Memo to the Indiana Supreme Court: The State never argued Dan Brewington threatened arson

Dan Brewington's criminal case is currently before the Indiana Supreme Court.  The core argument of the Indiana Attorney General is that Dan threatened to commit arson or burn personal property of Judge James D. Humphrey in retaliation for a prior lawful act.  Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard continues to make public statements to media outlets claiming that Dan threatened to commit arson.  Now the subject is in the hands of the Indiana Supreme Court.  How will they rule?  If they read the record of the original trial they should overturn Brewington's intimidation charge.  Why?  Because during the course of Brewington's entire criminal trial, at no point did Prosecutor Negangard ever accuse Brewington of threatening to commit arson against anyone.

Below is a list of links to the transcripts of Dan Brewington's criminal trial from October 2011.  The transcripts were scanned and posted to the web server as a searchable PDF meaning a person is able to search for words within a document.  If you click within the document then press "control"+"F", a box will appear where you have the ability to type in the word to be searched.  If the word appears in the document, then it will appeared as highlighted text.  Arrows in the search box allow you to move to the next appearance of the word in the document.  Try this for yourself.  Open one or more links to the transcripts and search for a common word like "the" or "and".  Get the drift?  Now do a search on the words "arson" and "burn".  At first you may think your computer is not working because the search came up empty.  This is common, but there isn't anything wrong with your computer.  The fact is the words "arson" and "burn" do not appear anywhere in the record.  Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard never made the argument that Dan threatened arson against anyone.  If Prosecutor Negangard truly believed that Dan threatened arson against anyone, why is the record void of any mention of Negangard saying "Dan Brewington threatened to burn so n so's house?"  Because Negangard had no evidence of that.  That's why the Indiana Attorney General is arguing Brewington is too clever to make direct threats.

Check the links for yourself.  See how the State of Indiana is currently arguing to uphold a conviction using an argument the State never used during trial.  Dan never threatened arson.  If he did, Negangard would have argued it directly.  Prosecutors do not hold back that kind of evidence.  If Brewington would have made a threat of arson, Prosecutor Negangard would have said, "On 'X' date, Brewington wrote he was going to burn so n so's house down."  It never happened.  Negangard never made the accusation while presenting evidence and calling witnesses.  He did not even mention "burn" or "arson" during his closing arguments.  Why is the Indiana Attorney General and Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard saying it is?  Because they have nothing else on Dan Brewington.  See for yourself how the Attorney General and Prosecutor Negangard are trying to obstruct justice in an effort to keep Brewington from clearing his name.  Feel free to contact federal and state officials about this injustice.

State Of Indiana vs. Daniel Brewington

Cause # 15D02-1103-FD-084

Trial Transcripts Part 1. Dan Brewington files three motions and addresses Judge Brian D. Hill. Opening statements from Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard and Public Defender Bryan E. Barrett. Angela Loechel – 1^st Witness- Divorce attorney for Melissa Brewington.

Trial Transcripts Part 2. Dr. Edward J. Connor – 2^nd Witness – Custody Evaluator from Erlanger, KY. He refused to release the case file for the Custody Evaluation Report. Dr. Sara Jones-Connor – 3^rd Witness – Custody Evaluator from Erlanger, KY.

Trial Transcripts Part 3. Judge James D. Humphrey – 4^th Witness – 2^nd Judge in the divorce action. Wrote the decree that, among other things, saw to it that Dan would not be able to see his girls for an extended time period.

Trial Transcripts Part 4. Ms. Anne Jordan – 5th Witness - Program attorney from the Indiana Judicial Center. She testified about the Supreme Court Ethics and Professionalism Committee. Mrs. Heidi Humphrey - 6th Witness – Dearborn County advisor to the Supreme Court Ethics and Professionalism Committee, according to their website, at the time of the issuance of the Divorce Decree.

Trial Transcripts Part 5. Ms. Melissa Brewington - 7th Witness – Dan Brewington’s ex-wife.

Trial Transcripts Part 6. Sheriff Michael Kreinhop – Current Sheriff of Dearborn County. He was a Deputy with the SCU at the time he investigated Ms. Loechel’s complaint. He filed his report around October 27, 2009.

Trial Transcripts Part 7. Court Business

Trial Transcripts Part 8. Closing Arguments – Deputy Prosecutor Joseph Kisor

Trial Transcripts Part 9. Closing Arguments – Public Defender Attorney Bryan E. Barrett

Trial Transcripts Part 10. Closing Arguments – Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard

Trial Transcripts Part 11. End of trial.