Happy 5th Birthday Audrey

I'm missing another one of my daughter's birthday's today. My little "Aud-ball" turns 5 today. She and her sister will someday understand how hard their daddy fought for them. They will understand how we sometimes have to face adversity and deal with mean people. My daughters will understand the despicable yet cowardly actions of Dr. Edward J. Connor, Judge James D. Humphrey, and others. They will know the truth because there is no court order that can prevent me from telling them that they lost the ability to see their daddy because Judge Humphrey wanted to make extra sure that their dad didn't present a possible danger to them. Even Dr. Connor said he wasn't concerned about the safety of my children when they were in my care.

Stay tuned as I hope to get a copy of the transcripts of my last court hearing on November 24, 2010, where my ex wife's lawyer expressed their concerns about my "potential danger." They believe that I may be dangerous because Judge Humphrey said I yelled, "I demand justice in this courtroom!" Seeing as he didn't even hold me in contempt, I fail to see their logic in clinging to such a ridiculous claim. The only danger to those who don't tell the truth is the truth itself. I plan on telling my daughters the truth. I will tell them that people kept daddy away from them for over a year and a half because Judge Humphrey didn't like daddy's writings. Judge Humphrey couldn't make daddy remove his writings because they were not dangerous to daddy's girls, so Judge Humphrey punished two little girls in order to punish their dad. I'm just fortunate enough to have two little angels worth fighting for.

Happy Birthday Audrey and always remember that daddy will always love you and your sister no matter how hard people work to keep you away from your dad. Just remember that your dad will never give up on you. I love you girls!

Another Victory for Dad

Today is the last day that I will have to deal with the telecommunication harassment charge that my ex-wife and her parents filed against me last September in Hamilton County, Ohio. They had me arrested for calling my daughters, which was allowed by the final decree in our divorce in Indiana. My ex was in contempt of the orders so rather than file something with the family court in Indiana, she and her family had me arrested in Hamilton County, Ohio. Luckily the Judge and the prosecution saw through my ex and her family and dismissed the charge. Today the arrest was expunged from my record.

This is a problem with a lot of fathers whom I have talked to. The mothers of the children have the ability to have the fathers arrested out of hatred or spite and then it is up to the fathers to pay to get out of a hole. A majority of the time, if the father tries to initiate criminal action against the mother, the police claim it is a civil matter. If the mother initiates criminal action against the father, there are arrest warrants and/or restraining orders filed. A woman almost always has the ability to gain an advantage in a custody dispute by filing bogus criminal action against the father. In 2005, my ex called 911 in an effort to harm me but the officer told her that she was trying to use our daughter against me and he made her leave. She's filed multiple contempt charges against me to no avail. The Judge denied her motion to shut down my internet content. When her efforts to have me punished in Indiana failed, she had me arrested in Ohio. At no point did she get punished or criticized for trying to bring harm to me with her bogus 911 calls, failed contempt charges, failed criminal complaints, etc... I was punished for filing multiple motions to obtain evidence from her expert even after it was discovered that my ex-wife submitted a false document from Dr. Connor's office in an attempt to obstruct my access to evidence. The only time I ever filed anything against my ex-wife was when I filed a contempt charge because she stopped letting me talk to my daughters. She had me arrested in another state a few days later. I find it baffling how courts will punish parents for writing about how they were falsely accused of crimes, yet the courts fail to punish the parents who make the false allegations.

Today was a good way to start the holiday weekend. Unfortunately it is another holiday spent without my precious little girls, but at least I will be able to have comfort in knowing that I successfully fought off another attack by my ex and her parents in an attempt to bring harm to me and to hinder my daughter's ability to have a father.

Women who make false allegations against the fathers of their children weaken father's rights and jeopardize the safety of women who are true victims of abuse. Crying wolf about harassment and abuse in an effort to gain a personal advantage over others, puts innocent people in danger. If I did not have a lawyer, I could have gone to jail. Problems arise when an actual victim files charges against an abusive person and the judge has to decide whether the victim is lying like the accuser in the last case. More scrutiny needs to be placed on people who abuse the system. A person who is willing to make a false police report to hurt the other parent, is emotionally abusive to the children. A parent who will intentionally bring harm to their own children, is unable to understand what is best for the children. Hopefully the courts will figure this out; for the best interest of the children. Have a fun and safe holiday. Go to www.danhelpskids.com for more information on my arrest in Hamilton County, Ohio.

Two Lawyers; Two arguments

Somehow the opposing party is making two separate arguments about limiting my parenting time. My ex-wife has two lawyers; one for the appeal, Leanna Weissmann, and one for the trial court, Angela Loechel. Ms. Weissmann made the argument to the appellate court that Judge James D. Humphrey did not error in ordering supervised visitation time. Unfortunately, Judge Humphrey ordered that I have NO visitation time. Leading up to the upcoming hearing in the trial court on June 14, 2010, Ms. Loechel is making arguments against potential experts who can evaluate me. I have to undergo an evaluation so I can see my children. One attorney fails to mention the no visitation order to the appellate court and the other attorney is still arguing that I am a potential danger to the trial court.

If my ex truly felt that I was a danger to my children, her appellate lawyer would have argued that the trial court did not error in ordering no visitation time. Rather than defend the Judge's decision, Ms. Weissmann made an argument for a court ruling that did not exist. Now heading into the June 14th hearing, my ex's trial lawyer, Angela G. Loechel, is objecting to the psychiatrist I have chosen to evaluate me. Ms. Loechel is still arguing that I am dangerous to my children. Rather than cooperate in an effort to return the my children to their father, the other side has decided to further obstruct my ability to be a dad.

One lawyer fails to make the argument that I should have no visitation while my ex's other lawyer is still arguing that I should have no visitation. My ex-wife and her lawyers continue to argue that I should not be allowed to see Dr. Edward J Connor's case file. They want me to prove that I am not a danger to my children yet they keep fighting to deny me the ability to see the evidence against me. They have even resorted to lying to the courts in an effort to deny me the ability to be a father. My ex's hatred for me is greater than the love for her own children. I love you girls. Daddy won't stop fighting for your ability to grow up with both parents.

***If anyone is interested in seeing family court corruption at its worst, feel free to come to my hearing on the second floor of the Dearborn County Courthouse on June 14, 2010 at 1:30PM.

Shame on you and your client, Angela G. Loechel.

I just received the word from opposing counsel Angela Loechel that my ex-wife still does not agree with the psychiatrist I chose to evaluate me to see if I am a danger to anyone. My ex-wife believes that the evaluation should be performed by an “unbiased” mental health professional and not anyone with any connections to the Affinity Center, where I have sought treatment for ADHD for over eight years. Apparently, they believe that the people who have the most experience in evaluating and treating me are the least qualified to determine if I “may” present a danger to anyone. They believe that the Affinity Center or anyone connected with the Affinity Center may lie about me not being a danger to anyone just to “hook me up.” Ms. Loechel wrote, “Frankly, I am extremely concerned about Mr. Brewington’s apparent apprehension to obtain an unbiased mental health evaluation in this matter, as the purpose of the evaluation is to determine whether or not he is a danger to my client or the children.”

First it is worthy to mention that Judge James D. Humphrey ruled that I had to undergo a mental health evaluation to determine if I could have supervised visitation with the children in a therapeutic environment. This supervised visitation is to be supervised by another mental health professional. Angela Loechel is extremely concerned that the psychiatrist I chose is not going to be able to accurately determine if it is safe for me to have supervised visitation with my children in the care of another mental health professional. She believes that an “unbiased” evaluator would be better. The last “unbiased” professional Angela Loechel and her client proposed was Dr. Edward J. Connor.

How unbiased was Dr. Connor? Dr. Connor said he would not release the case file from the custody evaluation to me because I was not a lawyer. Dr. Connor sent copies of my correspondence and/or records to Angela G. Loechel but failed to provide me with copies of any of their correspondence and/or Ms. Loechel’s client’s records. Dr. Connor had Ms. Loechel’s client sign a bogus Office Policy Statement which Ms. Loechel submitted to court to obstruct my access to the case file. According to Angela Loechel’s billing statements, Ms. Loechel had phone conversations with Dr. Connor just prior to the final hearing in my divorce and even gave Dr. Connor legal advice to help keep Dr. Connor’s wife and partner, Dr. Sara Jones-Connor, from having to testify in court. Ms. Loechel and her client attacked me for publicizing the unethical conduct of their expert and continued to blame me for their legal expenses even after it was discovered that Ms. Loechel submitted a false document from Dr. Connor’s office nearly a year before the final hearing and it was Ms. Loechel’s expert that continued to communicate with Judge Carl H. Taul outside the presence of the parties which led to Judge Taul removing himself from the case. Ms. Loechel continued to communicate and send information to Dr. Ed Connor after the final divorce decree was issued. Now Ms. Loechel is complaining that I tried to get an evaluation so I can review the results before it could be submitted to court. No, I am just trying to save a little money and use the evaluation that I received after Ms. Loechel’s client had me arrested for trying to maintain a phone relationship with my children.

The following is a statement from Angela Loechel:

“[The psychiatrist’s] association with Mr. Brewington as an evaluator prior to his approval in this action and for the purpose of his defense in the criminal case in Hamilton County, Ohio, is even more problematic. I have no idea why Mr. Brewington would hire a mental health evaluator to defend against a telephone harassment charge, except in an attempt to get a mental health evaluation of which Mr. Brewington would know the results of prior to attempting to submit the same to this Court.”

There was nothing in the final decree of my divorce that prohibited me from maintaining a relationship with my daughters on the phone. My ex-wife “allowed” me to speak to the girls from August 19, 2009 until she stopped all phone conversations between my daughters and me on September 5, 2009. Rather than trying to file a contempt charge against me in the Indiana Court for calling the children on the phone per the Indiana Parenting Guidelines, Ms. Loechel’s client filed criminal charges against me in Hamilton County, Ohio. Not only did I face a criminal record because Ms. Loechel’s client decided to have me arrested in Ohio rather than follow Indiana law, now Ms. Loechel is second guessing my criminal lawyer’s legal strategy to build a defense against her client’s false criminal complaint. The criminal trial was set for a jury hearing and I had no way of defending my credibility because my ex-wife submitted the final decree in my divorce which claimed that I may be a potential danger to my children. Judge Humphrey based his decision on Dr. Connor’s testimony. Since Angela Loechel successfully argued that I should not have a copy of the evidence supporting the testimony against me from her “unbiased” expert, I needed an expert in case there was any question about my mental stability. Fortunately the Hamilton County Prosecutor recommended dismissing the charges because she felt my ex-wife was trying to retaliate against me. Now Angela Loechel is accusing me of taking advantage of being arrested as a result of her client’s irresponsible attempts to keep her children away from their father.

What are they really afraid of? They are afraid of the inevitable. It is only a matter of time before a mental health professional says there is nothing wrong with me and they are appalled that a parent could lose the ability to see his children while being denied the evidence against him. Ms. Loechel and her client want control of who evaluates me so they can have some input in the evaluation. Ms. Loechel and her client argued that my parenting time should be limited because I have ADHD, yet they argue that I should not be evaluated by a professional with a connection with the facility that has treated my ADHD for the better part of a decade. If Ms. Loechel has the ability to contact the professional who evaluates me, she will have the ability to have her own private conversations with the expert just as she did with Dr. Connor. Then Ms. Loechel can argue that I shouldn’t have access to the evidence against me because I may misuse it. I would think Ms. Loechel would have an interest in keeping Dr. Connor’s case file under wraps because it may contain inappropriate contact between Dr. Connor and her.

Ms. Loechel and her client are focused on two things: concealing Dr. Connor’s evaluation case file and arguing over which mental health professional evaluates me; neither of which are going to help expedite the children’s return to their father. Judge Taul told Ms. Loechel that if I release any confidential information about her client, it would be a civil matter. Ms. Loechel and her client worked to deprive my daughters’ right to question why Dr. Connor filed a report that he claimed contained “numerous errors and oversights” and the right to question why Dr. Connor and my ex-wife appear to be the only people in the world that have difficulties understanding me. Ms. Loechel and her client failed to file any motions to modify parenting time during the 2 ½ year divorce where the children were in my care nearly half the time. They did not file any physical restraining orders. The only time Ms. Loechel and her client tried to limit my parenting time was during the final hearing of the divorce. Now, after no testimony or evidence from anyone that my mental health would present an emotional or physical danger to anyone, Ms. Loechel and her client are arguing that I may be able to trick mental health experts into believing that I am not dangerous or that anyone who has previously met with me may lie and say I am not dangerous. If they believe that I am trying to trick a mental health professional into believing me, then it would be a lot less likely that I would be able to fool the people who have been treating my ADHD for 8 ½ years than a new expert. It is ridiculous for them to believe that my expert or treating therapist/doctor would risk their professional career just to lie for me and say that I am not a danger. It’s even more ridiculous for them to insist on me seeing an “unbiased” evaluator to get the most accurate evaluation while refusing to allow the new evaluator to have access to Dr. Connor’s case file which would give the new evaluator all the information necessary to come to an informed conclusion regarding the safety of the children.

It does not matter who I see. Any professional is going to say, “Why are you here?” and I will say, “I’m here because Dr. Connor said I might be dangerous but my ex-wife and her lawyer will not let you see how he came to that conclusion. They claim it may be dangerous to release the information that explains why I may be dangerous.” I’m going to take in all of Dr. Connor’s statements where he lied about the release of the case file and where he lied about his Office Policy Statement during his May 27, 2009 testimony. Then I would direct the evaluator’s attention to my web content and explain how I publicized my experience to help other parents. I would tell them that my ex-wife had me arrested because she did not want me to maintain a relationship with my daughters. I would tell them that my ex-wife told my daughter’s school to call the police if I appeared at the school for any reason despite the absence of a court order prohibiting me from doing so. I would explain how hard people have worked to damage the relationship between a father and his daughters. Then I would tell the expert that I have not broken any laws and I have never threatened or harmed anyone during my efforts to ensure my daughters have the ability to grow up with both parents. It does not matter if it is my own expert or the psychologist appointed by the Hamilton County Court; they are all going to see what a travesty the situation is. That’s what Ms. Loechel and her client fear. If they cannot find anyone to agree with the notion that I am a dangerous father, it will be apparent that all of their efforts have only served to deny two beautiful little girls the ability to see their father for an entire year. If they were truly concerned about my daughters’ well being, Ms. Loechel and her client would allow me to have all of the information possible to help a mental health professional form an accurate opinion of my psychological well-being. Defending Dr. Connor’s actions are more important to them than allowing my children to have a father. Ms. Loechel and her client’s only hope is to find a professional that they can have private conversations with and hope that they can conceal records; just as Ms. Loechel did with Dr. Edward J. Connor Psy D. I love you girls. Daddy will keep fighting to protect your ability to grow up with mommy, daddy, and their families.

(The Affinity Center specializes in diagnosing and treating children and adults with ADD/ADHD as well as behavioral, learning, and mood disorders. Clients of The Affinity Center undergo extensive testing for ADD/ADHD to determine appropriate treatment options. They also perform IQ testing to help develop custom treatment/therapy plans for their clients. Their staff includes both mental health professionals and medical doctors who work closely with clients to manage therapy and/or prescribed medications. The Affinity Center is located in Cincinnati, Ohio. For more information on The Affinity Center please visit www.theaffinitycenter.com.)

Two letters, On Lie

---Before I go any further with this blog post, I want to clarify that these letters are not going to be sent nor shown to my children. My sometimes satirical and hypothetical writings often find their way to court so I want clear up any misunderstanding before anyone would try to use this to as a reason to further deny my children of their father. I am writing these mock letters to demonstrate how the actions of Dr. Edward J Connor, Judge James D. Humphrey, and others will continue to harm my little girls. The first letter to the girls is what the Court probably wants to tell my daughters. The second letter is the truth. The fact that my children have to be given excuses as to why they still can’t see their dad only brings them more harm.---

LETTER #1

Dear Girls,

Daddy is going to be so happy to see you. Daddy worked very hard to be able to see you again. Sometimes these things just happen when moms and dads get divorced. I know I have not been able to see you for a long time but that is about to change. I am going to have to visit you in a place like a doctor’s office for a while but that is just what happens sometimes. You may not be able to spend the night at my house for a long time but I still love you. Soon you will be able to see Grandma Sue and everyone else. We just have to wait until all of the visits in the doctor’s office go okay. The whole family loves you very much and cannot wait to see you. I am sorry that I have not been able to see you. Sometimes it is better not to ask why I did not come to see you and be a part of your lives. We should just concentrate on the fact that I get to see you a little bit and hopefully we will be able to go fishing, camping, hiking, and playing like we used to do before you could not see me. Like I said, sometimes parents just have to go away after divorce. I love you.

Love,

Daddy

LETTER #2

Dear Girls,

Daddy is going to be so happy to see you. Daddy is working very hard to be able to see you again. Sometimes when moms and dads get divorced, there are people who make mistakes and bad decisions. There are people who think they know what is best for kids, but they do not really know. Sometimes these people make mistakes and get mad if people ask them about their mistakes. If you accidentally broke your sister’s toy, you would say you are sorry because it’s the right thing to do. You would not be mean to your sister because she would already be upset that her toy was broken. The people who were in charge of doing what is best for you made a mistake. When daddy told them that they made a mistake, they got mad. They did not say they were sorry for making mistakes; they got mad at daddy for pointing out their mistakes. Sometimes when people get mad, they do not think right. They thought Daddy was not a good parent because Daddy told them, “You guys made a mistake”. If you broke your sister’s toy, you would not say “You are a bad sister”, you would say, “I’m sorry I broke your toy.” Unfortunately, these people sometimes blame their mistakes on other people. They thought that taking Daddy away for a long time would be best for you girls. Obviously that was not the right decision, but Daddy is doing everything he can to fix it. Daddy will be careful not to make the people mad again so they do not get confused. We do not want them to think that I am not a good dad because they are mad at me for telling them that they made a mistake. That does not have anything to do with how much I love you guys and how much fun we have together.

It has been a long time since I have seen you and I love you very much. When I first get to see you, we will have to see each other in a doctor’s office because they forgot how much we love each other and how much fun we had together. It is like a test to see if we can still have fun together. That sounds like a fun and easy test to me! You will be happy to know that I have been working very hard to see you and I have been working very hard to help other kids and their parents spend time together. There are a lot of people who thank Daddy for helping them but they should be thanking you. You two are the most special things in my life and you have given me the strength and courage to help protect a kid’s ability to grow up with their mommies and daddies. Without my little angels, I would not have been able to help other kids and parents. You two are very special girls. I love you and I can’t wait to take our test together.

Love,

Daddy

Prior to the August 18, 2009 final decree in my divorce, there had been no mention of terminating my parenting time so I was unable to defend myself. Why would I think that my parenting time was at risk? In my ex-wife’s response to my appeal, she did not even make an argument against the termination of my parenting time because it is indefensible. Dr. Connor did not mention anything about terminating my parenting time. People say that it isn’t fair for children to know about the conflict in a divorce. What’s even more unfair is allowing children to believe that a parent did not love them or did something wrong to prevent the parent from being with their children. I did my part, I was a good father. Dr. Connor was the one who claimed his child custody evaluation report contained “numerous errors and oversights.” Judge James D. Humphrey punished me for asking “why?” Now they probably expect me to take responsibility for not being able to be with my daughters. If my ex-wife cannot make an argument to the appellate court that Judge Humphrey’s decision to terminate my parenting time is justified, why should I take responsibility for Judge Humphrey’s actions? The longer they lie to my daughters only increases the chance of long term emotional damage. I’m sorry but I’m not going to lie to my children. For more information go to www.danhelpskids.com.

Dear Family Court Professionals, If you lie, I'm going to write about it.

It’s amazing what lengths people will go to in an effort to win. Why would a lawyer lie in a brief to the appellate court? That is what my ex-wife’s appellate lawyer, Leanna Weissmann, did. Maybe it was necessary given that there really isn’t a logical explanation for ripping a father away from two little girls.

Before I get started, I would like to tell any judge presiding over my case that they should refrain from reading this even though Leanna Weissmann snuck in some ex parte evidence regarding a new website and invited the appellate judges to review the new internet postings in my ex-wife’s brief to the Indiana Court of Appeals. Ms. Weissmann wrote, “Husband continues to post about the court system which now include references to this appeal. As of April 23, 2010, he maintained several sites with derogatory comments about many of the people involved in his case including Judge Humphrey. See e.g. http://Husbandhelpskids.com/index.html; http://Husbandbrewington.blogspot.com/. I am not aware why Ms. Weissmann felt compelled to refer to a website that wasn’t created until 6 months after the final hearing in my divorce but I am sure that she is aware of the appellate rules that forbid the court to review new, ex parte evidence. And I don’t know why she mentioned Judge Humphrey. My statements about Judge Humphrey have nothing to do with the appeal, other than it being just a cheap shot to tattle on me for talking about Judge Humphrey in an effort to gain favoritism with other judges. I felt compelled to write about my ex-wife’s appellee brief in the case that an Appellate Judge would take Leanna Weissmann’s illegal advice and check out the websites and new evidence for themselves. Since my lawyer follows the rules and is unable to offer new evidence, I’m just putting the information on my blog and website to explain why I am fighting for my daughters and how my attorney and I do not resort to dishonest measures that can damage children’s relationships with their parents.

The best place to start is probably near the end of the Appellee’s (my ex-wife’s) brief. Rather than just make a case for her client, Leanna Weissmann strikes out to speculate what my defense against their accusations might be. She wrote, “While husband will likely defend his behavior as aggressive litigating on behalf of his kids, a quick review of the Record should convince this Court otherwise.” This has been the whole song and dance from the very beginning. For some reason, none of these legal professionals seem to grasp that I am only doing this for my children. What I find rather ironic, is the appellate lawyer for my ex-wife is starting the debate of whether or not I am an aggressive litigator. That’s rather flattering considering that Leanna Weissmann wrote that one of the reasons Judge Humphrey justified his decision to terminate my parenting time was “Husband has Attention Deficit Disorder affecting his ability to concentrate.” Given that there are no facts that demonstrate that I am a danger to my children, they tattled on me for questioning judges and made things up.

Leanna Weissmann wrote, “Husband blogged and continued to post confidential information on the web after being ordered not to.” On April 29, 2009, Judge Humphrey held a hearing on my ex-wife’s motion requesting the Court force me to take down my internet content. On May 14, 2009, the orders from the Court were filed DENYING her motion. Ms. Weissmann made the above statement claiming it was justification for the Court ordering “Supervised Visitation.” Just for the record, Judge Humphrey did not order supervised visitation; he ordered NO VISITATION. Ms. Weissmann made up the supervised visitation order because the no visitation order was indefensible. Judge Humphrey only ordered me to take down my internet postings if I wanted UNsupervised visitation. In the final decree Judge Humphrey stated,

“Because of the potential danger to the children, Husband must remove all postings created by him from the internet concerning the children before any UNSUPERVISED visitation may commence and/or continue.”

Ms. Weissmann must have been a little confused about the situation which is understandable. Judge Humphrey’s order states that my web postings are only dangerous if I have UNsupervised visitation and not supervised visitation. I guess Judge Humphrey was concerned that if left unsupervised, I would allow my, now four and six year old, children to go to my website and read my internet postings. That would be a miraculous feat considering my oldest was just learning to read nine months ago.

Another false statement made by Leanna Weissmann was “Husband’s behavior in the courtroom required the presence of a police officer.” The officer was in the courtroom because it was his job. Judge Humphrey was angry with me because I kept questioning why I was not allowed to have Dr. Edward J. Connor’s evaluation case file when the law stated I was entitled to it. Judge Humphrey asked the officer to stand behind me. Actually it was an act of intimidation. If Judge Humphrey used a police officer to stand behind me to keep me from arguing for the rights of my children and me, then that’s an act of intimidation. If I was out of line, Judge Humphrey should have held me in contempt. Instead, he placed the threat of police action behind me for the three day proceeding.

Ms. Weissmann rambled on and on about my numerous pleadings and how I kept trying to obtain my ex-wife’s medical records from Dr. Connor. This is the spin they have put on the release of the case file since I requested it over two years ago. My ex-wife’s legal fees were not due to my numerous pleadings and attempts to get the case file; they were a result of her and Dr. Connor not honoring the agreement that we both signed at the beginning of the custody evaluation. She consented to the release of the case file at the beginning and then successfully fought to not release it. Now their argument is that the court did not release it because the court was afraid that I would post confidential information on the internet. I had requested the file over a year before they submitted any of my web material to court. I first requested Dr. Connor’s case file on March 6, 2008. I did not post anything on the internet until mid-September of 2008. I created a website to tell people about Dr. Connor’s false/conflicting statements. My first blog post came on February 25, 2009; nearly a year after I requested Dr. Connor’s case file. If my ex-wife and Dr. Connor would have honored their part of the bargain and released the file, she wouldn’t have accumulated a high amount of legal fees. The irony in the situation is if Dr. Connor would have released the case file to me per the agreement that my ex-wife and I both signed, my website and this blog would never have existed.

Another thing Ms. Weissmann wrote about was how I inconvenienced Judge Carl H. Taul. Leanna wrote, “Husband then attempted to subpoena Judge Taul to testify, requiring Judge Taul to hire counsel to quash the subpoena.” I am not aware if Judge Taul had to reimburse Deputy Attorney General, Betsy Isenberg, for her legal services because it was never mentioned in court. I do not know why Leanna Weissmann is privy to this new information. What I do know is Judge Taul and Dr. Connor communicated outside the presence of the parties, which is against the rules. In a letter dated February 25, 2008, Dr. Connor stated,

“With this letter please be advised that Hon. Judge Carl Taul contacted me on 2/22/08 to convey his agreement for the review of the above-captioned case.”

If you assume Judge Taul follows the laws, then you have to assume that Dr. Connor is lying because it would be illegal for Judge Taul to contact Dr. Connor and make arrangements for the parties without the parties’ input or knowledge. Since Judge Taul recused himself after participating in ex parte communications with Dr. Connor, the only way to find out if Dr. Connor was telling the truth was to subpoena Judge Taul. Rather than hold Dr. Connor and Judge Taul accountable for doing something illegal, the professionals in the system got mad at me for following the rules in trying to deal with the situation. Ms. Weissmann even tattled on me for picketing my former lawyer’s office. That has absolutely nothing to do with anything.

This is just the tip of the iceberg. I’m going to post more information on www.danhelpskids.com about the situation to expand on some of the ridiculous arguments they made as an argument to keep me away from the children. Some examples include:

-“Husband’s attacks on Dr. Connor revealed by Dr. Connor’s testimony that Husband posted Dr. Connor was involved in a three-way sex triangle with his office manager.” My ex-wife knows Dr. Connor lied about the statement because she submitted my blog to court that contained my actual comments. [Check out the following link to see how they distorted the truth http://danbrewington.blogspot.com/2009/03/to-all-of-people-who-thought-my-story.html. The blog post is about Dr. Connor’s former office manager that pled guilty, after an FBI investigation, to making $126,558 worth of unauthorized purchases with Dr. Connor’s credit card. Just another reason to question the accuracy of Dr. Connor’s records.]

-“Husband allowed the children to watch age inappropriate movies, claiming Disney movies were more detrimental to the children than “Austin Powers.” That’s what you get for making an argument that Shrek and Austin Powers both have crude humor involving flatulents and kicks to the family jewels.

-“Husband has Attention Deficit Disorder affecting his ability to concentrate.” You heard that correct. My ex-wife is arguing that people with attention deficit disorder should have supervised visitation with their children.

-“Husband’s psychometric test results reveal a degree of psychological disturbance.” Dr. Connor graded the tests and then would not give me all the information behind his conclusions.

Here’s a memo to the people in the system who continue to cry about my web postings, “Stop doing illegal and/or unethical things to keep me from my children.” I’m getting tired of lawyers and judges whining about me trying to intimidate them. Last time I checked, they were lawyers and judges. I was going to refrain from posting anything about the specifics of the briefs that were filed with the appellate court, but since Leanna Weissmann provided the appellate court with ex parte evidence and encouraged the court to do their own investigation, I felt compelled to address the matter directly. Maybe if people understand that they will be held publically accountable for their actions, they would conduct themselves in a more professional manner. Check out www.danhelpskids.com for more information.

I think I can predict the future.

Looking into the future, I can kind of guess how the hearing is going to go on June 14, 2010. On August 18, 2009, Judge James D. Humphrey terminated my parenting time with my three and five-year-old daughters without warning, after I had cared for the girls nearly half of the time during the course of a two and a half year divorce. Judge Humphrey based his decision on the testimony of Dr. Edward J. Connor of Connor and Associates, PLLC. (Dr. Connor also oversees the psychological staff for the Children’s Home of Northern Kentucky and testifies for the Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Services. For information on Dr. Edward J. Connor’s “questionable” conduct, go to www.DanHelpsKids.com.) Judge Humphrey said that before I could even have supervised visitation, I had to undergo an evaluation by a court approved mental health provider. When a mental health provider deems that I am not a danger to anyone, then Judge Humphrey said I could petition the Court to have two, two hour supervised visitation sessions a week with the children in a therapeutic environment that is monitored by another mental health professional. Even though there is no record of me presenting a physical or emotional risk to my children, Judge Humphrey is making me undergo a mental health evaluation with one professional to determine if I am fit to undergo supervised visitation with my daughters, which has to be supervised by another professional. Judge Humphrey felt all this was necessary because he was concerned about “[my] irrational behavior and attacks on Dr. Connor” and Judge Humphrey felt that I “lacked a level of maturity necessary to properly parent.”

In January of this year, I filed a motion to have Dr. Edward J Connor’s evaluation case file sent to a psychiatrist so I could be evaluated in order to see my children. Judge Humphrey denied my motion because he said he didn’t have jurisdiction while my case was in the appellate court. When I retained a lawyer and my lawyer reminded Judge Humphrey that Indiana Appellate rule 39 stated that the trial court still has the ability to enforce the orders, Judge Humphrey decided that he did have jurisdiction and set a hearing for June 14, 2010 to see if the psychiatrist I chose is worthy of his approval. I don’t know how the hearing is going to turn out, but I have a good idea of how it’s going to go.

Since my ex-wife’s lawyer, Angela G. Loechel already said they were not in agreement with my choice of mental health providers, I assume that they are planning on fighting my chosen psychiatrist, who graduated from medical school roughly twelve years before Dr. Connor received his bachelor’s degree in psychology. (Dr. Connor began his collegiate career at Wilmington College (OH) in 1975. Nearly fifteen years later, Dr. Connor received his bachelor’s of psychology from Thomas More College in 1989. Dr. Connor is a psychologist and NOT a medical doctor.) Given that there is hardly an argument to be made that my expert is somehow less qualified, they are going to bring in all of my printed web material in an effort to somehow make an argument that it is harmful to the children. When they do, my attorney may hold up examples of my internet writings and ask questions like, “Did Dr. Connor provide false information to the Court and why is it harmful to the children if Mr. Brewington speaks publically about his story of how he lost the ability to see his children because Dr. Connor submitted the false information?” He may ask something like, “Is it true that you effectively took a 51” television that belonged to your former mother-in-law? Why shouldn’t Mr. Brewington be able to speak publically about Judge Humphrey awarding you property that never belonged to you or Mr. Brewington?” They may use the argument as they did last time where it would be damaging to my daughters if someone read my story and told my daughters, opposed to just allowing my girls to think that daddy did something bad and cannot see them or daddy doesn’t love them anymore. The hidden reason behind my ex-wife wanting to submit my writings to the Court is that they want Judge Humphrey to see that I sometimes do not speak very kindly of him. One time I said Judge Humphrey abused my children. My reasoning behind that is it is emotionally traumatizing for a child to suddenly lose all contact with a parent; if a parent is intentionally removed from a child for no reason, it is child abuse. Judge Humphrey knew Dr. Connor lied and punished me for challenging Dr. Connor’s conduct, which in turn is abusive to my children. Besides, if Judge Humphrey reads and understands my writings, it only further demonstrates that Dr. Connor and my ex-wife did not tell the truth when they claimed that my writings were confusing and difficult to follow.

If that doesn’t work, they will probably go with the intimidation bit and try to say that I tried to intimidate my oldest daughter’s school because I was persistent in obtaining information that I am entitled to by law. That may be a hard argument to make because, in my daughter’s school records, there was a picture of me on my wedding day, with my ex-wife cut out of the picture, and a note that read, “Please call the police if he arrives at the school for any reason.” That’s why I was persistent in viewing the records. I wanted to see if there was any inaccurate information in my daughter’s school record. Considering that the school invited me to attend parent-teacher conferences and there was no restraining order stating I was not allow to be at the children’s school, my ex-wife will have to explain why she gave the school a note instructing them to call the police if I showed up at the school.

The opposing party will probably make an argument that my writings may hinder my ex-wife’s future employment opportunities. No Google search of my ex-wife’s first name will lead to any of my web content and there are plenty of Ms. Brewington’s in the world; my mother and a few cousins and aunts, to name a few. If we get on the subject of jeopardizing future employment, any background check will find, due to Dr. Connor’s false statements mentioned above, that there is a legal document from Dearborn County Circuit Court (IN) Judge James D. Humphrey that states that I am a “potential” danger to my children. Based on Dr. Connor’s conflicting testimony, I am forbidden to see them and I need a mental health evaluation to determine if I am a “danger to my children, their mother, and/or to myself.” If that’s not enough to scare a potential employer away, I’m sure that the telecommunication harassment charge in Hamilton County, Ohio that is on my record won’t help my employment opportunities. Even though the Judge dismissed the charge because it is not a crime to call your children on the phone at reasonable hours, there is still a record of me being charged with the crime. If that does not put a damper on my job outlook, if I go back to being self-employed, it will be hard for me to get a business loan when I currently own my ex-wife a judgment of nearly $170,000. I have to pay her $122,000 for my parent’s farmland that I have never owned, may never own, and have no control of the sale, mortgage, and/or value of the farmland. I also have to pay $40,000 towards her $50,000 of attorney’s fees. She racked up a large amount of legal fees after she and her attorney submitted a bogus document from Dr. Connor’s office in an attempt to obstruct my access to evidence. I did not know that Dr. Connor’s Office Policy statement for individual psychological services, the policy my ex-wife and her attorney submitted to the Court, was not part of the forms given at the beginning of the custody evaluation. On May 27, 2009, Dr. Connor testified that his secretary had inadvertently provided my ex-wife with the document to sign. I was under the impression that Dr. Connor’s office forgot to have me sign Dr. Connor’s Office Policy Statement because on September 9, 2008, Dr. Connor wrote me a letter stating:

“With regard to the Office Policy Statement, we do not have a signed Office Policy Statement for you on file. It appears you were not provided with this document when you initially came to our office, which was an oversight on the part of the office staff. Nevertheless, the Office Policy Statement is simply an adjunct document to the Court order in which you and Ms. Brewington agreed to participate fully in a custody evaluation to be conducted at this office.”

My wife incurred substantial legal expenses when I questioned why she and Dr. Connor would enter into an agreement for individual psychological services while he was performing a custody evaluation. When Dr. Connor’s September 9^th letter, which Dr. Connor copied to the Judge, indicated that the Office Policy Statement was “an adjunct document to the court order”, I became even more suspicious and filed more motions to get the case file or to have Dr. Connor removed. I wish Dr. Connor would have told me in his September 9^th letter that his office had mistakenly provided my ex-wife with his Office Policy Statement rather than tell me that it was an “adjunct document to the court order” for the custody evaluation. If Dr. Connor wouldn’t have gone out of his way to not tell the truth on September 9, 2008, I wouldn’t have had to reimburse my ex-wife for her legal fees resulting from her expert’s false statements.

The only strategy left for the opposing party is to isolate some of my writings and take them out of context. For example, one time I wrote, “They are going to have to kill me to stop me.” It was part of a larger written piece where I was making the point that they were going to have to kill me to stop me from fighting to protect my daughters’ rights to be raised by both parents. When they brought it up, they made it sound like I was insinuating that they were going to have to kill me to stop me from driving a Mack Truck through an orphanage full of blind children. So when they go into court on June 14^th, now they can submit this blog post and say, “We’re afraid that if he gets to see his little girls, we are afraid that he might drive a Mack Truck through an orphanage full of blind children.” If I object because I don’t have a Mack Truck, they will probably say they are afraid that I will “Jedi Mind Trick” a Mack Truck driver to do it for me because opposing counsel, Angela G. Loechel, already asked me about a web post where I claimed to “Jedi Mind Trick” Dr. Connor.

The ball will be in the hands of Judge James D. Humphrey on June 14^th. I doubt he will say, “Let’s see, you haven’t done anything dangerous in the past ten months even though the transcripts from the final hearing demonstrate that Dr. Connor maliciously provided false information to the Court and the children’s mother continues to try to have you arrested so we should reinstate your parenting time immediately.” Judge Humphrey will probably tell me that my internet content that details how many that times Dr. Connor provided false information to the Court, is dangerous to my children. He probably will say that I continue to intimidate people because I continue to write about things like being arrested for trying to maintain phone contact with my children and how Dr. Connor does not know what contracts he has parents sign at the beginning of custody evaluations. Judge Humphrey terminated my ability to see my children because I attacked Dr. Connor in my writings, so Judge Humphrey will probably think I am still dangerous because I continue to post Dr. Connor’s conflicting and/or false written statements and testimony. If Judge Humphrey continues to say that I am a danger to anyone, we will probably have to call the court staff to testify because the court staff privately told Judge Humphrey that I tried to intimidate them because no one from Judge Humphrey’s staff ever testified in my divorce. We may have to call Dearborn County Prosecutor Aaron Negangard and Dearborn County Sheriff Candidate Mike Kreinhop to testify to see whom they interviewed when they investigated me. (No charges were ever filed.) If they testify that they questioned Judge Humphrey or anyone in his immediate family, Judge Humphrey will have to recuse himself. If their testimony indicates that Dr. Connor lied in his meeting with Detective Kreinhop, it may serve as a reason to set aside the whole judgment in my case and I would be reunited with my daughters.

I cannot say how the hearing is going to end but I think I have an idea of how it is going to go. My argument is going to be, there has never been any evidence to suggest that my parenting time would put my children in any emotional or physical danger so the children should be able to have a father. The case law precedence in Indiana is the Court may only terminate parenting time if there is evidence that parenting time “WOULD” place the children in emotional or physical danger; not “MIGHT” place the children in danger. (D.B. v M.B.V., Indiana Appellate Court, Oct 2, 2009) Their strategy is going to consist of ignoring case law while nitpicking and grabbing at straws in an attempt to make a case that I “MIGHT” still be a danger to the children. If they do not prove that I am not a danger to my children, my ex-wife, her attorney, Dr. Edward J. Connor, and Judge James D. Humphrey will be responsible for denying two precious little girls the ability to see their father for nearly a whole year. The longer they try to argue that I am dangerous, the more time two little girls will lose with their father and his family. Somehow, I don’t think my little girls are going to be happy to learn that they were kept away from their daddy for a few years because people just wanted to make sure that daddy would not turn into a dangerous person. I guess we will have to wait and see. I will get a copy of the transcripts and let you know if I guessed it right. I’ll keep you posted. For more information go to www.DanHelpsKids.com.

People who defend bad people

This is what I have to deal with in a day, this person alleging to be not my friend wrote:

How's the job seach going Dan? So you can get the $$ you need to get counseling so you can see your children?!?! You seem to have plenty of time to follow what goes on in Dr. Connors life - let's follow yours!! What did you do today besides this? GET REAL!!! While you are playing around doing this I know your wife is taking care of the kids, working, paying her bills and trying to provide a healthy environment for your children. What did you do today?? I know, you worked on slamming Dr. Connor - I am sure this will get you just want you want . . . your children back in your life. If you had them back then you couldn't do this and you would need to get a job to help support them - if you are still not working who pays child support????? Get help!!!!! KUDOS DAN!!! Not your friend - Trish!!!

It kills me how this woman named Trish (I know it's not you TC) is worried about my job. Why don't you ever mention that my ex wife lived for free for nearly five years when we were married. Why don't you mention that she never tried to modify parenting time during the 2.5 year divorce that she filed for? Given her profession, it would have been a class B misdemeanor if she failed to report child neglect. Why don't you mention that she successfully convinced a Judge to award her over $122,000 for property that was not marital property? Did you mention how her family has worked to keep the children from being able to communicate with their father on the phone? Why are you so angry? Do you think that I am unreasonable for questioning someone who lied about their office policy statement. Do the research Trish. Do you know why I don't get to see my children? Because my ex wife couldn't just quit at requesting supervised visitation, she had to say that my mother, who has her master's degree in guidance and counseling, wasn't qualified to supervise the visitation. What people really can't grasp, aside from the fact that my ex refuses to let the children speak to their father, is how a person could make a claim to property they know is not theirs. My mother and father spent their lives investing in farmland. Just before my father died of cancer, they put the farmland in a trust. My mother has the right to use all of the assets of the trust for medical reasons, standard of living, etc... as the trustee sees fit. I have no ownership or control of the trust. If I die before my mother, I get nothing and the girls inherit property upon mom's death. After 4.5 years of marriage, my ex wife deemed it necessary to make a claim to $122,000 of the trust and the judge awarded it to her. Not only did she take the children away from their father, she did everything she could to destroy everything the girls' grandmother and grandfather worked so hard to build.

My Ex told me she didn't expect the court to take away all of my parenting time. Why didn't she file something? As for going to counseling, I have been going to the same place for ADHD for over 8 years. Check the evaluation. Dr. Connor didn't say that my ADHD would cause any problems for the girls; he said that my Ex's OCD may cause problems if not treated. You keep protecting people who lie in court. If you have so much insight to the situation, why don't you bring some evidence that I have done something bad to the children. Oh, I'm sorry, there isn't any.