Dan's Adventures in Taking on the Family Courts

Judge Brian Hill Threatened Sue Brewington with Contempt of Court

2012-01-23T18:46:00.008-05:00

Judge Brian Hill Threatened Sue Brewington with Contempt of Court

A couple of weeks ago, someone suggested to my mom, Sue Brewington, that she make a public records request for the audio from the hearings/proceedings of my criminal trial. On January 12, 2012, Sue personally delivered a written public records request to the Office of the Dearborn County Superior Court II, Judge Sally Blankenship. On Saturday, January 14, 2012, Sue received an order from Judge Brian Hill. The order stated Sue was allowed to obtain the public records. Judge Hill’s order threatened Sue Brewington with criminal contempt if she shared the public records with any other member of the public. (See #4 in the order)

“The release of these audio records is hereby specifically limited to the personal review of said recordings to Sue A. Brewington.” “The recipient Sue A. Brewington is barred from broadcasting or any way publishing these recordings in any manner. Violation of this order may result in contempt proceedings.” The same judge who sentenced me to prison for intimidation is the same judge who is threatening Sue Brewington in an attempt to intimidate her from sharing public records with other members of the public.

Judge Hill’s “ruling” is disturbing because it discriminates against my family. Anyone is entitled to the audio from my criminal trial; Judge Hill just decided to set the precedence that each member of the public had to receive the public records through the Dearborn County Superior Court II and not from another member of the public; especially Sue Brewington. Judge Hill’s “ruling” basically states that every U.S. citizen is entitled to the court audio from the criminal trial of Dan Brewington but Judge Brian Hill has decided to force every U.S. citizen who is interested in reviewing the audio from my trial to pay Dearborn County for the right to listen to the public records and to wait an estimated 30 days for their public records request to be processed. If Judge Hill fails to place the broadcasting/publishing restrictions on future public requests for my trial audio, then it will prove that Judge Hill’s ruling on my mother’s public record request was discriminatory and threatening. If Judge Hill continues to rule that every U.S. citizen who is interested in obtaining the audio from the public record of my trial, then Judge Hill is effectively placing a public tax on acquiring public records in my case.

The record of my case is no different than thousands of other criminal cases. Aside from issuing a gag order or sealing records, trial records are public record. The premise of releasing public records is to promote transparency in efforts to maintain checks and balances on government. The public is entitled to acquire and share documents from my trial. The public is free to do the same with transcripts from the hearings. The public was free to sit in on the hearings and listen to witnesses and the overall court proceedings. Now Judge Brian Hill doesn’t want the public to have the same access to the audio. Judge Hill threatened Sue Brewington with contempt if she shared the audio from my trial; even with people who attended the original proceedings. What does Judge Hill and Dearborn County have to hide? Are the transcripts accurate? Is the court audio incriminating? Is Judge Hill claiming to “protect” the alleged victims in the case? If so, does he protect all victims in criminal trials when it comes to the release of public records or just judges and officers of the Court? Judge Hill sentenced me to prison for blogging “too much” about public officials. He said I was a bad candidate for probation because I would probably blog about the probation department. Judge Hill threatened to jail Sue Brewington if she shared public records from the trial. Judge Hill’s record of protecting public officials while disregarding constitutional rights is distressing, but it appears that Judge Brian Hill is threatening members of my family with criminal contempt in an effort to stifle free speech.

If you feel strongly about free speech, access to public records, please download a copy of Sue's public records request and mail the request to the address on the form. If Judge Hill fails to respond to new requests in the same manner as he did in the first order to Sue Brewington, it will only further demonstrate his discriminatory practices and disdain for the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America.
Thank you for your support.

"Frivolous Lawsuit," Eagle Country News Reports

2012-01-07T18:38:00.002-05:00

“Frivolous Lawsuit” Eagle Country News Report.
The website of Eagle Country Radio 99.3 listed my story as its number five news story of 2011. I have followed the Eagle News stories throughout my incarceration and have found the reporting to be fairly unbiased but not entirely accurate; though the misleading information may not have been a result of bad reporting, just bad sources.
The Eagle Country 99.3 website reported that a federal civil rights lawsuit, filed on my behalf, against Dearborn County and other individuals was dismissed as being frivolous, which is unequivocally false. The lawsuit was dismissed without prejudice upon motion by my lawyer, Robert Kelly. Either Eagle Country made a mistake in their reporting or someone lied to them. Civil Rights lawsuits against government officials cannot be dismissed as being frivolous on the surface. In my suit against the County and some of its agents, people like Judge Humphrey and Prosecutor Negangard do not have the ability to claim that a lawsuit against them is frivolous prior to any hearings or fact finding. It would make it nearly impossible for any civil rights lawsuit against government officials to prevail if the official only needed to resort to a “frivolous” defense claim. The United States Supreme Court has not issued a rubber stamp ruling or opinion on such a defense. Why would the courts and law libraries of the United States be filled with intricate findings in the rulings of civil rights cases if judges were allowed to toss suits based on simple “frivolous” arguments by the defense? However, courts may dismiss suits if the Plaintiff fails to cite a violation of civil law or if a suit is brought against someone who enjoys absolute immunity from civil action; like a judge.
Now before the detractors rush out and start blogging about how I admitted that I can’t sue Judge James D. Humphrey in a civil court, I want to make it clear that I never named Judge James D. Humphrey, in his professional capacity, as a defendant in a civil law suit; only the private citizen, Mr. James D. Humphrey. Judge Humphrey has the ability to victimize children and families in the domestic courts while enjoying absolute immunity from any civil responsibility. Judge Humphrey can hide behind his black robe while violating my Fourteenth Amendment right to be a parent. Unfortunately Mr. James D. Humphrey does not enjoy the same immunities as his judicial counterpart as defending public criticism does not fall under the judicial capacity of Judge James D. Humphrey.
“This was sick revenge dragging my wife and kids into the matter,” Humphrey said during his testimony. “I don’t know of many cases where a subject has more clearly expressed his intent to do harm.” These statements as reported in the Eagle’s October 25, 2011 story is exactly why James Humphrey is named as a defendant in a civil rights case. This is coming from a man with over two decades of service as a judge and prosecutor. Despite the fact that my writings contained no threats of illegal harm or conduct, Humphrey testified that my case surpasses nearly all of the murder, rape, assault, stalking, harassment, and other intimidations cases he has come across over the past twenty plus years when it comes to an expression of intent to do harm. I never involved his, nor anyone else’s children in the matter. James Humphrey involved his children when he contacted their schools because I blogged too much about their father. I spoke generally about Humphrey being a family man and having the opportunity to enjoy spending time with his children and grandchildren. (I overestimated Humphrey’s age when I assumed he had grandchildren.) The first specific mention of his two sons in my case did not come until Prosecutor Negangard sought a restraining order against me and placed the names and ages of Humphrey’s children on the order. I was ordered to stay away from people who I did not know existed. As for the wife of James Humphrey, Heidi Humphrey was listed as a public official by the website for the Indiana Supreme Court. Heidi Humphrey involved herself in judicial activities when she became an advisor to the Judicial Ethics and Professionalism Committee of the Indiana Supreme Court. She claimed she didn’t recall serving on the committee. I wonder how it would fly if someone testified in Judge Humphrey’s court that they could not remember being in a gang? “Sorry for the misunderstanding sir. You’re free to go.” Ignorance seems to be a defense reserved for his wife.
The October 25, 2011 article on the Eagle website justifies my federal lawsuit. The website quotes Dr. Sara Jones-Connor as saying “For over four years we have dealt with his attacks on a daily basis.” Dr. Edward J. Connor condemned my family for supporting my “harmful views.” What is worthy to note is Dr. Jones-Connor lied under oath about how long I had been expressing my views and at no point in the trial did anyone offer any evidence to disprove my views and opinions. The fact that Dr. Connor acknowledged my family supported my public opinions demonstrates how the criminal action was brought to undermine my First Amendment rights. Since the Connor’s and Humphrey’s realized they would lose if they brought a civil libel/defamation suit against me, they utilized the Dearborn County criminal justice system to conspire to deprive me of my civil rights. “Nothing that has been done has stopped Dan Brewington in his attacks on Dr. Connor and Judge Humphrey”, Negangard echoed. “He needs a sentence that demonstrates the severity of his actions.” Translation – Dan Brewington will not cease exercising his First Amendment right to free speech and he should be given a severe prison sentence for continuing to exercise his constitutional rights. To this date, no one has ordered or even asked me to stop writing. Why? It would constitute prior restraint of free speech; a violation of the United States Constitution. No civil or criminal court order demanding me to stop; just a five year prison sentence punishing me for my political and social opinions.
That’s why a federal civil rights lawsuit cannot be dismissed with simple “frivolous” claim. I would hope Eagle Country will address the error and question who made the false statement. As it appears that the Dearborn County Register/Birdcage liner operates out of the Dearborn County Prosecutor’s office, Eagle Country 99.3 seems to be the only credible news source in Dearborn County. Hopefully Eagle Country will have the courage to take county officials to task for constitutional violations. Unfortunately for all media groups and public voices who criticize Dearborn county officials, their speech is only as free as Judge Humphrey and Prosecutor Negangard allow it to be. That’s why Eagle Country and the other county news organizations should take great interest in the re-filing of my civil rights lawsuit because if I fail, they will only be able to report the news as Negangard sees fit.

Don't Drink the Kool-Aid Dearborn County, Regarding the Jail Expansion

2011-12-19T13:17:00.002-05:00

Don’t Drink the Kool-Aid Dearborn County, Regarding the Jail Expansion.

I received word that Dearborn County officials have adjusted the figures for the funding of the new jail. This isn’t an effort to save taxpayer dollars; it is another example of how the Dearborn County government is trying to protect the county citizens from the citizens’ own intellectual deficiencies. County officials have gone on record to say the voters lack the necessary education to approve funding for a new jail so the government is taking the decision out of the voter’s hands. The Dearborn County government has so little faith in the intelligence of its citizens, the voters will be lucky if they are allowed to choose the flavor of Kool-Aid.
If the new financing plan is superior to the original, then why wasn’t it presented in the beginning? The fact is, the only reason there is a new funding option is because county officials did not want to chance the voters having a say in the spending of their tax dollars. The government doesn’t feel the voters have the ability to understand jail overcrowding caused by sentencing and bond amounts that exceed any comparable counties in the state. Officials like Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard, Sheriff Michael Kreinhop, and Commissioner/Deputy/Special Crimes Unit Detective Shane McHenry want a new jail so they have the ability to incarcerate anyone they want.
I spent roughly seven months in the custody of the Dearborn County Law Enforcement Center during the course of Prosecutor Negangard’s efforts to desecrate the Constitution of the Untied States of America. During my stay at the DCLEC, I talked to many inmates and read a lot of their paperwork and discovered that it takes very little to become a longtime resident at the DCLEC. A sure-fire way to get a one-way pass to the DCLEC is to have another person, called a snitch, allege that you have been involved in some form of illegal conduct. There doesn’t have to be a controlled drug buy with an undercover cop; no trading of marked money; or video or audio of illegal conduct. The only evidence necessary for Prosecutor Negangard and his Special Crimes Unit (SCU) to issue an arrest warrant is the word of someone looking to evade punishment for breaking the law. All the criminal has to do is point a finger or say his/her name and another person is locked up with an excessively high bond. The new person is stuck in jail listening to a paid attorney advise them that it’s too risky to take the case to trial in Dearborn County so the inmate has the choice of snitching and/or taking a plea deal to get out. The plea deals demonstrate the outrageous charges and bonds of inmates in Dearborn County.
An elderly man that I got to know pretty well just signed a plea deal involving a drug charge that landed him in jail with, at least, a one million dollar bond. To a layman, a one million dollar bond would suggest that he posed an immediate and substantial risk to society. His plea bargain entailed the following: a fifteen year sentence with fourteen years suspended and he only has to serve six months of the one year that wasn’t suspended. The 72 year old man who Negangard alleged was a danger to society is now, or will soon be, back on the streets because he’s already served a six month sentence. The day before he signed the plea deal he was a million dollar risk to society. Somehow this plea deal “alleviated” all of the danger the man posed to society. He was never dangerous; Dearborn County used available jail space to scare an elderly man into accepting a plea deal, while paying a Lawrenceburg lawyer hundreds or thousands of dollars, over the course of six months to walk across the street to “discuss” a potential deal with Prosecutor Negangard. Regardless of the man’s innocence or guilt, it is a prime example of a main contributor to unnecessary jail overcrowding.
One of the ways the DCLEC reduces the inmate population is by freeing snitches. A person has to realize Dearborn County law enforcement doesn’t use snitches in the same manner as credible law enforcement agencies. Normally the purpose of using a snitch or informant is to catch a bigger fish. In my situation, I was already “caught” but Prosecutor Negangard arranged to have the “panty burglar”, Joseph McCaleb, placed in my cell as my new bunkie about 2 ½ months before my trial. McCaleb, having been able to read any of the stuff in my cell for 2 ½ months, including 1368 pages of discoveries provided by the Prosecutor and the entire grand jury transcript, wrote a letter to Prosecutor Negangard on September 25, 2011 stressing everything that Prosecutor Negangard might mention at my trial to emphasize that I was dangerous. A copy of McCaleb’s letter can be found at http://dearborncounty.blogspot.com/2011/11/joseph-mccaleb-letter-from-brewington.html Prosecutor Negangard did not use any of McCaleb’s letter at trial but waited until the sentencing hearing. By then McCaleb testified that he didn’t think I was capable of carrying out anything that he had written about to Prosecutor Negangard. Still he testified against me at my sentencing hearing alleging that I fantasized about an elaborate plot to kill Judge Humphrey. Joseph McCaleb provided this information to Prosecutor Negangard, prior to my trial but Negangard waited until after I was convicted to raise the issue. In his efforts to increase the sentence of a blogger during my sentencing hearing, Negangard used the letter from the “snitch” he placed in my cell. While sharing a cell with McCaleb, he informed me that he was being accused of stealing clothes from houses where he installed Direct TV systems. The kicker is he was accused of returning to the houses, AFTER he did the installation, to steal the clothes. It was only after his court room testimony I discovered he was stealing women’s undergarments, photographing his “loot” and putting it on his computer. In his efforts to lengthen the jail sentence of a blogger, Negangard used a sick perverted stalker who plotted how to break into homes to steal women’s panties in an effort to satisfy some twisted fetish. Rather than protect families from a serial panty burglar, Negangard obviously was not concerned about McCaleb’s victims he was only concerned about Brewington and trying to protect the images of Judge Humphrey and his wife, Heidi Humphrey. Joseph McCaleb was out of jail just a little more than a month after testifying against me because according to Prosecutor Negangard and Judge Humphrey, McCaleb is much less a threat to the women he victimized than the threat I supposedly pose to the Judge and his family, who I have never had any personal contact with. McCaleb, who broke into womens’ houses, stole their panties, and posted pictures on his computer is out on the streets and Brewington who blogged about his experiences in the family courts is in jail with a 5 year sentence.
Dearborn County residents need to question who the new jail is going to house. The answer is whoever Prosecutor Negangard wants to keep incarcerated. People have to realize they may be arrested and detained because they are loosely associated with someone who breaks the law. What happens if one of the “Valley kids” (Hidden Valley is a prominent area in Dearborn County) is busted for selling drugs and decides to place the blame on one of the “peasant’s” children? Who do you think will take the fall? A kid from Judge Humphrey and Prosecutor Negangard’s neighborhood, or the child with a different address? If the new jail is built, I’d advise anyone to steer clear of Hollywood Casino in Dearborn County because the county would increase arrests, bonds, and penalties for disorderly conduct. There is a certain irony to the fact Hollywood Casino is partially responsible for funding a jail that will likely lead to increased harassment of their clientele.
Look how your money has been spent Dearborn County. You should shudder to think about the tens of thousands of dollars Dearborn County law enforcement has squandered to investigate, incarcerate, and convict me for writing on the internet and low and behold, I’m still writing. When someone is convicted of selling crack, they get arrested if they sell it again. Dearborn County cannot order me to stop blogging because blogging is not a crime but somehow I am writing as a felon convicted of blogging. Sheriff Kreinhop testified he never contacted any other law enforcement agency during his investigation of my case. Despite the fact that Prosecutor Negangard alleged I approached two separate inmates, in two different states about plots to assassinate an active judge, I have yet to be named as a target of another investigation. That’s because Negangard knew the allegations were false. But these are the everyday things that occur in Dearborn County that will keep any jail at full capacity.
It doesn’t matter if Dearborn County residents agree with me or not because either way they should use common sense and voice their opinion. If you agree with me contact government officials about your concerns regarding the unnecessary jail expansion. If you are of the opinion that I am a menace to society, I would encourage you to contact Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard and demand an immediate grand jury investigation into Negangard’s allegations that I made two separate inquiries into the assassinating Judge Humphrey. Please demand the grand jury summons of renowned conman and jail house snitch Keith Jones and Joseph McCaleb the perverted serial panty bandit, so Mr. Jones and Mr. McCaleb have the opportunity to further “protect” public safety. Of course it may be difficult to believe Joseph McCaleb since he recanted his thoughts at the sentencing hearing and any investigation involving Keith Jones will include testimony from officials from the Hamilton County(Ohio) Justice Center, who will testify Keith Jones never came in contact with Dan Brewington at the Hamilton County (Ohio) Justice Center. Of course they will have to find Keith Jones who is serving a 10 year sentence, after having his probation revoked from Franklin County, Ohio. (days after he reported the alleged “drive by shooting attempt”).
The choice is yours, Dearborn County residents. Trust your logic, or trust the people who believe you are too ignorant to know what’s good for you. The general consensus I’ve received from officials outside of Dearborn County is the Dearborn County government makes Boss Hogg look like Mother Theresa. If you do not agree with anything I’ve written, please take this one bit of advice; go with the Blue-Raspberry flavor. It’s cool and refreshing.
Be smart Dearborn County.

Dear Dearborn County, I need the Transcripts

2011-12-17T20:11:00.001-05:00

Dear Dearborn County, I need the Transcripts.

One of the things I find a little amusing about the Dearborn County legal system is their inability to transcribe court records in a reasonable time. The county wants to build a new jail yet the Court can’t maintain the staff necessary to complete court transcripts in a timely manner. ( or the person making $4 a page for typing the transcripts doesn’t want to share). Last time I needed court transcripts from Dearborn County it took over 90 days. Judge James D. Humphrey’s court reporter/transcriber claimed her computer crashed and she had to “rebuild” the files. I know a bit about computers yet I’m not sure what that means. Either Dearborn County has a computer genius typing transcripts or Judge Humphrey’s assistant, was lying about why she didn’t complete her job on time.
I know Judge Humphrey and Prosecutor Negangard find it amusing that they succeeded in abusing the criminal legal process leaving me to sit around in jail but it is only a matter of time before everything is overturned. Stalling the preparation of the transcripts is bush league. And just a note to whoever prepares the transcripts; make sure they are accurate as I will eventually cross check the transcripts with the court audio. It appears that there were a few mistakes in the transcripts from the grand jury hearings and some of Prosecutor Negangard’s inappropriate remarks were omitted. The best part about receiving the transcripts is I get to post them on the internet to show everyone how many times Prosecutor Negangard lied throughout the trial. I’ll post Dr. Edward J. Connor’s quotes when he testified how he refused to provide me a copy of his case file in March 2008 because he was afraid I’d post confidential information on my website. When I post Dr. Connor’s testimony, I’ll also post information documenting my website wasn’t created for another 6 months. Will Prosecutor Negangard do anything about Dr. Connor’s false statements? No, but I will be there to remind people how Judge Humphrey and Prosecutor Negangard punish innocent citizens and children for standing up against corruption in the family court system.

I Am a Diabolical Mastermind!!!

2011-12-17T20:03:00.001-05:00

I Am a Diabolical Mastermind!!!

That is the opinion of Judge James D. Humphrey, Dr. Edward J. Connor my ex-wife and others. It has been nearly five years since my ex-wife filed for divorce on January 8, 2007 and those few people continue to analyze and dissect my every action as an effort to undermine the peace and security of the world. Rather than accepting the fact I want my children to grow up spending equal time with both parents, even after I’ve missed nearly 2 ½ years with my daughters, they’re paranoid hatred of me has branded yours truly as their own Lex Luther. Branding me as an evil and diabolical menace, their only intention is to instill fear and panic into people and continue to insist my children should be protected from their diabolical father. Rather than concede that I am never going to lash out and I have never lashed out in a violent or illegal manner, they take the “sooner or later he’s gonna blow” mentality. So their contention is the longer I go without a violent eruption, the more dangerous I actually am. How can I be more dangerous by not engaging in illegal dangerous activity? A few days ago a good friend of mine summed up my situation with a perfect analogy. He said people like Humphrey, Connor and my ex-wife treat me like a 55 gallon drum of gasoline by a fire. They keep pushing the drum closer to the fire then go running and screaming “HE’S GONNA BLOW!” They run around telling the locals to fear for their lives because of the potential danger. They share all kinds of worst case scenarios of what may happen when the drum explodes. And then time passes and still no explosion. Soon the locals are caught scratching their heads because the danger did not come as predicted. They question the honesty and logic of those preaching the doomsday scenario. So what happens when there is no explosion? The doomsayers push the 55 gallon drum of gasoline closer to the fire with the hope “He’s gonna blow” to fulfill their twisted thinking and logic.
I’m not a 55 gallon drum of gas. I’m more like a 55 gallon drum of water. They’ve pushed and prodded and the worst they have drawn out of me is a little steam. I’m used to it. Unfortunately it has become a way of life for me. They just underestimated the level of “abuse” I was able to tolerate.
When my wife decided she wanted a divorce, she took our 10 month and 3 year old daughters to stay with her at her parents’ house on the days she determined to be “her” days with the girls. However, she would not allow me to exercise parenting time alone with our daughters because she now claimed I was dangerous. This is the same woman who left the children in my care while she worked nights as a nurse or when she went on three day weekend trips with friends. When she filed for divorce, I suddenly became dangerous. This is a period of time that she claimed she felt threatened by me. Despite her claims of alleged fear she would come home after working a late shift, 12:30AM, block my truck with her car, hide her keys and then spend the next 12 to 24 hours “monitoring” my parenting. She began stepping into feeding the girls, giving them bathes and normal child care/ parenting duties during my time with the girls. I could argue or let it go. I let it go. Then in court she claimed she primarily cared for the children. Then came the gun issue. I always stored two old fashioned style muzzle loaders under the couch with my modern guns locked in a closet. Now she suddenly declared my guns were dangerous and I never locked the closet. So I bought a gun safe. Now my oldest daughter who was 3 at the time took an interest in the big metal box in the house so I had to explain guns to her when previously I had never exposed my children to firearms. When she took an interest, I let her keep a plastic “toy” bb gun in the safe to teach her gun safety. When she was five, “Santa” brought her a pink bbgun. I was later vilified in court for giving “firearms training” to my daughter. If my ex-wife wouldn’t have pushed the issue regarding my guns safely stored in a locked closet, then the subject would never have come up with my daughter.
My life has been filled with “damned if I do, damned if I don’t” scenarios. During the course of this entire criminal trial/investigation (where my ex-wife volunteered to participate without being subpoenaed, she testified to living in fear, “double-checking locked doors”, looking over her shoulder, etc… Despite having no contact with my ex-wife for over two years this was the first time she had ever made any statement like this, even during the course of the divorce. Even though, during the course of my criminal proceedings, she testified that she lived in constant fear of me, I was vilified in both my divorce and my criminal trial for not jointly participating in the children’s activities with their mother. On one side my ex was expressing her horror about having to live life in fear of me gunning her down with a 357 magnum handgun, while at the same time she condemned me for not attending our daughter’s dance practice with her. Rather than questioning her absurd logic, my ex-wife receives praise as a “single mom” who is willing to risk her life in order to have the children’s psychotic gun-toting father present at dance practice. Of course when I did “participate” in my daughters lives. Finally, all my efforts to remain in meaningful contact with my children were described as my feeble attempts to demonstrate that I could be a primary parent and not because I loved them.
I may be the only parent who has ever been criticized for seeking medical attention for a 17 month old child experiencing breathing problems. When my youngest daughter was experiencing breathing problems I called the pediatrician’s office and they told me to bring her in. I called my wife to tell her the situation and she demanded that I wait for her in the doctor’s parking lot. I said I wasn’t going to make our 17 month old daughter wait for treatment just so my wife could walk in at the same time. Dr. Connor’s custody evaluation later stated the only reason I rushed my daughter to the doctor was to demonstrate I could be a primary parent. Never mind mentioning, that Daddy’s instincts were correct. My daughter needed breathing treatments for a few weeks. Do you know who gave the first treatments, unassisted? Daddy.
This has been my life for the past five years. I have been forced to defend the absurd time and time again. When I purchased a 357 magnum handgun I had to fend off “suspicions” that I may have let my five year old daughter shoot it. I applied for an Indiana handgun permit so I could transport a hand gun I was planning to purchase. Fear was expressed that I obtained a license to carry a handgun so I could legally carry the firearm to commit a crime. The ultimate absurdity lies in the fact that Humphrey, Connor, my ex-wife, and Prosecutor Negangard equate my level of dangerousness to the fact I own a 357 magnum. The 357 shouldn’t be the only issue as I own at least a half dozen other firearms. I am already less dangerous now that my Indiana handgun license is expired. If obtaining the permit made me more dangerous then not having the permit makes me less dangerous, right? If you see the ridiculousness of the previous statement, you are truly grasping the purpose of this blog post.
Dearborn County Sheriff Michael Kreinhop told a grand jury that he didn’t believe I even wanted to be with my daughters. He felt I was using my children for my First Amendment cause. Everything is just a part of my diabolical plan, isn’t it Mike. What Sheriff Kreinhop failed to tell the grand jury was that I started providing child care for my children during my 2 ½ year divorce long before any custody evaluations or websites.
My ex, Humphrey, and Connor claimed I only wanted Connor’s case file to harm my ex., actually it was after a meeting with attorney Donald Meyer, a Cincinnati attorney, where I got the idea of obtaining the case file. Mr. Meyer said the first thing a lawyer does in contesting a custody evaluation report is obtain a copy of the case file. During the criminal trial, Dr. Connor testified he feared I wanted the case file to post on my website. Dr. Connor lied at the criminal trial. I didn’t have any websites at the time I initially requested the case file. When I publicized Dr. Connor’s lies they charged me with attempting to obstruct justice in a legal proceeding in a different county. When I criticized Judge Humphrey for his rulings, they determined my intent wasn’t to instill public debate on family court issues, it was to instill fear in the Humphrey family. These people all insist that I am just acting like I love my children throughout the course of my five year diabolical plan to… That’s the problem. They can’t even give a halfway logical explanation as to what my alleged diabolical plan wishes to accomplish.
This situation might be comical if my daughters wouldn’t have had to go nearly 2 ½ years without a father. Whoever heard of a diabolical villain on a five-year plan who suffers from ADHD? My ex-wife testified that I couldn’t even keep the house clean. During the divorce, she claimed my ADHD was the reason for our failed marriage. During my criminal trial, 2 ½ year later, she claimed it was my Ritalin prescription, to treat the ADHD that might have been the problem. During the divorce proceedings, Dr. Connor testified he found my writings “confusing and difficult to follow” and also claimed my writings were “similar to those of individuals who have committed horrendous crimes against their families.” At my sentencing hearing 2 ½ years later, Dr. Connor testified that he found me to be intelligent and a very good writer. I guess that is why Dr. Connor is the high paid psychologist and I am not. I just can’t seem to find the logic in his thinking.
“He’s delusional, disgruntled, crazy, diabolical, etc…” These are all words that are used by people who do not want to address facts. I’ve listed Dr. Connor’s conflicting statements a million times, but all he has to do is come up with a plethora of psychological terms labeling me as delusional or disgruntled without any evidence or conduct to support his thinking. It is psychobabble without substance. Judge Humphrey can deny me of any parenting time with my children based on what he deems to be “irrational behavior and attacks on Dr. Connor” without reviewing the validity of my statements. Why let facts get in the way of protecting Dr. Connor? Prosecutor Negangard attacked me for criticizing the Indiana Court of Appeals when even Dr. Connor’s testimony demonstrated that the Court of Appeals was wrong and I was right. But no one wants to listen to facts because I am a diabolical madman.
Anyone who truly believes that I am going to “explode,” after dealing with what I have over the past five years, is clearly delusional. If these people truly felt I was dangerous they wouldn’t have continued to poke and prod at me for the past five years in the hopes I might harm someone. As I said earlier, my ex-wife would block me from leaving my home, create hostile tension, and then claim that she feared for her life, while also complaining that I did not jointly attend dance practices of my daughter’s. It makes about as much sense as Judge Humphrey allowing me to care for my daughters in the 2 ½ months it took him to decide I was an immediate danger to my children. Who is delusional? Who is attempting to protect the children? Prosecutor Negangard initiated a grand jury investigation of me 1 ½ years after I allegedly threatened Judge James D. Humphrey. Prosecutor Negangard argued the need for my $600,000 bond because I may be dangerous. For those keeping count, I’m heading into the sixth year since my ex-wife filed for divorce and I have yet to act out in a violent manner. Paranoia is an unrealistic fear that something or somebody is out to get you. My ex-wife, Dr. Connor, and Judge Humphrey have claimed I’ve been out to get them for up to five years yet nothing’s happened. Who’s paranoid now?
I’m no Lex Luther. As my ex-wife would claim that I lack the ability to focus long enough to tie my shoes, I find it hard to believe I’m capable of a five year diabolical plan. The only plan I have is to continue to fight to be a father. The only plan “they” have is to continue the lie to justify why they stripped two precious little girls of a loving father. My ex-wife continues to lie about fearing me. A person doesn’t barricade herself and her children inside a home with someone who she fears. People like my ex-wife hoped and prayed that I would lash out so they would have some justification as to why my daughters went so long without their father. I just hope my daughters never fully understand the role that mommy played in keeping me out of their lives. For all I’m concerned, all the blame can be placed on the child abusing Judge James D. Humphrey. Great, I did it again. I just gave the fragile Humphrey family more ammunition in their campaign to convince the world that Dan Brewington is a diabolical villain. Just a reminder, if you do not like the content of this blog, stop visiting.

Judge Brian Hill; Another Black Eye for the Indiana Judicial System

2011-12-17T20:01:00.001-05:00

Judge Brian Hill; Another Black Eye for the Indiana Judicial System.

My family and I breathed a small sigh of relief when Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard appointed Rush County Superior Court Judge Brian Hill to preside over my criminal trial. The appointment of Judge Hill seemed to be much better than the previous appointment of Decatur County Circuit Judge John Westhafer, who admitted to being a good friend of Judge Humphrey’s for 25 years. A little internet research demonstrated that Judge Hill was a relatively young family man that still worked the family farm who also took an interest in history. It appeared that I finally had a judge that possessed the constitutional intellectualism necessary to handle my case. It turned out Judge Brian Hill had the constitutional intellectualism of a turnip.
When Judge Hill handed me a five year sentence for my non-violent blogging about public officials, he said I was not a good candidate for probation because I would blog about the probation department as well. Judge Brian Hill denied my ability to serve any of my five year sentence on probation because he felt I would exercise my First Amendment right and blog about another government agency. He didn’t deny probation to protect the alleged victims in the case or to ensure the safety of the general public; Judge Brian Hill denied probation to protect a government agency from any potential, fair or unfair, public criticism. Judge Hill deprived me of many constitutional rights during my trial because he was afraid I would continue to exercise my right to free speech. He denied me a reasonable bond based partly on the likelihood of me continuing to exercise my First Amendment rights. Judge Hill ordered the jurors’ names in my case to remain confidential because he worried I would exercise my right to free speech to comment on the jury. (To put this in perspective, jurors’ names in the Casey Anthony murder trial were kept confidential during the trial to protect the integrity of the criminal proceedings but were released at the conclusion of the trial). The benefit of the jurors’ names remaining anonymous in the nation’s most publicized and controversial murder trial of 2011 did not outweigh the rights of the prosecution or the defense to be able to determine if there was any jury misconduct. All of the jury members on my case realized who the powerful people in their community were and what they were asking the jurors to do. The prosecutor’s office used the case of to defend their request for a confidential jury. In that case the appellate court had ruled that having a confidential jury in a 3 count murder trial was wrong but was considered harmless error and the guilty party’s sentence of 175 years was appropriate. The only way I can find out who was on the jury is by initiating another legal action, from prison, to have the identities of the jurors revealed. During my sentencing hearing, Judge Hill was upset that I continued to write about public officials while I was in jail even though the writings, in Judge Hill’s words, were “not criminal.” So why didn’t Judge Hill issue a gag order preventing me from writing about these things? Because it would be considered prior restraint to free speech and would be in violation of the First Amendment of the United State Constitution. Judge Brian Hill could not order me to stop writing about the same subjects that led to my conviction because the writings are protected by the Constitution of the United States of America. So how in the hell did I get convicted of engaging in constitutionally protected activity?
Judge Brian Hill’s actions have less to do with constitutional intellectualism and more to do with having the integrity and morality of an Illinois Nazi. (and as Jake Blues said in the Blues Brothers,”I hate Illinois Nazis.”) Judge Hill maliciously disregarded my constitutional rights, not to protect the public but to protect the “integrity” of public and government officials. One of the reasons Judge Humphrey gave for terminating my parenting time was I suffered from severe ADHD. During the course of my criminal trial I was accused of being delusional and psychologically disturbed. Rather than question my ability to stand trial, Judge Hill refused to ensure that I was given my proper medication for ADHD so my mind would operate normally at trial. Judge Hill’s only concern was to assist Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard protect the reputation of Judge James D. Humphrey.
Rush County Circuit Judge Brian Hill deprived me of my right to competent counsel as he was aware that my public defender, Rush County public defender Bryan Barrett (appointed by Judge Hill) never met with me nor spoke with me about trial preparation. Barrett never subpoenaed any witnesses or evidence and never took the depositions of any of the alleged victims or state witnesses. Judge Hill knew I did not receive a copy of the 350+ pages of grand jury transcripts until less than two weeks before trial and he was also aware that I never received some of the prosecution’s evidence at all. Before the trial, I tried to explain how I did not know what actions led to my charges. Judge Hill said if I didn’t like it, I could represent myself. During my sentencing hearing I questioned the validity of the indictments as Prosecutor Negangard was never able to produce any evidence during trial that I ever released information from the grand jury proceedings. I questioned how a grand jury could indict me for releasing grand jury information in the absence of ANY supporting evidence. Judge Brian Hill simply told me that I had a remarkable ability to manipulate information to make me appear to be a victim. No Judge Hill, I just have a tendency to challenge government officials who fail to follow the provisions set forth in the Bill of Right s of the U.S. Constitution.
If I am truly guilty of the crimes alleged by Prosecutor Negangard, I now run the risk of being convicted of the same crimes in Rush County if I criticize Judge Hill too much. Dearborn County had jurisdiction to prosecute me for criticizing Judge Humphrey as a special judge for a Ripley County Court so Rush County has the same ability to prosecute me for criticizing Rush County Superior Court Judge Brian Hill while he was serving as a special judge for a Dearborn County court.
Judge Brian Hill doesn’t lack intelligence; he lacks honesty and moral fortitude. He chose the good ol’ boys over the founding fathers. He thought Judge Humphrey’s reputation was more important than the blood of the fallen soldier who made it possible to ink the Constitution of the United States of America. This is exactly why it is crucial to fight to protect First Amendment rights; so we have the ability to speak out against the Nazi-esque approach of officials like Prosecutor Negangard, Judge Humphrey, and Judge Hill, who seek to squash the voices of people that have the nerve to question authority.
Thanks for the support.
You can contact the family at contactdanbrewington@gmail.com

Judge James D. Humphrey's Own Holocaust

2011-12-17T19:56:00.001-05:00

Dan wrote his first blog since leaving Dearborn County on October 27, 2011. That has already been posted. He continued to write as his journey took him to the RDC for over 4 weeks. This is a collection of the blogs that he wrote, during November, 2011, while at the RDC. That is where everyone in the prison system starts out to be classified for their permanent placement.

Judge James. D. Humphrey’s Own Holocaust – Written around 11/4/11
Ironically, one of the first books I read in prison was The First Amendment, The Tumultuous History of Free Speech in America by Nat Hentoff. In reading the book, I discovered that it appears Judge James D. Humphrey believes his family’s emotions, which were allegedly upset due to my verbose blogging about the family court system containing already public information, have a much greater entitlement to protection than the survivors of Adolf Hitler’s Holocaust. As a judge, he was well aware of the First Amendment, is required to uphold it, and most certainly knew about one of the most controversial First Amendment cases in U.S. history, the Village of Skokie v. the National Socialist Party of America.
In 1977, the Chicago-based National Socialist Party of America focused on organizing demonstrations in areas with high Jewish populations. The Nazis set their sights on a village on the outskirts of Chicago named Skokie. The village, whose population of 70,000 people consisted of 45,500 Jews, 7,000 of which were Holocaust survivors, obtained a circuit court injunction prohibiting the Nazi demonstration. The village also passed an ordinance requiring that public assemblies consisting of over 50 people were required to purchase a $350,000 insurance policy to cover any potential public liability and damages. The cost of such a policy would be up to $900 depending on the risk. It was up to the prospective demonstrators to find an underwriter willing to insure the groups and even then the village council had the power to deny a permit for a demonstration if they felt the proposed assembly might create a “breach of the peace.” The village also banned public demonstrations by members of political parties wearing military-style uniforms. In addition, the village banned demonstrations that “incite violence, hatred, abuse, or hostility toward a person or group of persons by reason or reference to religious, racial, ethnic, national, or religious affiliation.” Though not named directly in the ordinance, the ordinance was aimed at prohibiting any future Nazi demonstrations.
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes’ definition of the most basic principle of the Constitution was the protection of all free thought, including thought we hate. In a controversial decision, the ACLU represented the Nazis because they agreed with the opinion of Justice Holmes and found the actions of the Village of Skokie to be unconstitutional. The decision of the ACLU to represent the Nazi organization caused a 15% - 20% drop in the ACLU’s national membership but the decision was one that the ACLU and its executive director, Aryeh Neier, felt was necessary to protect the rights of all citizens.
“As a Jew, and a refugee from Nazi Germany, I have strong personal reasons for finding Nazis repugnant. Freedom of speech protects my right to denounce Nazis with all the vehemence I think proper. Despite my hatred of their doctrine, I realize that it is in my best interest to defend their right to preach it.” Those were the sentiments of ACLU executive director Aryeh Neier. Neier felt passionately about protecting the rights of a Nazi organization that applauded Adolf Hitler’s efforts to exterminate Neier’s own people.
The Illinois Supreme Court tackled the issues pertaining to the Nazis’ right to demonstrate. The Court stated, “It is firmly settled that under our constitution the public expression of ideas may not be prohibited merely because the ideas are themselves offensive to some of their hearers.” As for the argument that the public display of the swastika represents “fighting words” the Court ruled, we do not doubt that the sight of this symbol is abhorrent to the Jewish citizens of Skoki and that the survivors of the Nazi persecutions, tormented by their recollections, may have strong feelings regarding its display. Yet…courts have consistently refused to ban speech on the possibility of unlawful conduct by those opposed to the speaker’s philosophy… It has become patent that a hostile audience is not a basis for restraining otherwise legal First Amendment activity.”
In February 1978, Federal District Judge Bernard M. Decker of Chicago struck down Skokie’s assembly ordinance as unconstitutional. Judge Decker stated the village of Skokie has “no power to prevent [the Nationalist Socialist Party] from stating [its] political philosophy including [its] opinions of black and Jewish people, however obnoxious and reprehensible that philosophy may be.” Judge Decker went on to say, “In resolving this case in favor of the plaintiffs, the court is acutely aware of doctrines of racial and religious hatred.” In terms of the First Amendment, “it is better to allow those who preach racial hate to expend their venom in rhetoric rather than [for us to] be panicked into embarking on the dangerous course of permitting the government to decide what its citizens may say and hear…The ability of American society to tolerate the advocacy even of the hateful doctrines espoused by the plaintiffs without abandoning its commitment to freedom of speech and assembly is perhaps the best protection we have against the establishment of any Nazi-type regime in this country.”
The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals sustained Judge Decker’s findings while taking troubling note of the many survivors of the Holocaust in Skokie, people with memories of family members being thrown into trains on the way to death camps. One Skokie resident had told of seeing his mother hurled on top of a mass of bodies in a hole in the ground and buried alive. The Court of Appeals stated it would be “grossly insensitive to deny, as we do not, that the proposed demonstration would seriously disturb, emotionally and mentally, at least some and probably many of the village’s residents.” But if the First Amendment rights “are to remain vital to all, they must protect not only those society deems acceptable, but also those whose ideas it quite justifiable rejects and despises.” The United States Supreme Court refused to hear the case. A few years later and a couple hundred miles away, a young James D. Humphrey would study First Amendment law at Indiana University in the early eighties where I’m certain he learned about one of the most controversial First Amendment cases in U.S. history.
Judge James D. Humphrey and Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard are well aware that the First Amendment protects a person’s ability, as horrific as it may be, to publicly praise the practices of Adolf Hitler in Hitler’s quest to exterminate all people of the Jewish faith from the face of the earth; however they claimed the First Amendment did not protect my harsh criticisms of Judge Humphrey. Prosecutor Negangard told the jury I used “fighting words.” In Gooding v. Wilson, U.S. Supreme Court Justice William J. Brenan defined “fighting words: as words that “have a direct tendency to cause acts of violence by the person to whom, individually the remark is addressed.” Put simply, Prosecutor Negangard accused me of typing words from my laptop that would “have a direct tendency to cause acts of violence by” Judge James D. Humphrey. But Judge Humphrey wasn’t tormented by memories of death camps, of family members being buried alive; he suffered emotional hardships because I blogged about public officials, which was sufficient to jail me for my speech. Judge Humphrey was worried about his home address being on my website. Unfortunately Judge Humphries home address is a public record because he lacks the legal acumen to place his home in a trust.
Unfortunately this isn’t a joke and my situation is as unbelievable and outrageous as it appears. The First Freedom makes no mention of anyone ever being jailed for non-threatening writings that were not in violation of any specific law or act. Now it’s time for the appellate process and I have very little faith in the high courts of the State of Indiana. To rule against Negangard and Humphrey would also be a condemnation of the duo’s malicious desecration of the law and the United States Constitution. It would be a move that Judge Brian Hill was unwilling to do or lacked the backbone to do as he gave me a five year prison sentence for peacefully voicing my concerns about the family court system from a computer, while Nazis are free to march into Jewish communities and praise Hitler for trying to exterminate an entire ethnic group. If or when the high courts of Indiana rule against me, my case will go through the same court that protected the rights of Nazi demonstrators and it will demonstrate the repressive and ignorant practices of the Indiana Court System. And just a reminder to the taxpayers of Dearborn County, Indiana, as long as the State of Indiana continues to argue that my speech presents a much greater danger than a Nazi rally in a village full of Holocaust survivors it will only add to the tens of thousands of Dearborn County tax dollars that have been wasted on the witch hunt of Dan Brewington’s internet writings.
Finally, love me or hate me, I am far from finished concerning my blogging and my refusal to submit to the authority of elected criminals.
Thanks for the ongoing support and keep checking back for updates.
Feel free to contact the Brewington family at contactdanbrewington@gmail.com

Dan's new address

2011-12-16T09:59:00.003-05:00

Reporting in. Dan is doing fine. When he left Lawrenceburg on October 25, 2011 he was sent to Plainfield, Indiana to a facility known as the RDC. Everyone goes there to find their permanent placement. They are supposed to be there 2 to 4 weeks. Dan was there for over 4 weeks. While he was there he could have no visits and no phone contact. His attorney could visit. His new address is:

Putnamville Correctional Facility
Daniel Brewington DOC # 223028 Dorm 11N
1946 W US Hwy 40
Greencastle, IN 46135

I wasn't able to talk to him until he called Saturday, December 10, 2011. I am now on the visitors list and will be able to see him soon. During this time we have been working feverishly on devising a plan for the next step. Things seem to be falling into place. Thanks to everyone for all of your thoughts and prayers. The appeal process is the next step. If anyone wants to contact us please write contactdanbrewington@gmail.com . If anyone wants to donate to the Dan Brewington Legal Defense Fund we have a paypal account set up on the blog. I am the administrator.

http://danbrewington.blogspot.com/2011/11/dan-brewington-legal-defense-fund_6727.html

Once more. Thanks to everyone for all of their support. We have a plan and will be moving forward.
Sue Brewington

Dan Brewington Legal Defense Fund

2011-11-26T12:50:00.004-05:00

We have decided to hire a first amendment attorney for the appellate process. People have inquired about donating money to help with this, so we have set up the Dan Brewington Legal Defense Fund through PayPal. Any contributions would be greatly appreciated. Sue Brewington (Dan's mom) will be the administrator of the account. For any questions, please email contactdanbrewington@gmail.com. Thank you so much for all of your support, we couldn't do this without you.

Please click here to donate, or use the "donate" button on the right side of the page.

Thanks,

Sue Brewington

Dan Brewington-Criminal Case-Dearborn County, Indiana

2011-11-13T16:40:00.046-05:00

Summary of Events

Timeline Brewington Criminal Case

Additional Links:

Chronological Case Summery (criminal)

Order Setting Bail
Bench Warrant
Application for Reduction of Bail (defective)
Target Notification (Grand Jury)
Motion for Confidentiality of Jurors Names and Identities
Hamilton County OH Inmate Movement Log
Discovery Answers (witness list and Sheriff Kreinhop's report)
Order Appointing 1st Public Defender
Blankenship Recusal
1st Public Defender Motion to Withdraw and Order
Supplemental Discovery Answer 9/30/11
Order Setting Trial
Order Denying Bond Reduction

Motion in Limine (both def and state)
Appellate Decision (divorce)

Divorce Decree

Motion to Dismiss for Ineffective Assistance of Counsel

Motion to Disqualify Prosecutor Negangard

Motion to Dismiss

Links to Press Articles:

99.3 Eagle Country Radio Online News

Search Dan Brewington

Dan’s First Blog from Prison. Written 10/27/11 Posted 11/3/11

2011-11-03T21:50:00.001-04:00

About 8:00AM yesterday at the DCLEC, Sgt. Rod McGownd called into my cell and told me to pack up my things because I was shipping out to prison. Fortunately, the day before I had the ability to tell my family that I could be moved out at any time. When you go to prison in Indiana you first go to the Reception Diagnostic Center (RDC) to be evaluated to determine what prison is appropriate for each individual, based on the offense, security risk, etc…The stay at RDC lasts anywhere from 2-4 weeks. While at RDC, inmates are unable to make or receive phone calls, so snail mail is my only means of communication for the next few weeks. What is the topic of my first blog from Prison: The arrogance and vindictiveness of Dearborn County officials.

My detractors like to claim that I am obsessed and do not know when to quit. I’ll stop blogging about crooked public officials when they stop being crooked. You would think that Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard, Sheriff Mike Kreinhop, and Judge James D. Humphrey would be basking in their glory that they succeeded in sending me to prison. They took away my daughters, indicted me for writing about it, set a $600,000 bond, denied me of my right to competent counsel, and sentenced me to 5 years in prison (I’ll have to do less than two years) because Heidi Humphrey and Dr. Sara Jones-Connor were frightened because I wrote extensively about the incompetence of their husbands. Unfortunately this wasn’t enough for the crooked Dearborn County officials so they took extra measures to attempt to bring me harm in prison. Fortunately RDC officials disregarded Dearborn County’s last ditch effort to hurt me.

I don’t think anyone outside of Dearborn County is buying what they are selling. When I arrived at RDC, I was in the check-in area where new inmates are un-cuffed and prepared for processing. When they said “Dan Brewington,” it threw up a red flag where a few people came to the area with one demanding that I not be un-cuffed. He said he received an email from a Dearborn County official warning RDC officials about me. The Dearborn County C/O who transported me was as shocked as I was. Luckily he told the RDC officials that he had been around me on numerous occasions and never had any problems. He assured them that I wouldn’t cause any problems. When I was changing into my RDC jumpsuit, an inmate worker said “what the hell did you do?” He said they didn’t usually get advanced “warnings” about inmates. I had heard the Dearborn County C/O say something about it stemming from my divorce hearing but the hearing was a few years ago. Later in the day another worker who heard about the email told me the email explained that I had to be restrained during a court hearing. The verbal debate I had with Judge Humphrey during the first 5 minutes of my divorce hearing on 5/27/09 had reached mythical status. Exclaiming, “I demand justice in this courtroom: turned me into Hannibal Lecter 2 ½ years later. Not only did RDC officials not buy the story, Dearborn County officials set the stage for many inquiries as to why they would go to such lengths to try to cause a level of concern or panic. I just explained how Dearborn County is full of arrogant and vindictive public officials. People just shrug their shoulders and say, “You get that in small counties.”

I’m in here for blogging,” that’s what I tell RDC officials. “But isn’t that free speech?” they ask. “I blogged too much.” They’re just as puzzled as I am. They are even more puzzled when I tell them that two different jailhouse snitches have claimed that I was plotting to kill a judge yet no criminal action had been taken against me. Jail records demonstrate that I never came in contact with the first snitch. The second one was my former cell-mate for two and a half months at the DCLEC, Joseph McCaleb. After reading all of my legal paperwork, “Joey” wrote a very detailed letter to Prosecutor Negangard, claiming that I admitted everything, including confessing to a plan to kidnap, kill, and then deposit Judge Humphrey into the Ohio River with concrete. Of course “Joey” was no longer there when I returned from my sentencing hearing. McCaleb was arrested for stealing women’s underpants, while working as a satellite TV installer. He was referred to as the “Underpants Bandit” because he stole women’s underwear (He also photographed his “stash” and put the pictures on his computer.) Did Negangard strike a deal with a pervert in his efforts to punish free speech? It just makes the story more interesting, yet sad for the women who were victims of McCaleb’s crimes.

Keep checking for updates as the appeal process will be underway soon. Thanks for the support.

Contact Dan/family at: contactdanbrewington@gmail.com

A Note from Dan

2011-11-02T13:44:00.001-04:00

November 2, 2011 (edited from a note I received from Dan on Monday, October 31, 2011.)

I was shipped out this morning (October 26, 2011). I’m doing fine at RDC (west of Indy). They told me to pack my things this morning around 8:00AM and told me I was heading out. The A-holes in Dearborn Co. sent an email telling the prison that I was dangerous. A team of guards approached me and told the driver not to un-cuff me. Like usual, the jackasses who try to hurt me only serve to help my “infamy”. I was here ten minutes before someone, who heard about the email, asked what I did to warrant a warning by email. When I got to my cell, I was talking to a nearby inmate who left Dearborn County 2 weeks ago. I was telling him about the warning and someone nearby blurted out, “yeah, they sent an email.” So the guy began telling people about how Dan Brewington fought Dearborn Co. and how he is suing them. Too funny.

I’m fine but I need money for commissary. (He has to have his paper and pencils) I think you can do it online at the Dept. of Corrections (DOC) website. My picture makes me look like an AIDS patient. I weighed 227 when I came in. Obviously I do not have paper and pencils. I can’t call and I may be here for a month. My money follows me from here so send money. Love you and don’t worry. Tell everyone I’m fine and tell them hi. Keep them posted on the Blog.

Dan

Submitted by Sue Brewington

We will continue to post and let people know what is going on and what we think. (Because that is the purpose of a blog: to inform and get a message out) We are disappointed in the trial results but will continue with our mission. A notice of appeal has been filed and we are going forward with the federal complaint with a jury request. This is the United States of America and we will try to get, not just our message out, but the message of lots of “forgotten” victims of the courts, too. The idea that you can’t criticize an elected official in Dearborn County is absurd. We are expanding our audience and will be asking for help. We want to thank everyone so very much for keeping us in your thoughts and prayers.

Sue Brewington

contactdanbrewington@gmail.com

Dan's update 10/26/11

2011-10-26T12:57:00.009-04:00

Dan has been sentenced to 5 years in the Indiana State Prison System. For right now we are directing people to the following links.
Eagle Country News (The local radio station also has a website with news)
http://www.eaglecountryonline.com/news.php?nID=2479
The unofficial minutes are recorded on the Dearborn County Blog.
http://dearborncounty.blogspot.com/2011/10/24-october-2011-sentencing-hearing-for.html
To follow public discussion of Dan's case you can visit
http://www.voy.com/201962/
We will be providing a lot more information in time. As always, thanks to our many wonderful friends and supporters. Please keep thinking of us.

Sue Brewington

I’ll Always Hold My Head Up High 10/22/11

2011-10-22T11:42:00.001-04:00

With just a few days before my sentencing hearing on Monday, October 24, 2011 I feel there is little for me to fear. I could be released on a time-served sentence or Judge Hill could sentence me to several years in prison. I’ve never been one to worry about situations beyond my control because they are beyond my control. Rather than ruminate on the possibilities of the unknown, my time has always been better spent gathering resources and information so I can be prepared to hit the ground running when adversity presents itself. I cannot do anything more than my best. As long as I feel I have given my all, I can always hold my head up high.

“I love it when a plan comes together,” is a favorite phrase of Hannibal from the television series and movie “The A-Team.” The leader of the under appreciated quartet of misfit, former military heroes usually delivered his trademark quote after the A-Team narrowly prevailed in another death defying plight to save the little guy. The humor in Hannibal’s quote is found in the fact that the “plan,” if an actual plan even exited, rarely worked as planned because there are too many uncontrollable variables in complex situations. The A-Team “plan” always consisted of gathering and processing as much information as possible, drawing up the best strategies(including plan B and plan C), utilizing the strengths of those around you, and being prepared to improvise when nothing goes as planned. But just as there are often many unknown variables within a complex problem, sometimes the goal of a mission is a mystery in itself.

During my criminal trial, Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard pretty much indicated that my every action in life was a direct attempt to defy authority and incite fear into the officials within the family court system. He claimed my sole purpose in representing myself in my divorce was to obstruct the court process. Negangard explained to the jury that my only intention in writing about my divorce experience was to bring harm to others. He even claimed that during the course of my 2 ½ year divorce, I exercised parenting time with my little girls instead sending them to daycare, for every negative reason other than the fact I just wanted to be a dad. In the process of trying to villainize me, Prosecutor Negangard, inadvertently turned the spotlight on the questionable conduct of others.

“He attacked Dr. Connor because he was upset that Dr. Connor recommended the mother have sole custody of the children.” Why does everyone keep saying that? Prosecutor Negangard, Dr. Edward Connor, Judge James D. Humphrey, the entire Appellate Court of the State of Indiana. I’ve been accused of being long-winded, verbose, voluminous, etc… I was found guilty of obstructing justice partially based on my numerous legal pleading. Prosecutor Negangard kept telling the jury to look at the stack of several hundred documents consisting of my writing. In all of my writings, blogs, legal pleadings, etc. there is absolutely no mention of me disagreeing with Dr. Connor’s custody decision. They all dealt with Dr. Connor’s conflicting statements regarding the release of Dr. Connor’s case file.

“You’re not allowed to lie,” was a popular phrase by Prosecutor Negangard during my trial. Here are a few examples of lies told during my trial:”He refused to get a mental health evaluation so he could see his children.” Negangard kept making this claim despite the fact the Judge Humphrey set a hearing to approve a mental health evaluator and vacated the hearing just days before the hearing claiming there was an investigation of me that pertained to him. “I can’t recall if I set a hearing,” was Judge Humphrey’s claim when asked about the hearing on the approval of a mental health evaluator. Despite Judge Humphrey’s remarkable memory of the events in my divorce, he forgot about the last two rulings; the last of which was the order to vacate the hearing due to an investigation Judge Humphrey had been aware of for nearly a year. One of my favorite lies came from Dr. Edward J. Connor. “I was concerned about releasing the case file to Mr. Brewington because I was afraid that he would post the mother’s confidential information on his website.”Sorry Dr. Connor. My website was created six months after Dr. Connor denied my request for the case file.

“I love it when a plan comes together.” I never had a solid vision of what my actions would produce. Many are wondering how I could conceive success on any level when I am facing lengthy prison time. I still have dignity. I’ve stood for something my children can be proud of. Most of all, I’ve further demonstrated the high level of corruption that exists in Dearborn County, Indiana.

“You can call a judge a son-of-a-bitch but you can’t call him a child abuser.” I’m sure Prosecutor Negangard’s statement will stand strong in my appeal, which will focus on First Amendment Rights. I would hope the higher courts of Indiana would chose not to side with Negangard’s contention as the state would be the laughing stock of the entire United States Court System when my case reaches the Federal Courts and/or the Supreme Court of the United sates. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in favor of radical religious groups being able to picket the funerals of fallen members of the U.S. military. The Court overruled state laws banning all cross burnings. It has protected the right of anti-abortionists to be able to picket planned parenthood clinics. A person is allowed to call a President of the United States a “baby killer” because he is pro-choice. People are free to call a President a “baby killer” because of his war policies. I don’t recall any Presidents in my lifetime killing any babies. The Supreme Court even protected Larry Flynt’s right to say Jerry Falwell had sex with his mother in an outhouse. I find it hard to imagine Negangard’s argument will make it past the high courts.

Prosecutor Negangard was angry because I would not take a plea deal to get out of jail five months ago. I refused to deal because I was adamant about standing up for what is right. Negangard wasted tens of thousands of Dearborn County taxpayer dollars in his efforts to conceal the wrongs of Dearborn County officials. Was he successful? At the end of the day my conviction will be overturned. Until then, all that is left for Negangard to do is to argue how the guy he was willing to release on May 13, 2011 is now deserving of a lengthy sentence. Regardless of the outcome of my sentencing hearing, I will be able to sleep at night knowing I stood for something. Prosecutor Negangard and other Dearborn County Officials will have to deal with the looks, whispers, and shouts from members of the public who are disgusted with Negangard’s wasteful spending of tax dollars in his crusade to stifle free speech. Whether in a cell or safe at home, I will take comfort in knowing I stood for something and I will always cherish the love and support I have received from so many along the way. Be sure to check back soon.

Still Looking for Fairness 10/19/11

2011-10-19T10:37:00.002-04:00

I finally received a copy of the list of additional evidence that Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard may use against me in my criminal trial which began October 3, 2011. The Prosecutor’s “Supplemental Discovery Answer” lists fifty-one documents; none of which I have yet reviewed with my public defender, Bryan Barrett. Did I mention today is Sunday, October 16, 2011? My trial concluded on October 6, 2011.

I feel like I am drowning in a kiddie pool in the middle of a lifeguard convention. First, there is no reason why a healthy adult should be gasping for air in a children’s pool. Second, there is no excuse for a gathering of professionals, who uphold their responsibilities to water rescue, to stand idly by while an adult is drowning in a couple feet of water at arm’s length of a lifeguard. I’ve found myself drowning in the Dearborn County Legal System while lawyers, judges, and law enforcement officials either ignore me, or further complicate my situation by throwing buckets of water at me. It’s like the Dearborn County legal community is at the helm of a Carnival Cruise ship; cruising past the sinking Titanic without stopping because it would interrupt the midnight shuffle board tournaments. It just doesn’t make sense.

I know, I know; I already hear my detractors yelling “Dan’s mentally ill.’ Fine, we’ll go with that. Last time I checked, mentally ill people still have a right to a fair trial. In fact, they are often entitled to additional legal assistance to help participate in the criminal proceedings. All right detractors; I’m looking for consistency. If, I am as mentally ill as you claim, did I receive an appropriate amount of legal assistance necessary for a proper defense? As my public defender, Bryan Barrett failed to review with me, any of the roughly 2,000 pages of potential evidence provided by the prosecution, my guess would be no. It wouldn’t have mattered if I were the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court; it is impossible for a lawyer to properly prepare for a four-day trial without subpoenaing documents and witnesses, taking depositions, and most importantly, meeting with the defendant. By the way, if you think four days is a long trial for a few D felony charges, just think how long it may have lasted if Bryan Barrett would have actually called a witness or submitted ANY evidence in my defense.

So who knows about all of this? I know Rush County Circuit Judge Brian Hill is aware of the injustices in my trial because he has presided over my case since June 1, 2011. Judge Hill is well aware that Bryan Barrett did not file an appearance to represent me until July 18, 2011, even though Judge Hill appointed him June 20, 2011. It was at the July 18, 2011 hearing when Judge Hill postponed my bond reduction hearing because Dearborn County Special Crimes Unit Detective Shane McHenry was not available to testify for the prosecution. Judge Hill acknowledged that he was aware that my public defender was on a leave of absence for a couple weeks, due to a family emergency, by continuing my trial and my already continued bond reduction hearing. During my August 17^th bond reduction hearing Detective McHenry, who is also a Dearborn County Commissioner testified he investigated a report that I approached an inmate at the Hamilton County Justice Center about performing a “drive-by shooting” on Judge Humphrey. Judge Hill never heard any testimony about the alleged “drive-by” during my trial. It was probably due to the fact that the alleged request never happened. Records from the Hamilton County Justice Center movement logs demonstrated that the inmate, who accused me of trying to arrange a drive-by shooting, and I never crossed paths. I was unable to present the evidence to the court because my public defender refused to meet with me.

During the pre-trial hearing on September 19, 2011, I informed Judge Hill that my public defender had not subpoenaed any witnesses or evidence and had not deposed any of the state’s witnesses. I told Judge Hill, Bryan Barrett, who is a Rush County public defender appointed by Judge Hill, had not provided me with any evidence. Judge Hill denied my request to continue the October 3^rd jury trial even though he knew I was not able to review the evidence against me. Judge Hill didn’t even care when I told him that neither one of my public defenders gave me an explanation of the crimes I allegedly committed that prompted the charges. Completing my trial was more important than protecting my rights.

“Do you want to represent yourself?” That was Judge Hill’s response to my motion to dismiss for ineffective assistance of counsel, filed just prior to the start of the October 3^rd trial. My motion explained how Barrett never met with me to prepare for trial. As my mental health has always been a hot topic of debate, I explained how Bryan Barrett refused to contact my treating therapist or doctor, who I see for ADHD. Judge Hill reviewed the letter sent to Barrett listing character witnesses and medical/mental health witnesses. The letter also contained a list of witnesses whose testimony would demonstrate how Detective McHenry and Prosecutor Negangard were aware of the falsity of the “drive-by shooting” allegations before Negangard called McHenry to testify. Judge Hill just kept asking if I wanted to represent myself and I kept telling him I wanted a public defender who would, at least, discuss my case with me prior to the day of the trial. Judge Hill made me go through with my criminal trial knowing that Bryan Barrett never reviewed any evidence with me. He knew Barrett didn’t provide me with evidence. Despite the prosecutions’ numerous remarks questioning my mental health, Judge Hill refused to address the fact that I was being refused my ADHD prescription by Sheriff Mike Kreinhop, who was the only investigator in my case and a witness in my trial, and Judge Hill deprived me of a competent public defender who would call a professional mental health expert to testify on my behalf. This is the same judge who has control over whether I spend several years in prison for making too many negative public statements about Judge Humphrey and Dr. Edward J. Connor.

“Negangard told Eagle 99.3 after the trial that he is not certain what maximum penalty Brewington would be eligible for,” is a quote from a story on the website of Eagle 99.3. This is just another example of Prosecutor Negangard’s web of lies. A D Felony in Indiana carries a maximum of three years; an A misdemeanor carries a maximum of one year. Add them all together and you get a total of eleven years. Indiana gives two years credit for every year served. Subtract the seven months I’ve already served, I’m facing a maximum of four years and 11 months of actual prison time. Does anyone actually believe that the two-term Dearborn County Prosecutor did not know this? He was probably a little leery about telling the public that people can serve many years in prison if they make negative statements about Dearborn County Officials.

I’m expecting the worst and why not? They can get away with these things in Dearborn County. Dearborn County lawyers look the other way and plead ignorance to the situation. Some attorneys sat in on my trial and witnessed the carnage first hand. One Dearborn County lawyer told me he was sure that I would prevail in my case. He just wasn’t sure if I could win in the state courts. He was certain that the Federal Courts would dismiss the case.

So I guess I’m at the “mercy” of the Court. I don’t want mercy; I want justice. Ordering me to serve five years in prison is just as offensive as letting me walk after my sentencing hearing on October 24^th. Of course I prefer freedom over prison as I long to see my children but the damage has been done. Due to the vindictive actions of people like Prosecutor Negangard, I am a convicted felon until my case is overturned which will make it more difficult to find a job and get back with my girls. Whatever Judge Hill decides on October 24^th he will know that he denied me any opportunity to a fair trial. This sort of thing can happen in Dearborn County because those who bear the power to bring positive change are coward and/or corrupt. The little guys who speak up are thrown in jail and prosecuted/persecuted. That’s why I’m treading water in a room full of lifeguards. Someone has to take a stand. Please keep me in your thoughts on October 24^th. Thanks for your support.

An apology to all of the brave men and women who have ever served in the United States Military

2011-10-16T12:17:00.001-04:00

I want to apologize to all of the people who have bravely served our country, for the insensitive and disgraceful comments made by Dearborn County Deputy Prosecutor Joseph Kisor.

“Soldiers did not die” to give Dan Brewington the ability to threaten Judge James D. Humphrey. This is an approximate statement made by Deputy Prosecutor Kisor during the prosecutions closing arguments in my criminal trial. Deputy Prosecutor Kisor, along with Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard, spent the majority of the trial trying to convince a jury that my internet writings were not protected by the First Amendment of the United States of America. Deputy Prosecutor Kisor claimed my speech was criminal because it wasn’t “appropriate.” He claimed that my speech wasn’t free because the “victims,” who were the subject of my speech, “paid the price” for my actions. Though there were absolutely no threats of illegal conduct in any of my writings Kisor pled to the jury that the “totality” of my writings constituted a threat. In his premeditated and dramatic theatrical presentation, Dearborn County Deputy Prosecutor Joseph Kisor emphatically communicated to the jury that the only reason I took on the judicial system was because I didn’t like the results of my divorce. Apparently Deputy Prosecutor Kisor believes that US citizens lose the right to question the judiciary if the court rules against them. Deputy Prosecutor Joseph Kisor either has no understanding of the First Amendment of the Constitution or he is using the blood of fallen military people as a soul-less metaphor in an attempt to deprive the public of the most fundamental freedom that our soldiers died to protect. John Adams once stated, “[The people] have a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible divine right to the most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge, I mean of the characters and conduct of their rulers.” Patriots have not fought and died to protect the rights of rulers to have the people kneel down and worship the authority of the ruler; they fought and died to protect the people’s ability to seek out and publicly criticize the character and conduct of the ruler. If the rulers have the ability to censor public opinion of their character and conduct, all freedom may be lost.

Dearborn County, Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard ranted about how the internet has somehow been damaging to the United States Judicial System because it gives people easy access to a venue where they have the ability to criticize judges. Negangard portrayed judges, like Judge James D. Humphrey, as precious, delicate orchid that may wilt and crumble in the face of even the slightest adverse conditions. He and Deputy Prosecutor Kisor continuously referred to the John Adams quote on the stained glass window in the courtroom. They kept reciting “we are a nation of laws and not of men,” and acting as if they were present when John Adams penned his Thoughts on Government. They used the quote, which Adams borrowed from the writings of the seventeenth-century philosopher James Harrington, to make themselves appear noble and patriotic. What they failed to mention was that Adams did not enjoy the right to free speech until after the Revolutionary War. On September 11, 1776 John Adams accompanied Edward Rutledge and Benjamin Franklin to a conference requested by British Admiral Richard Lord Howe to discuss giving up the Declaration of Independence as Lord Howe claimed “it might possible effect the King’s purposes to restore peace and grant pardons” the committee of three obviously rejected Lord Howe’s proposal. Years later, Adams discovered Lord Howe had been given a list of American rebels who were granted pardons. John Adams was not on the list and was to hang. In the eyes of King George III, Adams was at traitor to Great Britain. He had been one of the most vocal proponents in favor of declaring independence from England. John Adams’ outspoken patriotism would have been his death sentence if the Colonial Army would have been defeated. John Adams rolled over in his grave this past week when Dearborn County convicted a man for making “false” public statements about government officials and agents of the courts. The founding father would abhor the notion that he was quoted by prosecutors Negangard and Kisor in an effort to criminalize protected speech.

“You cannot be, I know, nor do I wish to see you, an inactive spectator… We have too many high sounding words and too few actions that correspond with them.” –Abigail Adams to John Adams. Rather than build on the words and wisdom of one of the greatest governmental minds in the history of human kind, F. Aaron Negangard and Joseph Kisor use the quotes of John Adams as a punch line to bolster their false pretense that they are protecting the public from rogue public speech. Kisor uses the name of our fallen soldier in vain in Kisor’s quest to deprive the public of the rights that the soldier died protecting.

“I cannot but wish I were better qualified.” – John Adams. It would much better serve people like F. Aaron Negangard and Joseph Kisor to take a more humble approach when interpreting constitutional law and the history of the United States of America. Patriots and Presidents like George Washington, John Adams, and Thomas Jefferson risked their lives to construct a government that ensured protected freedoms. For over two hundred years, our military has fought and died to protect those freedoms. Contrary to Mr. Kisor’s contention, our fallen solder has protected our right to speak our minds and challenge leaders in government. The fallen soldier is so selfless that he/she protects the rights of the few individuals who choose to protect the soldier himself. So once again on behalf of Dearborn County officials like Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard and Deputy Prosecutor Joseph Kisor, I want to offer my sincerest apologies to the men and women who have served and are serving in our armed forces for the shallow patronizing of your services to our country.

Thank you for your support.

Quotes and historical information provided by John Adams, by David McCullough.

Contact Dan/family at: contactdanbrewinton@gmail.com

Dear NRA Members, Get rid of you Guns. 10/11/11

2011-10-11T17:22:00.001-04:00

On October 6, 2011 a Dearborn County, Indiana jury found me guilty of three counts of intimidation because I criticized public officials via the internet. There were no threats of violence or illegal activity. My public speech that was peacefully transmitted from my computer did not incite panic nor was it a call for lawless action. My public speech consisted of my views, opinions, and experiences with/of the family court system. Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard convinced a jury that I said too much and used the wrong words in my public speech. But in the process of stripping me of my First Amendment rights, Prosecutor Negangard deprived me of my Second Amendment right as well.

“He’s got a gun” is a phrase that, if taken out of context, can incite fear. If you use the phrase at an NRA function someone will probably inform you of the fact that everyone at the function probably owns a gun. Rather than respect my Second Amendment right to own a firearm, Prosecutor Negangard used my gun ownership to instill fear in the members of the grand jury and trial jury in my case. If you yell “shark” at the beach, people will swim for their lives to get out of the water regardless of whether a shark is present. This was the tactic of Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard. He yelled “Gun!” just to bring fear to the jurors.

I’ve never been accused of committing a gun-related crime. I’ve never been accused of having a gun related accident. It seems I am constantly being accused of owning firearms and people continue to punish me for it. During my divorce, my wife testified that I purchased a 357 Magnum after she filed for divorce. She testified that she wanted the handgun in the property settlement because she felt the gun was dangerous and should be destroyed. Despite the fact I purchased the gun after she filed for divorce and the fact that there were no reports of the gun being used improperly, Judge James D. Humphrey awarded a 357 Magnum handgun to someone who had never even fired a gun. Humphrey’s orders came out on August 18, 2009 and I have yet to turn over the handgun. Why? Because it may be against Indiana law.

Indiana law prohibits someone from transferring ownership of a firearm to someone they believe may be mentally ill. At the very least, my ex-wife wanted possession of my 357 magnum just to punish me. That’s not a very compelling reason to give someone a dangerous handgun especially a person with absolutely no experience in handling firearms. She wasn’t concerned about safety or violence because there were several other guns of mine that were listed in the property distribution that she had no interest in. Her hatred for me was so great that she wanted ownership of a handgun, which I purchased after she filed for divorce, just to punish me. I just don’t feel comfortable with turning over a handgun to someone whose only purpose in acquiring the gun was to, at the very least, cause me emotional harm.

“He’s got a 357 Magnum handgun and nobody knows where it is.” This was part of Prosecutor Negangard’s closing argument. Number one, the issue was irrelevant because it had nothing to do with the charges. Number two; he wouldn’t have raised the issue if it were kitchen utensils that I failed to return, rather than a 357 Magnum handgun. I feel comfortable in knowing that my ex-wife does not have the gun especially after listening to/reviewing her testimony to the court and grand jury in my criminal trial. She told the grand jury that I threatened her with physical violence on several occasions. She never made any such accusations during the custody evaluation and the 2 ½ year divorce. She never contacted the police about the alleged threats. I have not had any contact with her for over two years. These alleged threats never occurred. If she truly believes these things then she has some serious psychological issues. If she lied to the grand jury about the alleged threats of violence in the hopes of sending me to prison and further alienating her own daughters from their father, then her venomous and vindictive hatred for me has no boundaries. Neither of the above scenarios are characterizations of someone who I would deem to be psychologically fit to possess a firearm; especially around my daughters.

“You can’t go into a crowed room and yell fire.” Negangard used this analogy in an effort to portray my peaceful writings as an attempt to incite panic. It was Negangard who yelled “fire” except he used the word “gun.” Members of the NRA and gun owners across the United States should be very concerned about this situation. The government may not be able to take you guns, but Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negnagard is trying to set a precedence of using legal and constitutionally protected gun ownership as a means to scare juries into returning guilty verdicts. This sort of thing goes on in a county that has a state senator who is also on the Board of Directors of the NRA. Contact NRA Board Member Senator Johnny Nugent and other NRA officials and tell them to put pressure on prosecutors like F. Aaron Negangard who criminalized legal gun ownership. Please help prevent government officials like Prosecutor Negangard from desecrating the Constitution of the United States of America.

Contact Dan/family at: contactdanbrewington@gmail.com

Be Afraid, Citizens of Indiana; Be Very Afraid. 10/9/11

2011-10-10T18:16:00.002-04:00

I am now a convicted felon as a result of my actions and events dating back to March 6, 2008. That’s when I first requested the case file from the child custody evaluation prepared by Dr. Edward J. Connor. Little did I know that my simple request, while acting as my own lawyer, would snowball into being a convicted felon?

I’ve covered the many reasons Dr. Connor has given as to why he would or would not release the case file a million times by now. [To review examples of Dr. Connor’s conflicting excuses please visit www.danhelpskids.com.] Actually, during his testimony in my criminal trial, Dr. Connor gave yet another reason as to why he denied me access to the case file. During his testimony on October 4, 2011, Dr. Connor testified that he denied my request for the case file because he was concerned that I would post my wife’s confidential information on my website. The flaw in Dr. Connor’s testimony is that I did not have a website at the time. My first website was not created until September 2008; six months after Dr. Connor denied my request for the case file.

This is where it gets hairy. I was convicted of intimidating Dr. Connor because Prosecutor Negangard claimed that Indiana law criminalizes false public speech. If the high Courts of Indiana uphold the rulings in my case, it would mark the end of free speech in the State of Indiana; at least until someone challenges the holdings of the higher courts of Indiana in a federal court or the United States Supreme Court. Among other things, I labeled Dr. Edward J. Connor as a liar and a criminal. One of the reasons I referred to Dr. Connor as a liar and a criminal is due to the fact that Dr. Connor lied during his May 27, 2009 testimony in my divorce hearings. Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard arbitrarily determined my statements to be false and unlawful. As someone who has been convicted of perjury, I know it is a criminal offense to lie while under oath before a grand jury or in a court of law. I called Dr. Connor a criminal because he lied in documents he sent the court and he lied while under oath, just as he did during his testimony in my criminal trial. Dr. Connor testified that he did not provide me with a copy of the case file due to concerns I would post the information on my website, which did not exist at the time. Now can I publicly state that Dr. Connor is a liar and a criminal? I don’t know. It all depends on whether Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard determines the statements to be true or false and the only way to verify if public statements pass the Negangard fact checking test is to make the public statement and wait to see if Negangard issues a warrant for your arrest. As unbelievable as this may seem it’s far less frightening than the next scenario.

I was convicted of a Class D felony, Attempt to Obstruct Justice based on my actions during my divorce while serving as my own attorney. It is important to note that my divorce was out of a Ripley County (IN) court and was finalized on August 18, 2009. Dearborn County Circuit Judge James D. Humphrey served as special judge following the withdrawal of Ripley Circuit Judge Carl H. Taul. I was convicted of attempting to obstruct justice in a Ripley County legal proceeding by a Dearborn County Court. None of the allegations of obstruction ever occurred in Dearborn County. Here’s the frightening thing though; if the Indiana Appellate Court and/or Supreme Court uphold the Attempt to Obstruct Justice charge, it will set a precedent that would allow prosecutors and judges to work together to criminally charge participants in a divorce with Obstruction of Justice if a person does not cooperate with the court or if the person delays the divorce proceedings. One of the explanations Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard gave as a reason why I should be found guilty of Obstruction of Justice was that I filed too many motions during my divorce, while representing myself. Not only did Prosecutor Negangard put a limit on free speech, he made it a crime for a self-represented litigant in a divorce to file too many motions. How many is too many? The only way to find out is to file the motions and then wait to see if Prosecutor Negangard believes the number of motions “cross the line.” Dearborn County Prosecutor Negangard also alleged that I attempted to obstruct justice in a Ripley County Court proceeding by filing a complaint against Dr. Edward J. Connor with the Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychology. Negangard told the jury that I contacted the office of the Kentucky Attorney General when my complaint was dismissed. I was punished because I did not prevail in my complaint against Dr. Connor.

This isn’t a joke or exaggeration. I often use metaphors and/or sarcasm on this blog to draw a laugh or to prove a point, but this is real. If the high courts’ of Indiana affirm the ruling in my case, a domestic relations judge would only have to contact the county prosecutor if the judge is dealing with a “stubborn” parent in a divorce. If you’ve ever had a problem with the Indiana Family Court system, it may have just gotten a lot worse. If you want to help keep the Indiana government from restricting and/or eliminating what little rights people currently have in divorces, and to help prevent the Indiana government from criminalizing a person’s ability to criticize domestic court judges; please contact your local and state officials immediately. Please help bring legislative change in Indiana by contacting State Senator Johnny Nugent and State Representative Judd Mc Mullin who represent the Dearborn County area as they should bear the responsibility of preventing the injustices of the Dearborn County legal system from bleeding across the State of Indiana. The contact information for the representatives both Federal and State are listed below.

Whether you consider me to be a diligent father or a radical wacko, the fact still remains that I was just found guilty on two Class A Misdemeanors and three Class D Felonies because I aggressively represented myself in my divorce and I publicly criticized the court officials involved. No threat; no phone calls; just opinions that were sent to the internet from my keyboard. For more information on the events of my divorce, visit www.danhelpskids.com. Help protect you rights Indiana. Speak up now.

http://www.in.gov/legislative/legislators/ You can find your representative by using your zip code.

http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm Search for Dick Lugar and Dan Coates.

Contact Dan/family at: contactdanbrewington@gmail.com

Recap of my Criminal Trial. October 8, 2011.

2011-10-09T12:18:00.001-04:00

My criminal trial began on Monday, October 3, 2011 and wrapped up on Thursday, October 6, 2011. The jury of six returned five “guilty” verdicts and one “not guilty.” The “guilty” verdicts are as follows: Intimidation of a Judge (James Humphrey), Class D felony; Intimidation of Dr. Edward J. Connor and Heidi Humphrey, both Class A misdemeanors; Obstruction of Justice and Perjury both Class D Felonies. The most important event of the trial came during the prosecution’s closing argument, when Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard explained to the jury the exact boundaries of free speech.

“You can call a judge a son-of-a-bitch but you cannot call him a child abuser.” That was the jury instruction from Prosecutor Negangard; honest to God. Prosecutor Negangard, in his greatness has summed up in one sentence, what the United States Supreme Court has debated since the days of John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. Prosecutor Negangard also informed the members of the jury that it was a criminal offense to lie about people like Judge Humphrey. As I am sure Prosecutor Negangard would never break the law by publicly lying about someone, I can draw from Negangard’s infinite wisdom and conclude that Judge James D. Humphrey is a son-of-a-bitch.

I was convicted of felony intimidation because I called that son-of-a bitch Humphrey a child abuser. Another reason for my guilty verdict was due to the fact that I instructed people to address concerns about the Dearborn County family court system to the Indiana Supreme Court Ethics and Professionalism advisor that was located in Dearborn County. I looked up the advisor’s address on the Dearborn County Tax Assessor’s website to determine where to have people send comments and/or concerns. When I looked up the address, I found one listing for Heidi Humphrey. The owners listed were James D. Humphrey and Heidi Humphrey. I was found guilty of lying to a grand jury because I stated that I did not know that Heidi was the wife of the son-of-a-bitch James Humphrey but it could be a possibility. The son-of-a-bitch is also the judge in Ohio County, Indiana so he could reside in that county as well. There is a Humphrey funeral home in Rising Sun (Ohio County) so I knew the Humphrey name existed there but I’m not aware if those Humphreys are related to the son-of-a-bitch Humphrey. Negangard accused me of lying about not knowing that Heidi Humphrey was married to the son-of-a-bitch, but I did not know for sure. When my father was alive there were two listings for Daniel P. Brewington in the Cincinnati phone book. For all I knew, Heidi could have been the son-of-a-bitch’s mother or daughter-in-law. Did I think it was possible that Heidi was the wife of that son-of-a-bitch Humphrey? Of course, and I testified to that before the grand jury. If I would have testified that I was aware that Heidi Humphrey was married to the son-of-a-bitch James D. Humphrey, it would have been a lie because I knew very little about Dearborn County and its politicians and citizens and I had never seen the son-of-a-bitch’s marriage certificate. But unfortunately I was convicted of lying about not being aware that Heidi was married to that son-of-a-bitch.

There was much more that went on but I have to check with my attorneys to determine what I am allowed to write about. There is not a lot of room for trial and error when it comes to protected speech in Dearborn County, Indiana. I feel fortunate that Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard clarified that people were not allowed to lie in public speech and that Judge James D. Humphrey is a son-of-a-bitch.

F. Aaron Negangard clarified that people were not allowed to lie in public speech and that Judge James D. Humphrey is a son-of-a-Bitch. I have a better understanding of the wording I am permitted to use in my writings during the course of my appeal.

Thanks to all of you for your ongoing support and prayers and rest assured that I do not plan to stop fighting for free speech until the public has the ability to call any public official a son-of-a-Bitch. Keep supporting the First Amendment!!!

(Feel free to contact Dan/family at: contactdanbrewington@gmail.com )

Results of Dan's Trial were not in his favor.

2011-10-06T22:38:00.002-04:00

I want to thank everyone who has been so supportive of Dan and our family. I could not begin to say how much it means to have so much support. Dan was convicted on 5 counts, 2 misdemeanors and 3 felonies. We are obviously moving forward but I don't have any information on that right now. Dan is doing fine. Again, thanks to everyone, I will write more later. Sue Brew

Dan's Trial (Day 3)

2011-10-05T18:57:00.002-04:00

Link to the Dearborn County Forum

Dan's Trial (2nd Day)

2011-10-04T20:38:00.002-04:00

The Trial resumes tomorrow at 8:30 and it should be the last day. We'll let everyone know how it goes. Thanks for your support.

Dan's Trial

2011-10-03T20:28:00.002-04:00

Jury selection was completed, opening statements were made, and one witness was called. Trial resumes at 8:30 tomorrow morning. Thanks to everyone for their thoughts and support.

How to fix a Grand Jury like Dearborn County Officials

2011-09-29T20:56:00.000-04:00

[DAN’S TRIAL BEGINS MONDAY OCTOBER 3^RD AT 9:00AM WITH JURY SELECTION]

Forward

The following post is a bit lengthy yet it represents just a minuscule portion of the irrelevant, exaggerated, and false statements made during the Grand Jury hearings on my case. The transcripts from the hearings include some of the following statements and testimony; Judge Humphrey, Prosecutor Negangard, and Sheriff Kreinhop informed a grand jury that the government has the power to censor some free speech; Negangard informed the grand jury that a felony conviction was one of the only ways the government can legally deny me the right to own firearms; and one “victim” in my case testified that both the Erlanger, KY Police Department and the FBI told the alleged victim to “ignore” my postings and the respective law enforcement agencies refused to arrest me for exercising my constitutionally protect rights, that Dearborn County officials deemed to be illegal. The following demonstrates the malicious and illegal attempts by the Dearborn County government to maliciously deprive me of my civil rights that are protected by the United States Constitution.

How to Fix a Grand Jury like Dearborn County Officials

Knowingly disclosing information from Grand Jury proceedings is a violation of Indiana law unless a Judge allows the information to become public record. For some reason Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard petitioned the Court to release the transcripts from the Grand Jury investigation in my case and Judge Brian Hill granted Negangard’s request. After reviewing the documents, I’m having a difficult time understanding why Prosecutor Negangard would want to give the public access to 340 pages of transcripts that document the incompetent and illegal actions of Dearborn County officials.

Before I get too involved in sharing the released information from the grand Jury hearings, I want to give the taxpayers of Dearborn County an update on how much of your money Prosecutor Negangard is wasting on his personal vendetta. Last time I paid for the transcription of court hearings in Dearborn County, I think the cost to transcribe was around $4.00 a page. Considering the Grand Jury transcripts consist of 340 pages, I can say with some certainty that the Dearborn County tax payers are not going to be very pleased with the result of their $1,360 purchase.

Dearborn County prosecutors want to demonstrate to the world that they may be the most dysfunctional, intellectually challenged, and corrupt prosecutor’s office in the United States, by actually going through with my trial. Although Prosecutor Negangard tries his best to portray me as a potential danger to jurors, it is Negangard who poses the greatest risk to jurors, as his vindictive criminal proceedings insult the intelligence of past and future jurors.

I’ve been sitting in the Dearborn County Law Enforcement Center for nearly seven months and I have finally discovered some of my specific actions that they deemed to be illegal. Prosecutor Negangard, Judge Brian Hill, and/or my public defender, Bryan Barrett, obstructed my ability to review Grand Jury transcripts until 9/23/11; barely a week before my 10/3/11 jury trial. In 340 pages of testimony there was absolutely no evidence or documentation of illegal activity on my part. The transcripts demonstrate how Negangard and his band of villains illegally used a grand jury investigation to assassinate my character in their efforts to trick the jurors into believing there are limits to peaceful and non-violent free speech. Judge James D. Humphrey testified that I went “a little too far” because I posted his address and his wife’s name on the internet. I had encouraged people to contact Heidi Humphrey with any complaints or concerns because she was listed as an advisor on the Ethics and Professionalism Committee on the website of the Indiana Supreme Court. Dr. Edward J. Connor felt that I broke the law when I copied a picture of him that was on a public social networking site and reposted it in a blog post. He also stated that I contacted businesses he was affiliated with and told them that he was a criminal. He also told the grand jury how I wrote on the internet that he lived in an affluent neighborhood named Triple Crown. Heidi Humphrey testified that she felt threatened when she received three letters concerning Judge Humphrey [not from Dan] even though she testified that there was nothing threatening in the letters. Ms. Humphrey testified that she “truly did not remember being on” the committee listed on the Supreme Court website even though the website listed Heidi Humphrey as an advisor. On March 2, 2011, Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard presented ten pages of comments from my internet posting to the Grand Jurors that the Prosecutor’s office “felt was over the top, um, unsubstantiated statements against either Dr. Connor or Judge Humphrey.” Negangard testified that he and his staff felt that my comments “crossed the lines between freedom of speech and intimidation and harassment.” The Dearborn County Prosecutor’s Office indicted me because I posted too much free speech that they did not agree with.

The residents of Dearborn County should sleep well at night knowing that officials like Judge James D. Humphrey have the ability to put limits on free speech. Humphrey explained to the jurors “I understand we have a first amendment folks and that’s reflected in some of my rulings I’ve made but is this conduct something that I consider appropriate? Does it go beyond? You bet it does.” Humphrey’s testimony reflects his greatest concern in his decision to deny me parenting time. In my divorce decree Humphrey wrote, “The Court is most concerned about Husband’s irrational behavior and attacks on Dr. Connor.” Unfortunately Judge Humphrey’s personal views and opinions of what he deems to be appropriate behavior does not supersede the Constitution of the United States of America.

It would probably serve Judge James D. Humphrey and the entire Dearborn County, Indiana Prosecutor’s office well to take a remedial law course. Indiana Code (IC) 35-45-10-2 defines “Harassment” as “conduct toward a victim that includes but is not limited to repeated or continued impermissible contact that would cause a reasonable person to suffer emotional distress and that actually causes the victim to suffer emotional distress.” Negangard, Connor, and the Humphrey’s told jurors that the “victims” felt real fear and distress, but what they failed to tell the jurors was that IC 35-45-10-2 also states, “Harassment does not include statutorily or constitutionally protected activity.” Did I go beyond the “limits” of free speech? Not by a long shot.

“There is a ‘profound national commitment’ to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide open.”, New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. In the case of Organization for a Better Austin v. Keefe, the petitioner had distributed leaflets near the respondent’s home that were critical of the respondent’s business practices as a real estate broker. The petitioner, a racially integrated community organization, did so after respondent refused to sign an agreement that he would not solicit property in their community. A state court enjoined the petitioner from distributing the leaflets; an appellate court affirmed the ruling “on the grounds that the alleged activities were coercive and intimidating, rather than informative and therefore not entitled to First Amendment protection. The US Supreme Court reversed the decision stating, “The claim that the expressions were intended to exercise a coercive impact on respondent does not remove them from the reach of the First Amendment.” The court went on to state, “Petitioners were engaged openly and vigorously in making the public aware of respondent’s real estate practices. Those practices were offensive to them, as the views and practices of petitioners are no doubt offensive to others. But so long as the means are peaceful, the communication need not meet standards of acceptability.” According to the U.S. Supreme Court, I could have distributed the information around Judge Humphrey’s neighborhood so long as the means were peaceful, but I most likely would have been arrested by law enforcement officials in Dearborn County as many of the officials lack the constitutional knowledge necessary for the job.

What does a person do when they feel criminally harassed, intimidated, and/or threatened? The person contacts the appropriate law enforcement agencies. That’s what Dr. Edward J. Connor did. When I failed to stop exercising my right to free speech on the internet, Dr. Connor testified that he contacted the FBI because he felt it was “an interstate type of thing.” Dr. Connor testified that the FBI told him to “ignore it.” Dr. Connor testified that he also contacted the Erlanger Police Department and they also told him to “just ignore it.” When all else fails, go to Dearborn County; they’ll arrest anyone for whatever you want, if you are “important” enough.

I find it rather ironic that the people who have accused me of being paranoid are the same people who are showing pictures of me to their children, warning them that I might harm them. No kidding. Dr. Connor testified, “I remind my children periodically that this is what [Dan] looks like.” The Humphrey’s testified that they contacted their sons’ high school and college to inform the schools that I ”could be a possible treat to [their] family.” Heidi Humphrey testified that Judge Humphrey had a police officer escort her to the state line on her way to work at 4:30AM. Heidi Humphrey testified that she told her employer that her husband had a case dealing with a man that “made threats to him.” She also testified that she told her employer, “if I ever never showed up or never called, immediately contact my husband and Sheriff’s department.” Ms. Humphrey testified that she and her husband even contacted the Lawrenceburg Police Department and the Jefferson county Sheriff’s Department because their sons’ schools fell under their respective jurisdictions. 340 pages of “concerns” of what I might do or may be capable of doing but there isn’t one shred of testimony that I ever threatened illegal activity. There was even testimony that I appeared at the Dearborn County Courthouse, which allegedly caused concerns about the safety of Judge Humphrey. I’m not sure why Dearborn County Officials were surprised about me appearing at the courthouse because I was representing myself in my divorce. If Humphrey was worried about me hanging around the courthouse why did he continue to preside over my family court case? After voicing all of the concerns about me posing a potential risk to the physical safety of his family, Humphrey served as the judge on my case for nearly another year. Prosecutor Negangard initiated a grand jury investigation 18 months AFTER the Humphrey family received police escorts and protection.

So what else was there in the 340 pages of the Dearborn County taxpayers new $1360.00 book?, a lot of psychological jargon from Dr. Connor. He testified that out of all the murders and rapists he had ever evaluated, no one had ever attacked his credibility like me. Detective Kreinhop testified that out of all the murder and rape cases he has seen in his career, no one has filed more legal pleadings than me, as if he was equating motions filed in a civil court to the potential to rape and kill. Everyone kept voicing their concerns that I own a 357 magnum handgun and had a concealed carry permit. Prosecutor Negangard and Sheriff Kreinhop made it clear to the Grand Jury that if I was convicted of a felony, I would never be able to own a firearm. Negangard even told the Grand jury that Indiana has very liberal gun permit laws and stated, “I don’t have a problem with that but that’s why the felony convictions (are) generally (the) only means by which one loses a license to carry a firearm.” Negangard made a less-than-subtle argument that I should be indicted/convicted, not because I committed a crime, but due to the fact that other people did not like my free speech. What everyone failed to mention is that I own several other firearms. They are listed in the property division of my divorce decree. I have a .22 cal rifle, a 12 gauge shotgun, a couple of muzzle loaders, and a .270 cal rifle that will shoot a few hundred yards, but no one ever mentions those because they don’t sound as intimidating as a 357 magnum; it’s like the kid brother of Dirty Harry’s 44 magnum. The fact that I had a concealed carry permit made it even worse because they acted as if the permit was going to make it more likely that I would be hiding in the shadows saying, ”Go ahead, make my day.” Well I am happy to inform everyone that my Indiana concealed carry permit has expired and I have not obtained a permit since I have moved back to Ohio. Does the fact that I no longer have a license to carry a concealed handgun make me any less or more dangerous? No, but it does demonstrate how asinine their contention was that obtaining a legal permit to legally carry a handgun somehow made me more dangerous. As I’ve always said, most criminals usually take the time to wait 6 – 8 weeks to get a concealed carry permit before they commit a crime.

I still can’t believe F. Aaron Negangard felt it was a good idea to make the Grand Jury transcripts part of the official record. What I found to be amusing are the exaggerations and lies that the witnesses thought they would get away with. When Negangard asked my ex-wife about the condition of the house when she came home from work, while we were still married, she testified, “It would be an absolute mess.” I mean, the dishes wouldn’t be done. He was so lazy that if he ate something, he would just throw like the wrappers on the floors. Um, almost like hoarding, like papers would be everywhere.”
Regardless of whether the kids and I could turn our home into a hoarder’s house during my ex-wife’s 12 hour shift as a nurse, I fail to see what it had to do with the grand jury proceedings. Another comical issue deals with the 357 magnum. My ex-wife testified that I bought it after she filed for divorce, which was true and she testified to that during the divorce hearing. Her lawyer, Angela G. Loechel, who also testified before the Grand Jury, testified that the gun was purchased before my ex-wife filed for divorce.

Probably the most disgusting and malicious attempt to mislead the Grand Jury came from Sheriff Kreinhop during the last minute of Grand Jury testimony. Kreinhop stated, “I have 26 criminal investigative years of experience and I’ve never encountered an individual, even on murder cases, where they filed motions for appeal and so forth and never had anybody file this many. I think these were all attempt by [Dan] to delay the process and I don’t think, of course it’s my opinion, but I don’t think he really wanted to be with his children. I think he’s using that as a platform to exercise his First Amendment right to free speech and there is limits as I’m sure you’ll be advised, or told at some point, to free speech and I think he’s went beyond that but that’s my opinion.” Mr. Negangard then said, “I have no further questions.”

That’s how it ended. They put a fictional line on free speech and then convinced a Grand Jury that I crossed it. There were no threats. There was no need for protection. There was no mention of how Judge Humphrey continued to preside over my divorce case for nearly ten months after police escorts and fear that I would abduct his family members, or worse. It was only an all out effort to destroy Dan Brewington, because he said too much. Here’s your tax dollars at work Dearborn County.

Am I going to be allowed to wear a suit and tie to court? 9/27/11

2011-09-28T16:06:00.002-04:00

My public defender, Bryan Barrett, must be mad at me because I write about the lack of communication between the two of us. In the time since his appointment on 6/20/11 to the writing of this post, 9/26/11, Mr. Barrett’s only meeting with me came on 7/18/11 and, at the time, Mr. Barrett had yet to review over 1,700 pages of documents that the prosecution said they may use against me. Mr. Barrett got angry with me because I repeatedly called the Rush County Public Defender’s Office in an effort to speak to him. Since the office would not accept my calls to take a message for Mr. Barrett, the only way I could reach him was to keep calling in the hopes that he would be in the office and accept my calls. Now it is a week before my jury trial and I don’t even know if Mr. Barrett is going to file the appropriate motion to prevent me from having to appear in front of a jury wearing orange jail clothes.

My mother raised this issue with Mr. Barrett’s assistant on 8/4/11 via email. She informed Justin Kerr that a DCLEC correction officer told me my attorney would have to file a motion to permit me to wear street clothes at trial. Mr. Barrett assigned Kerr, who is not a lawyer, to work on my case in Barrett’s absence. Mr. Kerr replied, “Whoever the alleged corrections officer happens to be, he is he either A) imaginary or B) doesn’t know what he or she is talking about” and claimed Indiana law prohibits jurors from seeing inmates in anything other than street clothes. Section 5.2 of the DCLEC handbook states the inmate’s attorney must request permission from the Court for an inmate to wear the inmate’s own clothes. As for the correction officer who told me this, I talked to Officer Turner yesterday so he definitely is not imaginary.

This is yet another troubling situation during the course of my criminal proceedings. If Bryan Barrett files the appropriate paperwork to allow me to wear a suit and tie, it will demonstrate how non-attorney Kerr not only gave me legal advice, but gave me bad legal advice. I tried to explain to Judge Brian Hill that Barrett’s assistant was acting as a lawyer in Barrett’s absence. Judge Hill assured me that Justin Kerr had only relayed communication and had not participated in any duties requiring an Indiana law license. How would he know? He didn’t. Rather than question me about my allegations or ask for evidence, Rush County Judge Brian Hill assumed that I was either mistaken or lying about Kerr giving legal advice without a law license. Either Judge Hill did not believe or did not care that Justin Kerr, who is an investigator out of the Rush County Public Defender’s Office, was giving bad legal advice.

Bryan Barrett has never asked me about potential evidence or witnesses. He didn’t object to the anonymous jury. Barrett waived my right to raise issues concerning my medical treatment, while incarcerated in the DCLEC. He refused to contact my family and/or my Ohio attorney for information and evidence. Following a hearing on Monday July 18, 2011, he told me that he would meet with me later in the week. He never returned. Barrett refused to subpoena and/or depose any witnesses. He won’t even take the proper measures that would allow me to wear a suit and tie during my jury trial. I have absolutely no knowledge of the strategy for my legal defense. Who knows? Maybe my public defender will fly into the courtroom on October 3^rd wearing a cape. Maybe he has a strategy that is infallible. Maybe he already made the arrangements for me to wear my street clothes. For anyone facing prison time, who has spent nearly 7 months in jail, it is a tough pill to swallow. Lawyers usually do not neglect their clients because the news is too good.

It amazes me how such a small group of people can exercise such public incompetence and/or corruption without batting an eye. I was arrested because I made too many negative remarks about public officials; Negangard and McHenry knowingly presented false information/evidence to the court; and I do not have the ability to address it with the Court because Bryan Barrett refused to contact me. My trial will probably be held in the basement of the courthouse so no one can witness the civil right violations. I guess I’ll start ironing my county oranges.

Dear Prosecutor Negangard, When are you going to just mail it in? 9 27 11

2011-09-28T15:13:00.003-04:00

The longer Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard allows his criminal prosecution/persecution of me to spiral out of control, the easier it is for me to demonstrate the high level of corruption and ignorance in the Dearborn County, Indiana legal system. Negangard serving as a county prosecutor is equivalent to appointing Bernie Madoff to head the SEC. They both know the rules and regulations of their respective trades, and they both know how to break them.

I recently found out what I did to get arrested. First of all, Negangard and Judge James D. Humphrey claimed I communicated a threat to Humphrey and his family because I posted his wife’s name and their address on the internet; however Negangard failed to arrest my “accomplices” in the crime, the entities that maintain the internet sites of the Dearborn County Tax Assessor and the Indiana Supreme Court because they posted the information first. (At the time, Humphrey's wife served as an advisor on the Supreme Court Ethics and Professionalism Committee.) I simply copied the already public information and pasted it in my posts. Dr. Edward J. Connor claims that I communicated a threat to him by copying a public photo of Dr. Connor dancing, which was on a public social networking site, and then re-posting it in a blog post. Judge Humphrey, Dr. Connor, Prosecutor Negangard, and Sheriff Kreinhop believe that I communicated threats to the alleged “victims” when I publicly stated that Judge Humphrey and Dr. Connor were criminals, abusers of children and families, tyrants, dangers to society etc… Sheriff Kreinhop believes that I crossed the lines between freedom of speech and intimidation and harassment. Judge Humphrey said I went too far. Prosecutor Negangard said my internet postings were not protected by the First Amendment because they were unsubstantiated… you heard that right. Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard insists that I should be a convicted felon because I made unsubstantiated comments about public officials on the internet.

In NAACP v. Claiborn Hardware Co., the United States Supreme Court wrote, “so long as the means are peaceful, the communication need not meet the standards of acceptability.” I want to clarify this for officials like Judge Humphrey, Prosecutor Negangard, and Sheriff Kreinhop; I peacefully posted the information on the internet so it doesn’t matter if you find my speech to be acceptable. But this is why prosecutor Negangard has resorted to cheating after I refused a plea deal; he knows he and his band of tyrants are lying. He just counted on me not being able to sit it out in jail.

There it is; I just summed up the simplicity of the argument against the prosecution in my shortest blog post ever. All Negangard can do now is add to the damage he’s already caused.

THE COWARDS, INCOMPETENTS, AND DESPOTS OF DEARBORN COUNTY

2011-09-27T09:51:00.001-04:00

Guest Blogger

I have watched from afar the situation involving Mr. Brewington and it is truly appalling the level of indifference of the attorneys, citizens, and elected officials in Dearborn County to the actions of the Prosecutor in this case and the Judges involved.

It is hard to understand there is not one attorney in Dearborn County who will stand up and support the Constitution and protect an individual’s First Amendment rights. Is the fear of the Prosecutor and the Judges so great within the legal community that it will permit an innocent man to be subjected to malicious prosecution without a word? Do the pocketbooks of the attorneys in Dearborn County override their oath as attorneys? Rest assured when the Prosecutor comes for the attorneys, I hope they all receive the same level of indifference to their plight as Mr. Brewington

Let’s discuss the level of legal representation and justice Mr. Brewington has received to date on the pending charges. Judge Blankenship, who sits on the same bench with Judge Humphrey, handled the arraignment of Mr. Brewington on the charges brought by the Prosecutor. Does anyone see a possible conflict of interest? Does anyone in Dearborn County write a letter to the Indiana Supreme Court concerning the issue of the obvious conflict of interest involving Judge Blankenship? Where is the legal community? Where are the citizens who permit this to occur?

Let’s discuss the bond for Mr. Brewington set at $600,000 by Judge Blankenship and someone makes the case that it is a reasonable bond. The bond is set by a Judge who has a conflict on the case and Mr. Brewington is unrepresented at the arraignment by counsel. Not only is Mr. Brewington not represented at the arraignment, the Dearborn County courts do not have a policy or procedure to appoint counsel for Brewington in advance of his arraignment. It is no wonder Dearborn County needs a bigger jail when the judges are setting bonds at astronomical levels for defendants who challenge the justice system in Dearborn County. Soon the jail advocates can simply erect a fence around Dearborn County!

If you want to discuss the public defenders assigned to Brewington’s case take careful note that the first public defender was appointed by Judge Blankenship, the conflict judge. There is nothing critical of the public defenders on the blog sites assigned to Brewington’s case until the point their representation was so pathetic, it cried out to be disclosed to the public. The first public defender withdrew when Brewington did not accept a plea deal. It would benefit the public to view the motion to reduce bond filed by the public defender which lists in the body of the motion the name of a different defendant and different crimes. Sometimes an attorney should at least proofread what is filed with the Court.

The first public defender withdrew because he alleged a conflict of interest because Judge Humphrey was a witness and the public defender had other cases before Judge Humphrey. Judge Hill, the current trial Judge for Brewington, permitted the first public defender to withdraw because of the alleged conflict. The Prosecutor has more cases before Judge Humphrey than the first public defender, so it seems obvious the Prosecutor should get off the case. If Judge Hill made a determination the first public defender had a conflict, why not the Prosecutor?

The second public defender has seen Mr. Brewington on how many occasions? Look at the docket sheet for Mr. Brewington’s case and attempt to determine how many witnesses were subpoenaed to testify on behalf of Mr. Brewington. There are no witnesses subpoenaed as of September 22, 2011. Check and see what witnesses were disclosed by Mr. Brewington’s second public defender through September 22, 2011 on the docket sheet and there are none. Check and see what records were disclosed by Mr. Brewington’s second public defender to be used at trial and there are none. The assignment of an attorney masquerading in a warm body to represent Mr. Brewington is hardly “effective assistance of counsel.” Is this what the court system has become in Dearborn County? Is there an obligation on the part of the Judge, the Prosecutor, or the attorneys in Dearborn County to report such lax representation for a defendant? If history proves right, the Judges, Prosecutor, and the local attorneys will follow the path of see no evil, hear no evil, and speak no evil since their dog is not in the fight. What a conundrum for the Judges, Prosecutor, and the local attorneys – do what is right or simply look the other way! Not only are the Judges, Prosecutor, and local attorneys looking the other way, they are greasing the skids of injustice for Mr. Brewington. Who is next? You, me, your family my family?

Is there any truth in the Dearborn County system? It is obvious the Prosecutor and McHenry wouldn’t know the truth or search for the truth after the allegations concerning the information about the drive by hit. No investigation and no verification of the information submitted to the Court by either the Prosecutor or McHenry. It is presented to the Court as truthful by the Prosecutor and McHenry, yet never by them. The Judge simply accepts the information as truthful based on the testimony of McHenry and the statements of the Prosecutor. The second public defender does nothing to investigate or determine the accuracy of the information presented to the Court or investigate the allegations in advance of the bond hearing. It becomes painfully obvious why a public defender is selected when so little is done to protect a client. The warm body selected by Judge Hill to defend Brewington is a joke. Hopefully at some point in the future, Judge Hill will have the opportunity to appoint the same individual to represent someone Judge Hill cares for and loves and the public defender goes about his job in the same manner. Would Judge Hill howl or what?

Finally, it seems painfully obvious that whether you like Brewington or hate Brewington, he has done a service to the citizens of Dearborn County to inform the citizens of the quality of the individuals elected to serve the citizens. Do you get that warm fuzzy feeling about the truthfulness of your elected officials? Do you believe your elected officials are truthful and honest? Do you believe they adequately investigate anything? Do you believe that Judge Blankenship and Judge Humphrey are fair and impartial? Do you believe it is worthwhile for Dearborn County to spend a minimum of $7,500 for the round the clock protection of Judge Humphrey when there was no threat? Do you believe that Judge Humphrey is worried about his address being on the internet when it can be accessed on the tax assessor’s website? If Judge Humphrey is so worried about his address being on a website, then he has the wrong job! There are any number of attorneys who could take over for Judge Humphrey and dispense justice in an even-handed manner without his histrionics. If we don’t check out the individuals elected to office, we are destined to have more of the same timid and lying officeholders we have at the present time.

Brewington only opened our eyes to the problem. The problem remains, not because of Brewington but because Brewington shined the light on individuals with no respect for the law and in turn no respect for our rights. I say kudos for Brewington in much the same manner as I do for anyone who chases from office individuals who do not respect the law or our rights as citizens.

Guest Blogger

The Smoking Gun That Proves Prosecutor Negangard’s Criminal Activity! 9/23/11

2011-09-23T11:23:00.003-04:00

“Where do I even start?” This is the question I found myself pondering when I sat down to write this post. How about this;”Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard and Special Crimes Unit Detective Shane McHenry conspired to commit fraud upon the court during my bond reduction hearing.” I could go with, “Prosecutor Negangard wasted thousands of dollars of Dearborn County taxpayers’ money on bogus 7 day, 24 hour surveillance outside the home of Judge James D. Humphrey in an effort to illegally build a phony case against Dan Brewington.” Or I could just begin here, ”The Inmate Movement History from the Hamilton County (Ohio) Jail Management System proves that Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard and Detective/County Commissioner Shane McHenry were fully aware that Hamilton County Jail inmate Keith Jones lied about Dan Brewington inquiring about someone performing a “drive-by shooting” on Judge James D. Humphrey, when Negangard and McHenry tried to convince the public and the court that Dan Brewington presented a physical danger to Dearborn County residents.” How do I know Negangard and McHenry are defrauding the courts and taxpayers of Dearborn County, Indiana? Because the Inmate Movement History at the Hamilton County Justice Center proves that Keith Jones and Dan Brewington never crossed paths while at the Justice Center.

The extent of the corruption in the Dearborn County government will never surprise me because I have been the subject of ongoing efforts, by people like Judge Humphrey and Prosecutor Negangard, to illegally deprive me of my children, my free speech, and my personal freedom. What I find to be amazing is the reckless, arrogant stupidity in making up a lie that could be easily disproved. During my bond reduction hearing on August 17, 2011, Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard called Detective Shane McHenry to testify about McHenry’s “investigation” of a report that I approached Keith Jones in the Hamilton County Justice Center, and asked him if he knew anyone that would do a drive-by shooting on Judge James D. Humphrey. Judge Brian Hill denied my request for a bond reduction stating, “The State also presented evidence that since his arrest, the Defendant may have contemplated violence towards at least one alleged victim in this case.” What Negangard and McHenry failed to mention was that they knew Keith Jones and I were never even in the same building at the Hamilton County jail but they ran with it anyway, in a malicious and vindictive attempt to prosecute me for publicly criticizing the Dearborn County Government.Hamilton County Jail Management Movement History

Prosecutor Negangard is a sick and twisted individual. “Evil” fits in as well. He not only knowingly used Keith Jones’ false statements against me in Court, but Negangard also used Jones’ statements in a quest to build public fear of Dan Brewington. Negangard took a page out of Adolf Hitler’s playbook as Negangard attempted to propagate false fears to the public because he felt that I posed a risk to the ongoing corruption in Dearborn County. Negangard and McHenry pulled in the “military” to perform a 7 day, 24 hour surveillance on Judge Humphrey’s home to bolster their fictional criminal case against me. They knew I had never met Keith Jones yet they wasted thousands of dollars of taxpayer money and dozens of hours of law enforcement manpower when they set up the unnecessary surveillance on Humphrey’s home… but they got caught.

“He is just trying to sabotage his own defense.” That was Prosecutor Negangard’s reasoning as to why I shouldn’t be able to postpone my October 3, 2011 trial to a later date. Why would Negangard care if I was trying to sabotage my own case? He wasn’t concerned; he just didn’t have a valid excuse. I told Judge Hill that my public defender had made no effort to defend me from the Keith Jones allegations. Negangard knew that any inquiry into Negangard and McHenry’s Keith Jones propaganda would not only seal the fate of the case against me, but could seal the fate of their professional careers as well. Negangard probably felt like he was in the clear after Judge Hill denied my request to continue my jury trial, but Negangard never counted on my Ohio Lawyer, who is also representing me in a civil case in the Indian Southern District Federal Court, coming up with a key piece of evidence that would shatter Negangard’s façade.

Now the question is, “Who else knew about this?” Did Judge Sally Blankenship know about Negangard and McHenry’s bogus allegations when she set my bond at $600,000? If she did, who told her because it wasn’t presented to the Court? I find it hard to believe that Judge Blankenship would not be notified about an alleged death threat on a fellow Dearborn County Judge and/or the 7 day, 24 hour police surveillance on Judge Humphrey’s home. Why did she even rule on my case if she was aware of the alleged threat? Could this be the reason neither one of my public defenders wanted anything to do with my Ohio attorney. Maybe they felt more comfortable in allowing me to be convicted rather than tipping the ox cart. And who else was aware that Negangard and McHenry were knowingly using the false accounts of Keith Jones in an effort to destroy me? Did Sheriff Mike Kreinhop know? What about Judge Humphrey? How about Deputies David Lusby and Terry Van Winkle? They were involved in setting up the costly surveillance outside of Humphrey’s home. I wonder if my public defenders were aware of the bogus Jones story. It wouldn’t even surprise me if Judge Brian Hill is aware of Negangard’s shenanigans. Judge Hill met privately with Negangard and my public defender, Bryan Barrett for nearly a half hour before my pretrial hearing on September 19, 2011 and Judge Hill promptly denied my request to continue my trial. Judge Hill denied my request to continue my trial because he said I was adamant about not continuing my trial back in August. I’m still having a hard time figuring out where Judge Hill and Negangard came up with that information because there is no mention in the court record of me being adamant about anything. The fact is that all of the mentioned legal and law enforcement officials were going to allow me to march off to slaughter without questioning Negangard’s fictional threat, while at the same time doing everything in their power to prohibit me from challenging Negangard’s preposterous allegations.

I have no idea how many people knew about the lie of Prosecutor Negangard and Detective/Deputy/Commissioner McHenry. I do know that by posting this information, many people will be aware of their illegal actions. It will be interesting to see if anyone does anything about it. Public internet posts like these are exactly the reason why tyrants like Judge James D. Humphrey and Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard have fought tooth and nail to deprive me of everything that is precious in my life. They have taken my children and my freedom but they could never strip me of my dedication to be a father and they could never detract from the many friends and family who have supported me along the way. Negangard was fully aware of the two precious little girls who were without a father when Negangard did everything in his power to destroy my credibility in order to salvage his own credibility. Negangard coldly and maliciously stomped on the hearts of my 5 and 7 year old daughters by trying to eliminate any hopes that they would be reunited with their father. Negangard’s disingenuous Keith Jones scheme came as a last resort when I refused to take a plea deal that would ensure my release. The prosecutor’s overall strategy has always been to do whatever is necessary to prevent me from damaging the credibility of Negangard and his cronies. Tyrants like Negangard are angered when they discover that respect is a virtue that is earned, not forced. Unfortunately for Negangard, respect is a virtue that will elude him for years to come.

As always, I want to thank everyone for the ongoing support. I also would encourage everyone to contact local, state, and federal authorities to inform them of the illegal actions of Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard and Dearborn County Commissioner/Special Crimes Unit Detective Shane McHenry. Dearborn County residents should call for the immediate resignation of these officials and should demand that the taxpayers be reimbursed for any monies that Prosecutor Negangard has squandered for his personal vendettas. Maybe finally Prosecutor Negangard will understand the power and importance of our constitutional right to free speech. I hope to see everyone on the outside soon. Thanks again.

Medical Conditions at the DCLEC, Update 9/22/11

2011-09-22T13:29:00.000-04:00

The Doctor at the Dearborn County law Enforcement Center, Dr. Nadir Al-Shami, is either one of the most highly trained and medically diverse physicians in the world, or he is conspiring with Sheriff Michael Kreinhop and Captain Dave Hall to deny proper medical care to DCLEC inmates. I have written how Dr. Al-Shami and the DCLEC altered my Ritalin prescription without contacting my prescribing physician, which is a violation of 201 IAC 3-1-11(k). The DCLEC contends that Dr. Al-Shami is as qualified, if not more qualified, than my treating physician and experts at Harvard Medical School in determining proper prescription dosages for adults diagnosed with ADHD. The DCLEC and Dr. Al-Shami believe that Dr. Al-Shami is more than qualified to overrule the prescription orders of a liver specialist, as Dr. Al-Shami altered the prescription of a man, who receives disability due to problems with his liver, without consulting the liver specialist and without performing any medical testing. As Dr. Al-Shami is a medical “expert” who wears many hats, Sheriff Kreinhop and Captain Dave Hall crowned Dr. Al-Shami as the DCLEC expert in an entirely different specialized medical field; dentistry.

Unfortunately this isn’t an attempt by me to create some kind of satirical metaphor to emphasize the inadequacies of the health care available to inmates in the DCLEC. This is another example of how Sheriff Kreinhop, Captain Dave Hall and Dr. Nadir Al-Shami, of Advanced Correctional Healthcare, are maliciously denying medical treatment to DCLEC inmates. The latest medical policy of the DCLEC requires inmates to first meet with the jail doctor before seeing the jail dentist. If Dr. Al-Shami determines that the dental issue is a medical emergency then the inmate is permitted to see the dentist. I learned about this new policy on 9/19/11, when an inmate informed me that he was prohibited from seeing the dentist for an abscessed, decayed tooth because Dr. Al-Shami concluded that the dental issue was not a medical emergency. This is coming from the same doctor who tells inmates to meditate rather than allowing the inmates to take medications that were prescribed prior to the inmates’ incarceration. This is the same doctor who had to consult with a prescription reference book to determine what average Ritalin dosages actually were before he altered the dose of my prescribing physician, who specializes in treating adults diagnosed with ADHD. I’ve known the inmate with the dental problem for five months. I’ve spent a good part of my jail time talking to him and getting to know him. I know that every few weeks the man is holding the right side of his jaw because his decayed tooth has developed an abscess. My cheap jail dictionary defines an abscess as “An infected place in the body which becomes sore and swollen and contains pus”. I’m neither a general practice doctor, nor am I a doctor of dentistry but I can say with certainty that the man’s tooth is dark gray, on its way to turning black. Judging from his swollen gum and the appearance of a boil just below the tooth, I’d say it meets the definition of “abscess.” Is the condition a medical emergency? Not by DCLEC standards. In my six months in the DCLEC I’ve concluded that there are two factors in determining whether a situation is a medical emergency: 1) Is the inmate going to die within the next fifteen minutes; and 2) Can the DCLEC be sued if they fail to provide medical treatment. Those are the DCLEC tests for “medical emergency.”

The inmate with the bad tooth is approximately 6’ 3” and probably weighs close to 320 pounds. He used to exercise regularly by walking stairs but is now unable to do so because of foot and ankle problems due to the fact that DCLEC foot ware offers little support for a man of his size. (Note: The inmate did see the DCLEC doctor about his foot problems, but Dr. Al-Shami, who also serves as the DCLEC podiatrist, concluded that the inmate did not have any problems with his feet.) So now the DCLEC is acknowledging the inmate has mobility problems, is very overweight and has reoccurring infections in his mouth that the DCLEC will not treat. Why, because he probably won’t die on the watches of Sheriff Kreinhop and Captain Dave Hall.

The DCLEC denies medical treatment to inmates out of convenience and/or to save money. The DCLEC dentist is only available once a month. This is to maintain the dental health of inmates as required by law. Sheriff Kreinhop and Captain Dave Hall use Dr. Nadir Al-Shami and Advanced Correctional Healthcare as a “buffer” to keep medical expenses low. The DCLEC did not drastically reduce my Ritalin prescription to protect my health. If the DCLEC was concerned about my health, the medical staff would have contacted my prescribing doctor before reducing my dose to less than a third of my original prescription. Dr. Al-Shami’s latest dental diagnosis is an oxymoron of monumental proportions. Dr. Al-Shami concluded that the inmate’s dental problem was not a medical emergency so it was not necessary for the inmate to see the dentist the next time the dentist arrived at the DCLEC. If the dental problem would have been a medical emergency (emergency – A sudden and unexpected situation requiring prompt action), the inmate would have been forced to wait up to several weeks until the jail dentist would be available to address the “sudden and unexpected” dental “situation requiring prompt action.” Dr. Al-Shami’s findings also demonstrate another troubling problem; either the DCLEC staff is incapable of detecting medical emergencies that require “prompt” medical action, or the DCLEC staff is willfully and maliciously subjecting an overweight inmate’s heart and body to unnecessary infections on a regular basis because treatment is inconvenient and/or costly. By the way, did I mention that the inmate was only requesting that the decayed tooth by pulled? Unfortunately, the new dental policy requires an inmate’s tooth to become infected to the point the infection subsequently leads to life threatening blood poisoning, which, by Dr. Al-Shami’s account, will require the inmate to wait until Dr. Al-Shami is scheduled to be in the DCLEC because the DCLEC staff is not capable of detecting medical emergencies and/or qualified to handle the “sudden and unexpected” medical “situation requiring prompt actions.”

Feel free to contact Dearborn County Sheriff Mike Kreinhop and/or DCLEC Captain Dave Hall with any questions or concerns about the negligent medical practices of the DCLEC. Feel free to contact local and state officials to express your opinions regarding the malicious and dangerous medical practices of Dr. Nadir Al-Shami and Advanced Correctional Healthcare. I will be providing Sheriff Kreinhop and Captain Hall hard copies of this post so there will be no question of whether they are aware of the matter.

My Emotional Scars and Subconscious. Written 9/12/11

2011-09-21T13:05:00.000-04:00

Last night I had a dream that I was reunited with my daughters. I found out at the last minute that they would be with me over a Fourth of July weekend. In my dream, where time and travel often have no boundaries, we decided to go to a beach in Florida. The timing of my dream was a bit off because I didn’t meet up with my daughters until I arrived at the hotel room. I can only say that I hope the real thing will be as good as my dream. My girls, who had visibly grown since the last time I’d seen them, yelled “Daddy!” and attacked me with hugs. After the heartfelt reunion, we decide to hit the water so we suited up. My mind was racing about safety issues. How bad was the undertow in the ocean? Are the girls, strong swimmers? Did I have the maximum SPF sunblock? I knew I had to have every safety issue nailed down because I could lose them again if there was one oversight or accident. After I covered all of the bases, I was confident that we would have a trouble free day of fun in the sun. The girls and I were only outside for a little while before we noticed lightening far out in the ocean. Not wanting to take any chances we went back to the hotel room to watch a movie. It was truly a wonderful moment. I was lounging in a big recliner with both of my daughters sitting on the armrests, snuggling up next to dad. There was no place in the world I would have rather been than holding on to my precious angels.

A short time later we decided to go grocery shopping, as we always liked to do, for supplies for dinner. The date was July 5^th because I received a text message from the girls’ mother stating that she had scheduled doctor appointments for the girls on July 4^th but I never took them. My mind started racing. Did I forget? Did she tell me about the appointment? Why would the pediatrician schedule appointments on Fourth of July weekend? It was then that I received the gut wrenching news. My ex-wife sent another text that she was going to tell the court. I was scared that I would have to go back to jail and would lose my daughters forever. Then I woke up.

The only reoccurring dream that I have on any regular basis is a dream that I somehow lose my teeth. I’ve always attributed it to the hellish years I wore metal contraptions to straighten my teeth and to correct an overbite. Dreams about jail and losing my daughters are becoming more common. I’ve had dreams that my little girls found a new father. I’ve had dreams where I have appeared in public wearing my orange jail clothes. I tell people that I have to go back to jail before the guards notice that I am gone. These dreams are becoming more common. They are subconscious fears that I may have to deal with for the rest of my life.

This is another aspect of the damage that people like Judge James D. Humphrey and Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard have inflicted on me. Am I going to get out of jail? Yes. Will I get to see my daughters again? Most definitely. Will I carry emotional scars that will haunt me from time to time throughout the rest of my life? Probably. I just hope that my daughters are young enough to escape most of the permanent scars and damage. But that’s why I remain on the path I’m currently walking. No child, mother, or father should fall victim to evil people like Judge Humphrey and Prosecutor Negangard. The harder they work to destroy me only makes me stronger. At least my daughters will someday understand how their daddy’s love is boundless and unfaltering.

Unofficial Minutes of the Pre-Trial Hearing 9/19/11

2011-09-19T18:35:00.003-04:00

A link to The Dearborn County Blog

Prosecutor Negangard’s Conflicting Interest in my Case is the Reason Why the Prosecutor Cannot Step Down

2011-09-13T20:20:00.001-04:00

Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard is doing everything in his power to prosecute me despite the fact that Prosecutor Negangard appears to have an unbelievable conflict of interest with my case. The problem that Prosecutor Negangard faces is no special prosecutor would take my case to trial so Negangard has no choice but to ignore his conflicts and special interests that are directly and indirectly tied to my criminal trial. Negangard is turning a blind eye to all laws and regulations pertaining to bias, prejudice, and impropriety in legal proceedings in a last ditch effort to save his reputation, his job, and to possible save him from being criminally charged for maliciously violating civil rights laws.

On March 17, 2011, Judge Sally A. Blankenship disqualified herself from my case and stated, “No judicial officer in Dearborn County is able to hear this matter.” The second judge in my case, Decatur Circuit Judge John A. Westhafer was appointed by the Indiana Supreme Court, but later recused himself because he had known one of the alleged “victims” in my case, Judge James D. Humphrey, for 25 years and considered Judge Humphrey to be a “good friend.” On June 17, 2011, the third judge in my case, Rush County Circuit Judge Brian D. Hill granted my first public defender’s motion to withdraw because Mr. Watson stated that he had multiple cases in Judge Humphrey’s court and claimed the “situation at minimum creates an appearance of impropriety.” Prosecutor Negangard is an officer of the Dearborn County courts, a friend of Judge James D. Humphrey, and has many cases in Judge Humphrey’s court, yet for some reason the prosecutor does not believe that the issues present the appearance of impropriety. Please note that the above situations are not the only matters that should be subjected to the impropriety test. Please read the following and decide for yourselves whether you believe that Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard has a conflict of interest in prosecuting my case. [Impropriety-The quality or state of being improper, an improper act or remark. Please also note that the test for impropriety in law is not determining whether an act, remark, situation, etc., is improper; the test for impropriety is determining whether a reasonable minded person would determine that the act, remark, situation, etc, appears to be improper.] Assuming that the readers of this post are reasonable minded individuals, ascertain whether you believe the following potential conflicts give the appearance that it would be improper for F. Aaron Negangard to serve as the prosecutor in my criminal trial.

1) Negangard tries cases in Humphrey’s court

2) Negangard is friends with Humphrey family.

3) Negangard worked under Humphrey in prosecutor’s office prior to Humphrey becoming judge.

4) July 12, 2010 Negangard sent email to Dan and County Officials stating he would “make every effort to prosecute” Dan

5) July 7, 2010, Negangard lied about Indiana laws regarding investigatory records to obstruct Dan’s access to public records.

6) Negangard claimed Indiana law prohibited the release of investigatory records.

7) Negangard reinforced his misconception to County Officials in 7/12/10 email.

8) Negangard claims that Dan threatened Humphrey in August 2009 but did not initiate grand jury investigation until 2/15/2011.

9) Five days prior to initiating grand jury investigation, Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard dismissed Dan’s complaint against Negangard, a complaint filed June 16, 2010.

10) No evidence of new “threats”, only web writings.

11) Unconstitutional to force person to defend 150,000 words of internet writings over the course of 18 months to support an alleged threat that occurred 18 months prior to grand jury investigation.

12) Negangard’s 7/12/10 email to county officials stated Dan “attacked” his office.

13) Negangard is being sued by Dan.

14) Negangard interviewed Connor on 10/20/11 and thus should be available to testify.

15) Negangard heads the Dearborn County Special Crimes Unit and actively participated in investigation.

16) Negangard heads both the investigation of Dan Brewington and the prosecution of Dan Brewington.

17) Special Crimes Unit detectives, such as Shane McHenry, operate under Negangard’s control and then testify on behalf of Negangard/Prosecution.

18) Negangard has influence over who may be dismissed from SCU and/or power to dismiss detectives from SCU if Negangard is not “pleased” with detectives’ performance.

19) Negangard has been the subject of Dan’s internet writings criticizing Dearborn County officials for nearly two years.

20) Negangard claims Dan’s writings threaten, intimidate, and/or attack the Humphreys, Connor, Blondell, Melissa Brewington, Loechel, Indiana Supreme and Appellate Courts, the current court, as well as himself.

21) Negangard represents the alleged “victims” on behalf of the state while claiming to be a victim of Dan’s “attacks” well over a year ago.

22) Negangard submitted Dan’s Connor complaint filed with the Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychology as evidence to support illegal conduct yet continues to prosecute the case despite Dan filling a complaint and amended complaint against Negangard on 6/16/10 & 7/16/10, respectively.

23) Connor is a witness used by both the Dearborn Co. Courts and Negangard.

24) Both know Connor was appointed as a psychological expert to Indiana courts while not being licensed in Indiana.

25) Simple impropriety test would suggest Negangard has an interest in protecting his expert (Connor) as any findings of illegal and/or unethical conduct on the part of the County’s witness(Connor) could have negative consequences for current and past legal proceedings.

Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard has to be the king of the hypocrites. Prosecutor Negangard is picking and choosing words and phrases from over 2000 pages of “evidence” in his efforts to demonstrate that the totality of my free speech content somehow constitutes threats against public officials. At the same time he is trying to assemble random sections of my writings to rationalize my prosecution, Prosecutor Negangard is disassembling and dismissing an array of potential conflicts in an effort to rationalize why he should remain the prosecutor in my case. Why? It probably has something to do with public comments on websites such as the Dearborn County Public Forum, where comments read, “Negangard’s political reputation is resting on this one. He’s got to win.” And “I think win or lose Negangard’s reputation is already in the toilet.” It appears that Prosecutor Negangard’s only hope in salvaging his reputation is to ignore all conflicts and improprieties and do everything in his power to prosecute Dan Brewington. Feel free to contact me or my family at contactdanbrewington@gmail.com If you feel that the actions of Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard have violated state and/or federal laws, feel free to contact local, state, and or federal authorities to report his actions. Thanks for the support.

The Medical Policies of the Dearborn County Law Enforcement Center Can Be Deadly

2011-09-13T19:08:00.001-04:00

The medical policies under Sheriff Mike Kreinhop and Captain Dave Hall could have deadly ramifications for inmates who are regularly under the care of doctors and medical specialists. 210 IAC 3-1-11(k) of the Indiana Administrative Code states “Jail officials shall use their best efforts to obtain any medication prescribed by a physician. All medications shall be administered in the dosage and with the frequency prescribed. No substitutions of medications shall be made without the prescribing physician’s approval.” One would assume that the prescribing physician refers to the physician that prescribed medication to a person prior to their incarceration in the DCLEC. Not so, says Captain Dave Hall.

Prior to my arrest on March 7, 2011, I sought treatment for ADHD at the Affinity Center in Cincinnati, Ohio. The Affinity Center specializes in diagnosing and treating children and adults who have ADD/ADHD. M y doctor, Dr. Doug Logan MD, prescribed 50mgs of Ritalin, which I took 3-4 times a day. Initially the DCLEC refused to allow me to take my medication. When I raised the constitutional issue of depriving me of my mental health at trial, Captain Hall recognized my Ritalin prescription that was prescribed by Dr. Logan and stated that I would be allowed to take my prescriptions. I soon discovered there was a hitch; I was not permitted to take the Ritalin as prescribed by my physician. The medical staff changed my prescription and only allowed me to take 30 mgs, 2 times a day, without even consulting with Dr. Logan, my prescribing physician. How can DCLEC officials get away with altering my medication without consulting with my prescribing physician per 201 IAC 3-1-11(k)? Easy, they just changed my prescribing physician without my knowledge.

Last week I submitted an Inmate Request Form requesting the name of the doctor that prescribes my Ritalin. The Ritalin bottle that was filled by CVS Pharmacy read, “Dr. Doug Logan.” The pharmacist that listed Dr. Logan as the prescribing physician did so because Dr. Logan wrote the prescription. Captain Dave Hall acknowledged Dr. Logan’s prescription because Captain Hall stated I was allowed to take the prescription. Following Captain Hall’s approval, the DCLEC dismissed Dr. Logan as my prescribing doctor and now claims that my prescribing doctors are Dr. Nadir Al-Shami and two other doctors who I’ve never met. Captain Hall and the DCLEC dismissed my specialist and replaced my prescribing doctor with three doctors who have never written a prescription for Ritalin for me. Captain Hall and the DCLEC medical staff arbitrarily changed my prescribing physician just so they could deprive me of my medication. Am I going to die because of it? No. I will be at a disadvantage during trial without having the ability to focus and concentrate as well as before my arrest. The DCLEC’s medical policies can jeopardize the lives of inmates with serious health conditions as Captain Hall and Sheriff Kreinhop allow the medical staff to disregard the prescription orders from the inmates regular physician by naming doctors who are contracting for the DCLEC as the inmate’s new prescribing physician.

If you have heart problems, you go to a physician who specializes in treating heart problems. When someone develops kidney problems they see a kidney specialist. A person who is diagnosed with cancer doesn’t go to his/her family practitioner for treatment; the person goes to an oncologist. When someone is arrested in Dearborn County, Indiana, medical contractors for the DCLEC become the inmate’s treating specialist. You think I’m exaggerating? One inmate, who has trusted me with his medical and contact information, receives disability because of a serious liver condition. Prior to his arrest in Dearborn County, his liver specialist and family doctor prescribed multiple medications based on extensive examinations and blood work. Upon his arrival at the DCLEC, medical contractor Dr. Nadir Al-Shami arbitrarily decided that the man did not need all of the medications prescribed by his liver specialist and family doctor. The man filed numerous requests and grievances requesting his normal prescriptions, but to no avail. It was only after the man wrote his liver specialist and after the specialist contacted the DCLEC, did the DCLEC give the man his required medications per the orders of the prescribing specialist. Unfortunately, the only way that the DCLEC will recognize a prescribing physician outside of the DCLEC is when the prescribing physician contacts the DCLEC to explain that without the proper medication, the inmate may die.

Most people would probably find the policies of the DCLEC to be despicable and inhumane. No one knows what kind of damage the man with the liver problems may have sustained while the DCLEC refused his necessary treatment. DCLEC officials are not concerned with the man’s health they are only concerned with the liability of an untreated inmate dying in their jail. The officials responsible for implementing the policies are Sheriff Mike Kreinhop and Captain Dave Hall. They simply sit back and wash their hands clean by saying, “it’s up to the jail doctor.” It will take the death of an inmate to call attention to this atrocity. The sad state of the DCLEC’s medical policies is just another example of the corruption and incompetence that plagues the Dearborn County government.

TIMELINE PART II

2011-09-08T17:23:00.003-04:00

On July 19, 2011 I published TIMELINE PART I, this is TIMELINE PART II published on August 29, 2011.

27. A Bond Reduction hearing was scheduled for August 3, 2011.

a. Dan had only talked to Mr. Barrett 1 time since July 18, 2011 and that was because Dan kept calling the public defender’s office until Barrett picked up. A rational call from Mr. Barrett to explain that he had a family emergency would have been a courtesy. But we were left to guess with the bond hearing approaching, as well as the trial.

b. On August 1, 2011 after not hearing from Mr. Barrett since seeing him at the July 18, 2011 hearing, I emailed him. I told him Dan did not want a continuance, that Dan had a lot of information and people that could be subpoenaed to testify as character and medical witnesses. I told him that Dan needed to talk to him that day and sent him my cell phone number, again. Dan had signed papers so Mr. Barrett could discuss his case with his Ohio attorney Robert G. Kelly or with me, Sue Brewington.

c. On August 2, 2011 I got a call from Mr. Barrett’s investigator, Justin Kerr, and he told me there would be no bond hearing because of Mr. Barrett’s family emergency.

d. He wanted Dan to continue his trial and he said that Dan had to decide today, Aug. 2, 2011.

e. If Dan were to continue his trial he could be in jail indefinitely because he would be giving up his right to a speedy trial and there would be all kinds of continuances, no bond reduction hearings…

f. Dan got information that was incorrect from Mr. Kerr

(1) Dan asked, through me, about filing a motion for him to be able to wear street clothes at trial. He responded with an email that explained that the CO that gave Dan the information about wearing street clothes to trial was either imaginary or didn’t know what he was talking about. I checked with Judges’ Cleary and Blankenship’s offices and was told that you did need something in writing to the court, from your attorney. In section 5.2 of the inmate handbook it says something in writing has to be submitted.

(2) Mr. Kerr told Dan that the state had 1 year to try someone but left out that they could only be kept in jail 6 months without trial if they did not file for any continuances. He tried to get Dan to file a continuance. There are 3 exceptions to this, see below.

28. I was reporting our story on the internet and Mr. Kerr didn’t like it so he wrote to say he couldn’t communicate with me anymore.

29. The trial was scheduled for Tuesday, August 16, 2011 at 8:30. Jury selection would be first.

a. Next – Dan’s counsel had to file a Motion to Vacate the Bond Reduction Hearing that was scheduled for August 3, 2011.

b. The judge ordered this because the public defender was out of town on a personal matter and since the trial is set for August 16, 2011 there is no need for a bond reduction hearing.

c. An order vacating the August 3, 2011 Bond Reduction Hearing was filed on August 4, 2011.

30. Judge Brian D. Hill filed a Voir Dire Order on August 4, 2011. That is to convene a jury.

31. On Monday August 8, 2011, Norwood, Ohio Attorney Robert G. Kelly became licensed to practice before the United States District Court Southern District of Indiana. He took his oath of office in Indianapolis and went straight to Dearborn County Law Enforcement Center to see Dan. After almost 5 months Mr. Kelly could finally see Dan under attorney-client privilege.

32. On Tuesday, August 9, 2011 Mr. Kelly filed a Writ of Habeas Corpus with the United States District Court Southern District of Indiana, in Indianapolis.

33. On August 9, 2011 Deputy Prosecutor, M. Joseph Kisor filed a Motion for Confidentiality of Juror’s Names and Identities.

a. Once again Prosecutor Negangard’s office uses the charges as fact when asking for this motion.

(1) The defendant has previously attempted to interfere with the judicial process, including continuous and long-term harassment of witnesses, judges, and attorneys involved.

(2) The defendant has previously made threats against witnesses, judges, and attorneys involved in the current court proceedings.

(3) Juror’s safety would be jeopardized…

(4) To support his argument Prosecutor Negangard’s office uses the case of Carl A. Major Appellant-Defendant vs. State of Indiana, Appellee- Plaintiff. This case involved the shooting of 5 people, 3 died and they were executed, 3 shots to the back of the head. The court ruled that the trial court erred in impaneling an anonymous jury but that such error was harmless, and that Major’s sentence of 175 years was not inappropriate.

(5) The Appellate Court ruled that the even considering the horrendous nature of the crime impaneling an anonymous jury was wrong in this case but it was a harmless error. How could it possibly be appropriate in Dan’s case?

34. On August 10, 2011 Deputy Prosecutor M. Joseph Kisor filed a Motion to Release Grand Jury Exhibits to the Prosecuting Attorney for Dan’s trial. We don’t even know what that means because we can’t talk to Dan’s attorney.

35. On August 11, 2011 there is an Order Vacating Jury Trial because the public defender had a family emergency, which he truly did, and Judge Brian D. Hill wanted to make sure the Defendant would get his right of effective assistance of counsel at trial.

36. As part of the above order, Judge Brian D. Hill also set a Bond Reduction Hearing for Wednesday, August 17, 2011 at 10:00AM.

37. On Friday, August 12, 2011 Bryan E. Barrett called me in a 1 minute 17 second phone conversation to tell me that the trial had been vacated and that a bond reduction hearing was to be set for August 17, 2011 and he would be there.

38. There was not going to be any attempt to call character or medical witnesses for Dan.

39. No communication with the attorney until August 17, 2011

40. Bond Hearing – Wednesday, August 17, 2011

a. Dan came in with help from a CO trying to carry all of his documents because he didn’t know what counsel would want or what he intended to do. He was wearing pink handcuffs that would rub his wrists red because he had to constantly go through his 1400 pages of discoveries with no help and not being able to take off the handcuffs. No one even asked if that was possible.

b. Barrett never talked to Dan. Barrett sat in the spectator seats until the judge was ready to come in and then Mr. Barrett moved to his spot next to Dan.

c. Barrett had no witnesses to call for Dan. No character or mental health witnesses. They would have been available if there had been time to call them.

d. Negangard calls Det. Shane McHenry to the stand.

(1). He testified that they have a recorded interview with someone who was in Hamilton County Justice Center when Dan was there. The man’s name is Keith L Jones. The Cincinnati Police got a crimestopper’s call (they are all anonymous) with a story that someone in jail was trying to hire a person to do a drive by on a judge.

(2). That someone was “allegedly” Dan.

(3). The man supposedly had details so you would know that he talked to Dan, or overhead Dan talking to someone.

(4). Keith L. Jones supposedly said he knew someone and supposedly gave Dan 2 phone numbers.

(5). The police checked only one number and the person (the informant’s daughter) had never heard of Dan Brewington.

(6). Prosecutor Negangard gave the recording to the judge.

(7). Keith L. Jones has a criminal record pages long covering 2 counties in Ohio; Hamilton and Franklin and the Federal Government. Charges consist of taking the identity of another, forgery, insurance fraud, falsification, receiving stolen property, possession of criminal tools, multiple felony thefts, and probation violation.

(8). Keith L. Jones has been an informant for the police but is now serving a ten-year prison sentence.

(9). Cincinnati Police didn’t pursue this further.

(10). The ATF officer didn’t pursue this further.

(11). The Hamilton County Prosecutor didn’t file charges nor did the Dearborn County Prosecutor file charges.

(12). The Dearborn County Sheriff formed a protective unit around the clock for Judge Humphrey from March 11, 2011 through March 18, 2011.

(13). During this time Dan was in custody in their Jail but they didn’t interrogate him. They just listened in to all of his conversations for a week. They didn’t hear anything about a drive by.

(14). F. Aaron Negangard offered Dan a plea bargain in May through public defender #1, John Watson. Mr. Watson conveyed this information to Norwood attorney Robert G. Kelly. It was time served. Would Negangard offer time served to a person who tried to hire someone to do a drive by on a judge?????

(15). He used it at the Bond Hearing to try to promote his argument that Dan is dangerous.

(16). For unofficial transcribed minutes to this hearing see

http://dearborncounty.blogspot.com/2011/08/17-august-2011-dan-brewington-bond.html

41. On Friday, August 19, 2011 at 3:23PM Dan filed a complaint and jury demand(lawsuit), by his Norwood, Ohio Attorney Robert G. Kelly, in the United States District Court Southern District of Indiana naming:

a. Judge James D. Humphrey – Family Court Judge Dearborn County, Indiana

b. Edward J. Connor – Child Custody Evaluator from Erlanger, Kentucky working in Indiana without a license.

c. F. Aaron Negangard – Prosecutor of Dearborn County, Indiana

d. Michael Kreinhop – Sheriff of Dearborn County, Indiana

e. Heidi Humphrey – former member of the Indiana Supreme Court Ethics and Professionalism Committee in September,2009.

f. Angela Loechel – divorce attorney, Lawrenceburg, Indiana.

g. Dearborn County, Indiana

John Does 1-25 For a complete copy of the complaint and jury demand (lawsuit) go to

http://dearborncounty.blogspot.com/2011/08/brewington-federal-lawsuit-filed-august.html

42. Order Denying Bond Reduction – filed August 23, 2011.

a. State presented evidence the Defendant has a history of refusing to follow court orders and disdain for authority of the court.

(1). Negangard made a point that Dan didn’t have the court ordered mental health exam and Dan’s attorney made no attempt to be able to ask Dan what he had done.

(2). Negangard made a point that Dan had not paid his ex $122,000 that he was ordered to pay to her immediately. Note: Dan has a public defender because he has no money.

(3). Dan has not paid Angela Loechel the $40,000 the court ruled he owed her.

(4). The first 3 all pertain to Dan’s divorce decree, filed August 18, 2009.

(5). He is current with child support payments and has never missed a payment.

(6). Disdain for the court is subjective. As far as bond goes, showing disdain for the court matters only if that disdain suggests that a defendant wouldn’t show for trial. It is ridiculous to suggest that someone, who doesn’t take a plea for time served and states that he wants to go to trial to proclaim his innocence, would run from trial.

(7). The state also presented evidence that since his arrest; the defendant may have contemplated violence towards at least one alleged victim in this case. See testimony of Det. Shane McHenry.

(8). The court concurs with Judge Sally Blankenship’s Bond. If she knew about the “alleged” drive by she didn’t mention it.

(9) What happened to Dan’s right to be released on or about September 11, 2011 because he has been in jail for 6 months and had not asked for a continuance? Judge Hill solved that issue by ruling that this case fell under the category of emergency so he invoked the emergency clause and Dan wasn’t going to get out in the 6 months the law demands through no fault of Dan’s.

43. Order to Release Grand Jury Exhibits – Filed August 23, 2011 – We still don’t know what that means.

44. There is an order that sets the Jury Trial for October 3, 2011 and the pretrial for September 19,

2011. There is a deadline for witness lists and subpoenas and Dan has only talked briefly to his attorney, who still hasn’t subpoenaed any witnesses, either character or medical. The attorney is supposed to visit this week, we will report later on this.

45. Judge Ted Todd, in Jefferson County, denied my motion to set aside the divorce decree even though it violates my right to due process regarding the money and the farmland so my finances are still frozen. It was filed with the Ripley County Clerk’s office on 9/6/11. I can’t sell land or borrow money because of the lien that was placed on my husband’s trust because of the divorce. For more information on this issue please see the blog post “When a Trust Becomes A Nightmare”. Judge Todd took over 6 months to rule on this.

Submitted by Sue Brewington 9/8/11

Prosecutor Negangard’s Big Lie 9/5/11

2011-09-05T20:33:00.003-04:00

During my bond reduction hearing on August 17, 2011, Prosecutor Negangard asked me if I had undergone a mental health evaluation by a court approved mental health professional per my divorce decree. When I started to explain, Negangard exclaimed, “It’s a yes or no question.” When I began to explain that I was evaluated by a psychiatrist in October 2009, Negangard again interrupted me and stated it was a yes or no question. I answered no because I hadn’t been evaluated by a court approved mental health expert, per the August 18, 2009 orders of Judge James D. Humphrey. Prosecutor Negangard presented to the Court that I didn’t follow through with Judge Humphrey’s orders. Actually, Prosecutor Negangard didn’t lie; he just told a convenient truth.

For some reason there are still a few people who harp on me for not following Judge Humphrey’s orders to undergo a mental health examination by a court approved mental health evaluator so I can see my children. Prosecutor Negangard pummels me every chance that he gets for not seeing a court approved evaluator. What Prosecutor Negangard failed to mention to Judge Brian Hill was how the family court obstructed my ability to seek the court’s approval of a mental health provider. Prosecutor Negangard is well aware of the court’s obstruction. Why doesn’t Prosecutor Negangard acknowledge it? Because he will have to acknowledge misconduct on the part of Judge James D. Humphrey.

I’ve been through this a million times but I’m going to explain it again for the sake of Prosecutor Negangard and the few others that shield themselves from reality. (There is a high probability that Negangard will be asked if he reviewed this blog during testimony in a federal suit. Then he will be asked why he continued to bend the truth during his mission of prosecuting me for exercising my 1^st Amendment Rights.) After Judge Humphrey terminated my parenting time, pending a mental health evaluation, Judge Humphrey ruled that he did not have jurisdiction of custody matters while the case was in appeal. In September/October 2009, I underwent an evaluation with Cincinnati psychiatrist, Dr. Henry Waite. When I petitioned the court to release Dr. Connor’s records to Dr. Waite, Judge Humphrey stated that he still did not have jurisdiction of the matter and stated that I had to seek permission from the Appellate Court for him to hear the matter. In March 2010, I hired Indianapolis lawyer Ryan P. Ray and on March 19, 2010, he filed a motion to approve Dr. Waite as an evaluator. Once I retained a lawyer, Judge Humphrey no longer required that I seek permission from the Appellate Court and promptly set a hearing for June 14, 2010. (The hearing wouldn’t have been necessary except my ex-wife argued that Dr. Waite would lie for me so she objected to his approval.) On June 9, 2010, Judge Humphrey withdrew from my case citing some investigation of me that pertained to him and vacated the June 14, 2010 hearing. To make a long story short, the courts delayed my lawyer’s attempts to get a hearing until November 24, 2010. Judge Ted Todd listened to arguments during the hearing on November 24, but did not make a final ruling on an evaluator until January 24, 2011. I first contacted the court appointed evaluator the first week of February. On February 15, 2011, I was made the target of a grand jury investigation by Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard. “This was just five days after Supreme Court Justice Randall T. Sheperd dismissed the complaint that I filed against Prosecutor Negangard with the State of Indiana. On March 7, 20ll, I was arrested in Norwood, Ohio on a warrant from Dearborn County, Indiana. I bonded out of the Hamilton County Justice Center on March 9 and voluntarily reported to the Dearborn County Law Enforcement Center at 6:00am on March 11, 2011, as arranged by my Ohio lawyer and Prosecutor Negangard. I have been detained in the DCLEC ever since; unable to seek an evaluation from a court approved expert.

Prosecutor Negangard is aware of everything mentioned in this post because I’ve posted blogs about it on numerous occasions and Prosecutor Negangard has provided the posts as evidence that he plans to use against me. Negangard refuses to acknowledge the facts because he will have to acknowledge the fact that Judge Humphrey presided over my case for ten months after Humphrey made a criminal complaint about my writing. Negangard knows that Judge Humphrey is either lying about being intimidated by my writings or Judge Humphrey violated the Indiana Judicial Code of Conduct by presiding over a legal proceeding for nearly a year while claiming to be “afraid” of one of the parties to the legal action.

This is how the Dearborn County Prosecutor’s Office operates. The ultimate goal is to bend the truth rather than to present the facts in order to seek a conviction. Don’t get me wrong, Negangard will mix in an undeniable falsehood such as when he stated that I picketed my former lawyer’s office for a week, when it was actually a little over an hour on a cold 5 degree day. These are all things that appear on the official record and will be used to demonstrate the damage that Prosecutor Negangard continues to maliciously inflict on me. The longer Negangard refuses to acknowledge the absolute truth, the more damage I will incur at the hands of Dearborn County, Indiana.

As far as I’m concerned, Prosecutor Negangard can make up all the “truths” he wants. It appears the Prosecutor is quite proficient in conjuring up his own “truths” and it is not a skill that is acquired overnight. The difference between the current case and the previous cases where Prosecutor Negangard has manufactured his own facts is that Negangard will eventually have to take the stand in a separate legal action and explain why his “facts” are different from reality. What should really frighten Negangard is information coming from state officials. In the meantime, Prosecutor Negangard is going to keep rationalizing why it is not a conflict of interest for the Dearborn County Prosecutor’s Office to prosecute my case even though Negangard is a friend, political ally, and former co-worker of Judge Humphrey; Negangard initiated a grand jury investigation just five days after the State dismissed my complaint against him; Negangard tries cases in Humphrey’s court; and the fact that Negangard is being sued by the Defendant for conspiring with others to deprive the Defendant of his civil rights. Prosecutor Negangard cannot relinquish his prosecutorial “duties” to an outside prosecutor because no prosecutor in their right mind would try a case like this.

As always, I wish to thank everyone for their ongoing prayers and support and I encourage people to check back as I will continue to document how Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard and other Dearborn County officials continue to conspire to deprive me of my civil rights that are guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States of America.

Dearborn County Prosecutor, F. Aaron Negangard’s biggest concern; not losing his job. 8 31 11

2011-09-01T10:55:00.002-04:00

Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard has been doing everything in his power to try to convince people that I pose a danger to society, but his argument is starting to flounder. Prosecutor Negangard argued that my $600,000 bond was necessary to protect the community. He is trying to convince Judge Brian D. Hill that the jury should remain anonymous to protect their personal safety. That’s why I find it perplexing that Prosecutor Negangard showed no concern for the safety of Keith Jones.

During my bond reduction hearing on August 17, 2011, Prosecutor Negangard called Dearborn County Commissioner Shane McHenry, who is also a detective with the Dearborn County Sheriff’s Department, to testify about an alleged plot to harm Judge James D. Humphrey. Commissioner McHenry testified that Keith Jones alleged that I approached Mr. Jones in the Hamilton County Justice Center, on March 9, 2011, and asked him if he knew anyone who would do a “drive by shooting” on Judge James D. Humphrey. Mr. Jones then alleged that he tried to set up his own sting operation for the police and alleged that he gave me two phone numbers to contact, one of which was his daughter’s, to set up the alleged “drive by shooting.”As a result of Commissioner McHenry’s testimony, Judge Hill denied my bond reduction while stating, “The Defendant may have contemplated violence towards at least one alleged victim in this case.”

I do not have any formal training in law enforcement or working with informants, but if Prosecutor Negangard truly believed that I was plotting to assassinate a witness in my criminal case, why would Prosecutor Negangard reveal the name of the alleged witness who reported the alleged plot to assassinate another witness; especially when Negangard claims that I pose a risk to the personal safety of the jurors? Could it be that Keith Jones is a career criminal? Maybe it has something to do with the fact that this was at least the 11^th time, by Mr. Jones’ own count, that Mr. Jones has snitched on others during his criminal career. It probably boils down to the fact that Prosecutor Negangard knows that I am not a dangerous person and that Keith Jones is a degenerate liar who was just trying to avoid more jail time.

On March 9, 2011, Keith Jones reported that I approached him about a drive by shooting. On March 11, 2011, Mr. Jones had already composed a letter to a Franklin County, Ohio judge arguing that he did not violate his probation and added that he had cooperated with or testified for the police on ten separate occasions including testifying in five murder cases for which he has “yet to receive any form of compensation”. He also stated that he was currently working with the US Justice Department and Commissioner Shane McHenry on an attempted plot on a judge’s life. Apparently Mr. Jones’s collaboration with the US Justice Department and Commissioner Shane McHenry was short lived as Commissioner McHenry testified that neither Hamilton County, Dearborn County, nor the US Justice Department pursued Keith Jones’ story after meeting with him. It may have had something to do with the fact that Mr. Jones has made a living out of falsifying information as his criminal history includes charges of: taking the identity of another, forgery, insurance fraud, falsification, probation violation receiving stolen property, possession of criminal tools, and numerous felony thefts, occurring in Franklin County, Ohio, Hamilton County, Ohio and Federal Court. The fact that Keith Jones claimed he provided me with a phone number, which turned out to be his daughter’s, may have thrown up a red flag because it takes a special kind of father to give his daughter’s phone number to someone who allegedly is attempting to be an accessory to murder. The three law enforcement agencies probably dismissed the allegations because it probably took less than five minutes to discover that Keith Jones is a degenerate criminal that will say and do anything to get out of jail.

Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard is a criminal. He is willing to say and do anything to protect his job even if it means depriving people of their civil rights. Dearborn County officials like Sheriff Mike Kreinhop and Commissioner Shane McHenry walk hand in hand with Prosecutor Negangard in conspiring to deprive me of my civil rights. They are trying their best to convince a jury that I may be a dangerous person when they know the truth. The truth is that I pose a physical risk to no one. I do not wish physical harm on anyone involved in this criminal trial. I want people like Judge James D. Humphrey, Dr. Edward J. Connor, and Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard to have to take the stand and explain their actions to a judge and jury. But that’s why Prosecutor Negangard is pinning his hopes on a habitual con-man like Keith Jones. Prosecutor Negangard fears the day he may have to be responsible for his actions.

I am fortunate to have friends and family to do research on people like Keith Jones. Prosecutor Negangard used Keith Jones’ incredible story for shock value in an attempt to further obstruct my civil rights but Negangard probably didn’t think that I would find out about Keith Jones’ rap sheet that documents his long history of fabricating and falsifying information. This is exactly why I continue to write about corruption in Dearborn County. The similarities between Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard and the Keith Jones’ of the world are frightening. Both have no remorse for the crimes they commit and will try to destroy the lives of innocent victims to get out of trouble. Keith Jones is currently serving a ten year sentence. Conspiring to deprive a US citizen of a constitutional right carries a maximum sentence of ten years. Negangard and Jones as bunkies? Oh the irony. Thanks for the support and stay tuned for updates.

No right to representation in Dearborn County. Transcribed 8/28/11

2011-08-29T11:55:00.003-04:00

“So noted”. This is Dearborn County Sheriff Michael Kreinhop’s response to my 8/21/11 inmate request. I submitted the request in the hopes that the Dearborn County Law Enforcement Center would change its unconstitutional policy of not allowing out of state lawyers to have confidential visits with clients who are incarcerated in the DCLEC. Rather than give a simple “yes” or “no”, Sheriff Kreinhop just dodged the question.

During my bond reduction hearing on August 17, 2011, Dearborn County Commissioner Shane McHenry testified that he participated in an inquiry into a “tip” from an inmate in the Hamilton County (OH) Justice Center. Inmate Keith Jones alleged that I approached him about finding someone to perform a “drive-by shooting” on Judge James D. Humphrey. Commissioner McHenry testified that after traveling to Hamilton County, Ohio and questioning Keith Jones with law enforcement officials from Cincinnati Police and the ATF, none of the law enforcement agencies pursued the “tip” from Mr. Jones. It appears that Mr. Jones not only has a long criminal history, but also has a long history of trying to snitch on people in order to get out of trouble. This isn’t the first time Dearborn County law enforcement has ventured out of state to investigate matters pertaining to me. On November 2, 2009, Michael Kreinhop traveled to Norwood, Ohio to question me even though my Ohio lawyer told Kreinhop that I would not be participating in any investigation if Kreinhop was unwilling to explain the nature of the investigation and who filed the complaint. Dearborn County law enforcement has the ability to investigate, issue arrest warrants for, and extradite people in other states, yet Sheriff Kreinhop and the DCLEC refuse to allow lawyers from those states to meet with their clients in the same confidential environment as Indiana attorneys.

This so called “policy” of the DCLEC is not a written one. In fact, the “policy” did not exist prior to my incarceration. The first time my Ohio attorney had been denied access to a client incarcerated in the DCLEC was when he attempted to visit me following my arraignment on March 11, 2011. Coincidently, it was the same Ohio lawyer whom Kreinhop ignored when Kreinhop traveled to Ohio to question me behind my lawyer’s back. Now Dearborn County is discovering that Sheriff Kreinhop’s seemingly immature and retaliatory actions can have severe constitutional ramifications, because Dearborn County is actively and knowingly obstructing inmates’ Constitutional rights to legal counsel.

A little while ago, I had a cell mate that was charged with fleeing from the police. The chase began in Indiana and ended with his arrest in Ohio. The man was charged and incarcerated in Hamilton County, Ohio. A short time later, similar charges were filed against him in Dearborn County, Indiana resulting from the same alleged incident. The man was extradited to Dearborn County, where he was held despite the pending case in Ohio. Now the only means of verbal communication that the man can have with his Ohio lawyer is by telephone or through a phone visitation booth both of which can be monitored by Dearborn County officials. Dearborn County forces inmates like this to discuss near, identical charges in another state through a medium that can be monitored by Dearborn County law enforcement. This isn’t the only way that the policies of Sheriff Michael Kreinhop imposed on the constitutional right of inmates in the DCLEC as Sheriff Kreinhop doesn’t allow some inmates to have legal counsel while being questioned/interrogated by law enforcement officials. In recent times Sheriff Kreinhop and the DCLEC allowed a detective from Florida to interrogate an inmate in the DCLEC regarding an alleged crime in Florida. Sheriff Kreinhop allowed the formal interrogation by the Florida law enforcement official to occur; however, Sheriff Kreinhop denied the inmate the ability to have a Florida attorney present to advise the inmate of his rights because Sheriff Kreinhop refuses to allow out of state lawyers to have confidential meetings with their clients.

I’m sure Dearborn County Sheriff Kreinhop will argue that the jail does not monitor phone conversations between lawyers and clients. He would also tell you that the jail does not monitor conversations between out of state attorneys in the phone visitation booth. (Inmates may only have two visits a week. Visits can only be scheduled 9am-11am and 1pm-3:30pm, Monday through Friday. Visiting times and dates must be scheduled on the prior weekend and time and dates are not guaranteed.) The concerning aspect is that Sheriff Kreinhop continues to defend his policy even though it does more harm than good.

Who does Sheriff Kreinhop allow to have confidential contact visits with inmates in the DCLEC? The obvious answer is attorneys that are licensed to practice law in the state of Indiana. The DCLEC also allows ordinary citizens to hold AA meetings with inmates. Sheriff Kreinhop allows personal GED tutors to have contact visits with inmates. The DCLEC allows spiritual leaders of any recognized religion to hold church sessions with inmates. So why is Sheriff Kreinhop so adamant about keeping lawyers from other states out of the DCLEC? Other than occasionally having to check the ID of an out of state lawyer and directing the lawyer to the contact visitation booth, allowing out of state lawyers to meet with their clients in a confidential setting poses absolutely no inconvenience to Sheriff Kreinhop and his personnel; unless Sheriff Michael Kreinhop is involved in illegal activity. The only things that Dearborn County stands to lose by permitting an out of state lawyer to visit inmates in the DCLEC are the ability to monitor otherwise confidential attorney/client conversations and the ability to fend off outside lawyers who may have an interest in protecting the civil rights of inmates detained in the DCLEC.

Dearborn County Sheriff Michael Kreinhop did everything in his power to bar my Ohio lawyer from meeting with me in the Dearborn County Law Enforcement Center. Prior to my arrest, there were no policies that banned out of state lawyers from meeting with clients who were incarcerated in the DCLEC. My current Ohio lawyer was allowed to have confidential visits with clients in the DCLEC until I was arrested. When my Ohio lawyer was admitted to practice law in the Southern District of the US Federal Court, Sheriff Kreinhop still balked at allowing my lawyer to meet with me. It was only after Sheriff Kreinhop made a last ditch phone call to an “unknown” Dearborn County official that Sheriff Kreinhop allowed my lawyer to meet with me.

If you disregard the notion that Sheriff Kreinhop, who has over 30 years of law enforcement experience, was unaware that his policies violated the constitutionally protected rights of inmates in the DCLEC then Sheriff Michael Kreinhop and Dearborn County Indiana are maliciously and willfully conspiring to deprive inmates of their civil rights. Dearborn County Sheriff Michael Kreinhop is also a key supporter of a new jail expansion proposal in Dearborn County. On one hand Sheriff Kreinhop is obstructing an inmate’s ability to get out of jail by depriving the inmate of his civil rights, and on the other hand, Sheriff Kreinhop is arguing that a new jail is necessary to relieve overcrowding in the current jail.

I encourgage people to voice their opinions and concerns about the unethical and/or illegal policies of Dearborn County Sheriff Michael Kreinhop and the DCLEC. I would also suggest that Dearborn County taxpayers call their elected officials to relay any concerns of a potential legal cataclysm resulting from Dearborn County willfully obstructing the civil rights of inmates who are detained in the Dearborn County Law Enforcement Center. To contact me or my family email: contactdanbrewington@gmail.com Thanks for the support.

Eagle News Article on Free Speech Lawsuit

2011-08-25T12:00:00.002-04:00

Lawsuit Alleges Free Speech Violation by Dearborn Co. Officials

Trial date set

2011-08-23T20:21:00.003-04:00

I called Judge Hill's office this afternoon and was told the following: the trial will begin on Monday, October 3, 2011 at 9:00AM and the pretrial hearing is set for Monday, September 19, 2011 at 1:00PM. I will keep you informed as we go. Sue Brewington

Federal Lawsuit Filed

2011-08-22T22:03:00.002-04:00

Dan filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court Southern District of Indiana on Friday, August 19, 2011 at 3:23PM naming F. Aaron Negangard, Michael Kreinhop, James Humphrey, Heidi Humphrey, Angela Loechel, Edward J. Connor, Dearborn County, Indiana, and John Does 1-25 names and addresses unknown, as defendants. To see the complete document see http://dearborncounty.blogspot.com/2011/08/brewington-federal-lawsuit-filed-august.html

update on bond hearing

2011-08-22T18:36:00.002-04:00

Not good news but not surprising either. I called the Judge's office at 3:00PM today and was told that the Judge denied the bond reduction. Dan is doing fine with the news. I will call again tomorrow because the lady I spoke to said they were working on the trial dates today and they would know tomorrow. Thanks to everyone for your support. We will keep moving forward. I will have something else to report tomorrow. Sue Brewington

No news yet

2011-08-18T19:27:00.001-04:00

The judge said he would rule no later than Friday on Dan's Bond Reduction Hearing. We didn't hear anything today so I guess we will hear tomorrow. I'll post as soon as I hear something. Thanks to everyone for their support. Sue Brewington

Bond Reduction Hearing 8/17/11

2011-08-17T18:28:00.002-04:00

Dan's bond reduction hearing took place today but we don't know the ruling yet. The judge took information back to his office and will rule Thursday or Friday. We will let everyone know when we get the ruling. Sue Brewington

Trial Vacated

2011-08-15T20:50:00.002-04:00

Dan's trial, which was set for Tuesday August 16th, at 8:30AM has been vacated. As far as I can tell that means cancelled but the charges still remain. Judge Brian Hill set a Bond Reduction Hearing for Wednesday, August 17, 2011 at 10:00AM. Sue Brewington

The Public Needs Protection from the Prosecutors Office

2011-08-11T11:09:00.003-04:00

In a move that can only be described as concerning, Dearborn County prosecutor Joseph Kisor, under the direction of Chief Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard, is attempting to strip the public of our right to an open judiciary. They are asking that the names of all of the jurors in Dan Brewington’s trial be kept secret. (see Motion For Confidentiality Of Juror’s Names And Identities) They are saying that Dan is guilty of threatening witnesses, judges, and attorneys without any evidence or prior convictions. Mr. Kisor and Mr. Negangard are again using fear in order to try and influence the public; attempting to convince us, before a trial, that Dan is guilty of the charges against him and some sort of danger to society. The case they reference in support of their motion is one in which a man was convicted of murder. [873 N.E 2d 1120 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007)]

Matt Brewington

Prosecuting Dan instead of Dr. Connor 8/6/11

2011-08-07T08:42:00.001-04:00

It’s pretty sad that Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard and Deputy Prosecutor Joe Kisor have acknowledged that Dr. Edward J. Connor committed crimes in Dearborn County, Indiana. They are well aware that Dearborn Circuit Judge James D. Humphrey is aware of Dr. Connor’s crimes but Dearborn County isn’t prosecuting Dr. Connor for his crimes. Prosecutors Negangard and Kisor are prosecuting me for speaking publicly about Dr. Connor’s crimes. As Negangard, Kisor, and others are conspiring to deprive me of my free speech in an effort to cover up Dr. Connor’s criminal activities, Negangard and Kisor’s conduct is a violation of federal criminal law.

Conspiracy against rights: “If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State…in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States,… They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned, not more than ten years, or both.” What is utterly amazing about the prosecutors’ conspiracy is, not only do they not hide the fact that they are aware of Dr. Connor’s criminal activity; Prosecutors Negangard and Kisor flaunt it.

During a hearing in my divorce in June, 2008, opposing counsel produced an unfamiliar document bearing my wife’s signature. Angela Loechel submitted this document from Dr. Connor’s office, titled Office Policy Statement, in an argument that the document prevented me from obtaining a copy of Dr. Connor’s case file from the child custody evaluation. On July 30, 2008, I faxed a letter to Dr. Connor requesting “copies of any privacy agreement, release and/or consent form, office and/or patient confidentiality agreement(s) that I signed in relation to the evaluation.” In a fax dated August 4, 2008, I stated, “I still haven’t received copies of the agreements I signed at the beginning of the evaluation that I requested last week.” On August 5, 2008, I sent Dr. Connor a copy of his Office Policy Statement bearing my wife’s signature and requested that he produce a copy of the document with my signature. On a fax cover dated August 6, 2008, I wrote, “Please forward the material I requested.” The petition for contempt that I faxed to Dr. Connor on August 20, 2008, stated, “The fact that Dr. Connor had the [wife] sign two contracts, Provision to Serve as an Impartial Expert in a Custody Evaluation; and Connor and Associate’s Office Policy Statement relating to individual psychotherapy treatment, has caused additional conflict and controversy further hindering and delaying the Court process.” In a letter to Dr. Connor, dated September 2, 2008, I wrote, “You still haven’t forwarded copies of your office policy statement with my signature on it.” On September 3, 2008, I faxed Dr. Connor a letter stating “Please forward a copy of your office policy statement with my signature on it.” “If you never had me sign the document, please let me know.” Nearly a month and a half after my first request, Dr. Connor provided an explanation of his Office Policy Statement. In a letter dated September 9, 2008, Dr. Connor states, “With regard to the Office Policy Statement, we do not have a signed Office Policy Statement for you on file. It appears you were not provided with this document when you initially came to our office, which was an oversight on the part of the office staff. Nevertheless, the Office Policy Statement is simply an adjunct document to the court order in which you and Ms. Brewington agreed to participate fully in a custody evaluation to be conducted at this office.” The following day, Dr. Connor sent a letter to the Court With a copy of his September 9^th letter. Dr. Connor’s September 10^th letter to the Court contained some of the following statements: “At this point, [Dan] is sending frequent faxes and his language is becoming more repetitive and provocative, which is concerning.” I have patiently and repeatedly responded to Mr. Brewington’s concerns to this point; however, it is clear that he disregards any information that does not serve his agenda.” “[Dan’s] repeated remarks in letters and motions filed with the Court implying that I have engaged in some form of unethical or criminal behavior are patently false and disturbing.” “[Dan’s} voluminous letters and baseless allegations are intrusive to the point of being harassing and slanderous.” “As such, I am requesting that the Court provide me with some protection in that I will not further communicate with [Dan] outside of a formal deposition or Court testimony unless ordered to do so by the Court.” “I had hoped to avoid bringing this matter to the Court’s attention but at this point, Mr. Brewington has made it a necessity.”

Negangard and Kisor are well aware of how Dr. Connor claimed that his office staff forgot to have me sign Dr. Connor’s Office Policy Statement. They are aware that Dr. Connor wrote in his September 9, 2008 letter, which was copied to the Court, that his Office Policy Statement was “an adjunct document” to the custody evaluation. Of course the Prosecutors’ know about Dr. Connor’s letter to the Court, dated September 10, 2008, because Kisor submitted Dr. Connor’s letter as evidence during my March 11, 2011 arraignment hearing. Judge Blankenship considered Dr. Connor’s letter when setting my bond at $600,000. But here’s the punch-line; Dearborn County Prosecutors F. Aaron Negangard and Joseph Kisor are fully aware that during a hearing on May 27, 2009, Dr. Connor testified that his Office Policy Statement was NOT “an adjunct document” to the custody evaluation and testified that his office staff mistakenly had my wife sign the Office Policy Statement. How am I certain that Negangard and Kisor are aware of Dr. Connor’s conduct? Because they included the information in the prosecution’s evidence against me. I wouldn’t have been able to write this post if the Dearborn County Prosecutor’s Office wouldn’t have provided me with Dr. Connor’s testimony and all of the letters to and from Dr. Connor’s office.

“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.” That’s a direct quote from Dr. Edward J. Connor that appears in the transcripts from my divorce hearing on May 27, 2009; the same transcripts included in my 1368 pages of discovery information from the prosecutor’s office. The evidence from the Dearborn County Prosescutor’s office clearly demonstrated that Dr. Connor has engaged in criminal activity. If it is indeed true that Dr. Connor’s Office Policy Statement is not an adjunct document to the custody evaluation, then Dr. Connor has committed a number of crimes.

It is still up in the air if Dr. Connor had my ex-wife sign the office policy statement in an effort to obstruct my access to Dr. Connor’s case file. If it was intentional, it would be a conspiracy to defraud me and to commit fraud upon the court. If Dr. Connor’s office mistakenly had my wife sign the office policy statement, that Dr. Edward J. Connor used his position as a psychologist and court expert to maliciously harm and intimidate a participant in a legal proceeding. Dr. Connor willfully provided false information in letters to a judge in an effort to conceal misconduct. Since the letters were sent via fax or US mail, Dr. Connor’s actions constitute mail or wire fraud. This doesn’t even take into account the fact that Prosecutor Negangard was aware of Dr. Connor’s above conduct long before the grand jury investigation.

“Screw you Dan Brewington. We will bury you if you expose criminal conduct within our ranks.” That’s what Dearborn Prosecutors F. Aaron Negangard and Joseph Kisor are saying as they are trying to send me to prison for defending my rights and the rights of my children against the criminal actions of Dr. Edward J. Connor. Actually Negangard and Kisor are saying “Screw the children and families of divorce in Dearborn County because Negangard and Kisor are doing everything in their power to enable Dr. Connor to continue hurting children and families in Southeastern Indiana. If you have any questions about the accuracy of the statements in this post, please visit www.danhekpskids.com to view the documents referenced in this post. Feel free to contact F. Aaron Negangard, Joseph Kisor, Sheriff Mike Kreinhop and/or Commissioner Shane McHenry to voice your opinions and/or concerns about the criminal conduct of Dr. Edward J. Connor and demand that Dearborn County law enforcement take action against Dr. Edward J. Connor for his criminal actions in destroying the lives of children in Southeastern, Indiana. To contact me or my family, email us a contact danbrewington@gmail.com. I invite all members of the public to drop by my jury trial on August 16, 2011. The public will have the opportunity to see F. Aaron Negangard, Joseph Kisor, and the rest of the Dearborn County Prosecutor’s office conspire to deprive the public of their constitutional rights just to protect the criminal actions of Dr. Edward J. Connor. Thanks for the support.

If anyone sees my Public Defender and/or his assistant, please forward this message. 8/6/11

2011-08-06T19:18:00.002-04:00

I have a jury trial scheduled for August 16, 2011 and I haven’t spoken with my public defender, Bryan Barrett about how he is going to prepare for trial. His assistant, Justin Kerr is handling my case because Mr. Barrett is out of town due to a family emergency and won’t be back until next week at the earliest. Mr. Kerr, who is not a lawyer, is handling my case, which is concerning because I have a constitutional right to be represented by a lawyer; not a legal assistant. What’s even more concerning is how Bryan Barrett and Justin Kerr have waived many of my rights without any concern for my defense and they refuse to subpoena relevant information pertaining to my case. For example Prosecutor Negangard and the Court have made several references to Dr. Edward J. Connor as well as his finding and opinions. Judge Sally Blankenship referenced Dr. Connor’s child custody evaluation in her bond order that set my bond at $100,000 cash and $500,000 surety. In fact, the bases of my criminal charges revolve around Dr. Connor’s controversial case file, but Bryan Barrett and Justine Kerr have refused to subpoena information and depose witnesses. They won’t file a motion to dismiss or a motion for a special prosecutor. I can’t even get in touch with them to make sure they file the paperwork to ensure that I can wear a suit and tie before the jury instead of my county orange. They didn’t even attempt to contact the Dearborn County Prosecutor in order to get a copy of the prosecution’s 1368 pages of evidence against me until Wednesday August 3, 2011; just 2 weeks before my jury trial.

Bryan Barrett left a non-attorney in charge of preparing my defense. Justin Kerr can’t even meet with me in the Dearborn County Jail because he isn’t a lawyer. He can’t subpoena information or file motions and Kerr isn’t even sure when Barrett will be available, so Kerr just told me that subpoenas and motions weren’t necessary. This is coming from a man who didn’t know that a defendant may not be detained in jail on a charge, without a trial for more than 6 months. (exceptions to the rule are court congestion, continuances filed by the defendant, etc…). This is the same guy who is waiving appealable issues because he determined that some motions weren’t worth filing. Justin Kerr isn’t basing his decisions on law; he’s basing them on time. When I told him that Barrett hadn’t even begun to work on my case, Kerr stated they talked about my case as far back as a “couple months” ago. Barrett was appointed as my public defender less than a month and a half ago.

The efforts of my defense resemble that of a 10^th grader, who is reading the Cliff’s Notes on Shakespeare’s Hamlet, just a period before he has to give an oral presentation in front of his English literature class. I can tell you from experience that it never works. I’m using this post to help reach my legal team and also to publicly document my concern, in the case they are more unprepared than expected. So if you read this Bryan Barrett and Justin Kerr, If you do nothing else in this case please just do the following two things before trial:1. Subpoena the case file from the child custody evaluation report that was completed by Dr. Edward J. Connor on August 29, 2007 and; 2. File the appropriate paperwork so I can appear in front of the jury in a professional looking suit rather than looking like a convict in my county orange. If you do those two things, I will be better prepared to handle my case in the event you should crash and burn because you waited until the last minute to prepare for a case consisting of a few thousand documents.

So if you see Justin Kerr or Bryan Barrett, please relay my message. Tell them to contact my mother with a time that I can call them or with a date that they will come and meet with me to help prepare for trial, hopefully before the day of the trial. It is impossible to prepare a defense against charges that reach back 4 and 1/2 years without even talking to the defendant. Since my mother received an email this morning saying that Justin Kerr would not be contacting her and the Rushville Public Defender’s Office will not pick up when they see I’m calling from jail (I’m not calling collect), and Justin Kerr will not pick up his cell when I call, I’m not sure how we are going to communicate. Here is a copy of the email.

Dear Sue,

I regretfully inform you that I will no longer be available to speak to you regarding Dan's case. The reason I have made this decision is directly related to your desire to post substantive portions of previous conversations (between you and I ) that took place earlier this week. The rules of professional conduct do not require any attorney or anyone working with an attorney to talk with family members when the defendant (or client) is no longer a minor child. Common courtesy is the sole reason I was willing to accept phone calls and emails from you while Dan's case was pending before the trial court. As I have previously stated, Mr. Barrett and I are continuing to review this case, the files contained therein, and all possible defenses in this cause. Finally, we will be prepared to try this matter on August 16th, 2011, as ordered by Honorable Special Judge Brian D. Hill.

Thank you in advance for your kind understanding and cooperation in this matter.

Justin

Thanks to everyone for their support. You can contact the Brewington family at contactdanbrewington@gmail.com

Re: Dan’s Bond Reduction Hearing.

2011-08-04T17:15:00.000-04:00

Tuesday morning as I was driving out to jail to see Dan, I got a phone call from a Justin Kerr who is Bryan Barrett’s (public defender#2) investigator. He tells me that Barrett had a family emergency and had to leave town late last week and didn’t know when he would be back. There would be no bond reduction hearing tomorrow, Wednesday, August 3, 2011. He also said that Dan would have to decide if he wanted to continue his trial that is scheduled to start Tuesday, August 16, 2011 and he would have to make the decision today because Judge Hill is ready to call the jury. So Dan has no chance to get out of jail and he has to decide if he wants a continuance. He could be in jail for a year without a chance of bail reduction without being convicted of anything, having no criminal record. He definitely does not want a continuance and I don’t think Judge Hill wants one either. Now the investigator is doing background work for the trial and we have no idea when he will be joined by an attorney. This all falls into the category of “I can’t make this stuff up”. Stay tuned for more information. Thanks to everyone for their support. Sue Brewington

Notice of Claim for Tort Brought Against Dearborn County

2011-07-28T23:15:00.003-04:00

Pursuant to Indiana Code 34-13-3-8 anyone who plans to sue the government and/or government officials, must notify the government of the tort claim prior to initiating legal action. So to comply with Indiana law, I have provided the Dearborn County Commissioners with my tort claim notice, alerting the Commissioners of my intentions of taking legal action against Dearborn County, Indiana and its elected and appointed officials for damages I have incurred as a result of my unlawful indictment, arrest, and incarceration. And a recent decision out of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, filed July 19, 2011, truly demonstrates the malicious, vindictive, and criminal nature of Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard and other Dearborn County officials. On July 19, 2011, The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit overturned the district court’s ruling in the case of United States of America v. Walter Edward Bagdasarian (WB). The district court found WB guilty of two counts of “threatening to kill and inflict bodily harm upon a major candidate for the office of President of the United States “for comments that WB made on a Yahoo! Message board on the internet on October 22, 2008. Before I mention the content of WB’s posts, I want to emphasize that I detest racism and do not condone violence as WB’s comments are deplorable in nature. With that being said, WB made the following statements on a public internet message board regarding, then, presidential candidate Barack Obama:”Re:Obama fk the niggar, he will have a 50 cal in the head soon” and “shoot the nig.” On July 19, 2011 in a 2-1 decision, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the district court ruling and found that WB’s statements were considered to be free speech that is protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.

The recent ruling out of the Ninth Circuit not only solidifies that I have been maliciously jailed for exercising my First Amendment right to free speech, but it demonstrates how Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard and others have conspired “to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State… in the free exercise of enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States” under United States Statute 18 U.S.C section 2421, conspiracy against rights. Prosecutor Negangard and other officials have lied and manipulated the truth in an effort to portray a perceived threat to be a whimsical and arbitrary emotion such as the happiness one might encounter at the sight of a puppy, but constitutional law is much deeper and much more complex; and Dearborn County Officials like Prosecutor Negangard, Judge James D. Humphrey, Sheriff Mike Kreinhop, and Commissioner Shane McHenry are well aware of it.

The Ninth Circuit relied heavily on the United States Supreme Court ruling in Virginia v. Black in the Court’s decision to overturn WB’s conviction. In Black, the Supreme Court held “that under the First Amendment the state can punish threatening expression, but only if the speaker means to communicate a serious expression of an intent to commit an act of unlawful violence to a particular individual or group of individuals.” The WB court stated “In order to affirm a conviction under any threat statute that criminalizes pure speech, we must find sufficient evidence that the speech at issue constitutes a ‘true threat’,” as defined in Black. Because the ‘true threat’ requirement is imposed by the Constitution, the subjective test set forth in Black must be read into all threat statutes that criminalize pure speech.” The Supreme Court rulings also require an objective test. One question under the objective test is whether a reasonable person who heard the statement would have interpreted it as a threat. This test requires the fact-finder to look at the entire factual context of the statements. Another test is determining whether the statement constitutes a threat in the ordinary meaning of the word: “an expression of an intention to inflict… injury… on another.” Webster’s Third New International Dictionary 2382 (1976). Under the subjective test, it must be determined whether the speaker made the statements with the intention that the statements may be taken as a threat. The Ninth Circuit Court wrote, “In Black, the Court explained that the State may punish only those threats in which the “speaker means to communicate a serious expression of an intent to commit an act of unlawful violence to a particular individual or group of individuals.” So in order to criminalize pure speech, the prosecution must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that a reasonable person would interpret a statement as a threat, as well as proving that the speaker made a statement with the intention that the statement be taken as a threat.

“Any person, law enforcement agency, etc… who takes action against the respondent for protecting the respondent’s children and the public from the child abducting tactics of Judge Humphrey will be held personally responsible for their actions.” This quote of mine appeared in the Dearborn County Special Crimes Unit Case Report that was prepared by then, Detective Mike Kreinhop on October 28, 2009. Would a reasonable person find the statement as an expression of an intention to inflict injury on Judge James D. Humphrey. When I made the statement, did I intend to “communicate a serious expression of an intent to commit an act of unlawful violence: against Judge James D. Humphrey? Of course not. I was informing people like Prosecutor Negangard that I would hold them personally responsible if they took action against me because I publicized the conduct of Judge Humphrey. As Prosecutor Negangard is trying to prosecute me because I warned the public of Judge Humphrey’s unethical and illegal behavior, I am holding him accountable by exposing the prosecutor’s illegal conduct and by taking civil action in a court of law. Unfortunately I am currently in jail because Judge Humphrey viewed the statement as “a threat to his and his family’s personal safety.” Negangard and Humphrey have the ability to determine that any statement is a personal threat to another individual’s safety if Negangard and Humphrey wish to imprison the speaker.

Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard loathes me because I stand up against corrupt government officials in Dearborn County, Indiana. Negangard’s prosecution strategy consists of demonstrating how much I despise Judge Humphrey and Dr. Edward J. Connor by providing a plethora of examples of where I claimed the men were evil, vindictive, unethical, criminal, liars, cheaters, etc… The problem with Negangard’s strategy is that it isn’t illegal to publicly express one’s opinions about public officials and it isn’t illegal to despise people who disregard the welfare of children of divorce. Negangard is simply using my critical expression in the hopes that he can trick a jury into thinking that my expression represents violent behavior. Fortunately the Ninth Circuit Court addressed this in its recent ruling. The Court wrote, “When our law punishes words, we must examine the surrounding circumstances to discern the significance of those words’ utterance, but must not distort or embellish their plain meaning so that the law may reach them.” Negangard and Humphrey are doing the exact opposite; they are distorting and embellishing my speech to rationalize my prosecution.

“Let me be the first to say this plainly: These judges deserve to be killed. Their blood will replenish the tree of liberty. A small price to pay to assure freedom for millions.” Hold the phones. Before Prosecutor Negangard and Commissioner Shane McHenry begin to claim that I am writing about the spilled blood of judges, I am not the author of the gruesome quote. The quote belongs to blogger and internet radio host Harold Turner. Turner was charged with threatening a federal judge with intent to intimidate or retaliate; essentially the same charge that I am facing in Dearborn County, except Prosecutor Negangard is unable to produce any examples or evidence that I have ever communicated a threat to James Humphrey, Heidi Humphrey, or Edward J. Connor.

During the course of my 2 ½ year divorce, the only threat on record came from Judge James D. Humphrey. Following a hearing on my, then wife’s petition for a restraining order to force me to remove my internet content, Judge Humphrey denied her motion because my writings were neither harassing nor harmful to my children or their mother. Order Despite his ruling that my writings were not harmful to my children or their mother, Humphrey’s order, filed May 14, 2009, threatened that he would consider my writings to determine my parenting time in the future. In the final decree of my divorce, filed August 18, 2009, Humphrey terminated my parenting time stating that I continued to share information pertaining to the conduct of the court and the court’s expert, Dr. Edward J. Connor, even after Humphrey said he “warned” me that he would consider the writings when determining my parenting time. The Indiana Appellate Court took the matter a step further claiming that my writings made it necessary for my wife to file for a restraining order on more than one occasion. Despite the fact that my appeal was one of the only, if not the only case in 2010 where all fifteen members of the Appellate Court ruled on an appeal, not one of the fifteen Appellate justices seemed to notice that my wife filed only one petition for a restraining order and it was denied. Humphrey ruled that my internet writings were not harmful to my daughters or their mother. Humphrey threatened to use my free speech against me in determining my parenting time. Despite his findings that my First Amendment protected speech was not harmful to my daughters, Humphrey terminated my parenting time because I continued to exercise my constitutional right to free speech. Not only did all fifteen members of the Indiana Court of Appeals uphold Judge Humphrey’s ruling, all fifteen justices from the Indiana Court of Appeals cited fictitious motions that were never filed in my case. Despite the fact that the Indiana Courts terminated my parenting time because of my free speech, which was found to be not harmful to my kids, the courts did not order me to remove the writings from the internet. The courts ruled that I did not have to remove my writings to have supervised visitation. The Indiana Courts ruled that I was not allowed to exercise my free speech if I wanted to have unsupervised visitation with my children. When the Indiana Courts discovered that extortion, intimidation, and threats failed to deter me from exercising the most fundamental right that is guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States of America, Dearborn County Prosecutor, F. Aaron Negangard imprisoned me claiming that my writings were threatening and intimidating. Unfortunately for Negangard, he’s discovering that threats of malicious prosecution will not deter my constitutionally protected free speech.

Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard and Dearborn County Circuit Judge James D. Humphrey are men who rule with terror and take vengeance upon those who question their authority except they finally ran into someone who wasn’t intimidated by their unethical and illegal tactics. When they discovered that they could not intimidate me, they claimed that I intimidated them. When I refused to take a time-served plea bargain for my release, Negangard decided to bring in Commissioner McHenry to testify against me in my bond reduction hearing. Prosecutor Negangard was only willing to let me go if I agreed to his terms. That’s why I am pursuing legal action against Dearborn County and its officials; their “terms” do not comply with the laws and the constitution of the United States of America.

Please stay tuned for updates on my criminal trial as well as information on the upcoming civil action against Dearborn County officials. If you feel that Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard and others are conspiring to deprive me of my First Amendment Rights, feel free to contact Governor Mitch Daniels, Attorney General Greg Zoeller, and/or even the FBI regarding Negangard’s crime against civil rights. Feel free to contact Dearborn County officials to voice your opinion of whether F. Aaron Negangard should resign as Dearborn County Prosecutor. If you have any comments, questions, or concerns, feel free to contact me or my family at contactdanbrewington@gmail.com Thanks for the support. My continued bond hearing will be Wednesday, August 3, 2011 at 1:30 in the Dearborn County Courthouse and my jury trial is scheduled to begin August 16, 2011 at 8:30AM in the same place.

My Public Defender 7/27/11

2011-07-28T22:47:00.001-04:00

I’m beginning to have some serious concerns about the public defenders in Indiana. It’s Monday morning (July 25) and I just got off the phone with the second public defender that has been appointed to my case. Our conversation has left me wondering if it is possible for me to have a public defender who will not only provide fair representation, but also not mislead me or lie to me.

I know it is a cardinal sin to share uncomplimentary information about a lawyer who is currently representing you but I’m just being consistent in sharing my experiences in being prosecuted/persecuted by Dearborn County, Indiana. My first public defender, John Watson, told me in March that he didn’t have a conflict in representing me in a case where Judge James D. Humphrey is an alleged victim. Two months later, Watson filed a motion to withdraw stating he had a conflict because he had pending cases in Judge Humphrey’s court. The third judge in my case, Rush County Judge Brian Hill, granted Watson’ motion to withdraw, after a hearing on June 17, 2011. On June 20, 2011, Judge Hill appointed Rush County lawyer, Bryan Barrett, to be my new public defender.

I feel very lucky to have people working to help me on the outside. Both the Court and my two public defenders have failed to notify me of court dates, judicial appointments and/or the appointment of public defenders. If I didn’t have my mom and brother searching court records and reporting the status of my case I wouldn’t have a clue as to what was happening in my trial. If it wasn’t for the fact that my mom and brother told me that the Court appointed Bryan Barrett on June 20, 2011 to serve as my public defender, I wouldn’t have known who my new defender was until the day of my July 18, 2011 pretrial hearing; the first time Mr. Barrett contacted me.

In my initial meeting with Mr. Barrett, which was a few hours before my pretrial hearing, Mr. Barrett informed me that he had not reviewed my case. (I did have a bond reduction hearing scheduled for that date but during the July 18, 2011 hearing, Judge Hill stated that he contacted both parties by phone to inform them that the bond hearing would be continued to a later date, based on a Motion to Continue filed by Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard on June 28, 2011. Mr. Barrett gave no indication that he was aware of the continuance as we discussed strategies for the bond hearing. At the conclusion of the hearing on Monday, July 18, 2011, Bryan Barrett gave no indication that he was aware of the continuance as we discussed strategies for the bond hearing. At the conclusion of the hearing on Monday, July 18, 2011 Bryan Barrett gave me the mailing address of his office and his cell phone number. He also told me that I could contact him at the Rush County Public Defender’s Office and provided me with the address and phone number of the RCPDO. Mr. Barrett also said he would give me a copy of the transcripts from the grand jury proceedings. When I told him that if he sent a copy of the CD-Rom containing the transcripts to my mother, she might have been able to get a copy of the transcripts to me a little faster because she was available to print and mail the transcripts immediately. Mr. Barrett said he would give my mother a copy of the CD-Rom outside after the hearing. He also told me that we would be in touch and he would be in to see me later in the week.

One of the great mysteries of the universe is why do many lawyers get mad at their clients because their clients voice their frustrations about their lawyers not following through on promises made to their clients. A couple of hours after my July 18, 2011 hearing, I phoned my mother to see if Mr. Barrett gave her a copy of the CD-Rom bearing the transcripts from the grand jury hearing. Mom informed me that Bryan Barrett had failed to do so. As Mr. Barrett provided my mother with two business cards and two email addresses, she sent an email to Mr. Barrett informing him that she was willing to assist him in printing and delivering the transcripts to me. I had given Mr. Barrett permission to share information with my mother and my Ohio lawyer. The next day she emailed him this information about helping anyway she could and then followed with phone calls, later in the week. When she called the RCPDO Mr. Barrett was not in. A day or two later I called both Mr. Barrett’s mobile and the RCPDO. Mr. Barrett did not answer his phone and the RCPDO denied my call from the Dearborn County Law Enforcement Center. I was not calling collect. The RCPDO originally told my mom that I needed to call Mr. Barrett’s private practice because they claimed that I was a personal client, but my mother informed the RCPDO that Bryan Barrett was appointed by Rush County Judge Brian Hill to serve as my public defender. The staff at the RCPDO later told my mother that the RCPDO did not accept my call from the jail because Mr. Barrett was not available and the staff did not want to waste my phone minutes by answering the phone. As the jail phone system won’t allow me to leave a voice mail, and the RCPDO would not answer the phone if Bryan Barrett was not in, and since Mr. Barrett hadn’t returned any written/electronic correspondence, the only way that I could communicate with Mr. Barrett was by continuing to call with the hopes of catching him in the office. So I kept calling, and now my lawyer is mad at me.

I’m writing this on Monday, July 25, 2011 a little more than a week away from my bond hearing on August 3, 2011 and a few weeks away from my jury trial scheduled for August 16, 2011, which gives me very little time to review the grand jury transcripts if I received them today. I called the RCPDO but they wouldn’t accept my prepaid call from the jail. I called Bryan Barrett’s mobile phone but there was no answer so I decided to continue calling the RCPDO until someone accepted my call so I could leave a message for my lawyer. After several attempts someone finally answered; an angry Bryan Barrett.

“You just can’t keep calling!” exclaimed Mr. Barrett. If my Ohio lawyer is unavailable when I phone his office, the office manager politely says “He’s in court”, “He’s on another line”, He’s with another client”, etc. and will take a message and usually gives me an idea of when my lawyer will be available. If I get my Ohio lawyer directly and he’s busy, he’ll tell me to call back later or that he will return my call. Mr. Barrett and the RCPDO apparently were just dodging my calls.

Before the anti-Dan people have the chance to accuse me of driving off another lawyer, prior to July 25, 2011 my only contact with Mr. Barrett was on July 18, 2011. He stated that he would give my mother the grand jury transcripts and told me he’d be in to see me later in the week. In a week’s time his demeanor changed drastically. He changed his mind about giving my mother the grand jury transcripts. He wouldn’t release them to my Ohio lawyer. Barrett said he wouldn’t let me have a copy of the transcripts unless he received approval from Judge Hill. Needless to say he hadn’t filed a motion seeking the Court’s approval of giving me access to the evidence against me. Actually, it appears as he hasn’t done anything at all.

“Do you want to represent yourself or do you want me to represent you?” This seems to be a common response from lawyers when they have been less than diligent in representing their clients. Rather than admit that they haven’t done their jobs, some lawyers resort to the old “if you don’t like it, do it yourself”. Mr. Barrett attacked me when I told him that he needs to subpoena the case file from Dr. Connor’s August 29, 2007 Child Custody Evaluation Report. I explained to him that the Court set my high bond partially based on psychological testing from Dr. Connor’s report. Despite the fact that I was not a lawyer, Barrett readily concurred that I was correct. In fact, the entire legal fiasco began in March 2008 over the release of Dr. Connor’s case file in my divorce trial. Dr. Connor lied about the release of his case file. Judge Taul recused himself after communication with Dr. Connor outside the presence of the parties. Judge Humphrey took over and denied me access to evidence in Dr. Connor’s case file. I wrote about the events on the internet so Judge Humphrey terminated my parenting time with my 3 and 5 year old daughters. When I continued to write about the conduct of Dr. Connor and Judge Humphrey, Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard had me arrested for exercising my First Amendment Right of free speech. Of course Barrett would have known this if he would have reviewed some of the prosecution’s evidence against me. The problem is that my public defender doesn’t even have a copy of the prosecution’s nearly 1,400 pages of evidence against me.

At the end of the hearing on my first public defender’s motion to withdraw, John Watson appeared noble in his statement to Judge Hill that he would work to send my case file to the next public defender as soon as possible. Watson even told me that Judge Hill already had my next public defender “lined up.” That was on June 17, 2011. Somehow my two public defenders have been unsuccessful in moving my case file from John Watson’s office to Brian Barrett’s office. In the 36 days since Barrett’s appointment, the two lawyers have been unable to coordinate the mailing of one CD-Rom from John Watson’s office to Bryan Barrett’s office. The real tragedy of the situation is that somehow I will be portrayed as a villain for writing about it. I can’t talk bad about lawyers.

I don’t know why a lawyer would take offense because their client wants to participate in the client’s own defense. While I had Bryan Barrett on the phone, I told him about the recent federal appellate case that dealt with the criminalization of free speech. (See my blog above on the appellate case.) When I told Barrett that the case was out of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Barrett scoffed at the case because he said everyone laughs at the Ninth Circuit. Rather than listening to the content of the court case, Barrett was ready to dismiss it because the case was decided by the Ninth Circuit. It was only after I told him that there were numerous references to Virginia v. Black, a defining case that sets the standards for criminalizing pure speech that Barrett acknowledged that he would look at the case.

I have a bond reduction hearing set for August 3, 2011, I have a jury trial set for August 16^th, and I have a public defender who doesn’t have 1,400 pages of the prosecution’s potential evidence, who, refuses to give me access to evidence, and who is angry at me because I was persistent in trying to get in contact with him to check the status of my case. He told me that he had 14 other things going on and he would get to me when he had a chance. This is coming from a man who was reprimanded by the Indiana Supreme Court for failing to file documents on time. This doesn’t even account for the fact that he has to take a minimum of three hours out of his day if he wants to meet with me. Barrett’s office is roughly an hour and a half drive from the Dearborn County Jail.

The State of Indiana is trying to wreck any chance of me having a fair trial. I’ve had two public defenders whom either didn’t want to take on my case and/or didn’t have the time to allot to my case. There have been three judges on my case. When the state finally got its act together, the judge sets my bond reduction hearing just two weeks before my jury trial. I could always continue the final hearing to a later date but then the State can claim that I waived my right to a speedy trial and then keep me incarcerated indefinitely, while Prosecutor Negangard has the ability to stall the proceedings.

I’m having a difficult time believing that our founding fathers would have approved of the way my case has been handled. It’s just an ongoing roller coaster ride filled with civil rights violations. That’s why I’m speaking up. If the system wants to punish me for writing about my experiences, I’m going to force the system to say that I’m not allowed to tell the public about the misconduct of the professionals in the system. Today someone told me that I’m never going to get out of here but a lot of people may benefit from what I’m doing. The problems extend far beyond my situation but someone has to take a stand. My family, friends, and I are in it for the long haul; I hope the State of Indiana is up for the challenge. Thank you for the support. My bond reduction hearing is Wednesday, August 3, 2011 at 1:30 in the Dearborn County Courthouse and my jury trial date is August 16, 2011 at 8:30AM in the same place.

Timeline

2011-07-20T20:11:00.001-04:00

Let’s set the record straight on Dan Brewington

An inside view of the Dearborn County Justice System.

Timeline -Criminal case – Daniel P. Brewington – Dearborn County, Indiana

1. Norwood, Ohio Police served a warrant for Daniel P. Brewington on Monday, March 7, 2011, at 2:30PM and took him to the Hamilton County, Ohio, Justice Center. He stayed there until Wednesday at 2:00PM when he was bailed out for $1000.

2. On Thursday, March 10, 2011, Ohio attorney Robert G. Kelly spoke to Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard and told him that Dan would need a public defender and that Mr. Kelly would like to represent Dan pro hac vice, since he is not licensed in Indiana. Mr. Kelly said that he would be doing this pro bono.

3. On Friday, March 11, 2011, Mr. Kelly and Sue Brewington delivered Dan to the Dearborn County Law Enforcement Center (DCLEC) at 6:00AM.

4. Dan’s arraignment hearing was at 11:10AM before Judge Sally Blankenship and he did not have an attorney. The deputy prosecutor, Joseph Kisor, read the charges, asked for a restraining order to keep Dan away from the people that he is accused of intimidating and an order to keep Dan and his agents off the internet, as a condition of bail. The judge said that she will set bond by the end of the day.

Charges - 3 counts of intimidation: Intimidating Judge James D. Humphrey, Dr. Edward Connor, Heidi Humphrey, releasing grand jury information, perjury, and obstruction of justice. 3 Class D felonies, and 3 misdemeanors, 2A’s and 1 B. Dan has no criminal record and never did anything but tell his story on the internet. All his “adventures” can be found on danhelpskids.com and danbrewington.blogspot.com

5. The charges are a blatant attempt at nullifying Freedom of Speech protected by the First Amendment, to the United States Constitution.

6. Bond is set at $500,000 surety and $100,000 cash. Dan would need $150,000 to get out of jail. It is a ridiculous waste of taxpayer money to keep a person with absolutely no history of violence from pre- school on, in jail. He has only lived in two communities, Norwood, Ohio and Milan, Indiana, Ripley County. He has no criminal record in either place. He is no flight risk. He surrendered himself to jail.

7. Sheriff Kreinhop denied Mr. Kelly the ability to see Dan because Mr. Kelly was not licensed in Indiana. Mr. Kelly had visited other clients in this jail. When Dan asked Captain Dave Hall and Sheriff Mike Kreinhop for the written rule he was told it was just our policy.

8. On Thursday, March 17, 2011, 6 days after setting the bond for Dan, Judge Sally Blankenship wrote to Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard to disqualify herself and ask him to appoint another judge, although she obviously felt qualified to set the extremely high bond. Could that possibly be motivated by her relationship with the “victims?”

9. Prosecutor Negangard should disqualify himself.

a. Dan’s writings about Judge Humphrey and Dr. Connor are intertwined with writings about Negangard and the Dearborn County Prosecutor’s office.

b. Dr. Connor has served as an expert witness for the Dearborn County Courts and Prosecutor’s office.

c. Judge Blankenship declared that “no judicial officer in Dearborn County is able to hear this matter to avoid the appearance of bias or prejudice.” The same should apply to the Dearborn County Prosecutor’s office.

d. Negangard’s testimony is needed to determine the nature of the “attacks” and how it negatively impacted Negangard’s ability to prosecute suspected criminals.

e. Dan filed 2 complaints against Negangard with the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission.

f. Negangard named Dan as a target of a grand jury investigation 5 days after the complaints against him were dismissed.

g. In an email, dated July 12, 2010 sent from his Blackberry, Negangard accused Dan of “attacking” his office in an attempt by Dan to get Prosecutor Negangard “not to do his job of prosecuting those who violate the law.” This was forwarded to 12 county officials and to Dan.

h. Negangard has administrative control over SCU, therefore Negangard is the lead investigator and may be required to testify; especially since Negangard received the initial complaint and initiated the investigation.

i. Negangard was involved with the investigation by the U.S. Office of Special Counsel after Dan filed a complaint against former SCU detective Mike Kreinhop for potential Hatch Act violations.

j. The Prosecutor’s office would be less likely to drop charges if it adversely impacted the reputations of Dr. Connor or Judge James D. Humphrey.

k. State v. Tippecanoe County Ind 432 NE 2d1377 4/2/82. If Negangard is disqualified then the entire staff is disqualified because Negangard has administrative control over the entire staff of Deputy Prosecutors.

10. Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard appointed Judge John Westhafer of Decatur County.

a. After two months, he asked to be disqualified because he is a 25 year friend of Judge Humphrey. Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard appointed a 3^rd judge.

11. Dan is denied the medication that he has been taking for 9 years for ADHD. He had letters from his doctor and therapist from The Affinity Center in Cincinnati, Ohio.

a. First the jail officials would not let him have it.

b. Next Captain Dave Hall said he could have it.

c. Then Dr. Nadir Al-Shami, who has his office listed in Fairdale, KY and had never seen Dan before, declared that his dose was too high and changed the dosage and times that it was to be administered. Dan chose not to take the medication that way but as time for court got closer he tried a compromise. The doctor said he could have 30 mgs twice a day, morning and night. Dan asked if he could have 20 mg 3 times a day but not at night. They said no. They finally agreed on 30 mg in the morning and 30mg around 4:00PM. This is a ridiculous way to treat a person who had been under the care of the same therapy center specializing in ADHD for 9 years. Regulation of the proper dosage is critical to his care and now they are just guessing.

d. ADHD is recognized by the American Disabilities Act.

12. An attorney from Sunman, John Watson, was appointed the public defender.

a. First he had a death in his family and could not see Dan.

b. Second he totaled his car and could not see Dan.

c. Third he had to leave the courthouse on the day of a scheduled pre-trial conference because his son had been rushed from school to the hospital.

d. He filed a bond reduction application, on May 13, 2011, two months and two days after Dan arrived in jail. The document had 2 serious flaws.

(1) The name of the client was incorrect, totally.

(2) He added a Schedule C Felony, battery with a deadly weapon.

e. He filed a Motion to Withdraw because he had active cases in front of Judge Humphrey.

f. He had originally indicated that he would be willing to sponsor Mr. Kelly pro hac vice. Mr. Kelly wrote the public defender a letter indicating what he thought should be done by now. The public defender responded and then filed his motion to withdraw.

g. The public defender gave Sue Brewington the discoveries that he got from the prosecutor. He gave Dan a copy of Detective Michael Kreinhop’s report on his investigation. Kreinhop wrote the report on October 28, 2009. The discoveries consisted of copies of all of Dan’s internet postings on his blog and websites. He also gave Dan a list of witnesses.

(1). Sheriff Michael Kreinhop

(2). Dr. Ed Connor

(3) Judge James Humphrey

(4) Heidi Humphrey

(5) Attorney Angela Loechell

(6) Melissa Brewington

13. Judge James D. Humphrey remained as the Judge of record from August 24, 2009 until June 9, 2010 on Dan’s divorce case, ruling on motions and setting hearings even though he was intimidated and felt his family was intimidated by Dan’s writings. Dan never had any contact what so ever with the Judge or his family.

14. Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard appointed Judge Brian D. Hill from Rush County, as the 3^rd judge in this case. Judge Hill set a hearing for June 17, 2011 to rule on the public defender’s Motion to Withdraw. Judge Hill set 2 new dates for hearings.

a. July 18, 2011, a bond reduction hearing and the final pre-trial hearing.

b. August 16, 2011 beginning of a jury trial

c. He said that he would appoint another public defender soon.

15. The new public defender was appointed June 20, 2011. His name is Bryan E. Barrett and he is the public defender for Rush County. Today, July 18, 2011, is the first time Dan met with him. Dan felt their first meeting was productive. Dan would not have known that a public defender had been appointed if Sue and Matt Brewington had not checked the computer in the clerk’s office.

16. On June 28, 2011 Prosecutor Negangard filed a Motion to Continue the Bond Reduction Hearing scheduled for July 18, 2011 because Detective/County Commissioner Shane McHenry would not be available to testify on that date. Until this time there had been no mention of Shane McHenry as a witness. McHenry was scheduled to testify at the trial of Lonnie Ray Johnson on July 18, 2011.

a. There is an entry in the computer in the clerk’s office that is file stamped July 5, 2011 that says the court accepted a plea deal from Lonnie Ray Johnson and a sentencing hearing was set for August 2, 2011. A person might wonder why the prosecutor did not tell Judge Brian D. Hill that Shane McHenry would be available on July 18, 2011 and the bond hearing could go forward as scheduled.

17. Instead the judge came down from Rush County just for the pre-trial hearing and will have to return for the Bond Reduction Hearing and then for the Trial on August 16, 2011.

18. As of July 14, 2011, according to the computer in the clerk’s office, Judge Brian D. Hill had not ruled on Prosecutor Negangard’s Motion. He said in today’s hearing that he telephonically communicated that he would be continuing the bond reduction hearing.

19. On June 29, 2011 Prosecutor Negangard filed additional Supplemental Discovery Answers indicating that the Transcript of the Grand Jury proceedings has been emailed to public defender #2 and public defender #1 will send copies of the State’s preliminary Discovery Answer to the new public defender.

20. Dan has had no opportunity to subpoena or depose witnesses for his bond hearing or his trial.

21. Dan has been in jail on excessive bail for 4 months and has not seen an attorney since May 24, 2011 until today. He still cannot see Mr. Kelly with attorney client privilege.

22. Mr. Kelly is working on a suit to be filed in Federal Court.

23. Dan does not have any idea of the evidence against him except for 3 binders full of his own blog and website postings and Kreinhop’s report.

24. Dan continues to post on his blog, danbrewington.blogspot.com

25. Because of the proposed jail expansion we learned some interesting facts about Dearborn County courts and how they use the jail. The information below was found in the letter written by attorneys Miller and Garner and from RQAW’s study.

a. The majority of time the Dearborn County judges set bond in two parts, requiring both a cash bond and a surety bond. This has resulted in higher bonds for many people arrested and leaves these people unable to post bond so they sit in jail pending the resolution of their case.

b. Most of these people do not pose a danger to the community nor pose a high risk of failing to appear on the scheduled court dates and therefore should not be held in jail while their case is pending.

c. RQAW also compared counties of similar size and the number of beds that they had in jail. Dearborn County would be way out of line with the jail expansion project.

d. RQAW also found that the average length of stay at the Dearborn County Jail is 70-100% longer than average stays at other jails studied by RQAW.

e. The RQAW study said an expanded jail would require $1.34 million per year in operating expenses when it reaches 100% occupancy.

26. Tuesday, July 19, 2011. I checked the clerk’s office and an appearance had been filed Monday, July 18, 2011 by Bryan E. Barrett.

27. A Bond Reduction hearing has been scheduled for August 3, 2011.

Submitted by Sue Brewington - July 19, 2011.

Two Articles from The Dearborn County Register 7/14/11

2011-07-20T19:56:00.003-04:00

Man Accused of Intimidation

Jail situation also shows county's violation of 6th, 8th amendment rights

Update 7/17/11

2011-07-17T21:54:00.002-04:00

Dan has a hearing scheduled for tomorrow, Monday, July 18, 2011.

Here is a short recap.

1. We got some positive press this week in The Dearborn County Register, published Thursday, July 14, 2011. There is an article on p. 3A written by Erika Schmidt Russell and a guest column on p. 6A written by Chet Wolgamot, “Jail Situation also shows county’s violation of 6^th, 8^th amendment rights.” You can read his article on-line but you can only see a partial of Erika’s article. I’m going to ask about the rules for posting newspaper articles on line tomorrow.

2. Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard appointed Judge Brian D. Hill from Rush County, as the 3^rd judge in the case. Judge Hill set a hearing for June 17, 2011 to rule on the public defender’s Motion to Withdraw. Judge Hill set 2 new dates for hearings.

a. July 18, 2011, a bond reduction hearing and the final pre-trial hearing.

b. August 16, 2011 beginning of a jury trial

c. He said that he would appoint another public defender soon.

3. The new public defender was appointed June 20, 2011. His name is Bryan E. Barrett and he is the public defender for Rush County. Today is July 17, 2011 and Dan has still not heard from his new public defender. Dan would not have known about this appointment if Sue and Matt Brewington had not checked the computer in the clerk’s office. No appearance has been filed by Mr. Barrett.

4. On June 28, 2011 Prosecutor Negangard filed a Motion to Continue the Bond Reduction Hearing scheduled for July 18, 2011 because Detective/ County Commissioner Shane McHenry would not be available to testify on that date. Until this time there had been no mention of Shane McHenry as a witness. Dan of course knows nothing because he has not been contacted by his new public defender and a trial is scheduled to begin on August 16, 2011 at 8:30AM.

5. According to the computer in the clerk’s office at the courthouse Judge Brian D. Hill has not ruled on Mr. Negangard’s Motion.

6. On June 29, 2011 Prosecutor Negangard filed Supplemental Discovery Answer indicating that the Transcript of the Grand Jury proceedings has been emailed to the public defender (the one Dan has not heard from) and public defender #1 will send copies of the State’s preliminary Discovery Answers to the new public defender.

7. Dan has had no opportunity to subpoena or depose witnesses for his bond hearing or his trial.

8. Dan has been in jail on excessive bail for 4 months and has not seen an attorney since on or around May 24, 2011. He still cannot see Mr. Kelly with attorney client privilege.

9. Wish us luck tomorrow. I will let you know what happens.

Sue

Conspiracy in Dearborn County, Indiana

2011-07-17T21:27:00.003-04:00

A few days ago, my mother was discussing my case with someone in the media who has been following my story. When my mother was providing the individual with information about my case the person had not seen a copy of the Special Crimes Unit report that was prepared by Detective Mike Kreinhop, now the Sheriff of Dearborn County, on October 28, 2009. I’m hoping that this post will help people realize the despicable measures that a few individuals are willing to take in an effort to destroy the relationship between a father and his little girls in their efforts to advance their own personal interests.

It is important to note that I had no knowledge of Kreinhop’s report until after my incarceration. During the investigation, Kreinhop refused to tell me who made a complaint against me or any specific information about the complaint. Kreinhop said he would only discuss the details of the complaint if I travelled to Dearborn County, Indiana to meet with him. Due to the suspicious nature of Kreinhop’s request, I declined to meet with him because Kreinhop refused to give me any information about his inquiry. The troubling thing is that everyone else who was involved with my custody case was aware of the nature of Kreinhop’s investigation a year and a half before I was made aware; especially my ex-wife and her attorney, Angela G. Loechel. It appears that Ms. Loechel may have been the person who made the complaint.

Kreinhop stated that Angela G. Loechel had previously contacted Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard because she felt that this blog “was a possible veiled threat to Judge Humphrey.” Ms. Loechel then informed Kreinhop that I tried to intimidate her by contacting “her husband, who is a police officer in Kentucky, at their residence, concerning firearms training. Kreinhop reported “Loechel suspected that this was an attempt by Brewington to intimidate her by showing her that he knew where she lived. Either Ms. Loechel “misled” Kreinhop or Kreinhop left out an important bit of information to skew his report. Apparently Ms. Loechel’s residence is the same location as K-TAC Inc. the gun training company that was listed on the internet.

Angela G. Loechel wasn’t the least bit concerned with the safety of Judge Humphrey; she just took advantage of the situation to help her and my ex-wife drive a bigger wedge between my daughters and me. From the beginning of my divorce Ms. Loechel and my ex-wife pushed the issue that I was a gun owner. My ex-wife had taken pictures of guns that were within reach of my daughters and Ms. Loechel reported it as dangerous behavior. What Ms. Loechel failed to mention was that the two unloaded guns that I stored under the couch were muzzle loaders. What Ms. Loechel and my ex-wife failed to explain was that the process of loading the guns was the same process as the firearms used during the Revolutionary War where you have to manually load black powder, a patch, and ball into the gun, pack it down with a decent amount of strength, and then create a spark to set the whole thing off. An untrained adult would have difficulties figuring out the process if given the proper materials. It would be nearly impossible for my daughters, who were 1 and 3 at the time to even lift the muzzle loaders. The irony is that Ms. Loechel was well aware that the muzzle loaders did not present a danger because she proudly displays a few muzzle loaders on the wall in her law office. No safe, no barriers, no key locks; just displayed out in the open where anyone could touch them. When I explained that I put the muzzle loaders in my gun safe, they express “concerns” that my daughter’s safety may still be compromised by the guns in the safe so I decided to make an extra effort to demonstrate that I was a responsible gun owner; I set out to find a place that offered gun safety courses. When I did a search on the internet I found two listings for gun ranges: Target World in Cincinnati, and K-TAC incorporated in Kentucky. Unfortunately the business listing for K-TAC Inc. made no mention that it was also the home address of Mr. and Mrs. Angela Loechel. Angela Loechel transformed my attempt to contact a seemingly legitimate business into a malicious attempt to bring fear to the Loechel household by calling their residence. Then Ms. Loechel made my inquiries about gun safety training appear as if I were seeking militant firearms training as if I were trying to join a radical militia organization. The fact is Angela Loechel took the opportunity to voice her “concerns” to Prosecutor Negangard to gain an advantage in my custody case because I was representing myself and Angle Loechel still represents my ex-wife even though Ms. Loechel is slated to testify against me for the prosecution. What I really find to be intriguing about Ms. Loechel’s self-righteousness is, rather than report her “concerns” about what she feels that I might do why isn’t Angela Loechel reporting the unethical and/or illegal actions of the other people involved in my situation?

Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard provided me with 1368 pages of discoveries which turned out to be all copies of information on my blog. Most of the documents detail and document the unethical actions of a few individuals. See the following examples.

1. Letter to both parties from Dr. Edward J. Connor dated 2/25/08. Dr. Connor’s letter stated that Judge Carl H. Taul contacted Dr. Connor on 2/22/08 to convey his agreement with Dr. Connor’s suggestion of additional evaluation sessions. Neither party of the divorce was a part of the alleged communication between Judge Taul and Dr. Connor, hence ex-parte communication, a violation of the judicial code of conduct.

2. Dr. Connor’s contract stated that I was entitled to the case file from his custody evaluation. After composing several letters stating why I could or could not have a copy of his case file, on 8/4/08, Dr. Connor claimed that state and HIPAA laws prohibited him from releasing the file. Dr. Connor sent his 8/4/08 letter to Judge Taul. Regardless of the law, Dr. Connor lied one way or another.

3. During a hearing on June 14, 2008 Judge Taul stated that he previously issued an order that the parties were to follow the laws of Kentucky in regards to the release of Dr. Connor’s case file. No such non-sense motion exists.

4. On 6/14/08, Angela Loechel submitted Dr. Connor’s office Policy Statement with my ex-wife’s signature claiming that the document prevented the release of Dr. Connor’s case file. In a letter copied to the Court dated 9/9/08, Dr. Connor stated that his office forgot to have me sign his Office Policy Statement but it didn’t matter because Dr. Connor stated the document was “an adjunct document” to the evaluation. In a letter to the Court dated 9/10/08, Dr. Connor attacked me for not understanding his policies concerning confidentiality. During Dr. Connor’s testimony on 5/27/09 Dr. Connor testified that his office mistakenly had my ex-wife sign his Office Policy Statement and he testified that his Office Policy Statement is NOT an “adjunct document” to the evaluation.

5. In Judge Humphrey’s final decree, filed on 8/18/09, Judge Humphrey stated that I tried to intimidate him and the court staff. If Judge Humphrey felt intimidated, he should have withdrawn. As for the court staff, no member of the court staff testified in Court so Judge Humphrey either came to his conclusion from evidence outside of the record or Judge Humphrey made it up.

6. On 8/18/09, Judge Humphrey terminated my parenting time. Judge Humphrey stated that he was most concerned about my writings about Dr. Edward J. Connor. Judge Humphrey claimed that I was irrational because I wrote about Dr. Connor’s conflicting statements on my website and blog.

Why didn’t Angela Loechel tell on Dr. Connor for lying to the Court: why didn’t she say anything about Judge Taul’s ex-parte communication or his make-believe order to follow Kentucky law? Why didn’t she tell anyone about Dr. Connor lying about his Office Policy Statement and the release of his case file? Rather than report the unethical and illegal actions of others, Ms. Loechel claimed that my writings that encouraged people to contact the Indiana Supreme Court Ethics and Professionalism Committee advisor located in Dearborn County were a “possible veiled threat to Judge Humphrey.” Judge Humphrey’s wife was the advisor in Dearborn County. Ms. Loechel would have never reported it if someone else would have contacted the Supreme Court Ethics and Professionalism Committee, but when I encouraged people to contact a public official to help reform ethics in the family court system, Angela Loechel took aim. She wasn’t concerned about Judge Humphrey; Ms. Loechel was just taking the opportunity to help my ex-wife further alienate my daughters from their father. If Ms. Loechel and my ex-wife were truly concerned about my daughters they would have told the new judge in my custody case about their “concerns” about my alleged threats to Judge Humphrey. They aren’t worried about my girls; they’re worried about punishing me for not giving up on being a dad.

Angela Loechel attacked me for filing numerous motions concerning Dr. Edward J. Connor. Judge James D. Humphrey terminated my parenting time because I wrote about Dr. Connor on the internet. Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard initiated a Special Crimes Unit investigation and instructed Detective (now Sheriff) Mike Kreinhop to investigate my writings. I have written about every aspect of my custody case concerning Dr. Connor, judges, and lawyers in legal pleadings on the internet forums on my website, and on this blog so there is no doubt that Prosecutor Negangard is fully aware of the unethical and/or illegal actions of the other people involved. There isn’t any debate about it as I have posted documentation to support my statements on this blog and on my website, www.danhelpskids.com. There is no doubt that Prosecutor Negangard and Sheriff Kreinhop are aware of all the misconduct because it is included in all of the prosecutions’ evidence against me. But rather than listen to the message, Negangard feels it’s easier to kill the messenger.

I have no idea what the future is going to bring. I really don’t see how Prosecutor Negangard is going to explain that I committed a crime by writing excessively about the crimes that Dr. Connor committed. I still cannot comprehend how the Dearborn County prosecutor is trying to prosecute me for the obstruction of justice in a Ripley County Court case. Even more troubling is the fact that Negangard is charging me with intimidating a witness in a Ripley County trial, who lives and works in Kentucky, and who wasn’t even licensed to practice psychology by the state of Indiana. But this is F. Aaron Negangard’s territory. Judge Humphrey is his friend, Dr. Connor is his professional witness, and Dan Brewington is just a father that exposed their misconduct so Negangard went on the warpath and is using Angle Loechel, Sheriff Kreinhop, and even Dearborn County Commissioner Shane McHenry to help stomp out Dan Brewington’s First Amendment Rights. Stay tuned to see how it goes. To contact me or my family, send emails to contactdanbrewington@gmail.com

P.S. – I love you M.B. and A. B. I’ll keep fighting to be your dad.

What evidence does Commissioner McHenry have against me?

2011-07-06T21:30:00.001-04:00

In my previous blog post I mentioned how Dearborn County Commissioner Shane McHenry wears two hats in Dearborn County. One hat is that of a Dearborn County Commissioner who is a proponent of building a new jail in Dearborn County. The other hat is that of a Dearborn County Special Crimes Unit detective, who Prosecutor Negangard wants to testify against me because I publicly criticized some public officials who are also proponents of the jail expansion. Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard, who is Commissioner McHenry’s boss when McHenry is not wearing his Commissioner’s hat, is trying to postpone my bond hearing scheduled for July 18, 2011 because Commissioner McHenry is unavailable to testify against me on that date.

I have been detained in the Dearborn County Law Enforcement Center on a $500,000 surety, $100,000 cash bond since March 11, 2011. I have been unable to receive a hearing for a bond reduction because it took the state nearly three months just to find a judge that could hear my case. Judge Brian D. Hill, the third judge assigned to my case, set a bond reduction hearing for July 18, 2011, less than thirty days before my scheduled jury trial, Prosecutor Negangard tried to delay my bond hearing because he doesn’t want me to be able to have a fair trial.

Dearborn County Sheriff Mike Kreinhop is telling the public that there is more to my case than what the public knows. Apparently there is more to this case than I am aware of as well. When Prosecutor Negangard released his list of potential witnesses, Commissioner McHenry was not included on the list. Actually, I did not see any mention of Commissioner McHenry’s name anywhere in the 1400 pages of the prosecution’s evidence against me. Federal law mandates that a defendant be provided with the evidence against him yet Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard seems to be denying me access to some evidence, a practice that is rumored to be not an uncommon occurrence in the Dearborn County Prosecutor’s Office. To the date of this blog, Prosecutor Negangard has yet to provide me any examples where I have illegally threatened people, lied to a grand jury, or released information from a grand jury proceeding; all of which are crimes that I have been accused of committing. So what evidence could Commissioner McHenry possible have against me?

Let’s first look at the facts. On 8/24/09, Sheriff Mike Kreinhop met with Judge James D. Humphrey where Judge Humphrey informed Sheriff Kreinhop, who was a SCU detective under Prosecutor Negangard at the time, that Judge Humphrey found my writings to be intimidating and “a threat to his and his family’s personal safety.” Despite his “feeling” that I was a potential danger to the safety of his family, Judge Humphrey continued to preside over my case until 6/9/10. During that time he scheduled and vacated hearings and denied motions which further obstructed my ability to see my little girls. Sheriff Kreinhop’s investigation report was composed on 10/28/09 and it is the only police/investigation report that was completed prior to my incarceration on March 11, 2011(at least it is the only report that Prosecutor Negangard will let me see.) Since there is no mention of Commissioner McHenry in the evidence provided by Prosecutor Negangard, Commissioner McHenry’s testimony would have to pertain to evidence discovered after my arrest, which probably means that Prosecutor Negangard commanded Commissioner McHenry to investigate my blog and/or phone calls since my incarceration.

I greatly appreciate everyone for stopping by my blog and those who have been following my blog would agree that I haven’t threatened anyone. I venture to guess that Commissioner McHenry, Prosecutor Negangard , and Judge Humphrey were pretty upset that I posted a lot of personal information about Judge Humphrey in my father’s day blog, but I simply copied the information from a public interview with Judge Humphrey that appeared on an Indiana Court web publication. Regurgitating public information is not a crime so maybe Commissioner McHenry has been using County tax dollars to listen to my phone conversations since I have been in jail. I’m sure Commissioner McHenry overheard me calling some Dearborn County officials S.O.B’s, pieces of s*#t, and maybe even the occasional Mf’er, but name calling on a private call is not against the law. Maybe Commissioner McHenry overheard me saying “I’m going to take them down”, “(So n So) is going down”, or something of the sort. If Commissioner McHenry thinks it is illegal to verbalize that a public official is “going down” by a legal means, then Dearborn County is going to have to build two new jails; one to relieve the alleged overcrowding and one for any little league, recreational, grade school, middle school, and high school coach who has ever uttered the words “We’re going to destroy the Spartans” or “Let’s kill the Tigers.”

Sheriff Mike Kreinhop is correct that there are aspects of my case that the public is unaware of. The public may be unaware that Prosecutor Negangard’s strategy is to comb my writings for negative statements and out-of-context quotes and claim that the writings as a whole constitute a violation of the law; thus destroying the First Amendment in Dearborn County. He’s even enlisted Commissioner McHenry to assist him. Why? Because I pose a threat to the “good ole boy” system that plagues Dearborn County, not a threat to anyone’s personal safety. So stay tuned to see how much taxpayer money Prosecutor Negangard can burn through in his efforts to nullify the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.

Feel free to contact me/my family at: contactdanbrewington@gmail.com

Now the Dearborn County Commissioners are After Me

2011-07-06T21:06:00.003-04:00

Now it appears that the Dearborn County Commissioners are conspiring with Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard and Judge James D. Humphrey to deprive me of my First Amendment right to free speech. On June 28, 2011, Prosecutor Negangard filed a motion to continue my bond reduction hearing scheduled for July 18, 2011, because Negangard claimed that Dearborn County Commissioner Shane McHenry would not be available to testify against me on that date. Why does Commissioner McHenry have an interest in hindering my ability to be released on bond; because Commissioner Henry wants a new jail in Dearborn County.

Dearborn County has been trying to build a new jail because of overcrowding in the current jail. County officials ran into a snag in their plans to build the jail because the estimated cost to build the jail exceeded the twelve million dollar mark. Indiana law requires any public project over a $12 million bond amount to be decided by referendum. I think it goes without saying that the jail expansion interests of Commissioner McHenry and the Dearborn County Commissioners could be hampered if I was allowed to post bond so I would have the opportunity to prepare for my trial outside the walls of the current Dearborn County jail. Commissioner McHenry doesn’t want me to have the opportunity to prepare a defense for trial because it will be detrimental to the jail expansion plan if/when I prevail in the case against me. The jail expansion proposal will be a tougher sell to the Dearborn County taxpayers when I demonstrate how Dearborn County officials like Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard and Judge James D. Humphrey imprison people to carry out personal vendettas. Commissioner McHenry is simply helping to stack the deck against me. [The Dearborn county Commissioners have a history of strong arming people who question the actions of Dearborn County officials. Roughly a year ago during the public comment portion of a commissioners’ meeting, a woman in attendance was raising some concerns about government accountability when one of the commissioners abruptly asked the woman if the fence around her pool was up to code in an apparent attempt to harass and/or intimidate her, as the commissioner’s fencing inquiry had nothing to do with the topic at hand. It is just another example of how some Dearborn County officials use strong armed intimidation tactics to retaliate against those who challenge their authority.] Many of you are probably wondering why a Dearborn County Commissioner would be testifying against me in a criminal trial. It’s simple. Dearborn County Commissioner Shane McHenry is also a detective for the Dearborn County Special Crimes Unit, which is headed by no other than Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard.

I just cannot comprehend why a government would allow a government employee to run for an elected government position. Dearborn County Commissioner Shane McHenry’s boss is Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard. When Commissioner McHenry is doing work for the Dearborn County Sheriff’s Department, his boss is Dearborn County Sheriff Mike Kreinhop; a key official who is pushing the jail expansion. This is exactly why modern governments have laws against public employees running for elected office. Commissioner McHenry cannot just arbitrarily choose which county job he is fulfilling at any specific point in time; Dearborn County Commissioner Shane McHenry is always a Dearborn County Commissioner just as Commissioner McHenry is always a Dearborn county Sheriff’s Deputy/Special Crimes Unit Detective. If Commissioner McHenry refused to testify, he could face disciplinary action from either or both of his bosses, Prosecutor Negangard and Sheriff Kreinhop. If Commissioner McHenry testifies in an attempt to deprive me of my First Amendment speech in order to advance the interests of the Dearborn County Commissioners, Commissioner McHenry may open up a whole new legal can of worms.

From what I have gathered in observing and talking to people about Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard is that the man blazes his own trails without fear of repercussions but now he seems to be sinking deeper and deeper into a hole and is dragging Dearborn County down with him. Prosecutor Negangard can claim that the Dearborn County Commissioners’ cannot be named in a First Amendment retaliation suit. He can argue that Commissioner McHenry’s absolute immunity as a Dearborn County Sheriff’s Deputy will protect Commissioner McHenry from civil action as a Dearborn County Commissioner. The truth is that Prosecutor Negangard doesn’t know. The County attorney probably doesn’t know either. What is certain is that it will cost county tax payers to determine the answer in a federal court. If a federal court were to find that the Dearborn County Commissioners conspired with Prosecutor Negangard in retaliation against someone who exercised their First Amendment right to free speech; rather than having to decide on how to fund a new jail, Dearborn County officials may be worrying about how to pay for extensive legal damages.

I encourage Dearborn County citizens to contact local and state officials and demand legislation that prohibits government employees from holding elected government positions. Feel free to contact the Dearborn County Commissioners with any questions or concerns you may have. Rather than going after individuals who speak out against the Dearborn County Court and Law Enforcement system, Commissioner McHenry and the Dearborn County Commissioners should focus on what people like N. Alan Miller III and Douglas A. Garner are saying about the proposed Dearborn County Jail expansion. A recent public letter released by the two lawyers from Zerbe, Garner, Miller, and Blondell, blames the jail overpopulation on excessive bonds, the detention of non-threatening defendants awaiting trial, and the fact that the average length of stay in the Dearborn County jail is 70% to 100% longer than the other jails studied by RQAW. It is gratifying to see a firm like Zerbe, Garner, Miller, and Blondell taking a stand against the Dearborn County machine. I just hope the firm and their clients do not become victims of retaliation because of their valiant position in reforming the Dearborn County Court System.

If you wish to contact me or my family, send emails to contactdanbrewington@gmail.com. Any emails addressed to me will be forwarded to me at the Dearborn County Law Enforcement Center. Your identity will be kept confidential to protect you from potential retaliation from the Dearborn County Courts, Prosecutors’ office, Commissioners, etc…

Men must endure whatever ills the gods may send.- Sophocles.

Father’s Day in the DCLEC

2011-06-22T11:32:00.004-04:00

June 19, 2011.

I’m writing this post on Father’s Day while incarcerated in the Dearborn County Law Enforcement Center. I haven’t seen or spoken to my 5 and 7 year old daughters for nearly two years. The irony of the situation is; I’m in jail because I want to be a Dad.

I went through a 2 ½ year divorce in Southeastern Indiana. All I ever wanted was equal parenting time. When I was denied evidence to which I was entitled, I shared my story on the internet. When the judge and custody evaluator violated court rules by communicating outside the presence of both parties, I wrote some more. When Dearborn Circuit Judge James D. Humphrey disregarded the custody evaluator’s recommendation of almost equal parenting time and terminated ALL of my parenting time, I wanted to tell the world all about it. Unfortunately it’s illegal for a father to voice an opinion and be an activist to help bring change to a broken family court system because Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard had me indicted.

I wonder what Judge Humphrey did on his Father’s Day? Maybe he spent the whole day with his wife and two sons. Maybe the Humphrey family went fly-fishing together, as Judge Humphrey taught his entire family how to fly-fish. He could have spent the day slow-cooking barbeque for the family. Several years ago his wife, Heidi, gave the Judge an outdoor cooker so he now cooks for the family on all holidays and family events. His specialty is apple wood pork shoulder. He probably does most of the cooking on family fly-fishing vacations in the mountains of North Caroline, Tennessee, or out west. Yellowstone National Park is the Humphrey’s favorite vacation spot. Humphrey’s cooking has led some to suggest that he open up a barbeque shack. But don’t count on the Judge cooking the entire Father’s day meal because his wife, Heidi, has become an excellent cook over the course of their 25 year marriage and she usually prepares all of the side dishes while he prepares the main course. Maybe Judge Humphrey just enjoyed a leisurely day reading his fly-fishing magazines.

One of the reasons I am in jail is because I encouraged people to send letters of complaint or concern to the advisor to the Indiana supreme Court Ethics and Professional Committee that was located in Dearborn County, Indiana. The advisor’s name is Heidi Humphrey. Her address was public record so that’s where I instructed people to send mail. Now I’m being charged with “communicating a threat: to Heidi Humphrey. At the time I wasn’t certain that Heidi and James were husband and wife but I didn’t think that her being married to Judge Humphrey should take away my right to have people contact a public official that was listed on the Indiana Supreme Court’s website. Now I have a protection order against me to stay away from James Humphrey, his wife, and two sons. Prior to my arrest, I didn’t even know for sure if Humphrey had children. So you are probably asking “How do you know so much about Judge James D. Humphrey and his family?” I read it on the internet.

My mother mailed me a printout of an internet article from the web publication, Indiana Court Times. The February 21, 2011 article features the “Honorable” judge James D. Humphrey. This is how I was able to speculate what Judge Humphrey did on Father’s Day. The article listed his family’s names, hobbies, sons’ ages, and even listed where they went to school. The article stated that James Humphrey grew up on a farm in Bright, Indiana where one of his “favorite activities as a child [was] squirrel hunting.” One of the reasons that Humphrey gave for terminating my parenting time was that I taught my daughter how to shoot a BB gun. Maybe someone should have separated Judge Humphrey from his father because his dad taught him how to kill animals with “dangerous” firearms as a child.

I didn’t lose the ability to spend Father’s Day with my daughters because I taught them how to shoot a BB gun; I lost the ability to spend Father’s Day with my daughters because I wrote negative things about James D. Humphrey. I’m spending Father’s Day in jail because I shared already public information on the internet. Why isn’t Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard trying to prosecute James F. Magurie of the Indiana Court Times for exposing personal information about James Humphrey and his wife and sons? I would be facing life in prison if I told people his sons’ names and where they went to school. The reason why James Magurie isn’t spending Father’s Day in jail is because he wrote nice things about James D. Humphrey.

Holidays without my daughters are always a little tough but I know that one day they will appreciate how hard their dad worked to be their dad. My daughters will understand that sometimes people have to face adversity and take a stand against evil and vindictive individuals. They will know that their dad helped prevent officials like Judge Humphrey and Prosecutor Negangard from abusing their power. Most of all, my daughters will know how much their daddy loves them and there isn’t a crooked judge or prosecutor in the world that can take that away from them. Happy Father’s Day girls. Daddy loves you.

Update 6/21/11

2011-06-22T11:28:00.002-04:00

I had a hearing on Friday June 17, 2011 and I wanted to give everyone an update on my case. The 3^rd and newest judge in my case is Judge Brian Hill of Rush County, Indiana. He replaced Judge John Westhafer who withdrew because he was good friends with the alleged victim, Judge James D. Humphrey. Judge Hill’s first ruling was an order granting my public defender’s motion to withdraw. Judge Hill’s second order set the dates for my pre-trial hearing and my jury trial; Mon. July 18, 2011 at 1:30PM and Tues. August 16, 2011 at 8:30AM, respectively.

The State of Indiana is trying to pull a fast one here. The legal geniuses in the Dearborn County Court system should have known that it would be a conflict of interest for Dearborn Superior Court II Judge Sally Blankenship to preside over a matter concerning another Dearborn County judge. After setting my bond at $600,000 and setting a pretrial hearing for April 26, 2011, Judge Blankenship bailed. The Indiana Supreme Court then appointed Judge Humphrey’s good friend, Judge Westhafer, to preside over my case. Rather than decline the appointment, Judge Westhafer accepted one month, then waited a month to come to the conclusion that the appearance of impropriety may exist if he presided over a case where the alleged victim was a close friend and fellow judge. So when I finally get a hearing in front of a judge who can hear my case, Judge Hill discharges my public defender, as requested by my public defender, and sets my jury trial for less than two months away.

The 6^th Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees the right to a speedy trial. Indiana law mandates that the state must try an inmate within six months, barring some exceptions such as court congestion, the defendant’s failure to raise the issue of a speedy trial with the court, etc… The number one way that a defendant can waive his right to a speedy trial is to petition the Court to continue the trial past the six month mark. The state of Indiana appointed a public defender who took two months to figure out that it was a conflict of interest to represent me because he had cases in Judge Humphrey’s Court. Then the State took nearly three months to find a judge that could preside over my case. In my first hearing in front of a capable judge, Judge Hill allows my lawyer to withdraw, then tells me that my jury trial is on August 16, 2011, less than two months away. If my trial would have been set for after September 7, 2011, the state would have had to release me because I would have been denied my right to a speedy trial.

Now I have less than two months to prepare for trial. I have no idea who my public defender will be or when he/she will be contacting me. My public defender will have the responsibility of reviewing a few thousand pages of documents, deposing witnesses, subpoenaing evidence, and preparing it all for a trial less than two months away. Of course my attorney may request the Court to continue the final hearing, and I’m sure the continuance will be granted; at the expense of waiving my right to a speedy trial.

Most defendants get at least four or five months to prepare for trial. My original pretrial was set for April 26, 2011. If Judge Blankenship would have held the hearing, she probably would have set my trial date for sometime in August so my lawyer and I would have ample time to prepare a defense. Now, rather than having roughly four months to prepare for trial, I have less than two. The time needed for trial preparation did not decrease, but the State’s deadline for giving me a speedy trial did. So in exchange for my right to a speedy trial, the state was willing to compromise my right to a fair trial.

I don’t want people to worry about me because I am confident about my case. The bottom line is that the State of Indiana is adamantly against the right to free speech but the State seems to have forgotten that the law of the land is dictated by one of the most important documents in the history of mankind; The United States Constitution. Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard and Dearborn Circuit Judge James D. Humphrey can try to “ignore and desecrate” the United States Constitution but it is only a matter of time before a federal court or the high court of the United States condemns Dearborn County and the State of Indiana for their tyrannical oppression of free speech.

Thanks for the support and stay tuned for more updates.

Feel free to reach me/my family at: contactdanbrewington@gmail.com

Dan’s hearing Friday, 6/17/2011

2011-06-18T13:39:00.002-04:00

Dan’s hearing took place Friday, 6/17/2011 at 1:30 pm at the Dearborn County Courthouse with Judge Brian D. Hill from Rush County presiding. Mr. Johnson and Mr. Kisor were representing the Prosecutor’s office and Mr. Watson was sitting with Dan. The only business on the agenda was Watson’s request to withdraw from the case. He said that he had active cases in front of Judge Humphrey and that it could look like a conflict of interest. The Judge let him off the case. The Judge let Dan speak but he wasn’t ready to address Dan’s concerns on the medicine situation at the jail or his inability to get Robert G. Kelly on this particular case.

Judge Hill set 2 new court dates. The first is Monday, July 18, 2011. He will hear the bond reduction issue and he has set the Final Pre Trial Hearing for the same time. It is not just the final but the only pre trial hearing. Mr. Watson had to tell the judge about the mistakes on the bond reduction, the client’s name was totally incorrect and he added a Schedule C Felony charge of assault with a deadly weapon. The Prosecutor’s office agreed to the changes so I guess things are “fine.”

Judge Hill set Tuesday, August 16, 2011 at 8:30am for Jury Selection. By this time Dan will have been in jail almost 180 days. The Judge made it clear that he wanted to move this case along. He mentioned listening to plea agreements.

He said he was going to appoint another public defender, not from around here, in the next day or two.

The Evidence Against Dan Brewington 6/11/11

2011-06-11T20:45:00.004-04:00

I received the evidence against me that was compiled by F. Aaron Negangard and the Dearborn County Prosecutor’s office. In all, I received 1368 pages of documentation that Prosecutor Negangard and his staff have gathered, highlighted, reviewed, and copied. It shouldn’t come as a shock to anyone that there are ZERO examples of where I threatened anyone.

Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard has wasted thousands of county, state, and federal funds in trying to investigate and prosecute me. He has spent the last two years scouring tens of thousands of words worth of documents, yet he failed to produce on example where I “communicated a threat” to James D. Humphrey, Dr. Edward J. Connor, or former Supreme Court Ethics and Professionalism advisor Heidi Humphrey. When Negangard discovered that he couldn’t find any evidence to substantiate the charges against me, he and his staff scoured hundreds of pages of documents in an effort to put together ten pages of quotes where I criticized Judge Humphrey and Dr. Connor.

“I’m getting tired of lawyers and judges whining about me trying to intimidate them”. – 5/13/10 blog post.

“Judge Humphrey knew Dr. Connor lied and punished me for challenging Dr. Connor’s conduct, which in turn is abusive to my children” – 5/6/10 blog post

“It will be on the public record that Judge Humphrey is aware that Dr. Connor is a liar.” – 5/21/09 blog post.

These are examples of quotes that the Dearborn County Prosecutor’s office spent many hours and resources in trying to make me appear to be a social/political activist. The only problem is that I am an activist and there’s nothing illegal about it. Prosecutor Negangard went out of his way to take quotations out of context in an effort to make the quotes appear threatening. He included the following quote from my May 11, 2010 blog post titled “You wouldn’t lose your children because you criticized a plumber would you?”

“That lousy son of a bi#$h, Dr. Custody Evaluator, lied in his report. He made me so mad I wanted to beat him/her senseless. The dirty piece of s*@t would not honor his/her contract and left me in a worse situation even though he/she took my money. Every time I think about the evaluation report that ‘contained numerous errors and oversights’; it makes me want to punch Dr. Custody Evaluator in the face.”

This is how Prosecutor Negangard is trying to sell his case against me. Negangard tells people (probably the grand jury) that I am angry and that I want to physically hurt someone. This is the only chance he has at getting people to believe that I may present a threat to anyone. What Prosecutor Negangard doesn’t want people to know is that the quote came from a blog where I was demonstrating how no one would accuse someone of being potentially dangerous for criticizing a plumbing company. In the same blog post, I also wrote the following mock complaint about a plumbing company:

“Those lousy sons of bi#$hes tracked dirt all over my house. They made me so mad I wanted to beat them senseless. The dirty pieces of s*@t would not honor their contract and left me in a worse situation even though they over charged me. Every time I see the stains in my carpet, it makes me want to punch them in the face.”

Once again Prosecutor Negangard has inadvertently gone out of his way to demonstrate another one of my points. No one says ”he’s a danger because he bad mouthed a plumber” but Negangard is proclaiming that I may be a danger to society because I bad mouthed a psychological expert in a comparative writing piece.

This is why during my arraignment hearing, Deputy Prosecutors Joseph Kisor and Brian Johnson were stuttering and stammering while trying to come up with a good excuse why Judge Blankenship should prohibit me from writing about my case. They stated that I shouldn’t be allowed to share the events of my public trial with the public. Either Kisor and Johnson are actively working to desecrate the First Amendment of the United States Constitution or F. Aaron Negangard is willing to risk the legal careers of his deputy prosecutors in Negangard’s efforts to cover up not only his illegal conduct, but the illegal conduct of James D. Humphrey and Dr. Edward J. Connor as well. Dearborn County taxpayers should be rallying in the streets to protest this publicly funded witch hunt. I would venture to guess that Negangard has wasted around ten thousand dollars of Dearborn County Funds on my case and that number could easily climb to over $100,000 but as long as Negangard has an endless supply of funding and control over staffers like Joseph Kisor and Brian Johnson he will never stop. I just hope Negangard doesn’t divert too much money and time away from protecting Dearborn County citizens from real crime.

Feel free to reach me/my family at contactdanbrewington@gmail.com

New Update; New Judge 6/11/11

2011-06-11T20:42:00.000-04:00

I found out that my second judge, Decatur Circuit Judge John Westhafer, withdrew from my case. Judge Westhafer notified Indiana Supreme Court Chief Justice Randall Shepard that he had been a good friend of James Humphrey for 25 years. Despite their good friendship, Judge Westhafer claimed he could still preside over my trial. After I shared Judge Westhafer’s comments about his friendship with Judge Humphrey on my blog, Westhafer called it quits. I’m just fortunate to know that I have a new judge because Dearborn County isn’t telling me anything.

You would think that a county justice system would tell an inmate about judge changes and court dates. Actually Dearborn County does share this information with inmates; except for me. My mom and brother had to go to the Dearborn County Courthouse to get the new information themselves. I sent an inmate request to jail Captain Dave Hall, requesting that I be provided with the same information that the jail and the courts provide to other inmates. Captain Dave Hall stated that I needed to talk to my attorney. Thanks Captain Dave but my public defender quit.

Dearborn County wants to prosecute me but they don’t want to tell me when it’s going to take place or who’s involved. I’d love to take Captain Dave’s advice and call my public defender but John Watson quit and I’m stuck with a “chicken and an egg” scenario in contacting my new public defender. Captain Dave Hall told me to contact my lawyer about getting notices from the Court, but I have to receive a notice from the Court advising me of my new public defender so I know who to contact. Either Captain Hall reeks of incompetence or it is a malicious attempt to keep me out of the loop.

I do have some positive news. I discovered that a motion to reduce bond has been set so hopefully I can get out of jail so I can work on my case. I just hope Captain Hall lets me know who my new public defender is and when my hearing will take place. I just hope I can make it to the hearing without another court official quitting. I’ve had three judges and I’m waiting for my 2^nd lawyer and I haven’t even had a pre-trial hearing. Every judge and attorney within a one hour radius of Dearborn County claims that they have a conflict of interest; everyone except Prosecutor Negangard of course.

Stay tuned for more updates. If you hear information on my case before Dearborn County tells me, please let me know. You can use contactdanbrewington@gmail.com

The First 10 of 1368 Pages

2011-06-11T20:23:00.004-04:00

Direct threat, or free speech?

The First 10 of 1368 Pages

New Judge and Hearing

2011-06-11T19:40:00.005-04:00

These are the court documents that qualifies a special judge and sets a hearing for the public defenders withdraw.

New Judge and Hearing

Application For Reduction of Bail

2011-06-11T19:22:00.003-04:00

This is the application for reduction of bail for Dan Brewington filed by his public defender. Can you find any mistakes?

Application For Reduction of Bail

Answers: 1. The Defendant is DANIEL BREWINGTON

2. There is NO charge of Battery with a Deadly Weapon, a Class C Felony

3. There is a missing signature from his public defender

Thomas Jefferson vs. F. Aaron Negangard

2011-06-08T12:37:00.002-04:00

Memo from Thomas Jefferson to F. Aaron Negangard, “Go back to school.”

“I discharge every person under punishment or prosecution under the sedition law because I considered, and now consider, that law to be a nullity, as absolute and as palpable as if Congress had ordered us to fall down and worship a golden image.” – President Thomas Jefferson letter, July 22, 1804.

The above quote from President Jefferson came after the President pardoned all those who had been convicted and sentenced under the Sedition Act of 1798. The Sedition Act, passed by Congress, made it a crime, punishable by a $5000 fine and 5 years in prison, “if any person shall write, print, utter or publish… any false scandalous and malicious writing or writings against the government of the United States, or either house of the Congress…or the President…with the intent to defame…or to bring them, or either of them, into contempt or disrepute; or to excite against them, or either or any of them, the hatred of the good people of the United States.”

Thomas Jefferson would be appalled to know that Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard is either ignorant of, or disregarding the principles that our country is founded upon. President Jefferson nullified the Sedition Act of 1798 because he believed that the citizens of the United States should not worship those elected officials who took an oath to serve the citizens themselves. Prosecutor Negangard has effectively nullified President Jefferson’s acts and intentions to help shield the actions of Dearborn County Circuit Judge James D. Humphrey and others.

In Craig v Harney (1947) the United States Supreme Court dealt with a case where a judge held a publisher, and editorial writer, and a news reporter of newspapers in contempt for material that was published about the case of Jackson v. Mayes. The Supreme Court stated “[the published content] was strong language, intemperate language, and, we assume, an unfair criticism. But a judge may not hold in contempt one ‘who ventures to publish anything that tends to make him unpopular or to belittle him…’ (Craig v. Hecht)… “The vehemence of the language used is not alone the measure of the power to punish for contempt. The fires which it kindles must constitute an imminent, not merely a likely, threat to the administration of justice. The danger must not be remote or even probable; it must immediately imperil.” Even though the high court believed the published criticism was probably unfair, the Supreme Court stated… “the law of contempt is not made for the protection of judges who may be sensitive to the winds of public opinion. Judges are supposed to be men of fortitude, able to thrive in a hardy climate.”

In New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964) the U.S. Supreme Court wrote, “As [James] Madison said ‘ the censorial power is in the people over the Government, and not in the Government over the people’. It would give public servants an unjustified preference over the public they serve, if critics of official conduct did not have a fair equivalent of the immunity granted to the officials themselves. We conclude that such a privilege is required by the First and Fourteenth Amendments.” Judges like Judge James D. Humphrey enjoy absolute immunity from civil action in trials over which they preside. Even malicious and vindictive actions are immune if the actions are performed under a black robe. Now Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard is trying to extend this absolute immunity to prevent negative public opinion. In an often cited case out of the Kansas Supreme Court, Justice Burch stated the following in Coleman v. MacLennan:”It is of the utmost consequence that the people should discuss the character and qualifications of candidates for their suffrages. The importance to the state and to society, of such discussion is so vast, and the advantages derived are so great, that they more than counterbalance the inconvenience of private persons whose conduct may be involved, and occasional injury to the reputations of individuals must yield to the public welfare, although at times such injury may be great. The public benefit from publicity is so great, and the chance of injury to private character so small, that such discussion must be privileged.

If Thomas Jefferson were alive today, he would not want F. Aaron Negangard to return to school for a remedial law lesson, he would demand that F. Aaron Negangard resign from the legal profession because Prosecutor Negangard and Judge Humphrey use the law for their own personal gain instead of advancing the needs of the public. “It is of the utmost consequence that the people should discuss the character and qualifications” of officials like Humphrey and Negangard. They are not men of fortitude so they must create their own protections. This is why I publicized their actions. That is why I am incarcerated in the Dearborn County Law Enforcement Center. That is why I continue to write about the unethical and illegal conduct of Dearborn County Officials.

Feel free to contact Dearborn County officials to demand the resignation of officials who tread on the U.S. Constitution. For more information email contactdanbrewington@gamil.com.

No Speedy Trial for Dan Brewington

2011-06-02T09:20:00.000-04:00

6/1/11

I guess a speedy trial is out of the question in my case. It appears that I will have to go without a public defender for a little while. On May 18, 2011, my public defender, John Watson, filed a motion to withdraw from my case. Mr. Watson stated that there was an “appearance of impropriety” because Mr. Watson “has multiple cases in Judge Humphrey’s court” and it creates a conflict because Judge Humphrey “is a victim in this case.”

This is just another example of the arrogance and incompetence of Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard and the Dearborn County Court System. Judge Sally Blankenship called John Watson personally after she failed to find any other Dearborn County public defender to take my case. Judge Blankenship set my bond at $600,000, appointed a public defender who has cases in front of Judge Humphrey, and then she withdrew from my case because Judge Blankenship felt there was a conflict of interest. John Watson took two months to determine that he had a conflict of interest. The newly appointed special judge in my case, Decatur Circuit Judge John Westhafer, declared that he has been a good friend of Judge James D. Humphrey for 25 years. In fact, the only person who doesn’t feel that their involvement in my case is a conflict of interest is Prosecutor Negangard.

John Watson said Prosecutor Negangard was willing to make a deal. In fact, Mr. Watson was willing to represent me if I was interested in signing a plea bargain but he decided that it would be a conflict of interest to take the matter to trial. I can understand why Mr. Watson was concerned because retaliatory strong arm tactics are the norm for Negangard and Humphrey. I just wish John Watson would have denied Judge Blankenship’s request two months ago rather than further delay my trial.

So who’s going to be my new public defender? John Watson told me that Judge Westhafer and Mr. Watson had previously discussed that Judge Westhafer had an Indianapolis public defender on standby in case Watson wanted to quit. Now it appears that my next public defender is going to be appointed by a good friend of Judge Humphrey. I guess there is no appearance of impropriety there.

Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard won’t give up because it could very well cost him his professional career. Dearborn County is trying to prosecute me for exercising my 1^st Amendment rights. Prosecutor Negangard is trying to cover up the unethical and illegal conduct of Dearborn County Court officials. Rather than give up their illegal prosecution, Prosecutor Negangard and Judge Humphrey are willing to go down shooting like Redford and Newman in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. They are hoping and praying that they can convince the right judge that it is a criminal act to exercise too much free speech. In the meantime, Negangard is crossing his fingers that jail time will coax me into pleading guilty to something that I didn’t do. I hate to disappoint Prosecutor Negangard, but it doesn’t matter how many conflicted judges and lawyers the State of Indiana tries to throw at my case. I’m in it for the long haul. So saddle up Butch and Sundance because the longer you drag this out the more it is going to cost the Dearborn county taxpayers when your “shootem’ up” adventures come to an end.

Dearborn County’s Case against Dan Brewington

2011-05-30T22:46:00.004-04:00

“’Any person, law enforcement agency, etc… who takes action against the respondent for protecting the respondent’s children and the public from the child abducting tactics of Judge Humphrey will be held personally responsible for their actions.’ Judge Humphrey viewed this statement as a further attempt to intimidate him and also as a threat to his and his family’s personal safety.”

The above is an excerpt from the Dearborn County Special Crimes Unit report that was prepared by Detective Mike Kreinhop. The quote within the quote is an excerpt from an internet post of mine that I submitted as an exhibit in a motion to the court. This is exactly why Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard does not want me to speak publicly about my case. Prosecutor Negangard and Judge Humphrey do not want the public to know that they are trying to prosecute me because I am willing to hold public officials to the same level of accountability that the officials expect from the general public.

Prosecutor Negangard’s Mickey Mouse case against me is disturbing. {Click here to see the entire SCU report.} Mike Kreinhop, who is now the sheriff of Dearborn County, and prosecutor Negangard have given James D. Humphrey a free pass to make Judge Humphrey’s paranoid delusions come true. I clearly stated that I would hold people accountable for interfering with my right to help protect people from the actions of Judge James D. Humphrey somehow Humphrey confused public accountability with a threat against his family. Did Humphrey really believe that I posed a physical threat to his family? I would guess not considering that Judge James D. Humphrey continued to preside over my case for nearly a year after he filed his secret complaint with Prosecutor Negangard.

If you read the Special Crimes Unit Case Report that was prepared by Sheriff Mike Kreinhop, you will find that there are no actual threats what so ever. Prosecutor Negangard, Sheriff Kreinhop, Judge Humphrey and Dr. Edward J. Connor have scoured hundreds of pages of my written documents and have still failed to find one example where I made any illegal threats. At this juncture we are talking about nearly a quarter of a million words from which to choose. Rather than come up with facts against me, they speculate and make up their own facts.

“Although Brewington had not threatened Dr. Connor directly with physical harm, Dr. Connor believes that Brewington was capable of committing physical violence.” That was Dr. Connor and Sheriff Kreinhop’s best effort at trying to portray me as a physical danger. My ex-wife got into the mix when Sheriff Kreinhop wrote “although there has not been any actual physical violence, she did believe that he was capable of committing acts of violence.” Kreinhop also wrote that my ex-wife stated that I made threats of physical violence to her. During the course of a 2 ½ year divorce and a custody evaluation, there was no mention of physical threats. On September 11, 2009 my ex-wife had me arrested in Hamilton County, Ohio for telecommunications harassment because I was trying to maintain phone contact with my daughters. (Hamilton County dismissed and expunged the charge.) The arrest in Hamilton County made no mention of physical threats either. Even my ex-wife’s lawyer Angela G. Loechel tried to mislead Kreinhop in an effort to bring criminal charges against me. Kreinhop wrote “Loechel also advised me that Brewington had contacted her husband, who is a police officer in Kentucky, at their residence, concerning firearms training. Loechel suspected that this was an attempt by Brewington to intimidate her by showing her that he knows where she lived.” I can honestly say that I had no idea where Mrs. Loechel and her husband lived until I received Sheriff Kreinhop’s report on May 24, 2011. During the course of my divorce Mrs. Loechel and her client tried to demonize me because I owned guns. I searched the internet for shooting ranges to inquire about target shooting and gun safety; especially around children. My internet search came up with a few results in the Indiana/Ohio/ Kentucky tri-state area, one being K-Tac Incorporated. It turned out that Angela Loechel and her husband Scott are the owners of K-Tac Inc.; little did I know their place of business was also their residence. Either Angela Loechel failed to tell Sheriff Kreinhop that I actually called a number that was a business listing that I found on the internet or Sheriff Kreinhop intentionally left that part out just to help manipulate a grand jury into indicting me.

“Dr. Connor stated the Brewington was possibly paranoid and paranoid patients have a history of ‘striking out’”. If all else fails, call them paranoid, huh Dr. Connor. I have no history of violence or threatening behavior yet I am sitting in the Dearborn County Law Enforcement Center on a $600,000 bond because they “think” I may be dangerous. Humphrey thinks I threatened his family because I stated that I would hold people personally accountable for unethical and/or illegal conduct. Angela Loechel believes I am intimidating because I made a telephone call to a business that she owns. It’s probably a good thing that she doesn’t own Wal-mart or McDonalds because it would be considered a menacing act every time I went through the drive-thru. Dr. Connor and my ex-wife feel that even though I’ve never committed an act of violence I am capable of committing a violent act just because they said so. And my favorite is Judge Humphrey’s alleged fear that I once had an Indiana handgun license. When I lived in Indiana, it was illegal to transport a handgun without a concealed carry permit. Without the proper permit, it is against the law to transport a handgun to a shooting range. Judge Humphrey claimed that he was threatened by the fact that I followed Indiana handgun laws. I bet throughout Judge Humphrey’s career as a lawyer and a judge, he has never come across a case where someone didn’t commit a crime with a handgun because the would-be criminal did not have a handgun permit.
“Sorry guys, I can’t rob the bank with you tonight. My concealed carry permit didn’t come in the mail today.”

After reading Sheriff Kreinhop’s report, it isn’t surprising that Prosecutor Negangard is talking about giving me a “time-served” plea. Negangard even told my lawyer that he didn’t expect me to be in jail this long. I think what Prosecutor Negangard meant to say was that he never realized how big of a headache his make believe case against me was going to be. Now Negangard wants the whole situation to go away but there isn’t any way that Negangard can bow out gracefully. Negangard has to press on to trial knowing that the public is well aware that the case against Dan Brewington is nothing more than a 1^st amendment witch hunt. Negangard also has to live with the fear that the Dearborn County prosecutor’s office may be disqualified from prosecuting my case. If that were to happen a real prosecutor would drop the charges. Why? Because I have never threatened anyone with illegal conduct.

For those who were concerned that I might plead guilty in an effort to get out of jail, don’t worry. I posted that to get a reaction out of the prosecutor’s office. Negangard said he would entertain offers from me but he wouldn’t put anything in writing. I assume Negangard lacks the security to have the public be aware of his everyday conduct. I, on the other hand, am going to continue to write about the unethical and illegal conduct of Prosecutor Negangard and the Dearborn County Courts throughout the course of this trial. When the trial is over, or the charges are dropped, I am going to continue to write about any civil action I may take against Dearborn county officials in an effort to recover damages I have incurred because of 1^st Amendment retaliation. The fact that this whole trial revolves around 1^st Amendment rights is the reason why this trial should be a very public one. If Judge Humphrey, Dr. Connor, and Prosecutor Negangard find this to be intimidating, they know that they are wrong. Stay tuned for complete trial coverage. Feel free to contact my family and/or me at contactdanbrewington@gmail.com

Letter to Dearborn County Officials

2011-05-24T20:43:00.002-04:00

Re: County Liabilities

As most of you are well aware, I have been incarcerated in the Dearborn County Law Enforcement Center since March 11, 2011. The reason I am being detained is that Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard has arbitrarily decided that there is a limit to the amount of criticism that a United State’s citizen is permitted to write about elected officials in Dearborn County. Prosecutor Negangard has declared himself the sole arbitrator of how much public speech is “too much” and opted to make me the target of federally funded investigations, grand jury proceedings, and costly court hearings; all the while declaring that I may be a danger to society… until now.

I believe it to be redundant and unnecessary to rehash all the events leading up to my incarceration. However, it is important to note that after an 18 month investigation by the Dearborn County Special Crimes Unit, grand jury indictments, and restraining orders to “protect” even Judge James D. Humphrey’s children, Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard has approached my public defender with a possible “time served” plea bargain. After all of the man-hours and money spent in trying to make a case that I was a menace to society, Prosecutor Negangard wants me to walk out of the DCLEC after serving a little more than 2 months of jail time.

It should come as no surprise to anyone that Dearborn County Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard has been on a personal witch hunt because I criticized Judge James D. Humphrey, the Dearborn County Prosecutor’s office, as well as other officials of the court. When I publicly criticized Prosecutor Negangard he lashed out and accused me of attempting “to get {Prosecutor Negangard} not to do {his} job of prosecuting those who violate the law.” Prosecutor Negangard went on to state “I assure you his efforts will not succeed. If {Dan Brewington} has violated the law then I will make every effort to prosecute him.” Five days after the state dismissed my complaint against Prosecutor Negangard, he made good on his promise and made me the target of a grand jury investigation.

The conduct of Dearborn County and some of the county officials borders on the insane. I have been indicted for posting lines from the movie “A Few Good Men”. After I exposed how Judge Sally Blankenship lent the prestige of the judicial office to endorse a potential witness in my case, Judge Blankenship withdrew from my case shortly after setting my bond at $500,000 surety and $100,000 cash; several hundred thousand dollars higher than many rapists and child molesters. After I was incarcerated, Sheriff Mike Kreinhop stated that lawyers not licensed by the State of Indiana were not allowed to have contact visits with clients who were incarcerated at the DCLEC, thus making it impossible for my Ohio lawyer to have a confidential meeting with me. Sheriff Kreinhop’s new policy prohibits Cincinnati lawyers from meeting with clients who were arrested across state lines, leaving lawyers unable to communicate with clients without being monitored by DCLEC officials. (Actually, Sheriff Kreinhop’s policy appears to apply only to my lawyer, Robert G. Kelly, as the DCLEC has allowed other Ohio lawyers to have contact visits with their clients.)

The coup de grace of Dearborn County’s malicious behavior has been the DCLEC’s obstruction of my mental health treatment. Judge Humphrey terminated my parenting time with my 3 and 5 year old daughters alleging that I suffered from severe ADHD. Judge Sally Blankenship set my bond at $600,000 based on Dr. Edward J. Connor’s opinions regarding my ADHD. When I arrived at the DCLEC, the jail stated that I was not allowed to continue my Ritalin prescription for my ADHD. When I cited case law stating that it was a violation of due process to deprive me of my normal mental health at trial, Captain Dave Hall soon informed me that I could take my Ritalin prescription in the DCLEC. A week later, DCLEC doctor, Dr. Nadir Al-Shami, stated that I was not allowed to take my prescription as prescribed. Dr. Al-Shami said I could take my prescription at a lower dose and only two times a day. Dr. Al-Shami stated I could take my Ritalin prescription, which is a 4 hour medication, once in the morning and once at night. After I refused to take my medication against my prescribing doctor’s orders, Dr. Al-Shami stated that I was fine and did not need to take Ritalin.

During my arraignment hearing in Judge Blankenship’s court on March 11, 2011, my Ohio lawyer, Robert G. Kelly, testified that we would be filing a federal suit about the matter and that still stands true, only the constitutional infractions by Dearborn Count have multiplied since then. Dearborn County continues to retaliate against me because I exercised my 1^st Amendment right to free speech. Prosecutor Negangard and other county officials have strived to destroy my family and my reputation, resulting in a long list of irreparable damages.

What kind of figure can be placed on the damage Dearborn County has inflicted on me? That question is best left to be answered by a federal judge or jury. As long as Dearborn County insists on incarcerating me for criticizing county officials, that figure could only rise. As I am likely to remain incarcerated until the charges are dismissed or until after a full-blown jury trial, I am going to continue to write about violations by the DCLEC, such as how the DCLEC is currently forcing some inmates to sleep on mats under toilets because of jail overcrowding. Even in the face of jail overcrowding, Prosecutor Negangard is willing to keep me in jail in order to fulfill a personal vendetta.

Please consider this letter as advance notice to Dearborn County officials so they have the ability to figure out how to explain to tax payers why their tax money is being appropriated to cover damages caused by the malicious actions of a few county officials. For Dearborn County taxpayers who are reading this, feel free to contact local, state, and federal officials to help put a stop to using Dearborn County monies to subsidize government corruption. Please feel free to contact me through contactdanbrewington@gmail.com. Email correspondence will be forwarded to me at the DCLEC.

Hunger Strike Results

2011-05-20T18:03:00.000-04:00

Hunger Strike Results 5/20/2011

Monday, May 16, 2011 marked the end of my 5 day hunger strike at the Dearborn County Law Enforcement center. I went 120 hours between dinner on Wednesday evening and dinner on Monday night, without eating. I was protesting the DCLEC’s refusal to administer my regular prescription for ADHD. I ended the hunger protest when I felt that I received a substantial reaction that I could use to demonstrate the inadequacies of the medical/mental health services at the DCLEC.

The day that I declared a hunger strike in protest of the DCLEC’s failure to properly administer my Ritalin prescription, Captain David Hall ordered that I be locked in isolation, consisting of 22-23 hour lockdown with no interaction with other inmates. Captain Hall stated that I wasn’t being punished; I was simply being put in isolation so I could be “observed.” On the way to isolation on Thursday afternoon, nurse Kelley Hogg weighed me and took my temperature, pulse, and blood pressure. That pretty well marked the end of any medical or psychological observation of my time in “the hole”.

Dearborn County’s perception of inmate observation hails out of some grotesque 1930’s laboratory experiments on asylum inmates. The DCLEC denied my treatment for my ADHD, locked me in isolation because I protested the denial of treatment, and then allowed the correctional officers to observe me through the camera in my cell. No nurses, no social workers, no doctors, just a handful of correctional officers checking to see if I were still alive or had gone mad. All of this while offering to give me the wrong Ritalin dose before bed, as prescribed by Dr. Nadir Al-Shami, to try to insure that I would not be able to sleep at night.

I want to be clear that the DCLEC staff was acting upon orders and they all acted in a very professional manner. This falls on the shoulders of Captain Dave Hall, Sheriff Kreinhop, and the DCLEC doctor, Dr. Al-Shami. They have some kind of sick fascination with denying inmates mental health treatment and then placing the inmates in insufferable situations just so they can take a video of the effects of the DCLEC’s experiments.

The mental health care at the Dearborn County Law Enforcement Center rivals that of the treatment that R.P. McMurphy received by Nurse Cratchet and the institution in “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest”, except Nurse Cratchet actually believed that she was acting in the best interest of the inmates. The DCLEC punishes inmates because it is inconvenient to continue the mental health treatment that inmates were receiving on the outside.

I never received my proper Ritalin prescription and I never expected to. As I alluded to earlier I achieved a reaction, not a result. The difference is that you will go crazy trying to force the hand of Dearborn County officials in the hopes of getting a specific result. On the other hand when people like Sheriff Kreinhop and Captain Hall are hyper-focused on fighting the proper treatment of inmates, they overlook the problematic manner in which they are denying the treatment. I’m just here to report it.

I am pleased with the result of my 5-day hunger strike. I never really felt sick or weak. I continued to work out during the strike. Actually, the main reason I ended my protest was because I did not have adequate access to a phone to stay in touch with my lawyer. In all, I lost 8.5 lbs. in 5 days, bringing my total weight loss to 26 lbs., while being housed in the DCLEC. If Prosecutor, F. Aaron Negangard chooses to waste Dearborn County taxpayer money on housing me in the DCLEC, I feel I owe it to myself and the taxpayers to get something positive out of it.

I was fortunate to get a warm welcome when I was transferred back to normal population. I was greeted with applause and well wishes as many have supported my efforts to improve human rights in the DCLEC. One inmate even informed me that my hunger protest made the local radio as a friend said they heard about my strike on Eagle 99.3. I hope Dearborn County is finally realizing that the good ol’boy system doesn’t work anymore and I’m here to report it.

Thanks for the support and please rest assured that my health and determination is fine. Stay tuned as Prosecutor Negangard has approached my Public Defender with a plea deal. I’ll keep you apprised of the situation. To contact me or my family, email us at contactdanbrewington@gmail.com.