Saturday, January 7, 2012

"Frivolous Lawsuit," Eagle Country News Reports

“Frivolous Lawsuit” Eagle Country News Report.
The website of Eagle Country Radio 99.3 listed my story as its number five news story of 2011. I have followed the Eagle News stories throughout my incarceration and have found the reporting to be fairly unbiased but not entirely accurate; though the misleading information may not have been a result of bad reporting, just bad sources.
The Eagle Country 99.3 website reported that a federal civil rights lawsuit, filed on my behalf, against Dearborn County and other individuals was dismissed as being frivolous, which is unequivocally false. The lawsuit was dismissed without prejudice upon motion by my lawyer, Robert Kelly. Either Eagle Country made a mistake in their reporting or someone lied to them. Civil Rights lawsuits against government officials cannot be dismissed as being frivolous on the surface. In my suit against the County and some of its agents, people like Judge Humphrey and Prosecutor Negangard do not have the ability to claim that a lawsuit against them is frivolous prior to any hearings or fact finding. It would make it nearly impossible for any civil rights lawsuit against government officials to prevail if the official only needed to resort to a “frivolous” defense claim. The United States Supreme Court has not issued a rubber stamp ruling or opinion on such a defense. Why would the courts and law libraries of the United States be filled with intricate findings in the rulings of civil rights cases if judges were allowed to toss suits based on simple “frivolous” arguments by the defense? However, courts may dismiss suits if the Plaintiff fails to cite a violation of civil law or if a suit is brought against someone who enjoys absolute immunity from civil action; like a judge.
Now before the detractors rush out and start blogging about how I admitted that I can’t sue Judge James D. Humphrey in a civil court, I want to make it clear that I never named Judge James D. Humphrey, in his professional capacity, as a defendant in a civil law suit; only the private citizen, Mr. James D. Humphrey. Judge Humphrey has the ability to victimize children and families in the domestic courts while enjoying absolute immunity from any civil responsibility. Judge Humphrey can hide behind his black robe while violating my Fourteenth Amendment right to be a parent. Unfortunately Mr. James D. Humphrey does not enjoy the same immunities as his judicial counterpart as defending public criticism does not fall under the judicial capacity of Judge James D. Humphrey.
“This was sick revenge dragging my wife and kids into the matter,” Humphrey said during his testimony. “I don’t know of many cases where a subject has more clearly expressed his intent to do harm.” These statements as reported in the Eagle’s October 25, 2011 story is exactly why James Humphrey is named as a defendant in a civil rights case. This is coming from a man with over two decades of service as a judge and prosecutor. Despite the fact that my writings contained no threats of illegal harm or conduct, Humphrey testified that my case surpasses nearly all of the murder, rape, assault, stalking, harassment, and other intimidations cases he has come across over the past twenty plus years when it comes to an expression of intent to do harm. I never involved his, nor anyone else’s children in the matter. James Humphrey involved his children when he contacted their schools because I blogged too much about their father. I spoke generally about Humphrey being a family man and having the opportunity to enjoy spending time with his children and grandchildren. (I overestimated Humphrey’s age when I assumed he had grandchildren.) The first specific mention of his two sons in my case did not come until Prosecutor Negangard sought a restraining order against me and placed the names and ages of Humphrey’s children on the order. I was ordered to stay away from people who I did not know existed. As for the wife of James Humphrey, Heidi Humphrey was listed as a public official by the website for the Indiana Supreme Court. Heidi Humphrey involved herself in judicial activities when she became an advisor to the Judicial Ethics and Professionalism Committee of the Indiana Supreme Court. She claimed she didn’t recall serving on the committee. I wonder how it would fly if someone testified in Judge Humphrey’s court that they could not remember being in a gang? “Sorry for the misunderstanding sir. You’re free to go.” Ignorance seems to be a defense reserved for his wife.
The October 25, 2011 article on the Eagle website justifies my federal lawsuit. The website quotes Dr. Sara Jones-Connor as saying “For over four years we have dealt with his attacks on a daily basis.” Dr. Edward J. Connor condemned my family for supporting my “harmful views.” What is worthy to note is Dr. Jones-Connor lied under oath about how long I had been expressing my views and at no point in the trial did anyone offer any evidence to disprove my views and opinions. The fact that Dr. Connor acknowledged my family supported my public opinions demonstrates how the criminal action was brought to undermine my First Amendment rights. Since the Connor’s and Humphrey’s realized they would lose if they brought a civil libel/defamation suit against me, they utilized the Dearborn County criminal justice system to conspire to deprive me of my civil rights. “Nothing that has been done has stopped Dan Brewington in his attacks on Dr. Connor and Judge Humphrey”, Negangard echoed. “He needs a sentence that demonstrates the severity of his actions.” Translation – Dan Brewington will not cease exercising his First Amendment right to free speech and he should be given a severe prison sentence for continuing to exercise his constitutional rights. To this date, no one has ordered or even asked me to stop writing. Why? It would constitute prior restraint of free speech; a violation of the United States Constitution. No civil or criminal court order demanding me to stop; just a five year prison sentence punishing me for my political and social opinions.
That’s why a federal civil rights lawsuit cannot be dismissed with simple “frivolous” claim. I would hope Eagle Country will address the error and question who made the false statement. As it appears that the Dearborn County Register/Birdcage liner operates out of the Dearborn County Prosecutor’s office, Eagle Country 99.3 seems to be the only credible news source in Dearborn County. Hopefully Eagle Country will have the courage to take county officials to task for constitutional violations. Unfortunately for all media groups and public voices who criticize Dearborn county officials, their speech is only as free as Judge Humphrey and Prosecutor Negangard allow it to be. That’s why Eagle Country and the other county news organizations should take great interest in the re-filing of my civil rights lawsuit because if I fail, they will only be able to report the news as Negangard sees fit.


  1. You should write a short, concise letter to Ron Paul describing your situation...whether or not he is electable as president is immaterial...he is a freedom fighter, and defender of the constitution. Short and he doesn't get bogged down and stop reading midway...
    You never know who will pick up the ball and help you.

  2. I agree, someone need to pick up the nasty ball on this one. This needs to be aired out. It's a shame that the state of Indiana allows this to happen. This needs to be brought to the light and heads need to roll.

  3. You two are pinheads.

  4. Dr Connor hit the nail on the head when he stated Dan Brewington could not accept views other than his own. Instead of dealing with this manner like a normal, rational person he decided to buck. Look where that landed him. He's now a convicted felon, a proven liar, a nutcase and he hurt his kids further with this crusade that everyone in Indiana is out to get him. He keeps proving Connor's opinion with every post. I for one am glad they took his kids away from him. They are better off without him.

  5. He also censors posts. What are you afraid of? Someone disagreeing with you?

  6. It's funny how the Dan Brewington detractors fail to mention that the the Indiana Supreme Court ruled that Brewington fell victim to constitutional flaws within his trial yet his right to relief was waived because the Court claimed Brewington's public defender Bryan Barrett invited the constitutional errors because it was his trial strategy to take advantage of Dearborn County Prosecutor F Aaron Negangard's failure to tell Brewington which statements were threats to reputation and which were threats to physical safety. The Indiana Supreme Court also stated that buffoon Negangard made a "plainly impermissible" criminal defamation argument, meaning Negangard convened a grand jury under a false pretext. That doesn't even take into account Brewington's public defender never meeting with Brewington to discuss his case before trial. Considering Negangard never defined the threat, Barrett couldn't have devised a plausible strategy. But the people who still hate Brewington are probably those who are mad because he brought a public eye to bad people like Judge James D. Humphrey, Dr. Edward J. Connor, and Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard or they are the people who are angry because they know Brewington's children will eventually be old enough to search their father on the internet and find out the truth about their dad. Like so many other people who have read Brewington's story, Brewington's children will also wonder why their mother did nothing to help them maintain their relationship with their father. No one forced her to testify at a grand jury proceeding and criminal trial in the hopes of sending the father of her children to prison. But the angry person calling Brewington a moron isn't really concerned with Brewington's children or the constitution; just themselves.