Michael Volpe, of CDN News, reports on a newly released police report from the Lakeville P.D. that reveals that runaway teens, Samantha and Gianna Rucki, fought against returning to their father after being discovered living on a therapeutic horse ranch after going into hiding for more than 2 years. The girls decided to run away after the family court system failed to protect them from an abusive father and placed them into a custody situation they felt was unsafe.
That Samantha and Gianna threatened to run away from their father’s care AFTER being discovered by police the supports defense raised by mother, Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, that she hid them for their safety (which is an affirmative defense). The girls demonstrated palpable fear of their father, David Rucki. It also validates the defense of Doug and Gina Dahlen who claimed both girls repeatedly threatened to run away if returned to their father, and they allowed the girls to stay on the ranch for their own safety, and that the girls were free to leave at any time but chose to stay of their own free will.
The police report, from November 21, 2015, was never seen before by Sandra who was charged with parental deprivation for her efforts to protect her daughters. As part of the discovery process, this police report should have been turned over to Grazzini-Rucki, and the 3 other defendants charged in this case.
According to Volpe: “If the Dakota County Prosecutor, whose office prosecuted the case, failed to provide this police report, this would be a “Brady violation” named after the U.S. Supreme Court Case Brady V Maryland, in which a conviction was overturned after prosecutors failed to provide exculpatory evidence, meaning, in this case, evidence favorable to the defense. In order for a legal proceeding to be just, all evidence must be shared with both sides…Ignoring Brady is not only an egregious violation of prosecutorial ethics…”
Volpe goes on to say: “Given this issue, under normal circumstances, Sandra Grazzini-Rucki’s conviction would have been thrown out. But nothing has been normal in this case.”
Upon being found at a therapeutic horse ranch belonging to Doug and Gina Dahlen on 11/18/2015, the Rucki sisters told police they would run away again if returned to the care of their father, David Rucki.
According to the police report: “Samantha and Gianna came down, and immediately told us that they would not go back to their father. We told them that our first concern was their safety. I did ask them about the last time that they had heard from their mother, and they told me that they would not say anything without a lawyer.” The report also indicated that Samantha has quote “issues with males”.
Arriving on scene was Detective Kelli Coughlin from the Lakeville police, who previously responded to an incident where Rucki swore and threatened a member of ex wife, Sandra Grazzini-Rucki’s family. The previous police report shows Rucki’s propensity towards violence, and the very real fear other people have of him. It also shows that Coughlin had knowledge of Rucki’s abuse violent behavior towards his family, and when the Lakeville P.D. pushed to return to the Rucki girls to a home they felt was unsafe, the Lakeville P.D. did so with full knowledge of the case, including abuse allegations.
The police report indicates the victim is fearful for his family and feels Rucki will follow through on his threats that include “I‘m coming after you and you won’t see me coming” and “It probably won’t be me (that will get you).” At the time of the incident, Sandra’s mother died the night before after an agonizing battle with cancer. While the family was still grieving Rucki fought to gain control of the family trust, and threatened and intimidated family members to stake a claim on something that was not legally or rightfully his. Rucki Police Report
Samantha and Gianna were assigned a social worker and also given a lawyer, both argued in court on behalf of the sisters that they their father and did not want to be placed in his care. The sisters stated they would attend therapy and not attempt to run away again if they were able to stay in foster care. Judge Michael Mayer of Dakota County denied the request, the sisters were sent to reunification therapy in rural California and then were placed backed into the custody of David Rucki, father, against their will.
(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
Child Support Magistrate Maria K. Pastoor claims to be a feminist and defender of battered women. She wrote in a widely publicized paper Police Training and the Effectiveness of Minnesota Domestic Abuse Laws (1984) that (p.9) “Prosecutors and judges, in particular, often ignore or trivialize the harm battered women suffer….At best, legal officers are consistent, at worst, criminal. “ If Pastoor really holds these beliefs, how can she justify the extreme rulings she has issued in the Grazzini-Rucki child support case?
The actions of the corrupt courts in Dakota County have hit Sandra Grazzini-Rucki like a massive earthquake, her life has been shaken to the core, causing devastation on every level. Sandra has been forcibly estranged from the five children she loves. Her 30+ year career as a flight attendant is in ruins and she is currently unemployed. All of her personal belongings have been seized by order of Judge David L. Knutson and turned over to abusive ex husband, David Rucki. In addition, any potential future income Sandra earns will be seized immediately handed to Rucki. Should Sandra become disabled or unable to work, even social security payments will be given to Rucki. Sandra now lives homeless, destitute and afraid for her life.
Just as earthquakes happen along the cracks in the surface of the earth, Sandra’s life has been cracked due to injustices of the court, and along those fault lines she would be struck again, this time in child support proceedings. Magistrate Pastoor, who once said, “The husband reasons that if his wife is bad, he is justified in hitting her. Because he is a man, he has the power to destroy what he does not like.”(p. 24) is now presiding over the Grazzini-Rucki child support case. Contrary to those remarks, Magistrate Pastoor has given David Rucki the power to destroy what he does not like – ex-wife, Sandra. Enabled by “injustice system”, Rucki has been given the tools to abuse, harass and stalk his ex-wife, Sandra, through the court system.
Magistrate Pastoor Has Connection to Judge Knuston, Asked to Be Appointed to Grazzini-Rucki Child Support Case
Magistrate Pastoor made great efforts to be put on the Grazzini-Rucki child support case. Throughout her appointment, Magistrate Pastoor has extended special treatment to David Rucki, and taken a radical departure from the law in doing so.
Are Magistrate Pastoor’s actions being influenced by her prior connection to Judge David L. Knutson? Magistrate Pastoor has previously worked side by side on the Parental Cooperation Taskforce with Judge Knutson, their professional relationship has spanned for years.
Consider this: An article written by journalist Michael Volpe Did judges in Sandra Grazzini-Rucki case previously fix husband’s cases? exposes the unusual actions and rulings issued by Judge David Knutson in the Grazzini-Rucki case resulting in ex-husband David Rucki getting preferential treatment in court proceedings. In this article, Volpe raises the question – did Judge Knutson work to get himself onto the Grazzini-Rucki case and then fix cases in Rucki’s favor?
Here, again David Rucki is receiving special treatment in the court, in a similar pattern where the law is circumvented by the extreme and unusual actions of a judge and the other party, Sandra, is victimized when the legal system is used as a weapon rather than to dispense justice.
Pastoor Inflates Income of Homeless, Destitute Sandra Grazzini-Rucki
Magistrate Pastoor says that “police must be trained to see a battered woman’s problems and take immediate steps to stop the violence against her...” Shouldn’t a judge or magistrate do the same?
Quoting Pastoor, “The primary problems should be self-evident in most cases–the man subjects the woman to physical and psychological torture. Police must be trained to see a battered woman’s problems and to take immediate steps to stop the violence against her. They should not provide an abusive man with an opportunity to discuss the woman’s supposedly provocative behavior.” (p. 35)
Throughout the Grazzini-Rucki legal proceedings, including child support, it is clear that financial abuse as well as what Magistrate Pastoor calls “physical and psychological torture” is occurring. Sandra’s very existence has been challenged by Rucki, who has enlisted the legal system to make her life as miserable as possible. The comforts most take for granted have been stripped from Sandra’s life – each day she faces the unknown of where she will sleep and if she will eat, haunted by the possibility of further court action against her. Her dreams at night are filled with images of her children, whom she has been prohibited from any contact with…only in dreams that she can see their precious faces again.
As a Magistrate, and as one who advocated for better legal protections for battered women, Pastoor should have been aware of tactics abusers use in legal proceedins and taken care that the court was not being used as a weapon. That is NOT what happened here.
Magistrate Pastoor also says a police officer “should not provide an abusive man with an opportunity to discuss the woman’s supposedly provocative behavior” yet in the Grazzini-Rucki child support case, she gives Rucki and his attorney, Lisa Elliot, not only a stage but a standing ovation to engage in victim blaming against Sandra. Magistrate Pastoor’s rulings are not based on fact or evidence but rely solely on the word of an abuser bent on destroying the victim.
What Rucki is really saying is that Sandra should be worked like a slave and then forced to turn over all of her income to him – this is abusive. Magistrate Pastoor says about the mentality of an abuser, ”In marriage relationships many men regard “their” women as property, with which they can do as they please. The man has the right to control the woman “by virtue of having penetrated her with his penis.” (p. 28) Once again Magistrate Pastoor says one thing and does another – her rulings only reinforce Rucki’s control over Sandra, and place her in a position of poverty and desperation where she cannot assert her rights, and has been deprived of basic human dignity.
Sandra has been chronically homeless since being illegally removed from her home by Judge Knutson on September 7, 2012. Judge Knutson then ordered that Sandra’s pay be garnished, which caused further financial hardship, and made it impossible for her to recover. In December 2015, the Red Herring Alert blog reported: “Her wages are garnished 25% for payment of past marital taxes even though mother has been left destitute with prior use of MN Care Insurance and food stamps after the divorce. Her ex-husband’s income is in excess of $200,000 per month and he retains all of the marital property.” Red Herring Alert posted a picture of Sandra’s paycheck showing that after deductions, the net pay is negative – $2.49. How is Sandra supposed to survive..what the court system is doing to her amounts to attempted murder.
Despite the evidence showing Sandra’s poverty, and that she currently has NO income, Magistrate Pastoor imputed Sandra’s income at a whopping $4,143 a month!In the revised child support order, from October 13, 2016,Sandra Grazzini-Rucki ordered to pay $1K monthly child support The order reflects Sandra has a monthly income of $0 zero dollars then includes an imaginary number in a “potential income” of $4143 a month.Child support is based on the “potential income” rather than the facts of the case.
The conditions of release, and complications of the criminal case, make it impossible for Sandra to work as a flight attendant. And with 6 felonies on her record, it has been impossible to obtain employment.
The State of Minnesota has since denied general assistance and food support to Sandra, she lives day to day in an unimaginable fight for survival. Sandra is living in truly desperate circumstances… child support should have been put on reserve.
Sandra has since filed an appeal in both her criminal court case, and filed an appeal on the child support case…she will continue to fight for justice.
A recent social media post from ABC 20/20 raises more questions about their portrayal of the Grazzini-Rucki case, which was featured in the episode “Footprints in the Snow”. 20/20 has been criticized for ignoring critical facts, and refusing to include evidence of abuse.
20/20 recently updated, and re-aired “Footprints” at the end of March 2017. By then ABC had ample time to further investigate the Grazzini-Rucki case, and include any information that was omitted in the original episode. They refused to do so. In addition, ABC had been the target of an onslaught of public complaint from viewers who were familiar with the case and recognized critical information was missing or inaccurately portrayed. There have also been news reports published with new information on the case. ABC 20/20 selected information from news sources, such as Sandra’s sentencing, to include in the updated episode of “Footprints” while continuing to ignore evidence of abuse.
In a post dated March 26, 2017, made when 20/20 updated their story, claims “Samantha denies that her father ever hit her.” However, in a police interview from June 2016, she said the OPPOSITE of what the post suggested and “The ABC tweet is even more misleading, given that Samantha Rucki also told Detective Coughlin that her father was pressuring her into recanting prior allegations of abuse…”
This article uncovers evidence and documentation regarding domestic violence, child abuse, and David Rucki’s extensive criminal history that ABC 20/20 failed to include in “Footprints”. You will also hear reports from witnesses who had experienced Rucki’s frightening and violent behavior.
None of this was included in the “Footprints” episode.
E-mail complaints, thoughts and feedback about “Footprints in the Snow” to ABC 20/20 at:
elizabeth.a.vargas@abc.com and sean.dooley@abc.com
Elizabeth Vargas, journalist and anchor, ABC 20/20
Is the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office participating in a cover up of corruption happening in Dakota County?
The current Attorney General in Minnesota is Laurie Swanson, who was elected in 2006, and reelected in 2010 and 2014. The Attorney General’s Office has been receiving documentation concerning the Grazzini-Rucki case for over 5 years and has refused to investigate or take any action in the face of serious allegations, and evidence, showing corruption in local government and law enforcement. However, when opposing President Trump’s immigrant order, Lori Swanson said “It does not pass constitutional muster, is inconsistent with our history as a nation, and undermines our national security.” The same can be said for Dakota County; yet instead of taking a public stance on a very real concern that affects not only the Grazzini-Rucki family but the entire state of Minnesota, and possibly tens of thousands of families victimized by an out of control court system, Swanson remains silent. Now is a time for leadership, not silence.
Minn. Attorney General Lori Swanson (Source: Wikipedia Commons)
The ONLY action the Attorney General’s Office has taken in the Grazzini-Rucki case is to vigorously defend the law-breaking, corrupt family law judge, David L. Knuston… this flies in the face of a recent letter issued by the Attorney General’s office stating they haveno authority over “investigating and prosecuting criminal matters”.
An article, and letter recently published by journalist Michael Volpe of CDN News Minnesota Attorney General’s office adds to confusion in Rucki case shows that the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office has recently been made aware of possible violations of the law in the Grazzini-Rucki case committed by various officials in Dakota County who are involved with the case. The Attorney General’s office acknowledges that they have received a letter from Volpe but has declined to take any action. Even if the Attorney General felt they had “no authority” they could at least refer to the complaint to an agency who could investigate or intervene. Instead the Attorney General’s Office refers Volpe to Dakota County, back to the people directly involved in potentially illegal acts, and corruption. The Attorney General is effectively enabling, and empowering those already breaking the law, and violating the Constitutional rights of Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, and the five Rucki children.
Judge David L Knutson
The Attorney General’s office has been receiving documentation regarding the Grazzini-Rucki case since 2011; with Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and her family law attorney, Michelle MacDonald, both contacting the Attorney General’s office. In 2013, Sandra Grazzini and Ms. MacDonald requested a meeting a with the Attorney General’s Office regarding a complaint against Dr. James Gilbertson. A meeting was held in which the Assistant Attorney General and an attorney appeared on behalf of Lori Swanson. During the meeting, the Attorney General’s Office was made aware of the abuse of the Rucki children by father David Rucki, and made aware of inappropriate behavior from therapist Dr. James Gilbertson, who was working with the children. Affidavits from S.R. and G.R. detailing abuse, court failures and allegations against Dr. Gilbertson, as well as their audio testimony, was provided to the Attorney General’s Office, among other substantial evidence of abuse. At the time of the meeting S.R. and G.R. had run away, and were still missing. During the meeting, the Attorney General’s Office promised they would protect the Rucki children from their father, David Rucki, and protect them from therapist, Dr. James Gilbertson, if they came into the office. For the Attorney General’s Office to now say that they will not get involved in the Grazzini-Rucki case contradicts their statement from 2013 stating they would protect the children.
Dr. James Gilbertson, PhD
The Minnesota Attorney General’s office has failed to protect the Rucki children as promised and instead has protected those who have placed the children in the abusive situation. In 2013/2014 Attorney General’s Office defended family law judge David L. Knutson, in a federal civil rights case involving Sandra and her children (Sandra Grazzini-Rucki v. Judge David Knutson, No. 13-cv-02477). In this matter, Alethea M Huyser represented the Attorney General’s Office. The cost of this defense was raised with tax payer dollars, and the expense of individual liberties. In Minnesota, an untold number of tax payer dollars, an estimated tens of thousands of dollars, was used to argue that Judge Knutson is immune for any consequence including a suit for damages regardless of what he did – even if he violated basic civil rights.
An online comments says about the lawsuit“…what Judge David Knutson has done to this woman and her family is diabolical. There is no possible way ANY rational human being could look at the file of this case and not have it be abundantly clear how out of control the “system” is when a judge can get away with what this man has done. This is not about a divorce, or a couple arguing over custody of their children…….that had already been settled long before Judge Knutson became involved in this case. This is about a judge acting completely outside the confines of the law, which is why he is being sued as an individual.”
As the CHIEF legal officer of the State of Minnesota, the Attorney General should be active in preventing corruption from happening within local government and state law enforcement agencies, should be defending citizens from Constitutional violations committed by judges and public officials, and should investigate – or refer the complaint to an authority who can investigate. Lori Swanson has the guts to stand up to the President of the United States – then why can’t she stand up to Judge David L. Knutson, and Dakota County?
And that is the great travesty of justice that has occurred in Grazzini-Rucki case, and is abundantly evident in the response from the Attorney General’s office – that when confronted with real substantial showing corruption is occurring in government offices, that the power entrusted to elected officials is being abused, that lives are being destroyed and laws being broken by judges, state officials, law enforcement (etc) that have violated their mandated duties –the Attorney General, like so many others in the State of Minnesota, has chosen to ignore, deny, shift blame or engage in victim blaming. Ultimately refusal to act equates that of being an enabler to injustice.
ALSO READ Archived Articles from the Carver County Corruption Blog:
“Minnesota Tax Payers To Pay Tens of Thousands of Dollars for Judge’s Legal Defense”. Posted 12/11/2013.
“Minnesota’s Attorney General Lori Swanson announced in a letter dated October 10, 2013 that her office will defend Judge David Knutson in a federal civil rights case. The cost of this defense will be tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars. Damages owed by Minnesota taxpayer will be tens of millions of dollars if the plaintiff wins her case.
The plaintiff in the case alleges that Judge Knutson, a former republican state senator appointed to be a judge by former governor Tim Pawlenty, violated the plaintiff’s civil rights and the rights of her five children ages 10, 12, 13, 15 and 17 in a Dakota County divorce and custody proceeding. Judge Knutson deprived the plaintiff of her home of seventeen years, her automobile, all of her other assets and possessions, leaving her homeless and penniless. Worse, Judge Knutson declared the plaintiff had Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS), a completely discredited theory. The PAS theory is that if children hate their father, it’s the mother’s fault, even if the father is an abuser. The father, David Rucki, has a long history of domestic abuse and also a history of sexual abusing his own daughters. Records show that he failed to report or pay taxes on millions of dollars of income. All of plaintiff’s children were taken from her. She has had less than four hours of contact with her children this past year. Two of her children, teenage girls, ran from their father’s and his sister’s abuse of them in April, 2013, six months ago. They still are on the run and not even in school. Judge Knutson is a participant in the abuse of these girls. This is domestic violence in Minnesota’s courts in the very month that is domestic violence awareness month.
The complaint asks for tens of millions of dollars as damages. If the federal court that hears the case and the jury that decides it rules in plaintiff’s favor, Minnesota taxpayers will have to pay the damages.”
Also from the Carver County Corruption Blog:
“Legislative Oversight of the Judiciary”. Posted 1/11/2014.
“Now Is The Time
Judges can do anything they want – violate constitutions, ignore enacted laws, disregard court rules of procedure, refuse to follow appellate court precedent – with no consequence or penalty at all. They have unlimited power. They are not accountable to anyone. Not even if they hurt children, destroy families, or alienate children from their parents. This was vividly illustrated at a hearing in Minnesota’s federal district court on January 10, 2014 in Sandra Grazzini-Rucki v. Judge David Knutson, No. 13-cv-02477 (SRN/JSM). Lori Swanson, the Minnesota Attorney General, vigorously defended Judge Knutson in this case without charge, i.e., at public expense. Her deputy argued that Judge Knutson was immune from any consequence including a suit for damages regardless of what he did – even if he violated basic civil rights.
In other words, according to Attorney General Swanson, judges are God. They are infallible. Like kings, they can do no wrong. But, is this the way it should be? Does Minnesota’s constitution fail to address this? The answer to both questions is “no.” Judges should be required to follow the Minnesota and U.S. constitutions, enacted laws, court rules of procedure, appellate precedent, and do what is right and just. They should not be allowed to ignore these standards. Legislative oversight, similar to executive oversight provided by the Legislative Auditor, will accomplish this. This should be because it will curb domestic violence, child abuse, repair our family court system, and because it is what is best for our society.
The book, Domestic Violence, Abuse, and Child Custody, edited by Barry Goldstein and Mo Hannah, states in the book’s introduction, “As one would expect of a diverse group of experts coming from many different disciplinary and practice fields, our contributors do not agree on every issue or approach. Nevertheless, they show an overwhelming consensus that the custody court system as presently constituted is broken and that the court’s failure to apply current research findings to court practices has placed the lives and well-being of thousands of children and protective mothers in jeopardy.” Thirty-two nationally recognized scholars contributed chapters to this book. One of these contributors, Erika A. Sussman, a nationally recognized attorney, wrote, “While legislatures and the general public have come to recognize domestic violence (DV) as a private and public wrong, family courts throughout the nation continue to inflict enormous injustices upon battered women and their children. In the name of ‘gender equity’ and ‘fatherhood rights’, custody courts often render decisions that ignore the substantial risks posed by battering parents, thereby jeopardizing the physical safety of survivors and their children.” Thousands, probably tens of thousands, of children and protective parents are victims of a severely dysfunctional judicial system, including many guardians ad litem (GAL), custody evaluators, and other court “experts.” Thousands of children are badly hurt and damaged by domestic violence and abusive parents, mostly fathers. These children become hurt and damaged adults. Many turn to alcohol and drugs. Some become violent resulting in massacres and murders. Our society is being poisoned by our dysfunctional judiciary. Judge accountability is the obvious solution. As Niccolo Machiavelli wrote, and as history has shown many, many times, power corrupts, especially unlimited power.
Please introduce a bill – already prepared – that implements Minnesota Constitution Article VI, Section 9, which provides; ‘The legislature may also provide for the retirement, removal, or other discipline of any judge who is disabled, incompetent or guilty of conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.’”
Posted Online in Reference to the Minn. Attorney General’s Office:
In excess of 7 YEARS of CORRUPTION in the MN. Attorney Generals Office (archives of corruption)
A recent article by journalist Michael Volpe, who has been extensively covering the Grazzini-Rucki case, chronicles the criminal charges filed against Doug and Gina Dahlen for their role in the disappearance of the Rucki teens, and the resulting guilty plea.
On November 18, 2015, a swarm of police and federal marshals descended on the small town of Herman, Minnesota. The rumble of trucks and men disturbed the quiet countryside, kicking up dust along dirt roads. The frantic chatter of radio announced the breaking news – the two missing Rucki sisters had been found on the Ranch of Doug and Gina Dahlen. The sisters, S.R. and G.R. were not happy to have been “found” and over the next few weeks, would bravely come forward to describe the nightmare that caused them to run away – physical and mental abuse at the hands of their father, David Rucki, and an uncaring family court system led by Judge David L. Knutson ignored their cries for help and worked to place them back into the care and custody of a dangerous abuser.
Doug and Gina Dahlen
Doug and Gina are an exceptional couple who has dedicated their lives to helping abused and traumatized children, and supporting families in need. They reside in the small town of Herman, Minnesota, which boasts that it is a “small town with BIG values!”; and holds true to that promise with a population just below 500 souls. The Dahlens are an all-American family, working hard to establish a non-profit therapeutic horse ranch on land Doug purchased from his grandparents that would be named White Horse Ranch. The Ranch also operates as an animal rescue and has taken in at-risk horses, and even dogs. The October 2014 WHR newsletter demonstrates the success of the program, and generosity of the Dahlens,”To date this season we have had 130 youth visit the ranch; and of these we worked with 44 of them one-on-one. Our youngest visitor was five months old, and our oldest was 85.”
Doug and Gina risked it all to shelter S.R. and G.R. – providing safety, nurturing and a second chance to experience their childhood that had been long denied. The Dahlens believed the teen girls truly had been abused – the girls not only spoke about abuse but their physical and mental state also indicated abuse and trauma had occurred. Investigative Report Dahlen, Witness Statements
The Dahlens offered their home, and their heart, to protect S.R. and G.R. from imminent physical or emotional harm. Now the Dakota County court system that worked against the Grazzini-Rucki family, would wage its legal guns at the Dahlens, and ruthlessly work to destroy the very family that had saved the lives of these terrified teens.
Doug and Gina plead guilty to felony charges in January 2017 but their attorney argues the Dahlens were basically bullied into accepting the plea under circumstances that involved witness tampering and Constitutional violations.
Doug and Gina have no previous criminal record. They are not dangerous; and in fact are described as being “kind and generous“. Doug and Gina did not act with malice or criminal intent, but instead, chose to help the Rucki girls because they were truly concerned for their well-being.
Both S.R. and G.R. have expressed their experience at the Ranch was positive, and they stayed based on their free will choice. S.R. said about the Ranch,”It was so great up there! They were given hugs and love. She loves Doug and Gina and states Gina was like a mom to her.” G.R. says she does not feel that she needs therapy because after her stay at the Ranch “she has it figured out” and remarks made to a social worker indicate that G.R. felt at peace – her only fear was returning to the care of her father, David Rucki. Rucki Social Service Records, Abuse Allegations
If anyone should be criminally charged, it should be Judge David Knutson, the Guardian ad Litem, court appointed therapists and others involved in the case who failed to protect the 5 Rucki children from abuse, and instead forced these children to live with the identified, and proven, abuser, David Rucki. David Rucki Police Reports, Documented History of Violence
When questioned about abuse allegations, and irregularities in the handling of the Grazzini-Rucki case, Dakota County, the Lakeville Police and Dr. Rebecca Bailey have all avoided questions raised by Volpe and CDN News.
Judge Karen Asphaug (Twitter)
What is Dakota County hiding? And why are so many refusing to answer basic questions about the Grazzini-Rucki case?
Justice for Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and Children 