A Video of experiences that some people don't want my daughters to have with their dad

I was going through some old pictures and videos and I found this one of my daughters. Happy Dancing Girls. This video was taken less than a month before they were ripped from their father. Do you think these children appear to be abused or neglected? Of course not. My girls were independent and confident. They enjoyed being out with their dad. They could feed off of a crowd. My three year old even bowed when her "performance" was over. Three weeks later, their relationship with their dad was over.

There are mean people in this world. For those who look at my story and wonder what the "other side" is, I'll tell you what the "other side" consists of. It consists of a crooked judge named James D. Humphrey who became enraged because I questioned the ethics of his unlicensed professional, Dr. Edward J. Connor. Dr. Connor began attacking me when I brought attention to the fact that he wasn't licensed to practice psychology in the state of Indiana and Dr. Connor lied about not being able to release the case file from the custody evaluation. The other side of the story consists of a parent who maliciously had the children's father jailed for trying to maintain phone contact with the children. (the telecommunication harassment charge was dismissed and expunged.) The mean people continue to strive to keep my daughters fatherless by postponing hearings and driving up my costs. They would like nothing more than for me to go away. The mean people believe that emotionally traumatizing my children is a small price to pay for punishing me.

The absolute worst case scenario of the "other side of the story" would be that the children were not safe in my care. If that was the case, then why didn't the court grant supervised visitation? Let's not forget that Judge James D. Humphrey waited 2.5 months after the final hearing to terminate my parenting time. If he thought that I was dangerous to my children, why did he allow me to continue to care for my daughters in the 2.5 months after the final hearing? The better question is, why did Judge Humphrey terminate my parenting time when even Dr. Connor testified that I could care for my daughters three days a week? There are mean people in the world, but I am not one of them. If I was, they would have forced me to stop writing about my situation.

If anyone related to my case sees this post, I hope they understand that the two little girls in the video lost the ability to have that kind of fun with their dad because their dad fought to protect their rights to grow up with both parents. Unfortunately, Judge Humphrey, Dr. Connor, and their mother felt that punishing their dad was more important than having a dad. Don't worry girls, Daddy loves you and will always fight to be your dad.

A touching email

Yesterday I received an email from another parent involved with the family court system. The mother thanked me for the information I've made available on my websites. I am thankful that I was able to help at least one more parent cope with the terrors of the family court system. Fear of losing a child is worse than the fear of death. Why should so many parents be subjected to this kind of fear? If a parent speaks out, they are labeled paranoid, narcissistic, or dangerous. If they do not speak out, they risk losing their children. The courts encourage bad behavior because they punish those who speak out against the bad behavior. Judge James D Humphrey and Dr. Edward J Connor believed my internet writings were harmful to my three and five year old daughters. If Judge Humphrey and Dr. Connor would not have acted in an unethical and/or illegal manner, there would be nothing to write about. If my ex-wife can testify that I am a dangerous parent without any evidence of abuse or neglect, why shouldn't I be able to talk about it? She complained that it could hinder her future employment. Go to the Ripley County Courthouse and do a background check on me. You'll find records stating that I may be a danger to my children, my ex-wife, and/or myself. How would that check out with a potential employer? My ex-wife testified in court that one time I became so enraged, she had to lock her and the girls in the bathroom and she ran bath water and sang songs to drown out my yelling. If that really happened, why didn't I use the screwdriver-like key above the woodwork of the bathroom door? I placed it there in the case one of the girls locked the bathroom door and couldn't get out. If parents believed that they would be held publicly accountable for what they said in court, maybe they wouldn't tell the tales. It is mind boggling to try to understand the logic that publicizing harmful actions to children is in fact more harmful than the original acts themselves. Lying in an effort to deprive children of a parent is horrific, but somehow publicizing the lie is worse. This is a new era for the rights of children and parents because courts are having difficulties keeping their activities undercover. The situation is somewhat similar to the scandal in the Catholic Church. At some point the health and safety of children is more important than protecting the system. Sooner or later a spark sets off an explosion where people begin to say, "The same thing happened to me." The secrets of small town courts can be exposed to the world with a few keystrokes. That's how this particular mother found my story that provided her with some intellectual and emotional support. No thank yous are needed; just knowing that my story helped another parent is thanks enough. We have to keep working to make it better. Thanks "A" for the kind email and I wish you the best of luck.

I was searching out similar issues on Internet and stumbled onto your site. After a long frustrating day in court, I embraced your story for many reasons, mostly the message to not fear, and to know that this insanity is all too real and not a result of my high drama delusional over reactive personality. It's a living hell and consumes the days and nights. Unlike your wife, I am at the other end of spectrum and too drained to say much else. I'm up late "advancing my knowledge" and thank you for providing such a labor of love. I wish you the best and hope your daughters are back in your life.

"A"

Update on "Help Dan Brewington see his girls"

The Facebook group I started this past week is at 416 members and growing. Over a hundred members of "Help Dan Brewington see his girls" are people I don't know but they have joined the group in support of my cause. The Dearborn County Indiana good ol' boy network is no longer a secret to the outside world. People keep joining up to to help me take a stand against the abuse of children by the court system. If the government officials are not going to hold people like Judge James D Humphrey and Dr. Edward J Connor accountable for their actions, I will give the public a venue to hold Judge Humphrey and Dr. Connor publicly accountable. I want to thank everyone for their ongoing support. Keep spreading the word.

Happy Birthday Audrey

Tomorrow is my daughter's 4th birthday. I haven't seen her or her sister since August 18, 2009. Their mother stopped letting me speak to them on the phone on September 4, 2009. I missed the first day of kindergarten, the first day of preschool, a 6th birthday, Halloween, Thanksgiving, Christmas, a 4th birthday and everything in between. Judge James D Humphrey said I had to jump through hoops if I want to see my daughters again. I can't even do that because Judge Humphrey ruled that I have to pay my ex-wife nearly $170,000. Judge Humphrey ruled that I have to pay my ex-wife $122,000 from my parent's farmland that I have no ownership stake in or control. There is a lien on my mother's property because of the ruling. He ordered that I pay $40,000 out of $50,000 my ex-wife's legal fees. Because I was forced to appeal the monetary judgments, Judge Humphrey says he can't hear anything regarding the children because the case is in appeal. Nice work James, lump people's children in with the dining room furniture and 401Ks.

This is what Judge James D Humphrey wanted for my children. He set everything up so I may not be able to see my children for maybe a year. Judge Humphrey punished my children to protect Dr. Edward J Connor. Dearborn County officials do not care about children. State Senator Johnny Nugent turned his back. Prosecutor Aaron Negangard does not care if children are abused by Dearborn County Courts. Sheriff David Lusby doesn't care. Detective Mike Kreinhop, who recently announced his candidacy for Dearborn County Sheriff, is aware that Judge Humphrey's expert committed mail and wire fraud but told me to take the problem elsewhere. Dearborn County Officials would rather protect their own than to protect children.

So what do I do? I keep working. I keep fighting to keep pressure on Dearborn County officials who abuse children or allow the abuse to happen. I have people working on the appeal to try to undo the damage that Judge Humphrey did. I'm going to miss a year of my children's lives because Judge James D Humphrey is a nasty evil man. I am going to be sure that the year will be spent trying to prevent this kind of thing from happening again.

The Bogus Testimony of Dr. Edward J Connor Psy D

Check out my cross examination of Dr. Connor to see how Judge James D Humphrey punished my children while he protected his expert from perjury. Please contact Dearborn County Prosecutor Aaron Negangard @ 812-537-8884 with any concerns about how the Dearborn County Court System condones child abuse when it comes to protecting Dr. Edward J Connor Psy D.

New name, same Dad

The new website is going to have a new name that is shorter and easier to remember. www.DanHelpsKids.com. It's hard enough for children who are caught up in divorces. They don't need to be punished by the Courts.

Stay Tuned...

I'm working on a complete makeover of www.dadsfamilycourtexperience.com and it should be done soon. I want to give people more insight to the specifics of my case and how it came to be. Check back soon.

Police Video

In case you missed it, here's the link to the video demonstrating how the Dearborn County Police treated me when I went to the Dearborn County Courthouse to listen to the audio from my divorce hearing. All I ever wanted was equal time with my girls. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOMuv0JXH7A

I hope they can sleep at night cause I can't

I have been taking an unofficial poll and the results are in. Everyone accept for three people think it's a very bad idea to terminate a good father's ability to see his daughters. The three people who think it is a good idea are Dr. Edward J. Connor, Judge James Humphrey, and HER. That's what you get when a judge tries to cover for a crooked custody evaluator. I'm glad they thought my children's lives were worth playing with. I hope my ex is telling my little girls the truth as to why daddy can't be with them on their first days of school. Can you say parent alienation?

My August 18, 2009 motion to the Court

MOTION TO CLARIFY AND TO RECONSIDER

Comes Now, Daniel P. Brewington, Respondent, pro-se, requests the Court to Clarify and to Reconsider, and in support, shows the Court as follows.

In the Final Order on Decree of Dissolution of Marriage, filed by the Court on August 18, 2009, the Court stated, “The Court is most concerned about Husband’s irrational behavior and attacks on Dr. Connor. Frankly it appears that these attacks have been an attempt at revenge from taking a position regarding custody contrary to Husband.”

There is no mention in the entire record of this case of the Respondent questioning Dr. Connor’s custody recommendations. Any of the Respondent’s motions, letter’s, public consumer complaints, etc… regarding Dr. Connor involve Dr. Connor’s refusal to provide the Respondent with a copy of Dr. Connor’s case file from the evaluation as agreed to in the Provisions to Serve as an Impartial Expert in a Custody Evaluation. Both the Petitioner and the Respondent signed this contract. As the Court cited Dr. Connor’s April 16, 2008 Addendum to the evaluation, the Court is aware that Dr. Connor stated “Mr. Brewington is correct in stating that our contract indicates we would provide the file to the representing attorney, however, given the circumstances, we believe that a Court order is necessary to release the file to Mr. Brewington given that he is representing himself pro se.” In a letter dated March 11, 2008 Dr. Connor stated the Respondent was not entitled to the case file because it contained confidential information. In a letter dated March 26, 2008 Dr. Connor stated, “If I receive verification from the Court of (the Respondent’s) pro se status, I would be happy to release the chart records to (the Respondent).” In a letter dated March 27, 2008 Dr. Connor stated that the Court indicated that the Respondent was not entitled to the case file, despite their being no hearing and/or protective order by the Court on the issue. In a letter dated August 4, 2008 Dr. Connor stated there were HIPAA and state laws that prohibit Dr. Connor from releasing the case file. In a letter dated September 9, 2008 Dr. Connor informed the Respondent that Dr. Connor failed to provide the Respondent with Dr. Connor’s Office Policy Statement for individual psychological services[1] but the Policy was simply an “adjunct document” to the Court order. In a letter to the Court dated September 10, 2008 Dr. Connor stated that as an evaluator per an agreed order, Dr. Connor was an “extension of the Court”. Judge Taul later stated that Dr. Connor was not an extension of the Court and Judge Taul recused himself due to ex parte communication initiated by Dr. Connor. [All of the above letters have been included in pleadings filed by the Respondent and are part of the Court record.] During the May 27, 2009 hearing, Dr. Connor testified that Dr. Connor’s office accidently provided the Petitioner with Dr. Connor’s Office Policy Statement and Dr. Connor testified that the Office Policy Statement was, in fact, NOT an adjunct document to the Court order. The Petitioner later testified that the Petitioner heard Dr. Connor testify to this.

Dr. Connor has repeatedly attacked the Respondent for not understanding matters regarding confidentiality yet the record demonstrates that Dr. Connor has failed to provide a clear and consistent explanation as to how Dr. Connor handles matters dealing with the release of the case file. Any outbursts from the Respondent, during the early moments of the final hearing that were arguably extreme and/or unwarranted, were due to the Respondent’s inability to legally inspect and cross-examine the information behind the allegations against the Respondent. The Respondent was troubled about the varying conflicting and false statements made by Dr. Connor and Dr. Connor’s attacks on the Respondent for not “understanding” Dr. Connor’s statements. Dr. Connor failed to mention any concerns about the Respondent being “potentially dangerous” until the Respondent began questioning Dr. Connor’s policies, statements and ethics. Dr. Connor did however fail to mention anywhere in the evaluation that the Respondent was dangerous to the children; in fact, on page 29 of Petitioner’s Exhibit 39 Dr. Connor states, “we believe this would be a benefit to the children” referring to the children being with the Respondent during the time the Petitioner works. Dr. Connor stated no concerns about the Respondent exercising overnights with the children.

The Court has failed to hear any testimony from any professional expert recommending that the parental rights of the Respondent be terminated and the Court was not provided any evidence that the Respondent has been charged, convicted, jailed etc… of any crime involving harassment, assault, sexual misconduct, or any other violent/deviant behavior that would warrant the termination of the Respondent’s parental rights. The Court did not hear any testimony that accused the Respondent of harassing the Petitioner in public, at home, at work, or on the phone. The Court did not hear any testimony from any medical doctor or child protection agency that would indicate that the Respondent neglected the children in any physical and/or emotional manner. The Court stated, “(The Respondent’s) words and actions show that (the Respondent) is, at least presently, unable to conduct himself with the level of maturity necessary to be a parent.” The Respondent requests the Court to clarify how the Court and the State of Indiana measures maturity and at what level of maturity can a parent’s rights be terminated/reinstated.

The Indiana Parenting Time Guidelines recommend that it is in the best interest the children to have as little deviation as possible to the time the children have with both parents. As testimony, school records, Dr. Connor’s evaluation, etc… state that the children were in the care of the Respondent on every Wednesday, Friday, every third Monday, and half of the weekends for over two and a half years; the children may suffer devastating and irreparable emotional damage by abruptly removing the Respondent from their life. The Respondent fears that this may have an adverse effect on the children’s love for the Petitioner as well. The Petitioner is left with the responsibility to somehow explain to the children how they cannot see their daddy anymore because daddy tried to hold Dr. Connor accountable for failing to tell the truth and daddy raised his voice in court out of frustration due to daddy’s inability to inspect the evidence behind the accusations against him. The Respondent feels that the children may resent the Petitioner because of the Court’s ruling.

The Respondent is concerned about the H1N1 flu virus following the deaths of two Dearborn County citizens and the worldwide concern of a possible pandemic. As the children begin school, there is an increased risk for infection if an outbreak happens. Given the Petitioner’s occupation as a [job omitted], the Petitioner is exposed to many people during the course of the Petitioner’s job. As government agencies and health organizations are warning parents to have alternate child care plans in the case that there is an outbreak at school, the children get sick, and/or the parents get sick; the Respondent’s inability to care for the children in emergency circumstances could be detrimental to the health of the children. Dr. Connor’s evaluation [Petitioner’s Exhibit 39] and other testimony indicated that the Respondent has the ability to recognize health concerns involving the children and the Respondent took immediate and appropriate action in dealing with the matter.[2]

WHEREFORE, Daniel P. Brewington, Respondent, pro-se, urges the Court to reconsider the Respondent’s rights to parenting time with the parties’ children to best serve the emotional and physical wellbeing of the children, or to clarify the Indiana guidelines of maturity and how it relates to parenting and to clarify what level of maturity is required to reinstate parenting rights.

---

[1] The Petitioner signed Dr. Connor’s Office Policy Statement on June 5, 2007. The Petitioner, through her counsel, submitted Dr. Connor’s Office Policy Statement as evidence as to why the case file should not be released to the Respondent during the June 13, 2008 hearing on the release of the case file.

[2] Page 13 of Petitioner’s exhibit 39 documents that the children were in the Respondent’s care when the Respondent rushed one of the children to the Pediatrician due to breathing problems. Dr. Connor stated that the Petitioner was at her own home when this occurred, but the Petitioner was actually at work according to the Petitioner’s testimony.

Judge Humphrey

Well I'm done with three days of Court and I have to say that I was impressed with Judge Humphrey's courtroom presence. I disagree with some of his rulings prior to the hearing on the final hearing (I think that's what they call it) but I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt. I don't take it personal if people think that I am just trying to cause trouble. I do cause trouble but it is a side effect of questioning the system. He didn't give any indication in the last couple days of court how he may rule, which is the way it should be. I have no idea how this will turn out but I know I don't have any regrets. I don't think that any attorney could have presented me any better. I wanted to present myself; not a case. I want the Judge to rule for me not against her. Actually I want the Judge to rule for the children.

We'll see how this turns out. I think the Judge may look at me like a train wreck; a shock and awe sort of thing. It almost seemed like he may have been intrigued as to how I hung around for the whole thing. I don't think that he hated me in the end. He may not have liked me but I think he understood that my only motivation in everything I did was my children.

Letter to The State of Kentucky

To: Julie Jackson; Mark Brengelman; Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychology; Jack Conway; and to others it may concern,

Please forward the Motion to Withdraw Appearance to the Board and to Mr. Jack Conway. This may seem like a joke but I can assure you that it is not. Judge James Humphrey is serving as the Special Judge assigned to my divorce because the former Judge, Carl H. Taul recused himself because of the ex parte communication he had with Dr. Connor. I have found this to be rather consistent behavior in dealing with anyone who has been associated with Dr. Connor or would be negatively impacted by Dr. Connor's professional demise. I have also found that the people who try to protect Dr. Connor often do ridiculous things they think they can get away with because I am not a lawyer; when actually they can get away with less in the end.

Some of Judge Humphrey’s actions are rather questionable. I would think that any of the people associated with the State of Kentucky who have dealt with me would believe that I am "competent." I would say that Judge Humphrey would assume the same. The problem that Judge Humphrey has is Dr. Connor stated that I just could not comprehend the policies and law pertaining to health records no matter how many times he patiently explained it to me. If Judge Humphrey says that I am competent to represent myself, then he will have to answer to why he protected Dr. Connor for so long. If he even rules on the above motion, it will be on the public record that Judge Humphrey is aware that Dr. Connor is a liar. If you combine this with the fact that Judge Humphrey just found out that the psychologist he regularly appoints as a professional expert was not licensed to practice psychology in the State of Indiana until July 8, 2008, Judge Humphrey could be subject to disciplinary action.

Try to put yourself in the Judge's position. His evaluator said I am dangerous. The Judge knows that I know he is aware that Dr. Connor is a liar. The Judge is aware that it "appears" that the State of Kentucky is protecting Dr. Connor. The Judge is aware of the Marco Chapman and Jeni Lee Dinkel incidents. Judge Humphrey is aware that Dr. Connor was not licensed to practice psychology by the State of Indiana when he was serving as a psychological expert appointed by an Indiana Court. The Judge knows that he is the special Judge because the former Judge recused himself due to ex parte communications with Dr. Connor. Judge Humphrey is aware that the Indiana Judicial Canon implies that he has a responsibility to report the actions Judge Taul; and the list goes on. Given that most people aren't aware that IP addresses are stored and can be subpoenaed, I would be willing to bet money that if I subpoenaed the IP addresses of all the people who visited my website and the records from the appropriate internet providers, I may find the names of people who shouldn't have been investigating the matter on their own. So what do you do if you are the Judge? Try to stomp out the opposition in an effort to save your own hide.

This is not going to end well. The final hearing of my divorce is still set for May 27, 2009. I think you understand that there is no chance that this ordeal concerning Dr. Connor is going to end on May 27. In fact, if the hearing goes forward, it will probably be much worse because you can count on people, who have protected Dr. Connor, to self-destruct; and you can count on me to continue to do what I do. After the May 27 hearing, I will begin preparing for a hearing on June 5 as I have been requested to testify against Dr. Connor in another father's custody hearing. I will be presenting Dr. Connor's December 22, 2008 response to the Board as evidence that Dr. Connor lies. That will make two legal proceedings involving Dr. Connor where his December 22, 2008 response to the Board will be part of the record. There is also the chance that two Judges will actively work to protect Dr. Connor. If anyone were to look at my original 237-page complaint, which was stamped "received" on November 21, 2008, it would be clear that the Board had all of the information necessary to determine that Dr. Connor lied in his December 22, 2008 response to the Board.

It may be too late for the Board to do anything before May 27, 2009 to prevent Dr. Connor from trying to cause further damage to my children. What is going to make the situation worse is that the Judge will probably rule on my Motion to Withdraw Appearance to represent myself. If he grants it, I will petition the Court to provide me someone to explain Dr. Connor's policies as I expect some difficulties in trying to find a lawyer and/or psychologist that will not think that Dr. Connor is lying about his policies and laws relating to the release of health records. I think these same people will probably have a hard time trying to figure out why the Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychology ignored the information in my 237-page complaint. If the Judge denies my Motion, I will contact the ACLU because the Court violated Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act because it was Dr. Connor, the Court's own expert, who said that I could not communicate and understand the basic concepts of confidentiality. I think it is appalling to play the disabled card, but it was Dr. Connor who said I suffered from "severe" ADHD.

Ask the Governor or Mr. Conway if there is a way to prevent Dr. Connor from continuing to hurt families before the May 27 and June 5 hearings. If there is not, tell them that the State of Kentucky will have to answer to why they protected Dr. Connor by stating that there were no "apparent violations of law" in my 237-page complaint.

Feel free to contact me with any questions. As usual I will be posting this letter on my blog @ www.danbrewington.blogspot.com.

Dan Brewington

Thank you Sheriff Grills

Hats off to the Sheriff of Ripley County, Thomas Grills. I sent out a packet of information to Sheriffs’ Departments and Prosecutors’ offices of Dearborn and Ripley County to let them know about Dr. Edward J. Connor providing psychological services to the County Courts while not being licensed to practice psychology by the State of Indiana. Sheriff Grills spoke with me for twenty minutes about my concerns with Dr. Connor and the family court system.

I don’t know what Sheriff Grills will do or can do but at least he demonstrated his professionalism in contacting a concerned citizen about an issue, unlike the other officials who received the information. Thanks Sheriff Grills.