The author of this diary is the grandmother of children who were placed into the full custody and control of their identified and confirmed rapist. Helen and her husband spent one and a half million dollars fighting for their grandchildren’s safety in a corrupt family court system. The mother was unable to write her story because she is still suffering from PTSD from being imprisoned for having challenged the authority of the wealthy father. She was tormented in prison for an entire year before she was released, thanks to a 20/20 investigation. Warning: graphic content.
My story is part of an attempt by Safe Kids International to raise awareness regarding divorce court judges covering up abuse and awarding custody to abusive fathers.
The DOJ Investigative Report explains-the nation’s divorce courts award custody to abusive fathers-while “good fit” mothers are court ordered supervised visits – or no contact.
The U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder’s-comments to the National Summit on Domestic Violence: Why are mothers who are victims of domestic violence losing custody of their children to the courts-even when their fathers have been abusive to them and their mothers?
I was driven mad by the horrific injustice. I was compelled to save [not only] my grandchildren-but other abused children in the nation’s divorce courts. To no avail. Every night I pray [Lord give us the strength for this journey]. We are still on that journey.
During an intact marriage, physicians diagnosed child sexual abuse-based on five-year-old son’s torn bloody rectum. Father’s reaction to the diagnosis was to go into divorce court with a criminal attorney.
Child Protective Services/CPS opened our case on March 4th, closed March 5th due to custody issues. Because when father was contacted by CPS, he stated the magic words [“There are custody issues”] which shuts down CPS investigations of child abuse.
The custody decision states: father is awarded sole custody based on parental alienation. Parental alienation is used in the nation’s courts to cover up abuse – it has nothing to do with alienating behavior. Minor’s attorney, Kevin Busch and custody evaluator Robert Shapiro recommended custody to father-based on parental alienation.
The physicians who diagnosed child sexual abuse-refused to testify. Illinois law book POF 6 2D 353 explains: physicians fail to report child abuse for a myriad of reasons -from a fear of harming their practice to a fear of entanglement as a result of reporting. Legislation has not achieved the desired goal-only a small percentage of cases are ever reported.]
At age 7 daughter drew and labeled a picture [Lynn Dad] of dad’s penis in Lynn’s mouth. Lynn had blood in her panties-when mom picked her up for visits. CPS and police investigated. The allegations were found credible and father was placed on no contact.
The court found: father sexually abused son and daughter-including, but not limited to, repeatedly sodomizing and forcing oral copulation. The judge’s court transcript states: In the case at bar, the danger is extraordinarily disturbing sexual assaults perpetrated many times-skillfully concealed. CPS explained to mother that father is on “no contact” and has no legal standing, recommending mother go home to California.
However, despite CPS giving mother permission – mother was criminally charged with leaving the jurisdiction by Kane County Illinois Assistant State’s Attorney, Clint Hull. The jurisdiction law is based on the parent-child relationship – the only inquiry is the status of the parent left behind.
Despite a court appointed psychologist concluding it was emotionally destructive for Mac and Lynn to have contact with their father, the children were ordered back to father. At which time, Mac + Lynn ran away. Mac [age 14] found a way to enroll in college-where he was a straight A student, studying law and psychology.
The National Center for Missing and Exploited children does not discern missing children running away from abusive fathers…from children being missing or exploited.
Mac and Lynn were hunted down. Twenty U.S. Marshall’s broke down the front door…pointed semi-automatic rifles at skinny Mac and Lynn-pinned them on the floor-and handcuffed them. Mac and Lynn were brought into court where U.S. Marshals championed father and championed parental alienation.
20/20 actually did their job of investigative reporting and helped bring justice to this Illinois family.
I wish we could say the same about their coverage of our cases. As most of you are aware, 20/20 did a hit piece on the Grazzini-Rucki case entitled Footprints in the Snow in April of 2016. They actually aided and abetted in the cover up of abuse in this case and have refused to make any corrections in their portrayal of this ongoing story. In fact, 20/20 actually asked an investigative reporter that has covered this case extensively, to refrain from sending any more documents that show the truth in this case.
Elizabeth Vargas was extremely biased and hostile when interviewing Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and very sympatheric toward the father in this case. The People Magazine article below shows the false secret network narrative that 20/20 had planned from the beginning. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest a “secret network” was involved in the Grazzini-Rucki case or involved in the disappearance of the eldest two daughters. In fact, both S.R. and G.R. openly admit they ran away due to safety concerns, and raised numerous abuse allegations prior to running away and after being found 2 years later. During all this time, their story is consistent, and does not change.
Elizabeth Vargas
Recently, 20/20’s Elizabeth Vargas announced her resignation from the show “to pursue new ventures”.
I want you to hear some news about me, from me. I will be leaving ABC News, and 20/20 at the end of this historic 40th season. It has been a profound privilege to be the anchor of 20/20 for 14 years, and a true honor to work with each and every one of you. I am incredibly lucky to work alongside the very best in the business: the producers, editors, writers on this show, and the enormous team working every week to get our show on the air. I am so very proud of the stories we have told together.
I am sorry only to have to share this news with you as we celebrate the holidays. I had hoped to make this announcement after the first of the year.
This is not goodbye – I will be here through May, and cannot wait to do more work with all you in the months ahead.
Have a happy holiday with your families, and I will see you next year.
With gratitude,
Elizabeth
Stay tuned for more information on Elizabeth Vargas and 20/20.
On this episode of Fighting B.A.C.K. with Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, courageous mother JF, shares her story of surviving an abusive relationship only to be battered through the family court system where she lost custody of her infant son to an abuser in a temporary order that continues to this day.
The State of Maryland later issued felony child abduction charges against JF for efforts to protect her son after his father had bruised and battered him during a two day weekend stay. On May 24, 2017, after a three day jury trial, eight woman and four men briefly deliberated and returned a unanimous not guilty verdict. Despite this, the child has not been returned and remains in the custody of a dangerous abuser.
JF was the primary caregiver when she was forcibly separated from her son, age 15 months, due to an unjust court order that has denied any and all access for visitation for over 8 long months, and counting. Sadly, the fight for her child’s freedom, and safety, continues to be an unbelievable struggle in the Howard County Circuit Court, where a custody hearing will be held this August.
Tune in to Fighting B.A.C.K. to hear JF share her story.
Other topics discussed include: protecting children from abuse, family court failures and updates from Sandra on her story, and her case.
Jamie Leigh Cramer writes these haunting words in an online post,”I have been sentenced to one year in jail and a bench warrant issued for my arrest. Custody of my daughter has been stolen without legal cause…My daughter is in imminent danger.
The individuals putting her in danger, those who are in control of this litigation, are utilizing loopholes silencing my daughter’s voice “Sheriffs, having eyes to see, see not; Judges having ears to hear, hear not; among the most dangerous things an injured party can do is to appeal to justice.” Mitchum v. Foster 92 S. Ct. 2151” Family Courts : Sanctuary for Pedophilia , Rapists and Sex Abusers
Thursday March 16th 9-11 p.m. E.S.T. – Fighting B.A.C.K. with Sandra Grazzini-Rucki: Exclusive Interview With An “Insider” Who Will Share Shocking Details About the Jamie Leigh Cramer Custody Case. Journalist Michael Volpe, of CDN News, joins the discussion to share what he has learned investigating Cramer’s case, and to share insights on the struggle for justice in family court.
Jamie Leigh Cramer is a mother from Michigan who is “on the run” with her 4 year old daughter after a family court awarded sole custody to Cory/Corey Alan Blair Rymal (or Rhymal), father. Rymal has an extensive criminal history (that includes 9 felony convictions, he has also admitted to using and selling drugs), and who was accused of sexually abusing his daughter. In addition, psychological tests showed that Rymal has is risk for acting out in a violent manner, displays anti-social behavior, has difficulty following rules and “may be somewhat affectively unstable“.
Corey Alan Rymal aka Red Eyed Wise Guy, mugshot 1/16/2016, Beaufort County Sheriff’s Office. Charge: Disorderly Conduct. Source: http://southcarolina.arrests.org
During a “supervised visit” facilitated by Guardian ad Litem Addison Fender, Rymal, was allowed to take the child to the bathroom, unsupervised. While in the bathroom, Rymal was accused of abusing the child, which was recorded on an audio device hidden in the child’s skirt.
A therapist had diagnosed the child with PTSD after witnessing the child struggle with behavioral and emotional issues, and disclose graphic accounts of sexual abuse.
Tune in to Fighting B.A.C.K. tonight as we discuss Leigh Cramer’s custody case …and an abuse cover up perpetrated by the family court.
DESCRIPTION:Sandra Grazzini-Rucki is Fighting B.A.C.K. with Guest Kristy Newberry Brooks. Family court failures, child abuse, and the great risks a mother will take to protect her child after the system fails will be discussed from two courageous women who have experienced the corruption first-hand.
Kristy Newberry Brooks, of Union County, North Carolina,went into hiding in December 2015 after the family court system, CPS, police have all failed to protect her daughter from physical, emotional and sexual abuse. The alleged perpetrator, her ex, is accused of abusing multiple victims. Brooks says she was in fear for her daughter’s safety after her ex was awarded custody. Brooks says that when the system failed, she had no choice but to go into hiding in an effort to protect her daughter.
Kristy Newberry Brooks (Charlotte Observer)
Another aspect to this tragic case is that Brooks was unable to afford legal representation, and has been fighting pro se against incredible odds. “I’ve taken every legal avenue to protect my daughter and nobody will help,” Brooks said, “I have contacted everybody, anybody; written letters, emails. Nobody has done anything.”
Brooks has been involved in a 4-year long custody battle, and says the case should have gone to criminal court. Instead evidence of abuse was dismissed by those charged with protecting her daughter. The infamous DSS Worker Wanda Sue Larson was supervising the Brooks case. Larson was later charged with child abuse in 2014 after a foster child was found tied to her porch with a dead chicken tied around his neck as a form of punishment. Larson, and her live-in boyfriend pleaded guilty to several child abuse charges and were sentenced to 17 months and at least six years in jail, respectively. But Larson was granted time served and released from prison nine days after she pleaded guilty in March 2015. The foster child was placed back into the care of his biological mother. He is now suing Larson. Wanda Larson Sued By Former Foster Son Over Horrific Abuse
Kristy has posted some evidence supporting her claims online, including this video:
Brooks surrendered to U.S. Marshalls on January 30th; her daughter was with her and since has been given to the care of her father. Brooks has been charged with child abduction and contempt of court. Union County Senator Fern Schubert put up money for her bond because he believes so strongly in her innocence, that her actions were taken to protect her child.
Commentary from http://www.familylawcourts.com on injustice in the Grazzini-Rucki v. Rucki custody trial and the use of bailiffs as the “personal thugs” of Judge Knutson (pictures added by blog)
Isn’t the courthouse the last place one would expect laws are broken?
Dakota County Judicial Center
Turns out, not so much….
09-18-13: What’s up with Minnesota?
Why are Hastings deputy bailiffs acting as if they are Judge David L. Knutson‘s personal thugs?
Worse; do bailiffs not realize their job description for safety includes everyone at the courthouse?
Do bailiffs not realize part of their job is to exercise independent judgment?
If Judge Knutson is this much of a whack job, (and it would seem he is) doesn’t the public deserve at the very least: Bailiffs with brains?
Read attorney Michelle L. MacDonald’s Affidavit (Page 6, Numbers Eight, nine…(oh heck, read the whole thing), here.
This is America? Have there been other complaints filled against this judge?
We initially hoped Judge Knutson wasn’t the Standard for what passes for justice in Minnesota, but turns out, he is.
Yep, Judge David L Knutson is the standard for Minnesota, because he is a sitting board member of the (we are not making this up) Minnesota Board on Judicial Standards.
So the joke is on Lady Justice, and the people of Minnesota.
Host Neil Shelton and Sandra Grazzini-Rucki discuss the terrible toll family court has on the parents and the children who suffer when the “best interest” of judges and family court professionals are put ahead of the “best interest” of children and families.
“A divorce proceeding should not result in a parent being divorced from their own children… where is the “family” in family court?” ~ Sandra Grazzini-Rucki
Systemic failures in the court system including greed, corruption and violations of due process are also discussed.
“They’ve taken away everything they can possibly take from us except our voices…” ~ Neil Shelton
Tune in to hear the two most mistreated and misunderstood people in this battle talk in a one on one conversation about everything that is Family Court.
“The rule of law was not adhered to and the entire trial was simulated litigation… ALL Judge Knutson’s orders are not merely voidable, these orders are already VOID.” ~ K.B. Complaint Against Judge Knutson
“Shame on you for allowing this family to be torn apart by your orders. Shame on you for forcing children into a relationship with a father they are terrified of. Shame on you for forcing these children to make the drastic decision to go on the run in order to protect themselves…In cases like this I have to wonder how our system got to the point that destroying families in today’s society is ok.” ~ L.M. letter to Judge David Knutson
(Hastings, Minn) A complaint filed against Judge David L. Knutson on September 4, 2013, outlines his mishandling of the Grazzini-Rucki case. The complaint also describes how Judge Knutson’s reckless actions contributed to ongoing chaos in the lives of the Rucki children, and deprived Sandra Grazzini-Rucki of her rights. The complaint concludes that Judge Knutson acted with malice, that there is no other reasonable explanation for his conduct.
According to the complaint, “The record on case no. 19AV-FA-11-1273 shows a disturbing pattern where throughout, Judge Knutson has engaged in multiple acts of misconduct and actual bias, has repeatedly violated parties rights, and consistently fails to follow the law…
Judge Knutson has repeatedly denied the mother (Sandra Grazzini-Rucki) any and all contact with her children without any findings of endangerment, abuse or parental unfitness. In addition, throughout this case, Judge Knutson has made absurd statements in an attempt to somehow justify abuses of discretion.“
The complaint accuses Judge Knutson of a “pervasive pattern of misconduct and impropriety” that includes:
-Bias, “acts for improper purpose to deny one party’s fundamental rights“
-Making false statements of material facts
-Failure to follow the law
-Failure to follow the children’s “Best Interest”
-That Judge Knutson ordered Sandra to use specific providers he hand selected under the guise of therapy; yet these providers do not provide therapy. Rather, they provide forensic evidence for use against the mother.
-Judge Knutson abused his authority by forcing Sandra, under the threat of arrest, to disclose her location and phone number to a known abuser (whom she received a protective order against). This directly contradicts a Minnesota law requiring judges to protect victims of stalking and abuse, and to prevent such disclosures of information to the abuser.
On September 11, 2013, attorney Michelle MacDonald filed a Federal Civil Rights Action against Judge Knutson on behalf on Sandra Grazzini-Rucki.
The Grazzini-Rucki custody trial commenced one week after this complaint was filed, on September 12, 2013. Which means that Judge Knutson was under investigation while presiding over a case that he was accused of misconduct on. Judge Knutson was also presiding over a case while a Federal Civil Rights Action against him was pending.
At the beginning of trial, MacDonald asked Judge Knutson to recuse himself, which he refused to do stating, “With respect to you notifying me that I’ve been made party to some Federal lawsuit for civil rights violations, I’m not aware of that. I have no information about that. I’m not concerned about that. We’re going to proceed…” MacDonald presses on, reminding Judge Knutson that she wrote him a letter to inform him about the lawsuit. Judge Knutson’s initial response is evasive then he admits he did receive notice of the lawsuit, and recounts some details. Which means Judge Knutson is caught lying in court. Judge Knutson refuses to recuse himself, and moves forward with trial stating “I‘m not going to hold that against your client or prejudice your client for something you do” and states a Federal Civil Rights Action is “irrelevant“.
The Board of Judicial Standards responded on November 12, 2013, and determined, despite overwhelming evidence of each of these claims, that the complaint “required no further action“. The Board further determined that the allegations did not sway them to take disciplinary action because the merits were not proven with a “clear and convincing standard“. It is unclear if the Board was aware of Judge Knutson’s conduct during the custody trial.
The Civil Rights Action faced a similar fate, excusing Judge Knutson’s actions under the guide of judicial immunity.
On November 25, 2013, David Rucki is granted sole custody of all 5 children. At the time of the order he was on probation for a guilty plea involving an OFP violation (Case No. 19AV-CR-11-14682, discharged from probation 10/17/2014. Judge Karen Asphaug conducted pre-trial on that case).
On February 11, 2014, Judge Knutson filed a complaint against attorney Michelle MacDonald with the Lawyer’s Board. MacDonald said about the complaint, “Judge Knutson’s complaint came after I complained about to him to the Board of Judicial Standards about this: On September 12, 2013, Judge Knutson had me participate as an attorney in a client’s child custody trial in handcuffs, a wheelchair, with no shoes, no glasses, no paper, no pen, no files,missing children – and no client. This was the day after I had filed a federal civil rights action against him, on behalf of that client…” MNBar.org Michelle MacDonald Candidate Information A hearing was recently held concerning the complaint against MacDonald, a ruling has not been issued at the time of this blog post.
Judge Knutson now sits as a member on the Board of Judicial Standards. No one in the family court system has been held accountable for the disastrous results of the Grazzini-Rucki case despite numerous complaints being filed.
When abuse allegations, and concerns for the safety of the Rucki children, were raised in this case the Court’s focus was not on the welfare of the children but instead pursued a dangerous agenda. Instead of protecting the children from harm, Judge Knutson and the various professionals involved, inflicted of trauma on children to force reunification with the parent they feared by taking an “assertive stance..to expose them to the object of their fear” and to “desensitize them“. (Dr. Gilbertson Letter). The Court sought to silence by any means, the parent, Sandra, who sought to protect the children and thereby, stood in the way. The events that led up to the Rucki girls running away is a direct result of the court’s own failings.
Had Judge Knutson, the professionals, appropriately responded to abuse allegations raised by the Rucki children and worked to protect them, there might have been a different outcome than a family completely destroyed; and children who may never recover from the abuses inflicted on them.
The July 7th episode of Speechless (starting at 21 minutes) takes an in-depth look at the allegations of abuse in the Grazzini-Rucki case, and discusses how the family court handled those concerns.
Highlights include:
–Sandra was not present at the September 2012 emergency court hearing that ordered her out of the home, and prohibited any contact with her children. This means Sandra is not allowed to see her children based on information she did not hear, she did not see, and that she could not rebut. To this day she remains forcibly estranged from her children due to an unjust court order.
– The April 2013 incident were Samantha and Gianna Rucki ran away from home was not the first attempt for the Rucki children to try to run away in order to escape the abuse and dysfunction they were living in. In September 2012, after the emergency hearing, four of the Rucki children attempted to run away from home; which is why the children were placed into the care of a maternal aunt.
– A letter from Dr. James Gilbertson, the court appointed psychologist treating the children indicates the children were afraid of their father, David Rucki, and suggests abuse did occur. The letter also indicates that the focus of therapy was not related to anything Sandra did but rather, dealt with the fear the children had of their father, whom they described as “an angry and violent person”.
Dr. James Gilbertson, PhD
–Judge Knutson pushed for reunification therapy after the Rucki children had disclosed allegations of abuse to him, and even after David violated the no contact order with the children.
-David was charged with disorderly conducted in a road rage incident, and on probation, when the run away Rucki girls were returned to his care. The girls had raised concerns about their father’s violent behavior, and expressed fear of him after being “recovered”. The road rage incident proves the violence that David is capable of – and validates the concerns the girls had. The system should have worked to protect the girls, but instead branded them with parental alienation and pushed for reunification, which has endangered their safety.
Please see full the episode and join the discussion in the comments section. The letter from Dr. Gilbertson is posted below.
“It is my opinion that the children’s fear issue needs to be addressed directly, and that can only happen when there is exposure to the specifically feared object, situation or person, i.e. father… “
“I would work with Mr. Rucki to have him present a certain structure and accounting of his own behavior while the family was intact that would acknowledge the volatile family history and express his empathy for the children’s painful memories…” – Letter from Dr. James Gilbertson, Feb 6, 2013.
This comment was left on our blog by a mother named Jessica who is involved in family court proceedings in Florida.
Jessica read our blog, and felt a similar injustice as to what Sandra Grazzini-Rucki has experienced dealing with the family court system, and felt a similar pain, from being estranged from children as a result of an unjust court order.
Family Court failures (bias, failure to recognize abuse, lack of training, corruption, malicious prosecution, violations of state and constitutional laws etc) are happening in every state of the U.S., and internationally – this is a pandemic crisis. As a result, the Court’s actions and rulings often endanger children, and punish parents who raise concerns about abuse or other safety concerns. Generations of children have been traumatized, abused, and hurt in the worst possible way. Children are being wrongfully taken from fit, loving parents – and robbed of the love and care that parent could provide, as well as being robbed of their cultural, religious and familial heritage. How is this in the “best interest” of children?
We are posting the comment, and this picture quote, to raise awareness about the devastating consequences of systemic failures in family court, and to give voice to parents whose children have been unjustly taken from them.
Jessica says:“The system does not care. I’m going through the same thing in Florida.
I have never been in trouble and have raised my children alone, because the father was not around for 5 years. I worked full time to provide for my family. He did not pay child support and owes $80,000 in arrears. The children have never been abused in my care and wanted for nothing.
Yet their father with a history of violence, criminal history (including spending 2 years in jail), Baker Acts (involuntary commitment for mental health emergencies) and injunctions is handed the children and I’m left with barely seeing them.
The judge refuses to hear or see any evidence from our side.
The system is hurting the children just as much as the abuser.
Did ABC 20/20 edit audio recordings of David Rucki verbally abusing his young son, to portray David in a more sympathetic light? And what message does their reporting send to abuse victims, to child abuse victims?
The next scene shows a lone David, standing in the snow, looking towards his house.
Vargas says, “He left this message after finding out his son, Nico, dropped out of hockey, his favorite long time sport.” The message from David says, “Do yourself a favor, get your ass back in hockey!”
ABC 20/20 and Vargas had obviously listened to the voicemail messages, a transcript of the messages was also available. Vargas implied that something was wrong for Nico to drop out of “his favorite long time sport.” The truth is that Nico wasn’t all that interested in hockey, and wanted to pursue acting.
David wanted Nico to continue with hockey, and hated the thought of his son becoming an actor. One voicemail David left to Nico says, “You’re making the biggest mistake of your life. You’ve got nothing other than school and sports. You can have acting, you can do all that shit, but the bottom line is Nico, you fuck this up, you never get it back.” recorded voice mail messages
Why was David so intent on having Nico participate in hockey. In my **opinion** there are two reasons. 1) David was serving as President to the local hockey association and needed to have his own children playing hockey in order to be eligible for the position. 2) David enjoyed the social aspects of hanging out at the hockey rink, drinking, and having fun. If his children were not enrolled in hockey, he would not have access to that social group.
In July 2011, David resigned from his position as President of the hockey association for “personal reasons”. Controversy followed – there was talk that David was mismanaging the finances and abusing his position as President. In the same month that David resigned three other Board members resigned, including David’s best friend and his wife, who also served on the Board. Another Board member was removed for his role in the controversy.
In my **opinion** it does not make sense that on one hand David is claiming that he is being alienated from his children, and yet his focus in the voicemails is only about hockey. You do not hear David say things like ‘I love you’ or ‘I miss you’ or ‘I can’t wait to see you again’ or even asking his son how he is doing. Instead you hear threats, shaming, guilt, and coercion – which are all tactics abusers use to gain power and control over victims.
And then to have David pressure Nico to participate in hockey also does not make sense. If Nico were to join hockey he’d spend most of his time practicing and playing games – which would taken even more time away from spending time with his father, David. Why would David encourage Nico to spend LESS time with him??
What Voicemail Transcripts Submitted in Court as Evidence Reveal
The short excerpts played on “Footprints” in the snow omitted 99% of the entire recordings. The viewers did not get to hear much of anything. Supplemented by the heavy editing was Vargas pushing her own narrative, almost as if she was drowning out the rest of the voicemail messages from being heard.
Elizabeth Vargas, journalist and anchor, ABC 20/20
Vargas also failed to ask Nico about the voicemail messages because she was focused on questioning Nico about whether his mother put him up to inventing abuse allegations. Vargas must have heard the voicemail messages but she does not question Nico about them, and how it made him feel? Why?
These same voice mail messages, and others, were submitted to the family court, presided by Judge David Knutson, in 2011 as evidence. The evidence included audio recordings, and included a written transcript of the messages as well. The voice mail messages were used to confirm that abuse was occurring, and that David’s behavior posed a danger to the children. The messages were just one piece of a much larger body of evidence suggesting abuse had occurred. Judge Knutson dismissed ALL credible evidence of abuse, without merit or legal justification.
The message Vargas refers to is titled “Message Six” and begins with, “If you have the balls to listen to this message, you’re going to find out that you’re going to regret every stupid decision you have made this summer listening to your mother…” David goes on to berate Nico, make negative and insulting comments about Sandra and uses guilt and shame tactics to manipulate Nico to do what he (David) wants.
The same message ends with this statement from David, “Your mother is holding me out with the court. There’s nothing I can do until I get through the court. Do yourself a favor and get your ass back into hockey. Don’t screw this up for yourself. You’ll regret it your whole life. And you’re going to regret it when you find out that it was your mother who lied to you.”’
In my **opinion**, if you carefully listen to what David is saying in his voicemail messages – he is telling Nico that once he gets through the court, he will have access to him, he will deal with Nico’s refusal to comply. David makes statements in his voicemail recordings that imply threats, that imply punishment and state that the only way to please his father is to do what he wants.
Statements tainclude:
“I’m waiting, um, I’m still your dad, and that isn’t going to change, and we will be together soon. And I’m basically going to tell you I’m going to hold you accountable and you will have to deal with me because, you know, the way you’re treating me is wrong.”
“Nico, it’s your dad, still wondering why you are not going to captain’s practice. Why are you dropping out of hockey? You’re not hurting me. You’re going to regret it for the rest of your g—d damn f—ing life and I’m trying to prevent that.”
“What the f– is wrong with you? You know what? You f– don’t understand.”
“I’m just calling to remind you that you will regret this your whole life by not following through with what you started. Secondly, I am your father and I guarantee, Nico, that we will be talking soon. And when we talk, you’re going to be held accountable for how you’re acting. And I wil not let this fly. I am your father. And you will respect me.”
“Um, you know, I wish you would pull your head out your a– and you’d call me back and talk because you need to get some stabilization in you, because what you’re doing is self-destructive and it’s not good, it’s not healthy. A
“I’m waiting, um, I’m still your dad, and that isn’t going to change, and we will be together soon. And I’m basically going to tell you I’m going to hold you accountable and you will have to deal with me because, you know, the way you’re treating me is wrong.”
“Nico, it’s your dad, still wondering why you are not going to captain’s practice. Why are you dropping out of hockey? You’re not hurting me. You’re going to regret it for the rest of your g—d damn f—ing life and I’m trying to prevent that.”
“What the f– is wrong with you? You know what? You f– don’t understand.”
“I’m just calling to remind you that you will regret this your whole life by not following through with what you started. Secondly, I am your father and I guarantee, Nico, that we will be talking soon. And when we talk, you’re going to be held accountable for how you’re acting. And I wil not let this fly. I am your father. And you will respect me.”
“Um, you know, I wish you would pull your head out your a– and you’d call me back and talk because you need to get some stabilization in you, because what you’re doing is self-destructive and it’s not good, it’s not healthy. And you know, eventually, we will be together here talking soon. Um, so you can run and hide all you want, but the sooner you confront this, the better off you’ll be.”
“Here’s one thing you need to think about: You’ve got one shot at life. One. And if you’re not guided properly, Nico, you will piss that away because you’re 15 years old and you don’t know your head from your a–. You’ve got a lot to learn in life. You make a mistake now, you’ll never get it back. Because you are being emotional like your mother, you will never get it back. I’m tired of all this crap I’ve been put through…”
This is very extreme language, that is NOT an appropriate way to communicate to a child. It is abusive.
Why did ABC 20/20 and Elizabeth Vargas suppress these voicemail recordings? The viewers should have been allowed to hear for themselves, and come to their own conclusions. Instead the viewers were given a nicely packaged story concocted by ABC 20/20, and dramatically narrated by Vargas. The irony in all of this, is that these invented stories are no different than the alienation that Sandra is accused of.
“When someone hears about child abuse, it’s easy to assume the abuse is physical, but child abuse can also come in the emotional form. Child emotional abuse includes but isn’t limited to verbal assaults, constant belittling, making threats, ignoring the child, providing no love and exposing the child to constant family conflict.” Source: Moody Air Force Base. http://media.defense.gov
Fact or Pigeon?
The next scene from “Footprints in the Snow” shows a courtroom and Vargas delves into a narrative of how Judge David Knutson appointed therapist to try to facilitate a relationship between David Rucki and his children.
A picture of a smiling David composed next to an order for reunification therapy, the courts suggesting Moxie, fills the screen. The court appoints an advocate, and special therapists to facilitate a relationship with their father, “the children say they don’t want one”.
Only now does Vargas mention abuse – but note the context she uses. “Nico takes to facebook, he writes my dad is a bad person, he abusive, verbally and physically…”
Didn’t the producers at ABC 20/20 and Vargas overhear some of the verbal abuse in the voicemail messages? Yet they failed to ask David about that. And failed to draw the connection between what Nico reported and what actually happened – that these recordings were in David’s own words!
Vargas goes to on talk about abuse of the runaway Rucki sisters in this way, “Gianna and Samantha make audio recordings to support what their mother says…”
Samantha’s recording is obviously emotional, her voice is choked with tears as she recounts physical abuse at the hands of her father. Vargas seems unsympathetic.
Vargas goes on to report that Judge David Knutson found there is no proof of abuse, and the expert he appointed found “evidence of parental alienation”. Judge Knutson decides that Sandra is the problem, and takes drastic measures.
Judge David L Knutson
The message being sent to victims of domestic violence, and child abuse, by ABC 20/20 and Vargas is harmful – it says if you disclose abuse, you will not be believed. Even worse, it casts suspicion on the children who bravely come forward – accusing the child victim that something is wrong with them, that they are “brainwashed”. All of this without investigation. Or if there is a report or investigation, claims of abuse are dismissed.
Abuse involves a pattern of threatening and harmful behavior inflicted on another person. When the relationship ends, the abusive behavior does not merely go away but continues in another form. There is also a term called Domestic Violence by Proxy which means that when an abusive partner no longer has access to a victim, he will try to regain control by using the children as a weapon. DV by Proxy describes abusive behavior that continues post separation – controlling behavior, stalking, harassment, legal abuse, turning a child against a parent – are all ways children are used by an abusive ex partner to regain control or inflict harm on a former partner.When court professionals fail to recognize the abuse, and how it manifests after separation, their actions and court rulings result in further harm to abuse victims, and their children. Misinformation about abuse, in turn, affects every level of society, including media outlets because there is a common presumption that judges never do wrong, that courts are always right. This is difficult for a victim of abuse to overcome; and it prevents our community from understanding abuse, and its effects, in a way that could promote ending the cycle of violence, and could assist in offering better protections to victims.
Footprints on My Heart
An emotional Sandra, on the verge of tears, tells Vargas, “I’ve never done anything but be there for my children… my children are my life.”
If anything positive is to come out of “Footprints in the Snow” I hope it is this… that wherever Sandra’s children are now, that they remember the memories shown in the home movies where mom is loving on them, and they are enjoying time spent together.
I hope her children know what Sandra has said, that the hurt and lies and forcible separation will not erase this truth: “my children are my life.”
I hope the Rucki children know how much they are deeply loved by a mother who grieves the loss of them everyday, and who has never stopped fighting to protect them from harm and be involved in their lives.
Because that is what I saw, as a viewer, watching “Footprints in the Snow”. And the outrage of this story is that a mother’s love and efforts to protect her children, resulted in punishment and forcible separation from those very children.
Justice for Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and Children 