24 October 2011 Sentencing Hearing For Dan Brewington- Notes

24 October 2011 Sentencing Hearing For Dan Brewington- Notes

Special Judge Brian Hill from Rush County presided over the hearing. Brian Barrett continued as Brewington’s Public Defender- also from Rush County. Prosecutor Negangard and his assistant prosecutor Joe Kisor were also present. Brewington was attired in his orange jumpsuit and pink handcuffs.

Judge Hill asked if they all received a copy of the presentencing evaluation report. Answer-Yes.

Negangard presented all the state’s evidence with Kisor nodding frequently throughout the presentation.

Mike Kreinhop- sheriff was called first and identified exhibit 1 as Dan’s Adventure’s in Taking on the Family Court’s writings. Negangard added- and those are just the ones he’s added since the jury convicted him!

Barrett asked questions for the preliminary purpose of objecting. He asked, “Do you have knowledge as to who posted these? He has been in your custody.” Negangard noted they were also posted in links on the Dearborn County Blogsite.

The postings were admitted over Barrett’s objection.

Dr Edward Connor was called by Negangard and identified as one of the victims. He read a lengthy statement for the court directed at Dan Brewington. Connor said he’d read his (Brewington’s) thought’s for four years and that you have spent an enormous amount of time blaming everyone but yourself. You have been scheming and plotting to intimidate. Connor cited a case where Brewington wrote an anonymous letter to damage his practice and get others to hate me. and said that he didn’t testify at trial because he knew they would ask him about that and he’d have to admit to it. You told people I was a pervert in a post about asking a client about “shaving pubic hair.” That is a commonly asked question in cases where we try to find out about possible molestation. This is how you take one item and twist it to your own purpose. Connor reiterated the accusations that Brewington tried to damage his reputation and practice by mass mailings to attorneys and colleagues of Connor’s from the trial. He said, you have obsessed about me for four years, You are paranoid. But you do know the difference between right and wrong. I couldn’t predict if you would act on your writings. You also posted things about my wife (who is also a psychologist and works with Connor) When you said you would beat the custody evaluator senseless, that was a real threat, You even found a picture of my deceased father and posted that and also a picture of me from a wedding- and it is not known how you obtained that. You posted my street name and the amount of mortgage on my house. It did intimidate us. Three judges, the KY Board of Psychologists, all agreed that I had a right NOT to release the case file to you. You hold fast to these ideas and it will be a longer time away from your daughters. Connor cited the ex wife, his former attorneys, staff at daughter’s school etc as people Brewington blames or thinks are all wrong. Connor said- I never wrote anything about you on the internet. You have tremendous writing skills, computer skills, and intelligence. But you lack emotional intelligence. I do not determine if you get the case file- the court decides. Know this- There is nothing in the case file that will have any bearing on your custody case! I know that you would have posted info from that case file on the internet and hurt your ex-wife and kids. You wasted taxpayer’s dollars with this trial. Your family supports your delusional behavior. If allowed to go free you will ramp up your efforts to hurt people. We need to set a precedent here about internet stalking. The Courts will not have assistance or citizens to help as they will fear internet retaliation.

Sara Jones- Connor- had no prepared statement- she defers to what Dr Connor said. This is frightening to us. We have dealt with him daily for the past four years. We were not sure how he got info on us. The number of websites he used is astonishing. The amount of time he spent in his quest for revenge is disturbing. She reiterated the so- called anonymous letter to her husband. He attempted to gather other disgruntled clients- some of the clients we have are dangerous individuals. We were frightened for our children. He won’t stop if he goes free. What will he do? No children for two years doesn’t stop him, jail time doesn’t stop him. This is not about free speech-it’s about threats and intimidation- the degree he has caused alarm and fear in ours and other victim’s lives.

Heidi Humphrey- said they had to change their life style. He was given a simple request to seek help- and instead he has used this to intimidate. We are scared. I am still looking over my shoulder.

Judge Hill conferred with the attorneys.

Judge James D Humphrey- identified as Circuit Court Judge for Dearborn and Ohio Counties and a victim of Dan Brewington’s crimes. He read a statement saying that he was here in an unfamiliar role and needed to temper his remarks as he is a judge. He said that NO judge who saw Brewington’s writing, behavior, etc. would have …. This is not first amendment, but a disturbed person. He has not taken his own kids into consideration. It is more disturbing that he put my wife and family in this as some sort of sick revenge.
Humphrey praised Judge Hill for taking the case and also the public defender and Negangard for their roles in the case. You will probably be the next target. My wife and I have been targeted in a ridiculous federal lawsuit. He said that the lawsuit paperwork was sent to their home address- as one more way of using their home address. (Heidi Humphrey’s only legal address)
Humphrey said this is not a banana republic where judges can be intimidated. We will not be bullied or intimidated by you!
He (Brewington) will not listen or show any signs of remorse. Probation will just be a new target of intimidation. My wife and I will accept whatever your decision is. This man has no remorse and will carry out his sick campaign into the future.

Humphrey then sat in the front row and watched the rest of the hearing.

Joseph Kevin McCaleb (in getting the correct spelling from the county jail inmate list other info is that he was incarcerated July 4, 2011 for several counts of theft and attempted theft) McCaleb said he was Brewington’s cellmate for the past 2.5 months. He identified and exhibit as a letter that he (McCaleb) wrote to Aaron Negangard. Negangard asked McCaleb if Brewington said anything about future behavior. McCaleb said that there were comments about shooting Judge Humphrey that were so detailed and thought out that he was worried. He said now I don’t think this anymore. Negangard asked why and he said after talking to him and getting to know his family, I don’t think the same. Negangard asked what the fantasy was that he had written about. McCaleb said following him home, shooting him and dumping him in the river. Did he admit to having the 357? McCaleb- yes. Did he admit to driving past Connor’s house? Yes. Did he admit Heidi was James Humphrey’s wife? Yes.

Negangard asked, “Did he have any other thoughts and opinions?” McCaleb said- “He had thoughts and opinions about you!” Negangard ignored that comment.

Barrett asked about the date of the letter- Sept 25,2011 – it was the date sent- and noted that was before the trial. (this was not brought up at the jury trial)

Negangard was finished with witnesses and Barrett asked if Brewington could use elocution and present evidence or testify. They recessed for Barrett and Brewington to consult and then resumed at 2:40 PM

Dan Brewington testified under oath from his chair. Barrett asked several questions to get the following information: Brewington is 37 years old, divorced, with two children, Mary (7) and Audrey(5). He has been incarcerated in the DCLC since 3/11/11 continuously with his previous arrest in Ohio 3 days prior to turning himself in Indiana. He bonded out of Ohio to report to Indiana. He is prepared to address the court himself and present several documents.

Brewington began by addressing the judge as your Honor and cited some court cases throughout this and quotes to show his belief in his constitutional rights of 1st amendment. ( Cantwell vs. Connecticut) he said- I vigorously challenged the legal system. If I felt the activities violated laws I would not have done that. I don’t like to use this word in court but Mr. Negangard said that you can call the judge a son of a bitch but not a child abuser. The prosecutor convinced the grand jury to indict me for exposing evidence and even told the jurors in my trial not to worry about that.(referring to the post where Brewington says he’s going to talk about the grand jury and then the link goes to a movie script.) This brings into question all the indictments by the grand jury. Judge Humphrey’s candidacy and political contribution report has a post it note that says “Do not disclose address.” In Ohio this is against election rules. This exhibit B shows Humphrey’s election forms dating back to Oct 12, 2004 ALL LISTING Humphrey’s address- as it is a public record.

In reference to publishing Heidi Humphrey’s address on the internet- Brewington said that as late as Aug 22, 2009, she was listed as a public official. In a Feb 21, 2011 article on the internet it lists all of James Humphrey’s activities, spouse, kids, and smoking recipes. He also hunted squirrels as a kid. And yet they question me teaching my girls to shoot a BB gun.

Negangard stopped him and questioned how he got the internet report- it was from his family and Brewington had asked them to research Humphrey on the internet.
Brewington said that Prosecutor Negangard did not tell the truth when he said I did not get a mental health evaluation. The exhibits introduced at this point were Sept 30, 2009 and Oct 2009 encounters with Dr Henry Waite, psychiatrist. He said that Dr, Waite is and MD and can prescribe, unlike Dr. Connor who is a PhD psychologist. Judge Humphrey’s orders to get a mental health evaluation were from August 18, 2009. There is a letter in this exhibit from Dr. Waite that he wrote after finding out about my situation and also a CV (curriculum vitae) for Dr. Waite.
Another exhibit shows Waite being able to receive Connor’s evaluation. Jan 19, 2010 and March 2010 dates were on these items. The court was aware that he wanted to use Dr. Waite. On March 19, 2010 a hearing was set for June 14 2010 to get Dr. Waite approved. Humphrey recused himself 5 days before this hearing. He served as our judge for a year after he knew I was investigating him. There are 8 different entries on the CCS documents on my divorce from Dr. Waite. Waite describes me as being like a CEO- with and energetic personality. He says that I am no danger to my kids or others. Brewington also showed a letter from his treating physician Dr. Doug Logan and patient ledgers showing that he has not missed treatments since 2002. Granted this is just for ADHD.

It was stated that I attacked Dr Connor because of the custody issues. That is not true- I went after this report because of the numerous errors and oversights and then he charged us to correct them. He had inaccurate prescription usage and listed my brother Mark as a reference. My brother is Matt and I never gave his name as a reference. There were issues with eth office policy statement submitted by my wife and her attorney, Angela Loechel. Connor said this was an adjunct document… Judge Hill interrupted and wanted Brewington to get to pertinent information.

Brewington said they brought another inmate in here attesting to ridiculous allegations. They had Keith Jones on a drive-by on Judge Humphrey tip that was investigated by Shane McHenry and ATF agent. The jail management system in Hamilton County shows that we never came in contact in the Hamilton County Justice center. This is an example of the QUESTIONABLE conduct of the prosecutor. This exhibit shows that and also certified copies of Keith Jones arrest records.

Judge Hill said- the inmate at the Hamilton County jail and the one at DCLC are not a concern. I will NOT take any part of these into consideration in my sentencing.
All the exhibits on Dr Waite are admitted. It was not clear if the info on the Keith Jones case was admitted or not.

Exhibit J had four letters of character references from people who knew Brewington- Thomas Maloney- fire chief, Tim Haywood, a police officer, Jane ( and RN) and Wendell- ( couldn’t catch their last names).

The final Exhibit- K- is a picture of me and my daughters just before they were taken away. One of the girls would run back and forth to reset the timer on the camera. We took a lot of pictures- we do creative things- it’s who we were- and what we did. Brewington’ s voice cracked several times talking about his daughters. Barrett helped fill in with a question to ease him through.

Brewington went on- I will turn 38 soon and aside from a DUI in 1996 I follow the laws, I did say harsh things on the internet. I didn’t know it was against the law. No one told me to stop or if this falls into telecommunications harassment. Vigorous criticism by citizens is allowed. I was under the impression this would be a civil matter- not a criminal matter. Connor said he is an extension of the court system to Judge Taul so he is public. They ask what my intent with blogging was. I met a new friend ( Greg Morehead)through the blog- we connected over our custody experiences with Dr Connor. I was not stalking Dr Connor- I went to support Greg Morehead at his invitation to his hearing.

My speech was harsh- but not malicious in terms of violating the law. Brewington gave other opinions- Brandenburg vs. Ohio about yelling fire in a crowded theater. I did not threaten public safety- I did things from behind a computer- some called me a coward for that- but I signed all my writing.
I accept the punishment I get- under no circumstances did I knowingly commit a crime- I thought it was free speech.

Judge Hill asked if Dan Brewington had read his pre-sentencing evaluation- and was it accurate. He said yes. The only self reported crime was a DUI in 1996- yes- in Campbell County, KY.

Closing arguments:

Negangard:

Cited Richardson vs. state, Engelmeyer vs. state and Blakely vs. state you can look at a range of sentences. Charges in this case can go to 9-10 years maximum, depending on if they are concurrent or consecutive.

The state is concerned- even as we sit here today he accepts no responsibility. Melissa ( his wife) and the judge suggested he stop. He never accepts responsibility. He lied again when he said he didn’t know he had to get a court approved psychologist. Nor has he paid any sums ordered except child support. It shows his disdain for authority. To this day he has not done what was ordered by the court.

Negangard then talked about Judge Joan Humphrey Lefkow of Illinois. Negangard said that her pro se litigant felt bad, filed motions, a suit, and complaints to the attorney general. This guy went to her home and killed her husband and mother. The judge was not home.

There is psychological evidence for years now Brewington has paranoia and delusions and has yet to be evaluated to shed light on who he is or what makes him tick. Now he says it’s MY fault! ( Negangard’s fault) He has continually blogged since the trial. His intent is to intimidate and he lied to the grand jury when he testified and a jury found him guilty. Mr. Brewington has attempted to affect the outcome of the judicial process. Negangard then went back to Judge Lefkow having to be protected by US Marshalls. Brewington has no apologies- no acceptance of responsibility. He says- “If I knew I’d violated the law…” He’s proud that he hasn’t turned over the handgun to his wife as she’s psychologically unstable. It still hasn’t occurred to him that he should do this psych evaluation and see his kids. There is NO POINT IN PROBATION! It would just be more letters and targets. We need to protect the judicial system. We need a sentence to send a message. Connor and others won’t testify in court if they fear internet harassment. There is a shortage of doctors willing to testify across the state. When witnesses won’t testify- that will cause the republic to fall.

In blogging- the intent was no longer to stimulate public discourse. Hold him accountable for his attacks on the judicial system, He is not someone deserving of mercy. Melissa ( Brewington’s wife) thought it would be a good thing if he’d address his problems. Brewington could be wrong and he needs to be fixed.

Barrett:

gave a printed sheet of his background cases and argument- then spoke:

All his criticism- he put it in writing. The law is about aggravating and mitigating circumstances. All of these items are part of an episode of criminal conduct. The average is 18 months. The maximum is 4 years. Generally criminal history is the most significant factor. I don’t know how these acts made people feel. Negangard doesn’t agree. That’s why we have appellate courts.

Barrett said it was INAPPROPRIATE to consider Bacher vs. State 1997. The impact requires that it would require specific findings that were foreseeable to defendant. It is inappropriate for a trial judge to send a message as in Greg vs. Bay vs. state 1996. ( don’t hold me to spellings on this he was talking fast) Defendant’s jail time should be rehabilitative as well as punitive. Buchanon vs. state – talks about the absence of physical injury and minimal property loss in sentencing guides.

Barrett said his speech is protected- right or wrong- tasteful or not. He has no criminal history. This is NOT like Judge Lefkow that Negangard mentioned. ( for the story look her up on Wikipedia and the internet) This defendant ( Brewington) is likely to respond to his time already served. He has been in jail for 231 days including the Ohio time. We ask you to use the 231 days as time served and he will live with his mother in Ohio.

Judge Hill-
went over the mitigating circumstances. He found that Brewington did plan to harm them based on his voluminous amounts published. He said the circumstances are likely to reoccur as he still intends to write, even if it is not criminal. He referred to the judge in derogatory terms as often as possible in his posting about son of a bitch vs. child abuser. The probation issue is not a reasonable solution. He has been a law abiding citizen since before all this and the DUI is too long ago to even consider.

As to aggravating circumstances, Hill said there was significant harm done to people. There were ongoing comments and threat after threat for years. You twist the fact to manipulate the justice system to make yourself out to be the victim. Hill used IC 35-50-1-2 regarding consecutive and concurrent terms regarding offenses closely related in time and circumstance. He found that the perjury was separate from the other four charges.

Count 1 was 6 month in DCLC ( Connor)
Count 2 was 2 years IN DOC (Judge Humphrey)
Count 3 was 6 months DCLC (Heidi Humphrey)
Count 4 Obstruction of Justice was 2 years IN DOC
Count 5 Perjury was 1 year IN DOC

He went on about which ones were concurrent and consecutive to each other and ended up with 5 years with 231 days credit and 231 days good time credit.

The judge said there was 30 days from today to file a motion to appeal or correct errors. If a motion to correct error is filed, there is 30 days from then to file for appeal.

Brewington said he intended to appeal and asked for a public defender. Barrett suggested it be someone besides him, but that he has the motion for appeal ready to file.

Court adjourned at 4 PM

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

Note: I attended the entire 4 day jury trial as well. Those 70 pages of notes are not posted. If you have any questions about the trial- please post them below in comments and I will be happy to refer to the trial notes to answer them.