Tuesday, January 21, 2014

Prosecutor argues "unsubstantiated" internet comments are not protected speech

Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard prosecuted Dan Brewington for making what he "felt was over the top, um, unsubstantiated statements against either Dr. Conner or Judge Humphrey."   The following are Negangard's closing statements to the grand jury in Dan Brewington's case. The truly disturbing thing is how the Cincinnati media, aside from the gracious professionals from 700WLW who have reported the story on numerous occasions, has ignored the fact that a local prosecutor indicted Dan Brewington for making "unsubstantiated statements" against public officials. Channel 12 New's "crime stopper" Deborah Dixon reported the  disturbing story of Joseph McCaleb who was arrested for stealing women's undergarments but failed to report how Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard reached a time served plea deal after McCaleb agreed to wear a wire and testify against Dan in Brewington's sentencing hearing.  Apparently Deborah Dixon and some of the other local Cincinnati media believe a panty burglar story is more of a pressing issue to the public than a local prosecutor violating the US Constitution by prosecuting a person for making "unsubstantiated" comments about public officials. See what you think of the strength of Negangard's closing arguments. 

MR. NEGANGARD: Okay we're on record. I want to present to the Grand Jury Exhibit 231 which is a summary of blog postings that he made of his blog in Dan's Adventures in Taking on the Family Court and what it is, is we highlighted where he said um, what we felt was over the top, um, unsubstantiated statements against either Dr. Conner or Judge Humphrey. This is not every, and as you can read, it's not every negative thing he said about Dr. Conner, but it's a step that we felt, myself and my staff, crossed the lines between freedom of speech and intimidation and harassment. Um, Grand Jury Exhibit 232 is a much smaller site that, Dan Helps Kids, that has a few things in there, um, you know, he says something in there like Judge Humphrey punished me for standing up to a man that hurts children and families for monetary gain, referring to Dr. Conner and uh, and that he called Judge Humphrey unethical, illegal, unjust, vindictive and that he abused my children. Um, again that's a summary in Grand Jury Exhibit 232 so that's for your review.  Click here to view Negangard's statements in grand jury transcripts. 

1 comment:

  1. This story to most people would simply be unbelievable, beyond the realms of decency that any reasonable person (or in fact any person) would expect.

    But for me, I understand exactly. On 21st January 2014, I was convicted in the UK for exposing similar injustice. My website was about a solicitor who had represented my wife in my divorce proceedings.

    For over 2 years he complained to the police about me and they did nothing, but eventually when the complaints did not stop, the Crown Prosecution Service CPS decided to charge me with Harassment without violence.

    I plead not guilty and fought the case - which I lost last week. There was nothing harassing on my website, just the truth. That truth has never been challenged in a court of law and none of the allegations on the website have ever been dis-proven. It would be difficult for that to happen, because I was telling the truth.

    The purpose of the website was to warn other members of the public about him, to offer help to people going through what I had and to make contact with those who had already experienced similar experiences to me.

    From that point of view the website was successful. Many people made contact and some I was able to help because their cases were still ongoing. Another was able to make a successful complaint and receive a meagre amount of compensation. Others, both male and female, both clients of his and not, are prepared to act as witnesses in the future, should I ever be able to bring him to court.

    During my trial, the judge ignored all of the lies that were told both in and out of his courtroom, which I proved were lies and convicted me.

    I was sentenced to 4 weeks in jail, suspended for 4 years and given a restraining order, that prevents me from making any complaints against him, except through the proper channels. I have obviously already tried this and failed because it would seem that the legal profession is more concerned with protecting its activities, than protecting the public that it is supposed to serve. I also cannot contact him in any way or post anything on the internet about him that would amount to harassment or encourage or facilitate anyone else to do so.

    So that is why I am unable to name him.

    But I have not given up - the fact that I lost makes me all the more determined that there MUST be some way to achieve justice. My first step is to appeal and take the matter to a higher court.

    I am so glad that Divorce Corp took on his story and has started to spread the word about what is going on in the divorce courts. I just wish they would come to the UK and do something similar.

    BUT - they have made a start! We need to keep up the momentum and tell everyone what is going on. Most people are oblivious to what is happening under their noses, that is, until they or members of their family get involved themselves and by then it is too late.

    One of my favourite quotes sums up the situation and was said by one of the USA's founding fathers.

    “Justice will not be served until those who are unaffected are as outraged as those who are.”

    - Benjamin Franklin

    The injustices of our family courts MUST be exposed, MUST become common knowledge and MUST be challenged, not by the few, but by everyone. Remember, if you pay taxes, you are paying their wages and if you do nothing, you or other members of your family are likely to be affected in the same way too, so get interested, get vocal and spread the word!