Congressional Testimony: Caroline Marie Rice to Bill Windsor of Lawless America.
“Our family was torn apart by violence, now it’s being torn apart by lies, I am so sorry for my children. I’m sorry I stayed too long. I don’t know what will happen next.. but I will stand for the truth.”
Thank you Caroline for bravely sharing your story… you do not fight alone.
Lawless America is a documentary film that is exposing government corruption, judicial corruption, and law enforcement corruption.
(Minnesota): “Dad’s so scary when he gets mad, steam comes out of his eyes…” these are the haunting words of Annelise Rice who, as a child, was taken from her her mother, the primary caregiver, and then placed into the care and custody of her abusive and largely absent father, Brent Rice, by an unjust family court order.
Caroline Rice, mother, was herself a victim of Brent’s rage, and suffered numerous beatings and emotional abuse at his hands – with much of the violence occurring in front of her five children. Courageously, Caroline sought a divorce after 16 years of violence and fought to keep her children safe by filing for a restraining order.
Restraining orders, however, do not apply to family court proceedings and in that arena, a new level of abuse would begin. The divorce was finalized in December 2004 but a permanent custody order was not issued until March 2006. In the custody order, the five Rice children were ordered to be split between Caroline and Brent Rice. Caroline would receive sole physical and legal custody of the two oldest children, and Brent would receive sole physical custody of the three youngest children which included Annelise (with joint legal split between the parties).
The custody evaluator’s report ignored the presence of domestic violence in the family, despite countless police reports and the issuance of a no-contact restraining order. The report also stated that the abuse “was not substantiated” and there was no proof that the children had witnessed any violence. Further, when making the recommendation to split custody of the children the report explained that “it would be difficult for either parent to be the sole physical custodian of five children given the demands of full time employment and attempting to meet the needs and schedules of numerous children.” The decision was made despite the fact that court records describe Caroline as the primary caregiver, and records also state that during most of the marriage she was a stay-at-home-mom. So it had been proven that Caroline was able meet the demands of caring for her five children. After the ruling Caroline filed for an appeal which was rejected.
To uproot and separate the children from their mother and siblings, and from the only home they have ever known caused significant trauma that would later fuel a lawsuit Annelise would file as an adult.
At 19 years old, Annelise is legally recognized as an adult, and would no longer be silenced or controlled by the family court and its players. All the tears she has shed would seep into the ink of the pen she held in her hand, as she clawed her voice out of a hole of imposed silence to put the words to the paper that would become a deprivation of civil rights lawsuit.
In an exclusive interview with journalist Michael Volpe of CDN News, Annelise Rice speaks out about her nightmarish childhood and recent Federal Civil Rights lawsuit against her Father, Hennepin and Carver Counties, along with Social Workers, Guardians at litem, and lawyers, seeking an excess of $240 Million in damages for deprivation of civil rights by tortuous intervention in a mother-child relationship and deprivation of rights under color of the law (Civil Action No. 17-cv-796 ADM/HB).
Read the full article from Michael Volpe here, and please consider leaving a comment on CDN News or Red Herring Alert to show your support of Annelise Rice in her courageous fight for justice: Annalise Rice, 19, describes her Family Court nightmare
Corruption in the Grazzini-Rucki case has reached epic proportions – affecting all levels of government in Dakota County and Minnesota, and even influencing local media coverage of the case.
Journalists should abide by ethics and standards so that their reporting is accurate, fair and does not cause undue harm to its subjects. Just the opposite happened when Brandon Stahl and Michael Brodkorb (who now works exclusively for David Rucki, promoting his interest in social media posts and blog articles) began covering the case for the Star Tribune.
A repost from Red Herring Alert suggests the behavior of reporters Brandon Stahl, and Michael Brodkorb, in their coverage of the Grazzini-Rucki case was unethical and exploitative. Further, Stahl and Brodkorb’s appearance at the Ranch in the hours before the Rucki girls were recovered suggests a leak in the Lakeville police that tipped them off to sensitive information on an open investigation that, by law, should not have been released. Did the presence of these rogue reporters compromise the investigation?
From Red Herring Alert: “Sources tell us that an unmarked vehicle with its flashers on was the first to arrive on the scene on Wednesday, November 18, 2015, the day that law enforcement officials located S. Rucki and G. Rucki.
It is further reported on Red Herring Alert that Doug Dahlen, who lives at the home where the girls were located, arrived home to find a vehicle with its flashers on, parked on a gravel road. Not knowing who was in the vehicle, he stopped to inquire if the driver was OK. The vehicle sat there for 3 hours before law enforcement arrived. Brandon Stahl was in the vehicle and went to the door asking for an interview. He gave Mr. Dahlen his business card, identifying himself as Brandon Stahl of the Star Tribune.
It is deeply disturbing to know how law enforcement has tipped off local media to parts of the investigation, prior to any public reports from the officials. Isn’t it pathetic that the Star Tribune sat there for 3 hours prior to the arrival of law enforcement? 3 hours!”
It is unclear if the reporters were tipped off by law enforcement or someone else. Brodkorb says about his role in discovering the whereabouts of the runaway Rucki girls, “Over the summer, my sources provided information that led me to a location near where the girls were found less than two weeks ago. I’m convinced that if I had knocked on one too many doors, I might have made it more difficult for law enforcement to find S and G.” Michael Brodkorb: Why I wrote about the Rucki case
Has Stahl and Brodkorb gone too far in their reporting of the Grazzini-Rucki case?
READ THE FULL ARTICLE FROM RED HERRING ALERT BELOW:
“Interesting, No?” Posted on the Red Herring Alert on November 21, 2015 by Susan:
Local media coverage of the missing Rucki girls has been politically motivated. It is very clear.
It is interesting to note that Michael Brodkorb, who always claimed his sole motivation was to find the missing girls, has not written anything about them being found last Wednesday, but on Thursday, did post an article about Michelle MacDonald.
No post about his relief that the girls were found. No post with relief that the girls can tell their story. No post reporting how relieved the father is. Nope. Just simply an article that shows his antipathy of Michelle MacDonald.
Sources tell us that an unmarked vehicle with its flashers on was the first to arrive on the scene on Wednesday, November 18, 2015, the day that law enforcement officials located S. Rucki and G. Rucki.
It is further reported to Red Herring Alert that Doug Dahlen, who lives at the home where the girls were located, arrived home to find a vehicle with its flashers on, parked on a gravel road. Not knowing who was in the vehicle, he stopped to inquire if the driver was OK. The vehicle sat there for 3 hours before law enforcement arrived. Brandon Stahl was in the vehicle and went to the door asking for an interview. He gave Mr. Dahlen his business card, identifying himself as Brandon stahl of the Star Tribune.
Michael Brodkorb, source: startribune.com
Our sources also tell us that law enforcement treated the girls very well, and promised to listen to what they have to say.
It is deeply disturbing to know how law enforcement has tipped off local media to parts of the investigation, prior to any public reports from the officials. Isn’t it pathetic that the Star Tribune sat there for 3 hours prior to the arrival of law enforcement? 3 hours!
This writer (Susan) appeared on Tim Kinley’s show Speechless MN, on October 29th to talk about the Rucki case. Tim made an observation about the media’s handling of Family Court:
Let’s face it. Divorced parents are treated as second class citizens in every state in the nation. No one cares if your child is withheld from you. The interest in the Rucki case would have received little attention, if not for the fact that the GOP needs Michelle MacDonald to go away. She came within 7 points of winning a seat on the Minnesota Supreme Court in 2014. If you listened to Ron Rosenbaum’s show last Thursday, you can hear his obsession with Michelle MacDonald. Dede Evavold will be posting about that soon.
We also know that the Minnesota Family Court would like MacDonald to go away, as well. She is bad for business as usual in the courts. To have her disbarred for this case would make many people very happy, but the truth is, she came in after the case was a mess. If Michelle MacDonald were to be disbarred for this, let’s hope that Lisa Henry would be, too. She was the lawyer who participated in the phone conference with Judge David Knutson, and was too timid to tell Judge Knutson that it was unlawful for him to throw Sandra out of her home with less than two hours notice.
In all my years of Family Court experience, that began with my own ordeal in 1998 and spanned eight long years, I have not seen any kind of intervention when children are withheld from a loving parent.
Tim Kinley mentioned the Caroline Rice case (accidentally referred to her as Susan Rice, but it is Caroline). You can read about the Rice case and the appeal.
In my opinion, the Rucki case was driven by political vitriol and the courts fail to do what they can to ensure both parents are allowed to spend time with their children. They also fail to protect children from abusive parents, who can be a mother or a father. Readers will have to draw their own conclusion about these issues.
Justice for Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and Children 