Friday, November 5, 2010

My daughter's preschool threatened to expel her because I requested records per the Federal Educational Rights to Privacy Act

Threatening (adj) - 1) Tending or intended to menace 2) Causing alarm, as by being imminent; ominous; sinister. That’s the definition provided by Dictionary.com. That’s also the word that my youngest daughter’s preschool used in describing my behavior in my request for my daughter's records.

I recently found out that “someone” was trying to hold me in contempt of court and one of the issues was that I contacted my daughters’ schools. The Parent/Student handbook of my oldest daughter’s school states, “The school abides by the provisions of the Buckley Amendment with respect to the rights on non-primary caregiving parents. In the absence of a court order to the contrary, St. XX School will provide the non-primary caregiving parent with access to the academic records and to other school-related information regarding the child. If there is a court order specifying that there is to be no information given, it is the responsibility of the primary caregiver to provide the school with an official copy of that court order.” The Buckley Amendment is the Federal Educational Rights to Privacy Act (FERPA) which states that parents are entitled to their children’s school records unless there is a court order stating otherwise. St. XX School has been providing me with the school records of my oldest daughter. My other daughter’s preschool, XX child care and kindergarten, has failed to respond to my correspondence.

Apparently my daughter’s preschool has threatened to expel my daughter because they do not want “to be involved in domestic disputes and put [their] staff in situations that [they] feel uncomfortable.” The school director went on to state in the letter my ex-wife submitted to Court, “We understand the need for a parent to be involved in the life of their children; however, going about it in a threatening manner seems counterproductive. We are asking for a swift resolution to this situation in order to maintain your children’s enrollment in this center.”

Nothing says “no child left behind” more than “we will expel your children if their parents do not get along.” Over the course of a year, I have sent the school approximately three letters requesting my daughter’s records and an appointment to meet with my daughter’s teacher. After my daughter’s first day of school this year, her mother sent me a pamphlet from my daughter’s teacher that stated, “Education is a partnership between home and school. I value parent involvement at every level and encourage you to partner with me. In order for this partnership to be effective, we need to be able to communicate.” “Please feel free to call the school or write a note if you have concerns or questions about your child. I am available at 12:30 p.m. each day for a phone call or conference.”

I wrote three letters and the school never responded. I phoned the school last year but the director never returned my call. My oldest daughter’s school provided me with copies of her records which included a photo of me and a note from my ex-wife informing the school to please call the police if I appeared at the school for any reason. Since there were no orders preventing me from going to the school and obtaining my daughter’s records, the school could have been liable for damages if I was falsely imprisoned on behalf of my ex-wife’s “orders”. On September 28, 2010, I wrote a letter to my youngest daughter’s school stating, “Please note that there are no protective orders that prevent me from visiting my daughters’ school and any legal action taken against me based on the erroneous claims of the children’s mother, will be grounds for civil action.”

My statement was not menacing. Stating that I would take civil action against the school if the school did something illegal should not cause alarm; unless of course the school did something improper. Either way, there was nothing harassing about it. If the school would have complied with the Federal Educational Rights to Privacy Act and released my daughter’s information as required, there wouldn’t have been any problems. Now the school that didn’t want to get involved has to get involved, because people will have to testify as to what part of my “behavior” was threatening. If the school did find me to be threatening, why didn’t the school file for a protective order to protect the welfare of the children at the school? If the school exaggerated or fabricated their claims and their slanderous statement causes damages, they may be facing legal action.

Now my daughter’s future at that particular preschool hangs in the balance. The school claims that if I tell them that I will seek civil action if they do something illegal; they will expel my daughter. Their refusal to provide me with my daughter’s records is a violation of the Federal Educational Rights to Privacy Act. I guess in a way, it’s a form of extortion. “If you say that you are going to sue us for doing something illegal, then we will kick your daughter out of school and we will tell the Court that you are threatening us.” The people who believe that I may pose an emotional risk to my daughters are the same people who will kick my daughter out of school because I told the school that I will hold them legally accountable for illegal actions. Dr. Connor once claimed that I was the one who couldn’t communicate. Maybe no one else could understand me because I was being too rational. Who knows? I do know that I love my little girls more than anything and I will never stop fighting to protect their ability to grow up with both parents.

Monday, November 1, 2010

It looks like the Indiana Supreme Court is cheating again

On October 8th, my lawyer filed a petition to transfer my case to the Indiana Supreme Court. Like clockwork, an IP address from the Supreme Court appears on my website. The same thing happened when my case was in the appellate court. I thought this was the land of the free and home of the brave or something. I thought we had the greatest court system in the world. This is what they want you to think. The Indiana Courts want you to think that justice is blind while they are Googleing ex parte evidence during legal hearings. Word to the wise, stay away from Indiana Courts

Sunday, October 31, 2010

Why I will not be voting anymore.

Dear political candidates,

I am a 36 year old male with a college degree with no criminal or violent history and I am writing you and other elected officials to inform you that I probably will not be voting anymore. I have always been a socially conscience person and have participated in politics nearly all of my life. A year before I was born, my parents purchased their home and “inherited” the polling that took place in their basement from the previous owner. I used to get excited about sneaking into the basement on election days because a neighbor working the polls would show me how to vote. In 1981, elections moved out of our basement when my mother decided to run for city council. Even at an early age, I was involved in campaign fundraisers and door to door “lit drops”. I can remember being excited to vote for the first time in a presidential election in 1992. I’ve worked the polls for school levies. Unfortunately I have lost interest in voting. I have found that it doesn’t matter whom I vote for or which party I vote for because no one is interested in protecting my right to be a father. No one is interested in protecting my rights to defend my ability to be a father. I was blamed for dragging out my divorce because I questioned the ex parte communication between the judge and the custody evaluator even after the judge recused himself for violating the Indiana Code of Judicial Conduct relating to ex parte communication. I was punished because I pointed out that the court and its unlicensed psychological expert were breaking the rules. I’ve tried to reach out to both Democrat and Republican elected officials but they say there is nothing that they can do. If elected officials cannot protect my children from judicial abuse, then what’s the point of voting? Education, health care, and the economy are irrelevant issues when compared to the fact that I am not able to see my children.

On August 18, 2009, Dearborn County (IN) Circuit Judge James D. Humphrey (R) terminated all of my visitation time with my three and five year old daughters. Prior to the termination of my parenting time, I had always played an equal role in raising my children. No one accused me of ever neglecting or abusing my children or their mother. There were no reports from the police or social services. I had a spotless parenting record. The custody evaluator, Dr. Edward J. Connor, recommended that the children’s mother have full custody but I should be able to continue to care for my daughters three days a week. It was only after I requested a copy of Dr. Connor’s case file that I became a “potential” hazard to my children’s emotion well being.

If a parent doesn’t have a constitutional right to be a part of their children’s lives, they should have a constitutional right to be able to properly defend their ability to be part of their children’s lives. On August 29, 2007, Dr. Edward J. Connor released his child custody evaluation report. On February 21, 2008, Dr. Connor contacted Ripley County (IN) Circuit Judge Carl H. Taul (D) to inform Judge Taul that Dr. Connor wanted to offer additional evaluation sessions because Dr. Connor claimed that his report contained “numerous errors and oversights”.[1] Dr. Connor also stated that the parties were responsible for paying for the additional sessions to correct Dr. Connor’s “numerous errors and oversights”. When I requested a copy of Dr. Connor’s case file from his evaluation report, per Dr. Connor’s contract and Indiana law, Dr. Connor sent a letter stating that he could not release the file. When I reminded Dr. Connor that his contract stated that I was entitled to the file, Dr. Connor stated that he would be “happy” to release the file to me once he confirmed that I was representing myself. After more ex parte communication with Judge Taul, Dr. Connor stated that he “interpreted” Judge Taul’s ruling to be that I was only entitled to the evaluation report and not the case file. In a letter to Judge Taul, dated April 16, 2008, Dr. Connor stated that his contract did state that the parties were entitled to the case file but he was not going to release the file to me because I did not have a lawyer. When I brought the matter to the Court, Judge Taul stated that the “Order to the Doctor to release was to release that which he was obligated to do under Kentucky law.”[2] Judge Taul stated that he was not going to undertake ordering Dr. Connor to release Dr. Connor’s case file because Judge Taul stated he was not familiar with Kentucky law. On August 4, 2008, Dr. Connor stated in a letter that state and HIPAA laws prevented him from releasing the case file. During a hearing on November 24, 2008, Judge Taul claimed that he ruled that I was not entitled to Dr. Connor’s case file.[3] On December 5, 2008, Judge Taul recused himself from the case.

Judge James D. Humphrey took over as Special Judge after the recusal of Judge Taul. Judge Humphrey denied my ability to review Dr. Connor’s case file. Over two and a half months after the final hearings of my divorce, without warning, Judge Humphrey terminated all of my parenting time with my children based on the testimony of Dr. Edward J Connor. Prior to Judge Humphrey’s order, no one had suggested that my parenting be terminated. Judge Humphrey wrote, “According to Dr. Connor’s testimony, Husband’s writings[4] are similar to those of individuals who have committed horrendous crimes against their families.” None of these alleged writings were submitted as evidence and Judge Humphrey also wrote, “The Court is most concerned about Husband’s irrational behavior and attacks on Dr. Connor.” When Dr. Connor began providing false information as to why he would not release the case file, I developed a website to share the information. There were no reports or testimony that I had ever placed my children in any emotion or physical danger yet Judge Humphrey terminated my parenting time because I publicized the actions of the Court’s expert.

Since the termination of my parenting time, I have run into several obstacles in trying to see my children. Judge Humphrey stated that I had to undergo another mental health evaluation, Dr. Connor’s evaluation report made no mention of me being a dangerous parent, by a mental health professional that first had to be approved by the Court. Judge Humphrey claimed he did not have the jurisdiction over the matter while the case was with the Indiana Court of Appeals. Judge Humphrey decided that he did have jurisdiction after I retained a lawyer. On March 17, 2010, Judge Humphrey set a hearing for June 13, 2010, on the approval of a psychiatrist. Just five days before the June 13, 2010 hearing, Judge Humphrey recused himself. Judge Humphrey informed my lawyer that there was an ongoing investigation that pertained to me.

On October 8, 2009, I was informed by Dearborn County Special Crimes Unit Detective Mike Kreinhop that I was under investigation for my internet writings. On November 2, 2009, Detective Kreinhop, who is currently the Republican candidate for Dearborn County Sheriff, drove to my mother’s house to speak to me. Detective Kreinhop tried to convince me that it was probably better that I did not pursue Dr. Connor because it would be better if I hired a lawyer to challenge Dr. Connor’s unethical and/or illegal practices. Detective Kreinhop refused to tell me any details of the investigation unless I would agree to meet in Dearborn County for questioning. I told Detective Kreinhop that my writings spoke for themselves and people could arrest me or sue me if I did something wrong, but I made sure that Detective Kreinhop was aware that any legal action against me would not go on without a jury of my peers. I did not hear anything about the investigation until Judge Humphrey recused himself. When I sent a request to Dearborn County Prosecutor Aaron Negangard (R)[5] for the records concerning the investigation of my internet writings, Prosecutor Negangard wrote, “Pursuant to Indiana Law, Investigatory records are confidential and are not to be disclosed.”[6] When I notified Prosecutor Negangard and other elected officials about Prosecutor’s less than accurate account of the law, Prosecutor Negangard copied me to the following email:

Please be advised that Dan Brewington is currently under investigation by the Dearborn County Sheriff's department. Once he was advised of this by Judge James Humphrey who had to recuse himself from his case only recently he has attacked me or my office. [sic] I take this an effort to get me not to do my job of prosecuting those who violate the law.[sic] I assure you his efforts will not succeed. If he has violated the law then I will make every effort to prosecute him. However I will point out that this matter is still under investigation and until such time he is convicted he is presumed innocent. He is also incorrect regarding his request. He clearly asked for records pertaining to his investigation that are not to be disclosed under Indiana law. If any of you need any further information regarding this matter. Please do hesitate to contact me.[sic]
Aaron

Sent from my Verizon Wireless Blackberry

Not only did Aaron Negangard continue to claim that Indiana law prohibited the release of investigatory records, but he accused me of undermining his ability to prosecute people who violate the law and threatened to “make every effort to prosecute” me if I violate the law. All of this came after I sent documentation to Prosecutor Negangard’s office regarding Dr. Connor’s conduct. Detective Kreinhop had previously informed me that Dr. Connor’s conduct violated interstate mail and wire fraud laws.

The Indiana Court of Appeals upheld the trial court’s ruling that I was not entitled to Dr. Connor’s case file. The Appellate Court wrote, “We first note that I.C. § 31-17-2-12(c) does not require that Dr. Connor’s entire case file be provided to Daniel. All items specified by statute were provided.” Not only did the Indiana Court of Appeals state that “the investigator’s file of underlying data and reports” in I.C. § 31-17-2-12(c) did not include Dr. Connor’s case file, the Court went on to state that I was provided with all of the information from Dr. Connor’s case file that were required by statute while knowing that it would be impossible to determine if the requirements of the statute were met without releasing the file, or having a Judge review the contents of the file under camera. The Court went on to write, “During the pendency of the proceedings, Daniel posted information concerning the dissolution on his website and blog, in response to which [Wife] sought a protective order and a temporary restraining order on more than one occasion.” My wife filed only one protective/restraining order, requesting the Court to force me to take down my internet writings. After an hour long hearing, the Court denied her motion because the information was neither harassing nor harmful to her or the children. The Indiana Court of Appeals fabricated the information about the multiple filings. The Court also ruled “panel per curiam” so the names of the judges would not appear on the ruling.

Why should I vote? I talked to Republican Indiana State Senator Johnny Nugent’s office and they said there was nothing that they could do. I sent information to Democratic Indiana State Reprehensive Bob Bischoff and also met Mr. Bischoff in person but Mr. Bischoff never responded to my correspondence. I wrote to both US Senators from Indiana, Richard Luger (R) and Evan Bayh (D). Senator Lugar was kind enough to respond but stated that there was nothing he could do. Evan Bayh didn’t bother to respond. I even contacted President Barack Obama about my situation. President Obama is always preaching the importance of fathers being involved in their children’s lives. He just doesn’t want to deal with hard part of ensuring that fathers have the opportunity to fairly defend their parenting ability in a courtroom in the United States.

Elected officials do not want to get involved with fixing this problem because it is messy. The more you look at the situation, the messier it gets. Judge Humphrey’s wife was one of four advisors on the Ethics and Professionalism Committee for the Indiana Supreme Court. When I instructed people to send letters of concern to the Ethics and Professionalism Committee advisor located in Dearborn County, I became the subject of a secret investigation. Why should Heidi Humphrey be immune from getting letters of concern that pertain to her husband? The Humphrey family should have considered the possibility of a conflict of interest before the wife of a sitting judge took the role as an advisor on the Ethics and Professionalism Committee for the Indiana Supreme Court. It appears that the Committee realized that there was in fact a conflict of interest. Within a month or two of the time I encouraged people to contact the advisor for the Ethics and Professionalism Committee that was located in Dearborn County, Becky Goshorn, Ann Heimann, JoAnn Heimann, and Heidi Humphrey were replaced by a staff attorney from the Indiana Supreme Court. It appears that they were all wives of judges. The next question is did Indiana Appellate Judge Margret G. Robb preside over my appeal because she was on the Ethics and Professionalism Committee when all of the judges’ wives were removed from the committee. Dearborn County has a few ties to the higher courts in Indiana as Former Dearborn County Superior Court Judge Michael Witte was named executive secretary to the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission this past May and Appellate Court Chief Justice John Baker is a native of Dearborn County.

Given the fact that the Indiana Appellate Court provided false information in their decision on my case, the above connections and events may seem a little suspicious. If you combine that with the fact that an IP address registered to the Indiana Supreme Court[7] is responsible for 187 hits and 33 page views on www.danhelpskids.com and has also visited www.danbrewington.blogspot.com, there definitely seems to be something wrong going on. So who do I go to? Do I appeal to the Supreme Court? It appears that they have already conducted their own investigation of my website. Should I contact law enforcement? The last time I did that, Dearborn County Prosecutor Aaron Negangard threatened to make every effort to prosecute me if I violated the law. I contacted members of the state and US congress and I was either ignored or told that there was nothing that could be done. President Barack Obama, whom preaches about fathers stepping up and playing an important role in their children’s lives, never got back with me.

That pretty much sums up why I won’t be voting anytime soon. That does not mean that I am giving up on my children or my responsibility to help other children and parents, it just means that I am giving up on my hopes that elected officials will take action to protect children and families from judicial impropriety and abuse. I will continue to face the threat of the Indiana Courts using my children as a means of extortion to pressure me into removing my web content. I will continue to face threats of prosecution from Dearborn County Prosecutor Aaron Negangard and his year-long ongoing investigation of my internet writings. I can tell you that I have published nearly 100,000 words on the internet and I have yet to be sued or arrested. Judge Humphrey ruled that the writings were not harmful to the children. If I made any threats, I would have been arrested immediately. It appears that the Indiana Courts are upset because I publicly challenged their authority and the courts continue to punish my children for my actions. The Indiana Courts refuse to allow me to have access to the evidence that was used to terminate my parenting time and the elected officials refuse to take any action. It’s always “that’s the judicial branch; I’m in a different branch of government.” I know; I took government class. Child abuse by the judicial system is still child abuse. Unfortunately elected officials turn their heads when judges abuse little children. I cannot bring myself to vote for people who turn their backs on children.

Please visit www.danbrewington.blogspot.com and www.danhelpskids.com for more information.

Sincerely,

Dan Brewington



[1] Judge Taul was the original judge in my case but later recused himself after engaging in numerous ex parte communications with Dr. Connor.

[2] Quote from the June 13, 2008 hearing on the release of Dr. Connor’s case file. Judge Taul claimed that there was an order from his Indiana court that instructed Dr. Connor to follow Kentucky law. Dr. Connor was not licensed to practice psychology in the state of Indiana. No such order is on the record.

[3] Indiana Code 31-17-2-12 states that the evaluator’s report may not be dismissed as hearsay if the investigator makes available to counsel and to any party not represented by counsel: the investigator’s file of underlying data and reports; complete texts and diagnostic reports made to the investigator; the names and addresses of all persons whom the investigator has consulted.

[4] Dr. Connor alleged in his report that he found my writings to be confusing and difficult to follow and Dr. Connor alleged that he had difficulties in understanding me because Dr. Connor claimed I had “severe” ADHD.

[5] Prosecutor Aaron Negangard also heads the Dearborn County Special Crimes Unit. The Special Crimes Unit was designed to investigate serious crimes such as murder and drug trafficking.

[6] Prosecutor Negangard refers to IC 5-14-3-4(b) which states that investigatory records of law enforcement agencies are excepted from public release at the discretion of the public agency.

[7] The IP address belonging to the Indiana Supreme Court is 207.250.133.30. To verify that the IP address is registered to the Indiana Supreme Court, go to http://cqcounter.com/whois/ and enter 207.250.133.30.

Saturday, October 30, 2010

Happy 7th Birthday. Daddy wishes he could be there

My daughter Mary turns seven today and I still can't see her and her sister. I still have a long hard battle in front of me because no one will let me see the evidence behind the court's findings that I have the potential to cause harm to my children. How does a father prove that he is not a potential danger to his children? I have a flawless parenting record, I've never been accused of abusing or neglecting my daughters, and during the course of a 2 1/2 year divorce, no one tried to modify or restrict my parenting time.

Judge Humphrey took away my children because he said that I may have the potential to harm them. He referred to Dr. Connor's testimony but wouldn't allow me to see Dr. Connor's records. How can I prove that I won't do something bad in the future; especially when there is no evidence that I did anything wrong in the first place? Dr. Connor testified that he thought that I "may" begin to coach my children against their mother. He was allowed to say these kinds of things and I had no way to dispute them. For some reason the fact that I never did these things was not sufficient to prove that I wouldn't do them in the future.

My ex wanted me out of my daughters' lives so she and Dr. Connor entered into different contracts and then used them to obstruct my access to evidence. When I questioned it, they attacked me. They claimed that the contract was the normal contract that was signed at the beginning of custody evaluations. Dr. Connor claimed that I couldn’t understand his policies no matter how many times he explained it to me. At the last minute, they said, "Oops, it was a mistake. Our bad" and then they claimed that I was paranoid because I felt they conspired against me. Dr. Connor said crazy things like my writings were similar to those of individuals who commit horrendous crimes against their families. My ex claimed that I became so verbally abusive that she had to take the children into the bathroom, lock the door, and run water in the tub and sing songs to the girls to block out the yelling. How do you refute lies like that? Bring in an FBI profiler to study my writings? If my ex was that afraid of me, why didn't she call 911? She didn't have any problems having me arrested for calling the girls on the phone, which was in line with the Indiana Parenting Time Guidelines. Better yet, she told her story as if the locked bathroom door protected her and the children from terrible harm. As responsible parents, we always kept a key for the bathroom door handy in case the girls would lock themselves in. If her story was true, why wouldn’t I have unlocked the door? The better question is, if I was verbally abusive to the children or around the children, why was there no mention of my daughters ever being afraid or uncomfortable with me. In fact, Dr. Connor’s report stated that the girls were very comfortable with me and that I had excellent parenting skills. This is what I have to fight against. First they claimed that I didn't take the children to the doctor and then turned around and said that the only reason I took them to the doctor was to try to act like a primary parent. My ex said that the girls were not safe sleeping on the second floor at my house because I didn't properly block the steps. After I moved both of the girls' beds into my 15' x 25' bedroom and double gated the doorway, she expressed "concerns" about the girls' sleeping arrangements, but no one wanted to elaborate on what the "concerns" consisted of because there could be severe legal ramifications for "those kinds" of false accusations. When my ex claimed that I left firearms lying around the house after she filed for divorce, I bought a gun safe and moved my guns from the locked closet to the safe. Then I was accused of only getting the safe to appease her and she even listed the safe as a marital asset. In 2005, my ex called the police because she said I wouldn't let her leave with our daughter. When the police arrived, they made her leave, alone. When this was brought up in court, she and Dr. Connor claimed that the police officer, who is now the Sheriff of Ripley County, didn't ask her for her side of the story. When I received help from my mother during the divorce, they claimed I dumped my children on my mother. When my ex received help from her parents, they claimed it was necessary in order to help her out during the tough divorce. All of my "problems" were attributed to my "severe" ADHD. All of her problems were attributed to my "severe" ADHD. They said I did not take responsibility for my actions. They claimed that I was responsible for her problems. Now I have to overcome all of this without having access to the evidence that "supports" the allegations against me.

Here's my dilemma, for some reason showing up in court and demonstrating that I have never done any of the things that they say that I might do, is not a valid defense. No one ever claimed that I ever brought harm to my children; they just claimed that I "might" do it in the future. How long do I have to continue not harming or harassing people before a judge will determine that I am not going to begin to do the bad things that people are claiming that I “might” do? I don’t need a psychological evaluation; I need a fortune teller because I need someone who will testify that, in the future, I continue to conduct myself in a responsible and law abiding manner. Maybe by the time my daughters turn 18, people will realize that I have never nor will I ever do anything to hurt my children or anyone else. The people who are hurting my children are the people who are preventing my daughters from spending birthdays and holidays with their father. Happy 7th Birthday Mary. I’m still the kind and loving father that I was before the mean people took your daddy away. For more history on my story, go to www.danhelpskids.com.

Friday, October 29, 2010

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.

Wednesday, October 27, 2010

How come the people at the 2010 NAS Jacksonville Air Show didn't have problems communicating with me?


Today I received an email from a Commander stationed at NAS Jacksonville, Florida, thanking me for introducing him to a friend of mine. The Commander also thanked me for sending him some of my photos from the 2010 NAS Jacksonville Air Show this past weekend. I took the photos while I was working with the Continental Air Show Productions sound crew. I had a great time meeting new people and making new connections. It was great to get away from the daily pressures of trying to get back to my daughters, but it also makes returning to reality a little more frustrating.

I lost the ability to see my children because my ex-wife and Dr. Connor claimed that I had communication problems and that my writings were confusing and difficult to follow. The other reason I lost the ability to see my children was because I questioned how Dr. Connor came to his conclusions. How could someone like psychologist Dr. Edward J Connor claim that he could not communicate with me when no one over the weekend seemed to have any troubles? I had a great time talking to Commander Surgeoner and Lieutenant Chan. I talked Skyline Chili and Graeter's Ice Cream with a base supervisor who was from Covington, Kentucky. The air boss for the show is now a Facebook friend of mine and I have a standing invitation to fly in a B-25 airplane. This doesn't even take into account the fact that I hooked up with the Red Devils Parachute Freefall Display Team to shoot some footage that they may use in their yearly video. (Click here to see the video of Sergeant Scobie coming in for a fast landing.) The Red Devils are a division of the British Army, and some of the team members have even met Prince Charles. This doesn't even account for meeting people like the nice lady named Mary who worked in the hotel bar or the electrician named Roger who helped us on the ramp at the show. Mary called me "Dan the Man" and I had a good time joking with Roger while he was giving us a hand. While I wasn't working, I was taking pictures and video and burning them to disk for people while the show was going on.

Now I am back to reality. I have to go to court on November 24th to hear people argue about how I am a potential danger to my children even though those people won't let me see the evidence that they base their opinions on. I have to listen to people argue about how they have to make sure that I will continue to be the parent that I was and continue to not put my children in danger. Read that out loud to hear how outlandish that sentence is. What is even more surprising is the reaction that I get from people when they ask me what I do. "I'm working to bring attention to problems with the family court because I lost the ability to see my children." When they ask why, I simply tell them that custody evaluator Dr. Edward J Connor claimed that he had difficulties communicating with me and when I asked for the evidence behind his conclusions, he started to claim I was dangerous. Then I tell them how Judge Humphrey claimed that he was most concerned about my irrational behavior and attacks on Dr. Connor. To say they are stunned is an understatement. They know what's going on. Everyone who hears my story knows. There are a few people in the world that don't want my children to have a dad because those people hate me. They don't care that my daughters love and miss their dad. If they truly believe that I am dangerous then they are mentally ill. But I keep trucking along and holding a place in my life for my girls when they are able to see their daddy. Someday when the people, who keep lying about me, realize that they are punishing two innocent children, I will be able to see my daughters. Until then, I'll just continue to communicate freely with people.




Tuesday, October 19, 2010

Don't act like a man Jack Conway, act like a father.

I don't live in Kentucky but I feel compelled to weigh in on the US Senate candidate Jack Conway (D). I've seen the Kentucky Attorney General's campaign ad against Rand Paul and it appears to be the typical low-blow, gutter-ball, 2-weeks-before-the-election political commercial. It happens, right? The problem I have with ads like Conway's commercial bashing Dr. Paul is that they scream personal interest. I believe that if you are running for a prestigious office you should act the part, rather than resort to tactics that resemble slanderous remarks on a middle school bathroom stall. It demonstrates that Jack Conway is willing to resort to low blows for his personal gain. Don't give me the line about it being in the best interest of the Democratic party for Jack Conway to win at all costs because some kind of greater good is being served by fighting the Evil Empire from taking over the US Senate. You don't act like a jerk because you think you are better than the other "jerk." Rand Paul told Jack Conway to be a man as if he were Vito Corleone speaking to Johnny Fontane in the Godfather. "Oh Godfather, I don't know what to do... I don't know what to do..." "YOU CAN ACT LIKE A MAN!" (Slap).

I don't think men should be told to act like men; they should be told to act like fathers. Some say that real men are the football players that yell and grunt and bang their heads against lockers. Others claim that "real" men don't cry. Usually someone yells "be a man" if they are trying to bait someone into a fight. What if Rand Paul would have said, "Act like a father"?

Many people have contacted me through this blog and www.DanHelpsKids.com. I can't give legal advice because I'm not a lawyer and I don't know enough about the law. I share my experiences to help others. The best advice that I can give people is to go through life conducting yourself in the same manner that you would if your young child was sitting on your lap. If I were Jack Conway, I would be embarrassed if my child saw the ad attacking Rand Paul. If I was Rand Paul's campaign manager, I would keep Dr. Paul away from Conway and applaud Dr. Paul for not shaking the Attorney General's hand because he took shots at Dr. Paul's Christian faith. From a political standpoint; it's a good strategy. If I was Rand Paul's father, I would have told him that he should have shaken Jack Conway's hand and that he should show up for the next debate. Can anyone tell me how Rand Paul's actions resemble that of a "man"? "He insulted my religion so I am going home and taking my ball with me." It's definitely not the conduct a father should teach to their sons about being "manly".

The worst thing about Jack Conway is that he sits on TV and tries to rationalize how his attack ad was something other than a low-blow. Jack Conway is a lawyer. As the Kentucky Attorney General, he is the highest ranking lawyer in the state. Jack Conway has participated in hundreds of trials, many of which involving juries. Jack Conway resorted to a legal strategy where he tried to implant into the minds of the "jury" that Rand Paul made fun of their religion. Unfortunately for Conway, the "jury" is the general public in this case and the strategy backfired because the “jury” didn't buy it.

So what is the lesson that we can take away from all of this? Should Jack Conway take Rand Paul's advice and start being a "man"? I don't think so. I fail to see how smashing beer cans on foreheads, painting sports logos on chests, and arm wrestling have anything to do with running the United States of America. Maybe Jack Conway and Rand Paul should concentrate on acting like fathers. It's hard to go wrong with someone who conducts themselves in an honest, compassionate, tolerant, and forgiving manner. Dear Jack and Rand, "Dad up" and show us what you are really made of.

For more information on Jack Conway, visit www.DanHelpskids.com.

-Dan Brewington