No Free Speech and No Fair Trial in Dearborn County, Indiana

Five days after the state of Indiana dismissed my complaint against Dearborn County Prosecutor Aaron Negangard, Aaron Negangard sent me a notice that he was seeking indictments against me for Harassment and Intimidation. The Judge that is supposed to preside over the case is Dearborn Superior Court II Judge Sally Blankenship. My case will involve subpoenaing IP addresses, emails, browser histories, etc., and anything else related to protecting my First Amendment Rights from being infringed upon by the Dearborn County "Justice" System. Now it looks like I may face an obstacle in obtaining necessary evidence. Honorable Sally Blankenship publicly endorses the services that Midwest Data provides to the Dearborn County Court System and the Dearborn County Prosecutor's Office.

The Honorable Judge Blankenship wrote, "The Prosecutor's Office along with the Court systems have been pleased with the service we have been receiving from Midwest Data." How can I expect to have a fair hearing when the prosecutor's office and the court system actively endorse the company that I would be subject to subpoenas? If Midwest Data were to file a motion to quash a subpoena of mine, I would be going up against a company whose website has a testimonial from the judge presiding over the hearing. I'll be going against a prosecutor whose office endorses the services from Midwest Data. This doesn't even account for the fact that the Dearborn County Courts and the Dearborn County Prosecutor's Office have previous discussed their satisfaction with the services of Midwest Data. (click the above image for large view) Now, the entities that employ and endorse Midwest Data are going to be responsible for deciding what information I may subpoena from Midwest Data.

This is just another advantage that Dearborn County uses to restrict free speech and the people's right to a fair trial. If you believe in free speech, feel free to contact Dearborn County Officials to voice your concerns. You can also post comments/concerns on Dearborn Prosecutor Aaron Negangard's Facebook Page.

I am in no way suggesting that the good people of Midwest Data have engaged in any sort of unprofessional conduct. They come highly recommended by members of the community. Midwest Data offers a multitude of technical services/sales and is very gracious in giving back to the community. I am not challenging the validity of Judge Blankenship's endorsement of Midwest Data; I just question why Judge Blankenship did not inform Midwest Data that Canon 2(B) of the Indiana Rules of Judicial Conduct prohibits judges from "lend[ing] the prestige of judicial office to advance the private interest of the judge or others."

Dearborn County Prosecutor Aaron Negangard is trying to indict me

Today I received a summons from Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard. (click link for copy of Negangard's correspondence.) Negangard stated the following in his accompanying letter dated February 15, 2011:

"Dearborn County Grand Jury is presently investigating allegations of Intimidation and Harassment that allegedly occurred in 2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010 in Dearborn County, Indiana.”

I guess Negangard felt some pressure to seek an indictment from a grand jury to rationalize the use of Dearborn County resources in using the Dearborn County Special Crimes Unit to investigate my writings. Of course Negangard really seems to be stretching the information because Negangard is alleging my alleged “Intimidation and Harassment” in Dearborn County dates all the way back to 2007. Prior to 2009, my case was before Ripley Circuit Court Judge Carl H. Taul so there are obviously some jurisdictional issues in Negangard’s claims. I’ve never lived in Dearborn County and I never initiated any internet transmissions from Dearborn County. The better question is, if my "string" of alleged harassment dated all the way back to 2007, what prompted people to wait over four years to raise the issue? Dearborn County will probably have to allege some kind of conspiracy to keep the statute of limitations alive.

Negangard put himself in a tough situation when he thought he could intimidate me long ago by sending Detective Mike Kreinhop to Cincinnati, alleging that there was an investigation of my “writings.” Detective Kreinhop, who is now the Sheriff of Dearborn County, told me that I should not fight the system on my own and advised me to hire an attorney. This is the real issue. I’m not being prosecuted for allegedly harassing and intimidating Dearborn County public officials; Dearborn County is trying to prosecute me because I publicized how Dearborn County has continuously tried to intimidate and harass me. Just check out my Dearborn County Police Harassment video on YouTube.com. Dearborn Circuit Judge James D. Humphrey’s office tried to have two Dearborn County Officers scare me away from requesting public records. The officers were unaware that I recorded the video. If I wouldn’t have documented the incident, it would have just been another case of their “word” against mine. Now the video has over 6,100 views. Rather than address the problems that I have raised in many blog posts and other written web material, Prosecutor Negangard is trying to hang the messenger. Humphrey terminated my parenting time with my three and five year old daughters because I criticized Dr. Edward J. Connor. Humphrey stated that I could not have unsupervised visitation with my daughters until I removed the internet writings. Negangard sent Mike Kreinhop to Cincinnati, Ohio to intimidate me. After I filed a complaint with the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission against Negangard, on July 12, 2010, Negangard sent me an email stating that he was going to "make every effort to prosecute [me]." On February 10, 2011, my complaint against Negangard was dismissed. Negangard did not waste any time in seeking an indictment because it was only a couple business days after the dismissal of my complaint against Negangard that Negangard continued his quest to prosecute me for my writings.

The biggest loser in the situation is the Dearborn County Taxpayers as Negangard is willing to subpoena judges, lawyers, and psychologists to testify in Negangard’s quest to silence my First Amendment Speech. The costs of deposing and/or subpoenaing a professional can be as much as $10,000 or more. Dearborn County taxpayers should ask Aaron Negangard why he is willing to spend tens of thousands of tax payer dollars to silence Dan Brewington. My guess is that Negangard is trying to throw up a smokescreen so people do not notice that Dearborn County paid Aaron Negangard’s legal fees in defending another complaint against Negangard that was filed with the state. Now Dearborn County Commissioner Shane McHenry is asking if the County can reclaim the $25,000 appropriated to Aaron Negangard’s “defense fund” because Negangard is not a county employee, but a state employee. Negangard wants to punish me because I publicized how the Dearborn County Judicial System retained the services of an unlicensed psychologist in both civil and criminal proceedings. It seems hard to believe that the Dearborn County Court System did not know that Dr. Edward J. Connor was not licensed by the state of Indiana when they were appointing Connor as an expert to the Court. Now Negangard is punishing me because I told people how the Dearborn County Court System relied on the opinion of an unlicensed mental health professional. But that’s what people like Aaron Negangard do; rather than address their own conduct, they go after the people who question the conduct. It is government accountability at its worst.

Stay tuned as I plan to keep everyone posted during any legal proceedings because people have a right to know about corruption in government. Feel free to contact state and county officials to tell them how you support the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. Too many people have fought, protested, and died to protect our rights to freedom of speech. I’m not going to allow Dearborn County Prosecutor Aaron Negangard to take that right from me.

Judge Ted Todd said I had to go to a psychologist 120 miles away.

No kidding. Jefferson Circuit Court Judge Ted Todd denied my motion to appoint a Cincinnati Area psychologist and appointed his own; Dr. Richard Lawlor. Dr. Lawlor's office in Nashville, Indiana is nearly two and a half hours away from my house so it would almost be a five hour round trip to and from Dr. Lawlor's office. Dr. Lawlor said that the psychological testing alone would take roughly four hours, so I would be looking at some nine hour days just to be evaluated. I filed the below motion for relief so hopefully I can see someone closer to home and obtain supervised visitation while I wait for the court to make up its mind. The motion also deals with the fact that the Court may be able to forbid me from getting treatment for ADHD from The Affinity Center in Montgomery, Ohio, where I have been a patient for over nine years. I'm still trying to find out who decided that adults with ADHD are automatically considered to be dangerous to their own children. Click here to see Dan's motion for relief from judgment.

Indiana just didn't go after my daughters; the courts took my mother's farmland as well

Can someone lose their rights to their own property in a legal hearing that they are not a party to? It can happen in the Indiana Court System. Many people have been following my efforts to be reunited with my children after Judge James D. Humphrey abruptly terminated my parenting time because I criticized the Courts and Dr. Edward J. Connor on the internet; but here is a subject that I haven't spent much time talking about. Humphrey didn't just punish me and my daughters; Humphrey punished my mother by taking away farm property that she and my late father worked so hard to acquire. If you or anyone you know has a trust and/or substantial assets and have married children, you need to read the legal pleadings at the end of this post to see how you can lose your property.

In 1974, my mom and dad began buying farmland where my dad was born and raised just outside of Milan, Indiana. Over the years they purchased 241 acres of farmland and two houses. They didn't inherit the property; they purchased the property with their hard earned money. When my father was dying of cancer, they put the property in a trust so all the assets could be used to take care of my mother and then be passed on to their sons when she died. The only problem is Judge Humphrey and the state of Indiana has prevented the trust from being able to care for my mother.

This is no joke. Judge Humphrey included the trust as a marital asset in my divorce. My mom wasn't a party in the legal action so she couldn't even defend her interest. Humphrey also failed to give the Trust/Trustee the opportunity to defend their interests as well. Humphrey proceeded to tear into the trust and assign a portion of the trust to the marital assets in my divorce. Then the Indiana Appellate Court went out of their way to enforce the order. Now there is a judgment lien on the property that was set aside to care for my mother. Now the property cannot be sold, transferred, or mortgaged; even to maintain the trust itself. As it stands, Indiana is forcing my mother's property into foreclosure and/or bankruptcy because the Indiana courts hate her son.

To get an idea of the lengths that some Indiana Judges will go to punish people who oppose them; check out the motions my mom and brother were forced to file because Humphrey took their rights without giving them the ability to defend themselves. Click here to see my mother's motion to vacate order. Click here to see my brother's motion to vacate order. If you live in Indiana and you have a trust and also have married children, you need to bolt to your lawyer because you can lose your rights to your own property. If you did not believe that Humphrey was an evil and vindictive man for what he did to my children, just click the above links to see how Dearborn Circuit Court Judge James D. Humphrey and Appellate Justices Margret Robb, John Baker and the rest of the Indiana Court of Appeals made every effort possible to bring financial harm to my entire family because I publicized the criminal behavior of the Court and the Court's expert, Dr. Edward J. Connor. The judges chose to ignore the fact that a person's rights cannot be infringed upon by a legal proceeding, the person is not a party. Laws and rules do not matter to people like Judge James D. Humphrey and Chief Justice Margaret Robb; as they will abuse the rules just as they will abuse children. Unfortunately for the unethical judges like Humphrey and Robb, my family doesn't hide from or cower to corruption.

Happy 5th Birthday Audrey

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

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

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

Cincinnati Catholic School Pride Week

Many of my friends on Facebook are encouraging people to cast a vote for St. Nicholas Academy in the Cincinnati Catholic School Spirit contest. I thought telling people where your children went to school was dangerous. At least that's what my ex-wife would claim. She testified that posting pictures of my daughters on my Facebook page could jeopardize their safety. Now the Cincinnati Catholic Archdiocese is encouraging people to say, "Hey vote for my kid's school; St. ***."

My oldest daughter is a 1st grader at a Cincinnati Catholic School but I wouldn't think of broadcasting it on Facebook. It's not that I think that it is irresponsible to publicly support your children's school; I just can't do it because my ex-wife would go to court and claim that I put my daughter at risk of being abducted because I asked people to vote for my daughter's school. It may sound crazy but it's true.

On April 16, 2009, my ex-wife filed a motion for a temporary restraining order against me requesting the court to "order that [I] immediately cease and desist in publishing information from the parties' dissolution proceedings on the internet or in any other public forum... and to order [me] to remove all postings that [I have] already made." The reason she didn't want me to write about my situation is that she didn't want people to know that she was using a crooked psychologist to assist her in removing me from my daughters' lives. Theses are some of the statements that she made in her argument that my internet writings were detrimental to my daughters' well being. "On said website, Daniel Brewington divulges the following information to the public:"

• "A picture of our (2) minor children taken from the back in the 'Home' section."
• "Dan's name, the town where he resides, and the fact that I filed for the divorce in the "My Story" section."
• A quote from our custody evaluation in the 'Edward J. Connor Psy. D. Child Custody Evaluator, Connor and Associates PLLC' section stating that 'Mr. Brewington can certainly provide child care for the children, but we believe that maximizing the time that he has with the children, will in fact, sustain their existing bond.'"

The only way that my internet content could be considered damaging to anyone is if

"some people" were concerned that the public would find out that someone knowingly used a crooked psychologist to deny two little girls of a good father. My ex-wife claimed that I put my children in danger because I posted of my children of them driving away in their John Deere Gator and I posted that I lived Milan, Indiana. She felt it would be detrimental to the children if they found out that it was their mother who wanted a divorce She claimed that I leaked information from the custody evaluation that was detrimental to the children when I wrote about how Dr. Connor stated that minimizing the time between my one and three year old girls and me would be in the girls' best interest. She didn't believe the statement was harmful to the girls, she just used it as an excuse to repeat the statement 4 times during her motion in an attempt to influence the judge with the hope that she could drive me out of my daughters' lives. Of course the information wasn't dangerous to the children because Judge Humphrey denied her motion, but unfortunately my ex-wife and Dr. Edward J. Connor were still successful in making two little girls fatherless.

Do I believe that it is dangerous to tell people where your child goes to school? No. If I was allowed to see my daughters, we would be developing websites to advertise our school spirit. I think it's great that a bunch of parents are scampering around to help their children win a school spirit competition. I would do the same if it wasn't for the fact that my ex-wife would probably use it as an argument as to why I am dangerous to my children.

Unfortunately I cannot vote for my daughter this year because I don't want to give my ex-wife the opportunity to twist the information around in an effort to hurt me. With that being said, I can't vote for the schools of my friends' children because I can't vote against my daughter; but since I can't endorse my daughter's school, please cast a vote for St. Nicholas Academy and support my friends and their children as they work together to show their school pride.

The Dangerous Dancing Dr. Edward J. Connor

Well here he is; Dr. Edward J. Connor, Psy D. People who read or hear about my story are always asking, “What does this guy look like?” I think people expect to see more of an evil looking person. This is what helps make Dr. Edward J. Connor one of the most dangerous psychologists in the OH/IN/KY area. By just looking at him, you may not think that he would actively work to hurt children and parents; but he does. But the dance floor isn’t the only place that Dr. Connor likes to show off his moves; he also does a lot of dancing in the courtroom. Here’s an example of how Dr. Connor dances around in his courtroom testimony:

Dan: Were the children around when you interviewed the maternal grandparents?

Connor: I believe they were out in the yard. I remember one occasion where, I believe, [daughter] came into the kitchen where we were sitting in the house on one occasion, but then went back out there. It was warm outside.

Dan: But did you interview them at the home visit?

Connor: Please?

Dan: Did you interview them at the home visit or at the office?

Connor: No. not at the home visit.

Dan: So, you conducted -- you interviewed the maternal grandparents in your office?

Connor: Yes.

Within just a few statements, Dr. Ed Connor went from providing a descriptive account of interviewing the maternal grandparents at their home to testifying to NOT interviewing the maternal grandparents at their home. Dr. Connor did the same thing with his Office Policy Statement for individual psychological services that he had my ex-wife sign. I wasn’t aware of the contract until a year after it was signed. When I asked Dr. Connor about the contract, he wrote me a letter dated September 9, 2008 stating:

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

The following day, Dr. Connor wrote a letter to the court attacking me for not understanding his policies pertaining to confidentiality and included a copy of the letter that explained how the Office Policy Statement was “an adjunct document to the Court order.” Somehow Dr. Connor’s policies changed between his September 9, 2008 letter and his May 27, 2009 testimony because Dr. Connor gave the following testimony:

Dan: [Is the Office Policy Statement] an adjunct document to a court order?

Connor: No

Dan: [September 9^th] letter says, ‘it appears you were not provided with this document when you initially came into our office, which was an oversight of the part of the office staff.’

Connor: That they provided it to the mother, yes.

Dan: Well, it says up here, ‘you were not provided with it when you initially…’ then you wrote, ‘never the less, the office policy statement is simply an adjunct document to the court order in which you and Ms. Brewington agreed to participate fully in a custody evaluation to be conducted at this office.’

Connor: There was an agreed order signed for a custody evaluation --

Dan: Yes, but is that office policy statement an adjunct document to the court order?

Connor: I’m not sure what you mean by this.

Dan: Well, I’m not sure, either. You wrote it.

Connor: (exact testimony) It’s an adjunct -- it’s not an adjunct to a court order. It’s -- it’s adjacent to what we do when people come in. They fill out the forms for the evaluation to participate in it.

This is why I lost the ability to see my children. In the final decree of my divorce, Judge James D. Humphrey wrote, “The Court is most concerned about Husband’s irrational behavior and attacks on Dr. Connor.” Two little girls lost their father because Judge Humphrey was angry that their dad made Dr. Connor dance around in Judge Humphrey’s courtroom. Judge James D. Humphrey punished my children in order to protect his expert.

So I guess this is the perfect photo that captures everything that Dr. Connor represents. Dr. Connor is free to dance from court to court, knowing that no judge will hold him accountable for his actions. He can continue to abuse children and their families, and he can do it with a smile; because that’s what he enjoys and Dr. Connor is immune from negative consequences. He can continue to ask inappropriate sexual questions during custody evaluations pertaining to the shaving of pubic hair (as reported by Eric Deters on 700 WLW). He can continue to hurt people by spying on their private lives, outside of his official duties. Why, because he is Dr. Edward J. Connor of Connor and Associates, in Erlanger, Kentucky.

So if you happen to see this man out in public; keep your distance. The best thing a person can do is forward this photo to as many people as possible to make sure that everyone stays clear of the very dangerous, Dr. Edward J. Connor. For more information on Dr. Connor's unethical and illegal activities, go to www.danhelpskids.com