for sure. When my father was alive there were two listings for Daniel P. Brewington in the Cincinnati phone book. For all I knew, Heidi could have been the son-of-a-bitch’s mother or daughter-in-law. Did I think it was possible that Heidi was the wife of that son-of-a-bitch Humphrey? Of course, and I testified to that before the grand jury. If I would have testified that I was aware that Heidi Humphrey was married to the son-of-a-bitch James D. Humphrey, it would have been a lie because I knew very little about Dearborn County and its politicians and citizens and I had never seen the son-of-a-bitch’s marriage certificate. But unfortunately I was convicted of lying about not being aware that Heidi was married to that son-of-a-bitch.

There was much more that went on but I have to check with my attorneys to determine what I am allowed to write about. There is not a lot of room for trial and error when it comes to protected speech in Dearborn County, Indiana. I feel fortunate that Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard clarified that people were not allowed to lie in public speech and that Judge James D. Humphrey is a son-of-a-bitch.

F. Aaron Negangard clarified that people were not allowed to lie in public speech and that Judge James D. Humphrey is a son-of-a-Bitch. I have a better understanding of the wording I am permitted to use in my writings during the course of my appeal.

Thanks to all of you for your ongoing support and prayers and rest assured that I do not plan to stop fighting for free speech until the public has the ability to call any public official a son-of-a-Bitch. Keep supporting the First Amendment!!!

(Feel free to contact Dan/family at: )

Thursday, October 6, 2011

Results of Dan's Trial were not in his favor.

I want to thank everyone who has been so supportive of Dan and our family. I could not begin to say how much it means to have so much support. Dan was convicted on 5 counts, 2 misdemeanors and 3 felonies. We are obviously moving forward but I don't have any information on that right now. Dan is doing fine. Again, thanks to everyone, I will write more later. Sue Brew

Tuesday, October 4, 2011

Dan's Trial (2nd Day)

The Trial resumes tomorrow at 8:30 and it should be the last day. We'll let everyone know how it goes. Thanks for your support.

Monday, October 3, 2011

Dan's Trial

Jury selection was completed, opening statements were made, and one witness was called. Trial resumes at 8:30 tomorrow morning. Thanks to everyone for their thoughts and support.