Wednesday, June 2, 2010

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.

Thursday, May 27, 2010

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.)

Dr. Edward J. Connor Psy D; Gun for Hire

Here is the latest case coming out of the Kentucky Appellate Court that involves Dr. Edward J. Connor Psy D, of Connor and Associates in Erlanger, Kentucky. Seth Smith was convicted of stabbing a man in the chest and the leg. One of the issues Mr. Smith appealed was the trial court's exclusion of a portion of Dr. Connor's psychiatric report. The trial court claimed the specific portion of Dr. Connor's report could not be admitted because “[Dr. Connor] would be testifying as to what was actually in the Defendant’s mind at the time he committed the offense.” Dr. Connor’s report of his findings after treating Seth Smith for more than two years and participating in over forty therapy sessions with Mr. Smith, stated:

"I can only state that in my clinical opinion although Mr. Smith had made significant improvement in psychotherapy, at that moment, he felt frightened that he would be assaulted and acted in a manner which he felt was necessary to defend himself. One can certainly question his judgment at that moment in time and can also consider in hindsight that there would have been a better way to protect himself, such as leaving the car."

Unfortunately for Mr. Smith, the Appellate Court agreed with the trial court's ruling and agreed that Dr. Ed Connor's mind reading abilities should not be admissible as evidence. The Appellate Court did reverse one of Seth Smith's arguments. The Appellate Court ruled that Mr. Smith's prior assault conviction should not have been admitted into the record. Mr. Smith had previously been convicted of stabbing his mother.

I wonder if Dr. Connor felt that Seth Smith was frightened and acted in self defense when he stabbed his mother? This is what makes my head hurt. Dr. Connor testified that he was concerned about my mental stability because I questioned his practices, yet Dr. Connor gave Seth Smith the benefit of the doubt in Mr. Smith's second stabbing. Coincidence and bad luck go out the window when the victim of your first stabbing conviction is your mother.

I find it frightening that judges like James D. Humphrey and Carl H. Taul use Dr. Connor to determine the futures of children of separated parents. How reassuring is it to know that the Children's Home of Northern Kentucky has Dr. Connor educate and oversee their psychological staff? Does Dr. Connor use tarot cards or crystal balls while he is working with courts? Seth Smith was drunk when he stabbed the victim. Did Dr. Connor evaluate Mr. Smith while he was drunk? Even if you accept that Dr. Connor could understand how Mr. Smith may have felt in the past, how could Dr. Connor speculate what emotions were going through Seth Smith's mind when he was drunk and stabbing someone? Who needs the court system when Dr. Connor can read people's minds like a Marvel comic book character? It just goes to show that Dr. Connor will say anything for a buck. For more information on Dr. Edward J Connor go to www.DanHelpsKids.com.

Wednesday, May 26, 2010

And Dearborn County controls the lives of my children.

Check out my post on the Dearborn County Indiana Public Forum titled "The Backwoods Dearborn County Government." You'll get an understanding of how Dukes of Hazzardish a modern day county government can be. It's the perfect place for a judge like Judge James D. Humphrey to abuse children who are a part of the family court system.

Friday, May 21, 2010

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.

Sunday, May 16, 2010

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.

Thursday, May 13, 2010

Maybe the time has come to sue everybody who enables Mr. and Mrs. Dr. Edward J. Connor's abuse of children

Today someone from the Kentucky Government was on this blog and http://www.danhelpskids.com/. Yesterday, someone from the Kenton County School School Sytem was on my website. The day before that, someone from the Pendleton County School System was on my website. Kentucky Attorney General, and U.S. Senate Candidate, Jack Conway knows about Dr. Connor. Kentucky Assistant Attorney General Mark Brengelman is aware that Dr. Connor doesn't release health records to clients but he advised the Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychology not to take action against Dr. Connor. The Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychology is aware that Dr. Edward J Connor committed mail and wire fraud as well. The Children's Home of Northern Kentucky has Dr. Connor oversee their psychological services. They are well aware of Dr. Connor's history of not telling the truth. Dearborn Circuit Court Judge James D. Humphrey listened to Dr. Connor gasp for breath during while I cross-examined Dr. Connor about Dr. Connor's conflicting and false written statements. Judge Humphrey took away my children because of my "irrational behavior and attacks on Dr. Connor." Judge Humphrey wasn't worried about protecting my children or their mother, Judge Humphrey was worried about his expert, Dr. Ed Connor. He denied my request for a GAL to represent my children because Judge Humphrey knew another professional would be appaulled by the conduct of Judge Humphrey's "expert". Dearborn County Prosecutor Aaron Negangard knows that Dr. Connor lied under oath. He knows because he had Detective Mike Kreinhop investigate me because an unidentified person made a complaint about my internet writings. Detective Kreinhop, who is the Republican candidate for Dearborn County Sheriff, interviewed Dr. Connor during the course of his investigation and reviewed Dr. Connor's fraudulent documents. Are any of these entities doing anything to protect children and families from Dr. Edward J. Connor? Not that I am aware of.

Here is what people need to do. If children are harmed by Dr. Edward J. Connor, adults need to focus on the entities that have knowingly allowed Dr. Connor to continue to harm children. If a child is harmed by Dr. Connor during the course of a school related psychology matter; the parents should file a lawsuit against the school. If a child happens to be neglected by the Children's Home of Northern Kentucky, as a result of Dr. Connor's actions; the Children's Home of Northern Kentucky should be held accountable. Dearborn County children that are victims of Dr. Connor's abuse should hold Dearborn County Law Enforcement responsible for turning a blind eye to Dr. Ed Connor's malicious behavior. Democratic Senate Candidate Jack Conway says he protects families, but the Office of the Attorney General only protects families when it is convenient. Jack Conway and the Kentucky Board of Examiners have an interest in protecting Dr. Edward Connor because Dr. Connor testifies in death row trials and often testifies on behalf of the state. Last but not least, we should not forget to hold Dr. Sara Jones-Connor accountable as well. Her name was signed at the bottom of my custody evaluation report that her husband claimed to contain "numerous errors and oversights."

I'm not a person who is out to sue everyone but if everyone is going to turn their backs on the Connor family child neglect ring, maybe it's time that people start suing everyone. I encourage people to start filing lawsuits against anyone connected to Connor and Associates, PLLC, who have looked the other way while enabling Dr. Edward J Connor and his wife, Dr. Sara Jones-Connor, to continue to harm children. Dr. Sara Jones-Connor signed the report so I am sure she was aware of the "numerous errors and oversight" in the evaluation report before the report was filed with the court. If we direct our attention away from the problem, the husband and wife combo of Dr. Edward J Connor and Dr. Sara Jones-Connor, and focus on the entities that have an obligation to report such abuse, people will stop looking the other way. If people start suing attorneys, public officials, psychologist, mental health organizations, school systems, etc... who have a duty to report the illegal actions of the husband and wife team of Ed and Sara Connor, people won't be so quick to look the other way when the Connor family is neglecting children and their families. So stand up, speak out, and sue 'em because we will never be able to stop the Connor family from hurting children unless we can deter people from protecting Mr. and Mrs. Dr. Edward J. Connor. For more information on how Mr. and Mrs. Dr. Edward J. Connor harm children, go to http://www.danhelpskids.com/. If anyone needs my assistance in any legal case involving Dr. Edward J Connor, I would be more than happy to forward evidence of Dr. Connor's fraudulent behavior and I will be happy to testify in any legal proceeding as well. I want to help protect children from being harmed by Dr. Connor by holding people accountable for protecting and enabling Dr. Connor's abusive practices.