Fellow blogger convicted

I have discussed the case of fellow angry dad blogger Dan Brewington before, and he has thanked me for my comments. But I lost track of his case, and I am sorry to see that he was convicted last fall of saying to much on his blog:

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. ...

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 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 charges seem lame to me, but I did not find the details. Maybe Dan posted the judge's home address, and the judge's DA buddy argued that was intimidation. There was also a charge that Dan blogged about secret grand jury proceedings against him, and that he lied about how much he knew about the judge.

I hope has a good appeal in the works. I do not see how the above jury instruction can possibly be a valid one. Family court judges who deprive children of access to their fit parents are child abusers. That is an obvious fact that I have documented over and over again on this blog, and so have many other angry dads. American free speech allows us to tell the truth about what govt officials are doing. Even lies are not criminal, according to a current supreme court case. I hope Dan posts his appeal papers and wish him the best of luck.

I hope has a good appeal in the works. I do not see how the above jury instruction can possibly be a valid one. Family court judges who deprive children of access to their fit parents are child abusers. That is an obvious fact that I have documented over and over again on this blog, and so have many other angry dads. American free speech allows us to tell the truth about what govt officials are doing. I hope Dan posts his appeal papers and wish him the best of luck.

I also don't see how it can be a crime for him to write about the grand jury hearing if he was being charged with perjury for his testimony at that hearing. Surely he has a right to blog about the criminal charges against him.

The indictment says that Dan put the judge in fear of retaliation for dissolving his marriage, and "did intimidate and/or harass" a shrink who was a witness. It seems to me that does not describe the situation at all. Dan doesn't like the judge because the judge is preventing him from seeing his kids, and Dan doesn't like the shrink because of his unethical child custody evaluation and testimony. Dan is not retaliating for the divorce decree; he just wants to see his kids. What does "intimidate and/or harass" mean? Don't they know which they are accusing him of? Intimidation and harassment are two different things. It appears to me that Dan's real crime is to expose the poor and biased testimony of a hack psychiatrist who should have been dismissed for lacking the competence to be an expert in the case.