Sherrod Brown Neglected His Children

Sherrod Brown was married to Larke Brown on August 25, 1979 in Germantown, Ohio. They have two daughters: Emily, born in 1981, and Elizabeth, born in 1983. According to Larke’s first affidavit, she And Sherrod had been separated since January 1986. Furthermore, Larke was granted a restraining order against Brown as part of the divorce procedings.

An August 2001 article by David W. Martin in The Cleveland Scene picks up the story:

When Sherrod and Larke Brown split in 1986, it was a well-known secret in political circles that they parted badly. Statehouse reporters at the time were delivered anonymous brown envelopes containing court documents with claims of neglect and cruelty. Larke had sought a restraining order against her husband. "I am also intimidated by the Defendant," her affidavit said, "and am in fear for the safety and well-being of myself and our children due to the Defendant's physical violence and abusive nature." Brown answered that he had never been abusive toward his wife and daughters. A divorce was granted in 1987; the court found both parties at fault.

It wasn't a pleasant marriage:

Today, those who knew the Browns speak of the divorce in the vague language of failed relationships. "It just wasn't one of those smooth ones," says Judge Brunner, a college friend of Larke's.

"It was just ugly," says Sherrod's brother Bob, who lives in Shaker Heights.
...

"It was not friendly," he says of his divorce, "but to her credit and to my credit, our daughters have been raised in two loving homes, and they've done very well, and they're very close to both of us, and I'm very thankful for that. The divorce was obviously unpleasant."

Court records dated 5/12/86 show that Larke filed for divorce, saying that Sherrod had “[b]een guilty of gross neglect of duty and extreme cruelty toward her…” She was granted a restraining order against Brown saying that “unless otherwise restrained, [Sherrod] will … harass … annoy, interfere with, or do bodily harm to [her] …” and added “I am also intimidated by the defendant and am in fear for the safety and well-being of myself and our children due to the defendant’s physical violence and abusive nature.”

Sherrod apparently couldn't or didn't provide for Larke and his two children sufficiently with alimony and child support because Larke claimed that Sherrod’s payments to her were “insufficient” to meet her monthly expenses and she was forced to borrow money from her parents. Ramona Whisler, the Brown’s neighbor, filed an affidavit saying Larke “has carried the major burden” of caring for the children “because Mr. Brown has been frequently out of town and involved in work related activity.” Whisler stated that she has “especially noticed that [Sherrod] has been gone from over one to four nights nearly every week.” She went on to state that “during the times [she] did observe [Sherrod] watching his two children by himself, he was not very attentive.”

In August of 1986, Larke files motion of contempt, charging Sherrod has not paid child support, as the court ordered. Sherrod responded in September filing for, and receiving, a restraining order against Larke, using much of the same language she used and alleging her family has harassed him. The very next month, Larke files a motion in contempt, charging Sherrod violated the restraining order. She said that while at home entertaining guests, Sherrod came over to pick up their children and Larke said he:

“refused to return to the car, pushed me up against the wall with his arms in order to pass and entered the house. He refused to leave and began to say insulting, derogatory things about me, my mothering of the children and my character in front of my friends and the children … [Sherrod] then cornered one of my friends … and again started on his tirade of character assassination. … [I] felt physically threatened because of [Sherrod’s] combative tone and his assault on [me] at the entrance to the house.”

Larke, in an 10/27/86 affidavit, says “I am definitely afraid of my husband, that he has struck and bulled me on several different occasions, he has completely destroyed my peace of mind and I am extremely intimidated by him.” Larke further claims that Sherrod “has embarked on a course of conduct designed to destroy the children’s peace of mind by making slanderous and defamatory remarks about [Larke] to them, as well as insisting that they repeat untruthful things that [Sherrod] had coached them to state.”

Finally, on 1/8/87, Larke and Sherrod Brown agree to settle the divorce, saying that both have been “[b]een guilty of gross neglect of duty …” All outstanding restraining orders were lifted. On official Secretary of State letterhead, Sherrod notifies the court that his address has changed on 9/30/87.

Two years later, on St. Patrick's Day, Sherrod files to reduce his child support payment because Larke had moved. About fifteen days after that, Larke files a motion of contempt, saying Sherrod has not paid some medical expenses for the children, as agreed to. In Februaru of 1990, Larke and Sherrod agree to dismiss all outstanding motions.

However, on 1/31/91, Sherrod files a motion to reduce child support, saying Larke should pay for the medical insurance for the children. A legal battle ensues and Sherrod gets subpoenaed on 5/23/91. THe case is heard in early August of 1991, the Referee in the case, discussing the allegations back and forth and remaining bitterness, says “neither of the parties … have much credibility on these issues.” He also notes that the “allegations and descriptions regarding past events … do not warrant inclusion in this report.”

The conclusion of the story occurs over a two year period starting in March of 2000 when Sherrod moves to have his child support for Emily terminated, since she is now 18 and has graduated high school. On 4/23/02: Sherrod moves to have all child support terminated, as Elizabeth is now 18 and will graduate from high school in June. By mid-September of 2002, Sherrod’s child support is terminated and paid in full.

Now, after all that, you may be asking yourself what all this has to do with the Senate race between Sherrod Brown and Republican incumbent Mike DeWine. Simple. All of this goes to the character of Sherrod Brown. You have to ask yourself if Sherrod Brown, who failed to support his own children, is capable of respresenting your interests in the United States Senate. It seems apparent that Sherrod Brown has something of a violent streak in him. Is that the kind of representation that Ohio deserves in the United States Senate? Does Sherrod Brown's principles reflect Ohio's values?

Personally, I take these child support charges very seriously. As a child of a broken marriage myself, I know how important those child support payments are. When you bring children in to the world, I feel it is your responsibility to take care of them. Failure to do so, indicates a serious character flaw. Perhaps Sherrod Brown has come to terms with his demons, I certainly hope so. And I sincerely hope that there has been some healing for whatever damage may have occured in the relationship between Sherrod Brown and his daughters. But I have to say that this is a dealbreaker for me...

UPDATE: Over at RightAngle, this comment was left:

When these accusations were raised in attack ads during Sherrod's first bid for Congress, Sherrod's ex-wife Larke asked his opponent to pull the ads. His opponent refused, and lost.

Larke and her husband are holding a fundraiser for Sherrod at their Granville home tonight (Friday, October 20, 2006). Sherrod will be there. Suggested contribution is $150.

Sherrod's daughter, Emily Brown, campaigns for him.

I am not a part of Mike DeWine's campaign. In fact, I worked on the campaign of one of DeWine's primary opponents. I found this information to be relevent because of my personal experience.

I'll add that when Sherrod's opponent ran the ad, that was not a state-wide race. Does that make a difference? I don't really know. I leave that for the reader to make that judgement for themselves. I found the information to be disturbing and felt that the story should be told again so that Ohio voters have another chance to examine Sherrod Brown's character and background in order to decide whether or not Sherrod Brown is the right choice for Ohio. I don't think that he is...

I am pleased to see that Emily has repaired her relationship with her father. I myself have had some reconcilliation with my own father, so I give Sherrod Brown credit for having patched that up.

UPDATE 2: A note to the BackStreetBoys...the last campaign I worked for lost to Mike DeWine in the primary...I'm not a DeWine fan. My point in writing this story is that I felt strongly about the issue of deadbeat dads. Your issue isn't with the campaign of Mike DeWine, it is apparently with me...and it appears that you are a-okay with deadbeat dads, and that's fine with me, but don't ascribe any feelings of loyalty to Mike DeWine in my posting of this story... I'll hold my nose and vote for him, but it's only becuase the alternative of Sherrod Brown is just a bridge too far.....

UPDATE 3: Interested Participant has something to say here. And a special thanks to RightAngle, FreeRepublic and RedState for driving traffic to the story.