Birthday Blow Up: David Rucki Chased Terrified Teens Down Street

policecake

I am asking the Court for this additional relief to clarify and extend the Order (the existing OFP) to keep the children and I safe. David has already plead guilty to violating the Order, and has engaged in criminal conduct that may well result in another criminal charge for an additional violation. He believes he is above the law and no one can stop him. I am pleading for the Court to send a strong message that this behavior has to stop, and that the Order for Protection has meaning and should be taken seriously.” – Amended Petition for Order for Protection, Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, November 2011

To better understand the devastating effects of the abuse David Rucki inflicted on his children, this article will share a police report from June 24, 2011 from a first person perspective. The “perspective” is based on the actual police report as well as other publicly available documents that disclose abuse, and record allegations of abuse made by the Rucki children in their own words.

A police report from June 24, 2011 details an incident where David Rucki yelled at, and chased his teenage daughter S.R. and her friends down the street on her birthday. (see page 60) druckipolicereports

See here more evidence suppressed by Judge Karen Asphaug at the criminal trial of Sandra Grazzini-Rucki:

*Police reports made against David Rucki for violating protective order, and other criminal behavior

*Surveillance photos documenting David Rucki stalking Sandra and children

*Suppressed CPS reports, social service records documenting abuse https://www.scribd.com/doc/316692570/SamiRucki

*Judge Asphaug also suppressed was witness testimony from an individual present at this incident, and who had observed other abuse Rucki inflicted on his family

asphaug-1

75% of defense evidence was withheld during the Grazzini-Rucki criminal trial. The jury was never allowed to consider evidence raised by the Defense, supporting the affirmative defense: It is an affirmative defense if a person charged under subdivision 1 proves that:

(1) the person reasonably believed the action taken was necessary to protect the child from physical or sexual assault or substantial emotional harm…. https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/statutes/?id=609.26

Without evidence to support a “reasonable belief”, and given instructions from Judge Asphaug that were both misleading, and manipulative, the jury found Sandra Grazzini-Rucki guilty on 6 counts of deprivation of parental rights. If the jury knew of this incident, and made aware of other evidence, would the outcome have been different? And would the outcome had been different had the jury know that Judge Asphaug presided over a previous domestic violence complaint against Rucki, and dismissed it?

Lakeville, Dakota County, Minnesota (6/24/2011):

Happy Birthday! S.R. walked down the cul-de-sac at Ireland Way with a group of giggling, excited teenage girls looking forward to a slumber party, and a night of fun. The house was decorated with banners and balloons, gifts were beautifully wrapped for her special day. The deep rumble of a motor followed by a harsh voice yelling her name tore through the warm summer day like a thunderbolt. She turned her head to see her father pulling up alongside the girls, yelling and swearing at her.

Her heartbeat hammered in her chest so fast she feared it would take off, seeking escape from her father’s anger. Since the divorce, things were so much calmer at home, she actually enjoyed being there… without having to deal with his rage, his flying fists, the ugly words he screamed at them…he hurt her mother and made her cry. But he didn’t stay away. After the divorce, in May, he tore through the house, and refused to leave when asked. He was yelling and screaming, threatening, ripping pictures off the wall. He drove up and down the street all hours of the day at night. He watched the house. He left angry voice mail messages. Just a few days ago, he was at the house again, stealing mail from the mailbox.

Ignoring him didn’t help. She told her father that she did not want to see him. He would not listen. You couldn’t pretend that everything was fine when it felt like your heart was breaking into a million pieces. When you were trying to hide the secret that made you so different from your friends. When you couldn’t hold up the fake smile anymore because the tears kept falling. Ignoring him just made him madder – and now he was here, on her birthday, without a present or a card, instead yelling – swearing – scaring her friends – ruining everything.

Giggles gave way to shrill, girlish screams. The word “run!” was a collective cry, one voice could not be distinguished from another. Run but where? The cul-de-sac had one way in and one way out. Only one way.

She remembered dressing up for her party, pulling her hair back in a pony, wondering if Mom would let her wear make up… now her feet slapped against the pavement, mud staining her sneakers. Her hair tore loose, and tangled at her shoulders. The girls grabbed at each other as they ran, tumbling into the nearest house. Her pretty outfit was ruined. Her friends were scared. And everyone was looking at her like they knew, all along, the ugly secret she tried to keep. As if windows could shut in the the threats, the yelling, the crashing sounds coming from the “Scream House” night after night. Her friends knew, and they were terrified. The door rattled as her father came up to the house, slamming the screen door open and pounding his fists on the door. He shook the door handle, trying to pry it open. Someone called the police. Someone hid. Someone called Mom. She ran into the pantry, sobbing. It was all happening so fast.

screaming

She wanted Mom to hug her and tell her everything would be okay. But she knew that wasn’t true. Lakeville Police had arrived, they looked over the court order that was supposed to protect them from her father… and said it did not cover her, a child. The judge had crossed the names of the children out on the OFP application. Mom said the order for protection meant that Dad could not be so close to the house, he was in violation. She wanted to press charges but the police officer told her to go back to court, he couldn’t do anything. No charges would be filed. And the officer certainly could not fix her birthday party – and now her friend’s parents now said they didn’t feel it was a good idea to have a slumber party. The parents didn’t feel safe that their children were at her house, the “Scream House”. Mom begged until they agreed to come over for cake. All she saw when the candles were lit was the flashing blue and red of police lights. By then the cake had melted, the pink frosting felt too sticky and choked in her throat.

One of the victims involved in this incident declined to file a police report, stating they are afraid David Rucki will retaliate against them.

Sandra Grazzini-Rucki’s application for an Order for Protection for her 5 minor children was denied on June 30, 2011. David Rucki continued to violate the OFP, and continued to harass, intimidate and stalk his family.

frisked

David Rucki violated the Order for Protection granted to Sandra Grazzini-Rucki on June 22, 2011 on two separate  instances, and plead guilty to one incident on September 19, 2011.

Family court Judge David L. Knutson awarded David Rucki sole custody of the 5 children despite overwhelming evidence of his abusive, and violent behavior. The children’s fear of Rucki is directly related to his behavior towards them. When awarded custody, Rucki was probation for a charge that resulted after he violated an OFP. Judge Knutson has actively worked to cover up the abuse allegations in the Grazzini-Rucki case, and has even dismissed criminal charges against Rucki.

Sandra continued to petition the Court for help, and raised abuse allegations in the custody trial – at every level, those who had the power to protect the Rucki children failed, and enabled the abuse to continue.

Judge David L Knutson

Judge David L Knutson

Rucki Child Speaks Out – Social Media Post Offers Glimpse From Months Leading Up to Disappearance of Sisters

May 13, 2013 - Diary posted by Rucki child online

May 13, 2013 – Diary posted by Rucki child online

Dakota County, Minn: A shocking piece of evidence suppressed by Judge Karen Asphaug during the criminal trial of Sandra Grazzini-Rucki is being publicly posted – see for yourself what the jury was not allowed to consider.

Judge Karen Asphaug suppressed 75% of defense evidence in the Grazzini-Rucki criminal trial and refused to allow several witnesses to testify, including a witness to David Rucki’s violent behavior and another witness who is an expert on domestic violence. Grazzini-Rucki raised the affirmative defense, meaning her involvement in the disappearance of her two teenage daughters resulted not from criminal intent but because she had a reasonable belief that the present environment posed imminent harm to her children. Grazzini-Rucki’s defense depended on showing the reasons why she feared for the safety of her children – which was contained in the exhibits jurors were not allowed to see.

Judge Karen Asphaug (Twitter)

Judge Karen Asphaug (Twitter)

Under these unjust circumstances, Grazzini-Rucki was convicted on 6 counts of felony deprivation of parental rights after the defense was limited in what it could present to the jury, and otherwise constrained. Grazzini-Rucki has appealed the conviction. 

There will be no appeal for the five Rucki children – who have been sentenced to live with their abusive father, David Rucki (who was on probation for a violation of a protective order when granted custody). The Rucki children have raised allegations of abuse, and asked to live with their mother only to be ignored by the family court, Guardian ad Litem and professionals, charged with protecting them. The evidence is overwhelming that Dakota County has conspired to take custody from a fit, loving parent and place these children in an abusive, dysfunctional environment.

A social media post, of what appears to be a diary, written by one of the Rucki children, and posted on May 13, 2013, offers a glimpse into the thoughts and feelings of a child living in an unimaginable nightmare.

Screenshot Rucki Child Diary

Screenshot Rucki Child Diary

This child attempted to run away, along with 4 siblings after Judge David L. Knutson forced Grazzini-Rucki out of her home on September 7, 2012, and temporarily transferred custody to paternal aunt, Tammy Jo Love (who never filed a motion for custody). Incredibly, all 4 children attempted to run away upon hearing the news – and the older children were not in the same location as the younger ones, meaning there was no planning, but rather a reaction based on fear alone. 

4bebc-brodkorb_rucki_love_elliot_donehower_19av-fa-11-1273_012616

The child was later found wandering down a busy street, more than 2 miles away from home, crying for mother. The child told police that Love had been abusive, and that if returned to her care, would run away again. Though a mandated reporter, the police never filed a report with CPS. Due to safety concerns, temporary custody of the Rucki children was instead transferred to a maternal aunt.

Seven months later, Judge Knutson again attempted to transfer the Rucki children into Love’s care. The only reason the two younger Rucki children did not succeed in running away was because they were detained at school, and physically prevented. The older two sisters, S.R. and G.R. did succeed in running away, and remained in hiding for 2 years; although the sisters had every opportunity to go home they chose not to, believing they would not be safe in the care of Love, or their father, David Rucki.

The  author of this social media post describes their feelings in the months before – and after – older sisters S.R. and G.R. ran away on April 19, 2013. The diary was written on what appears to be a dry erase board and includes one word statements with a date to indicate when they were written. Many of the statements include what you would expect from a pre-teen, but there are also troubling statements that show signs of fear, and indicate a problem. The words: “Scared”, “Killed” “Miserable”, “Creeped” and “Escaping” are included along with drawings, that include faces with wide eyes and gaping mouths.

The importance of this diary is that it is the only publicly available record that offers a first-hand account from one of the Rucki children – in their own words, without being altered or manipulated. Each entry is dated, which provides a picture of the mental and emotional state of this child in the crucial months involving court hearings (the children were present in court at some of the hearings the request of Dr. Gilbertson, and also spoke with judge David L. Knutson) that ultimately lead up to a transfer of custody, and then sisters S.R. and G.R. running away on April 19, 2013 in fear for their lives.

Judge David L Knutson

Judge David L Knutson

In an interview with Yahya McClain (12/28/16), Sandra Grazzini-Rucki said her children wanted to speak to the court, and wanted to be heard, but the court would not allow them to provide input, and instead worked to silence them. In fact, Judge David L. Knutson spoke to the Rucki children in chambers on Feb 26th 2013, and sealed the transcript after the children spoke about abuse; thereby blocking the abuse allegations from being entered into the record. An entry from the former Carver County Corruption blog have preserved what S.R. and G.R. wanted to tell Judge Knutson, Dr. Gilbertson and GAL Julie Friedrich, their personal note along with a cover letter were sent to 150 Representatives and Senators in Minnesota shortly before S.R. and G.R. ran away (below). The highest levels of government in Minnesota have been made aware of the egregious abuses of power and violations of law happening in the Grazzini-Rucki case.. and so far have not responded. How many more families need to be victimized, and how many children more need to be abused before the State of Minnesota will do something to hold out of control judges, and related family court professionals, accountable?

Another way the Rucki children have been silenced, and their testimony altered, is by unethical treatment from court-appointed therapist Dr. James Gilbertson, who conducted“reunification therapy” on the Rucki children. Some of the sessions with Dr. Gilbertson included forcing the Rucki children to attend court hearings where they were forced to listen to painful details of the family’s troubles. Judge Knutson and Dr. Gilbertson used mother, Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, as an example to demonstrate his power over their lives and send an intimidating message to the children. Grazzini-Rucki was the primary caregiver, and shared a close loving relationship with her children. There were times she shielded her children from Rucki’s rage by putting her body in front of his fists. Imagine then, the horror the Rucki children must have felt watching their mother, their protector being humiliated and re-abused in the family court; laws easily broken with just the wave of a gavel.

On February 6, 2013, Dr. Gilbertson wrote a letter to Guardian ad Litem Julie Friedrich (link below) that the court needed to take an “assertive stance” with the children and stated,The presence of the court, a bailiff nearby, my own presence, and then meeting with father, in my opinion, would deal with the fears they experience, either real or imagined.”

And,”I understand this may represent a somewhat unorthodox recommendation, but I do not believe there could be a bridging of the gap between the children and their father, at this point in time, unless all are physically present under the authoritative and safe umbrella of the court.”

These are children we are talking about – frightened, vulnerable children who are being treated by Judge Knutson, and the players in this family court case, like prisoners of war.

rucki-children2

During one of these hearings, the Rucki children sat in a conference room for several hours before being addressed by the court – during that time Dr. Gilbertson witnessed that the children were “anxious” and “apprehensive”. Dr. Gilbertson also noted that the Rucki children wanted – of their own free will – to have a say in what happens to them. In response, Dr. Gilbertson admitted to giving the children “factual knowledge” about the case – i.e. feeding information to influence them. Dr. Gilbertson also noted that he children make requests to see their mother, but not their father.

Dr. James Gilbertson, PhD

Dr. James Gilbertson, PhD

The child who authored this diary entry was subjected to reunification therapy which involved breaking down the child’s will in order to suppress memories of abuse, so with a “blank slate” the child could be programmed to accept a relationship with an identified abuser. This is why reunification therapy is also referred to as “de-programming” – the child is actually being told what to think, believe and feel.

S.R. has made various statements indicating this has happened – stating the therapist and the Guardian ad Litem gave her false information, and specifically made negative comments about her mother in an attempt to influence her. S.R. also says that when she spoke about abuse she was called a liar and told that she needed “de-programming”. Dr. Gilbertson has admitted that “therapy” also included explaining to the Rucki children why they could not see their mother.

Instead of identifying the cause of that fear, Dr. Gilbertson’s treatment involved “exposing them to the object they fear” i.e. father, in order to “desensitize” them.Dr. Gilbertson asked that GAL Julie Friedrich clear her schedule to plan for a 2 hour session to “desensitize” the Rucki children. Dr. Gilbertson is talking about holding 5 frightened children in a room inside the courthouse with a bailiff guarding the door, and using the authority of the court to force these children to recant abuse allegations, and develop a bond with an identified abuser who they are terrified of. Let’s be clear – this is not “therapy”, it is psychological torture. The methods Dr. Gilbertson used on the Rucki children do not meet the standards of trauma based therapy, and certainly no credible psychologist would attempt “therapy” on 5 children all at one time, failing to address or consider the individual needs of each child.

After S.R. and G.R. ran away, reunification therapy continued with the 2 younger children. Reports written AFTER the events of April 19, 2013, indicate the child who authored this post continued in reunification therapy and continued to showed fear of Rucki. The child also would leave the room when Rucki entered and avoided physical contact with him. Similarly,  investigative reports showed similar behaviors present in S.R. and G.R. Witnesses who interacted with the sisters during the time they stayed on the Ranch, recalled they were fearful, avoided physical contact, and spoke about abuse (see Dahlen investigative report below). These types of emotional and behavioral reactions are common with children who have experienced abuse and trauma; yet Dr. Gilbertson completely ignored all evidence and information suggesting abuse had occurred, and worked to intimidate the Rucki children even as they are crying out for help. 

The diary entry you are about to read is the voice of a child who may not even exist anymore – reunification therapy forces a child to suppress who they really are, and become a child the court approves of. There is no success in treatments like these, the relationship that results is not one of love or trust, but instead a relationship based on trauma bonding.

Despite all this child has had to endure, they also show incredible courage in posting a family photo taken with Sandra. A playful image shows laughter, and demonstrates the closeness once shared….

Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and children continue to be estranged due to the forcible actions of the court, and due the actions of a dangerous abuser. Photographs and perhaps a few stubborn memories that have resisted “de-programming”, are all they have to hold onto each other.

Diary, Posted 5/13/2013 by Rucki Child Include the Following:

4/2/13 Sick

4/4/13 Headache

4/6/13 Woe (means sorry, grief or misery)

4/8/13 Killed

4/11/13 Scared

4/12/13 Wow

4/21/13 Crappy

4/22/13 612-308-0512

POSTED MONDAY, MAY 13, 2013 AT 8:36 pm

2/2/13 Silly

2/7/13 Drained

2/12/13 Lazy

2(?)/12/13 Creeped written in black next to the word Miserable

2/23/13 Dent (?) Pho next to it is a picture that could be a bowl of noodles. The word Bic and what could be a pen.

2/27/13 Goofy – Next to this picture is the word “Pain” and then a picture of an eye, a hand on a book, an unknown shape and a face with large eyes and a mouth, wide open showing scared

2/28/13 Colored in block letters that read Freake! Next to this in blue, date unknown, is the word Fall

3/2/13 Worried

3/3/13, 3 pm Worried (includes a face)

3/5/13 Stupid

3/8/13 Animal

3/9/13 Creeped includes a face drawn in black with two eyes peering out

3/11/13 Prankster

3/12/13 Gleeful next to a pair of pom-poms and a smiling face

3/13/13 Gleek

3/14/13 Nervous – a face is drawn next to the words with eyebrows, cartoonish black eyes and a face that appears to be smiling

3/16/13 Rainbowed

3/17/13 Green St Patty’s Day

3/19/13 Ignored

3/20/13 Awful

3/21/13 Escaping – Underneath, date unknown, Bored written in black and red

3/21/13 Screwed picture of a screw drawn underneath – Next to it is some words scribbled in orange

3/28/13 Palmed – Underneath, not dated, Silly

4/2/13 Sick

4/4/13 Headache

4/6/13 Woe (means sorry, grief or misery)

4/8/13 Killed

4/11/13 Scared

4/12/13 Wow

4/21/13 Crappy

4/22/13 612-308-0512

4/28/13 Funky

5/4/13 Annoyed – includes a frowning face

(The Justice blog has tried to provide a complete record as possible, these notes are based on what can be visually seen in the diary entry)

 

FROM THE CARVER COUNTY CORRUPTION BLOG:

On September 7, 2012, Judge Knutson said an emergency required him to remove the five children from their mother’s care. He said mother had the condition of Parental Alienation syndrome (PAS). That condition is based on the theory that if a child dislikes a parent, the cause is the other parent.
He appointed a therapist, Dr. James Gilbertson, to “re-program” the children to like their father. The children say their father has abused them and their mother.
At a conference on February 26, 2013, two of the children told the judge the following:
14 year old girl
“I am 14 and in June I will be 15.I am here today to say a few thing to not only you but Ms. Friedrich and Dr. Gilbertson.
“I would first like to say I am appalled by the way this court has treated me and my brothers and sisters.
I have not only been called fat a number of times by Julie Friedrich but have been ask if I was pregnant and been called a down right liar by not only Ms. Friedrich but also Dr. Gilbertson. I’m not only disgusted be the way they talk to me, my brothers and sister, but pissed at the way this court has accuse me of being a liar. I’m 14 and in a couple of months I will be 15. I know the difference between a lie and the truth.
I stand here today to tell you the truth about my father. To begin with, he has not only told my family that he is homicidal, but sat us down at kitchen table and yelled at us saying that he was not only going to kill me but my brothers, sister and mom. Not even a week later I received a horrifying voicemail of 6 gunshots. He has also choked, slapped, and hit and verbally abused my mother repeatedly throughout their. marriage. He also has lost it on us kids more than a number of time physically and verbally. Also he has made sexual comments to me over the year about my boobs look bigger and so forth and over the year many of my friends could not hang out with me because of my father. The day my father officially moved out of the Ireland place home was not only a day of peace and happiness but safety in the household.
“And second I would like to say it was absolutely absurd of you to remove us from our mom’s care. She has been nothing but loving and our rock and you not only removing us from us from her but not letting have contact with her for 6 months, 19 days except for the one 3 hour meeting on January 11. It is down right cruel, ruthless of this court. I ask you to let me live with my mom, let me be happy because all this courtroom has done has cause misery and heartache. Thank you for your time.”
13 year old girl
“Your Honor,
I am 13 years old. I am here to speak my voice because I have never been given the opportunity to do so.
My father has frightened and hurt my family. After the divorce was final, my father kept repeatedly threatening and shocking myself and my bothers and sister and my mother. I have been called a liar and have not been able to say what I believe without a court member discriminating me.
I wish to be with my mother, because my father has brought nothing but pure torture to my family.”
Julie Friedrich is the court appointed guardian ad litem. Sandra Grazzini-Rucki filed a complaint against the Guardian ad Litem, the Minnesota State Guardian ad Litem Board has never formally investigated her complaint or taken any action against either GAL involved – Julie Friedrich, and Laura Miles.
Guardian ad Litem Julie Friedrich

Guardian ad Litem Julie Friedrich

 

For More Information:

Casualities of W.A.R. Radio – “Beauty and the Basketball Player” Yahya McClain Interviews Former NBA Star Joe Smith, and Minnesota Mom Sandra Grazzini-Rucki 

Investigative Report Dahlen/Rucki

Letter from Dr. James Gilbertson to Julie Friedrich about Rucki children

Pressured, Threatened S. Rucki Bravely Speaks Out Against “Horrendous” Family Court

Sandra Grazzini-Rucki convicted of hiding daughters (CDN)

Shocking Interview from Grazzini-Rucki Case – Brodkorb Goes Rogue, Dronen Wants to Make Rucki Girls Wards of the State, More…

I honestly believe Judge Knutson is psychotic, that I have no doubt. I’ve sat in his courtroom, the guy is absolutely crazy. I believe there needs to be a lot of changes in family court as well….

If David Rucki is as crazy as these Girls say he is, then I don’t know what he is capable of...” ~ Lori Musolf, prosecution witness

Lawless Lakeville, Dakota County, Minn:  Lion News has released a shocking audio of the Lakeville police interview between Detective Dronen and Lori Musolf, witness for the Prosecution in the Grazzini-Rucki case. This interview covers a variety of subjects including abuse allegations, family court failures, and interference in the investigation of the runaway Rucki girls by Michael Brodkorb.

During the interview Detective Dronen admits that confidential information about the open investigation into the disappearance of the Rucki girls had been obtained by Brodkorb. Dronen was concerned because Brodkorb was contacting witnesses without the knowledge or consent of the Lakeville police, who were handling the investigation. Lakeville’s investigation into the missing Rucki girls became contaminated as Brodkorb contacted witnesses before the police could secure the information and then leaked sensitive details in his articles, which were widely distributed. 

musolf2

Additional testimony from Doug Dahlen reveals that the Star Tribune reporters, Brandon Stahl and Michael Brodkorb, knew ahead of time that police would raid the ranch to take the Girls. Dahlen states that reporters from the Star Tribune were calling the Grant County Courthouse a day ahead of time, and were asking when a warrant would be served.  This leak of information, and the inappropriate involvement of the Star Tribune has created an unsafe environment for the Rucki girls, whose safety and well-being came second to the media sensation their “recovery” would generate.

Doug and Gina Dahlen cared for the runaway Rucki sisters, who refused to return to father David Rucki because he abused them. Source, ABC News: http://abcnews.go.com/US/minnesota-sisters-missing-years-lived-plain-sight-time/story?id=38190862

Doug and Gina Dahlen cared for the runaway Rucki sisters, who refused to return to father David Rucki because he abused them. Source, ABC News: http://abcnews.go.com/US/minnesota-sisters-missing-years-lived-plain-sight-time/story?id=38190862

Ironically, Brodkorb blasted all the adults who “did nothing” while the Rucki girls were missing – and now he qualifies as one of those adults, seeing that he had knowledge of where the Girls were staying for at least 24 hours and did nothing to notify local police or intervene. This happening while Brodkorb admits father, David Rucki, was an emotional wreck over the disappearance of his daughters. So Brodkorb also lied to Rucki and did not disclose to him that he knew where the Girls were, and let him suffer. All of this so Brodkorb could break the the story that would make his comeback after an adulterous affair, and a drinking problem destroyed his political career and nearly ended his life.

Michael Brodkorb, source: startribune.com

Michael Brodkorb, source: startribune.com

Also in the interview, Musolf discloses that Sandra Grazzini-Rucki was afraid of ex-husband David Rucki, and specifically stated “she acted like she was terrified of this man” and “she thought he would kill her if he had the chance. Musolf comments that Sandra used burner phones because she was afraid Rucki would track her down (a tracking device was placed in the wheel well of a friend’s vehicle. Police traced that device back to Rucki’s house). The behaviors Musolf describe in Sandra are common in women who have suffered abuse. In the criminal trial, it was portrayed that Sandra used burner phones to avoid arrest for the disappearance of her daughters. Evidence suggests otherwise, yet Prosecuting Attorney Kathryn M. Keena  promotes a lie. This is prosecutorial misconduct.

Musolf candidly expressed fear of Rucki and stated she “did not trust David Rucki” and was concerned that he would harm her because she assisted his daughters in running away, and was a friend of Sandra. This is coming from a prosecution witness who testified against Sandra, yet is also building her case. Sandra plead the affirmative defense in charges that she hid her daughters from Rucki, meaning she took action to protect her children from imminent harm or abuse. Sandra was found guilty of felony deprivation of parental rights; critics argue she could not prove abuse happened yet evidence that abuse did happen continues to mount even after Sandra’s conviction.

David Rucki

David Rucki

In a bizarre twist. Musolf tells Detective Dronen that she believes that the Rucki girls have “alot of psychological” and should not be placed with either parent when they are found. What is so unbelievable is that Musolf is a self-proclaimed victim advocate. Musolf’s attitude and actions could pose a risk of harm to an abuse victim or other vulnerable person because she shows no understanding about abuse, and its effects on children. Also troubling is that Musolf is basically stating that Sandra, the victim, has said or done something that is comparable to the horrific abuse Rucki inflicted on his family. NO victim of abuse could ever do anything to justify the abuse inflicted on them. If a so-called “advocate” does not understand that, what is she really advocating for? Detective Dronen agrees with Musolf, and says he thinks the Rucki girls should become wards of the state to get the help they need. 

Wards of the state? The “help” the county offered has done nothing but bring pain and upheaval to the Grazzini-Rucki family. How much more damage will Dakota County inflict on Sandra and her children? .

Help raise awareness, and fight for a worthy cause – please comment, like, repost and share.

Public Domain: http://chainimage.com/

Public Domain: http://chainimage.com/

 

Note: Musolf is the only person who has not been criminally charged for her role in assisting the runaway Rucki girls. Musolf remained in contact with the Rucki girls in the days after they ran away and arranged their interview with Fox 9. During the Fox 9 interview, both Girls disclosed allegations of abuse committed by their father and expressed fear of him. Musolf was listed as a witness for the Prosecution in the Sandra Grazzini-Rucki criminal trial but did not testify in court.

Special thanks to Lion News for posting this video 🙂

2011 Lakeville Hockey Scandals Lands David Rucki in the Penalty Box

Allegations of Fraud, Financial Abuse Surround David Rucki including…             2011 Lakeville Hockey Scandal

spam clip art

Note: When researching David Rucki, a number of concerning incidents suggest fraud or financial abuse, this is just another piece of the puzzle. Please check back for updates.

Lakeville, July 13, 2011: After controversy and public outcry, David Rucki, then President, resigned from the Lakeville Hockey Association (LHA) for “personal reasons. Rucki’s sidekick, Toney Canney, and his wife, Joni Canney, also stepped down from the Board. Rucki personally selected the Canneys to serve on the Board. Tony served as the VP of Administration and Joni as the Tournament Director. Rucki also created a position for John “Gus” Barger, who was removed after allegations of misconduct and financial impropriety.

somethingshady

Hockey suited Rucki’s need for dominance, and provided an outlet for his aggression. He bullied his own children into playing hockey, even against their wishes. And prided his daughter on her athletic ability, especially in hockey, ignoring that she hated the sport and would rather be doing other things. Rucki needed his children to gain access to LHA, he could only qualify for a position if they played. In a pattern you will see emerging throughout this article, Rucki plays people like pawns to get what he wants.

The LHA Board is a volunteer position but even so, Rucki prided himself on being involved, and sought power among its ranks like a general leading an invasion. After Rucki was elected President, chaos and controversy ensued, at a level never seen before in the history of the LHA.

The problems began in January 2010 when a routine audit was conducted, the Auditor recommended that a finance committee be created to oversee financial activities, including charitable gambling. Gambling profits had also been down for the past 2 years. As President, Rucki took control by offering a solution, and strategically placed his friends and supporters on the financial committee, and in other key roles.

A close friend of Rucki, John “Gus” Barger served as Development Administrator and was given a salary for his “volunteer” position. Rucki lobbied the board to pay Barger $35k a year salary, the Board was reeling on how to afford the additional expense.

The Development Administrator position was given to Barger with no competitive bid, no public posting of an opening – drawing criticism that he was unfairly elected because there is a protocol for hiring. Rucki avoided questions raised by Board members, and had them vote on Barger’s salary without discussing any details of his employment. Board meetings are recorded but the night of Barger’s election, the audio mysteriously disappeared.

Rucki then worked with Barger to systemically re-design the structure, policies and voting procedures of the LHA. Most of this happened as deals made between friends, and was never formally documented. Included in the changes – Rucki gained power of signature on the LHA bank accounts, none of the past presidents had that authority.

Board members who were not useful to Rucki were promptly removed, violating numerous Board policies was just a matter of business to Rucki. The Gambling Manager claims he was wrongfully removed, and false information was provided to cover up how the Board’s actions violated procedures by forcing him out. The ousted Gambling Manager took to a public forum to clear his name, and explain the circumstances of his removal: “Then I proceeded and asked the CEO/President “if he didn’t discuss any of this with the LHA Board then who was it discussed with”? His reply in front of the board was “the important board people” I have no idea who he was referencing and by the looks on all the Board Members faces they had no idea either.”

A friend of Rucki’s was then installed as the new Gambling Manager. This was a high stakes gamble – when Rucki served as president of LHA in 2009-2010, gross receipts totaled $2,232,355 for this non-profit.

Public Domain: Sachin Patekar, http://pdpics.com

Public Domain: Sachin Patekar, http://pdpics.com

The hockey stick that broke the proverbial camel’s back came when LHA was cited for a gambling violation in February 2011. Public criticism intensified over the following months, citizens attended LHA Board meetings to demand answers. Others took to a public message board to raise concerns.

Rucki’s subsequent resignation was commemorated in a poem about his tyrannical rise to power that includes the following verses,

The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the Lakeville Board that day; When Rucki grabbed the gavel, he had some cards to play, 
He first removed Past President, and Prez Elect the same, 
A pall-like silence fell upon the patrons of the game.

Rucki apparently remains bitter about the LHA scandal. Recently his loyal buddy Tony Canney took to the press to complain,”Following the Ruckis’ May 2011 divorce, Canney said Grazzini-Rucki spread false allegations about Rucki to neighbors and parents in the Lakeville Hockey Association of which Rucki was president.Finding normal goal for Lakeville dad after missing daughters found Sandra had no involvement in LHA; these remarks are that of an abuser projecting his actions onto the victim in order to avoid responsibility.

The quiet streets of Lakeville have settled but there remains a dark shadow that Rucki has cast upon the town, and its hockey ring.

 

For More Info:

The Lakeville Hockey Scandal Message Board, Poem: http://www.ushsho.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=24139&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=75

The “Goose Chase” articles include info about Rucki bullying his child into playing hockey: Footprints in the Snow or Wild Goose Chase? Did ABC 20/20 Edit Audio Recordings to Suppress Evidence of Abuse in the Grazzini-Rucki Case? Pt. 1

Footprints in the Snow or Wild Goose Chase? Did ABC 20/20 Edit Audio Recordings to Suppress Evidence of Abuse in the Grazzini-Rucki Case? Pt. 2

LHA 990 – 2009/2010

 

 

 

Multi-Millionaire David Rucki claims pauper status in MN court (Michael Volpe)

There’s another twist in the contentious Rucki divorce and child custody case. Father David Rucki who’d said he was a millionaire on ABC’s 20/20, now claims indigence.

Lady Justice. (Image via Wikipedia)

Lady Justice. (Image via Wikipedia)

LAKEVILLE, Minnesota, August 29, 2016 – The high profile and contentious Rucki divorce and child custody case experienced another twist recently, when father David Rucki claimed indigence. This latest claim counters his previous assertions, which aired on ABC’s 20/20, that he is a multi-millionaire.

While portraying himself as a wealthy man on “20/20,” Rucki now presents himself as a pauper in need of public assistance in court. Rucki owns 3 homes and is a principle in multiple businesses.

His lawyer, Lisa Elliott, recently argued in court that Rucki’s minor children, of which he has sole custody and his ex-wife has not been allowed to see since early 2013, would starve and not be able to get medical care without child support from their mother.

David Rucki presented a wholly different picture when he testified at his ex-wife’s criminal trial. During that trial, he claimed he had taken his five kids on three vacations-two to California and one to Florida- in the year since his two daughters returned.
A picture of the Rucki family on a  Disney World vacation was featured in ABC 20/20 “Footprints in the Snow” and also mentioned in a Star Tribune article. The Star Tribune also says that Rucki is employed as a trucking contractor.

 

The Fix: Grazzini-Rucki Case Discussed on “The Long Version”

According to host,  Fletcher Long, there are many ways the government can fix a trial – the justice system is designed to benefit, and profit the government. The fix discussed in this episode of “The Long Version” is the Grazzini-Rucki criminal trial and the miscarriages of justice that happened in the family law case.

The Fix: the Sandra Grazzini-Rucki Story” with Fletcher Long features guests, Michelle MacDonald and Michael Volpe.

Listen to “The Long Version with Fletcher Long” podcast: http://longversionw4j.com/podcasts

The opponent against you in the criminal trial is the government. The government pays the judge, he is a party in a criminal court. Exclusionary rules never benefit a defendant, they help the government win cases. The private citizens don’t pass rules of evidence. Rules of evidence are passed and adopted by Legislators, and Legislators work for the government. All the money flows from one entity and that entity is in that court.. it is the ultimate David and Goliath scenario, you are always and perpetually beating your head against a wall and that wall is the adversary in court.” – Fletcher Long

The Fix in the Grazzini-Rucki Criminal Trial

In the podcast, Fletcher Long and Guests discuss the elements of the Fix that are present in the way Dakota County mishandled the Grazzini-Rucki criminal trial.

Including:

  • Judge Karen Asphaug did not allow jury to hear evidence that would give context to why the affirmative defense was being raised.
  • Evidence was excluded that would show why Sandra Grazzini-Rucki was afraid of ex-husband, David Rucki. Evidence was excluded that demonstrated Rucki’s predilection towards violence (evidence that Rucki had 3 prior protective orders filed against him was excluded, as well as CPS reports that investigated and documented abuse allegations raised by the Rucki children, and more).
  • Judge Asphaug only let certain pieces of information in so that the jury only heard one side of the story, that being told by Prosecution ( Kathryn Keena).
  • Judge Asphaug would not allow evidence in that would impeach testimony or refute allegations raised by the Prosecution. Long says that you have a right under the 6th amendment to confront your accuser. To deny a defendant the right to confront the government’s proof is fixing the trial to the government’s benefit.

Allegations that Judge Asphaug and Prosecutor Keena are working together, and working to exclude and discredit evidence are raised. Long states that when the Judge and the Prosecutor are working “in concert” or working together against a litigant, that gives the appearance to the jury that the defendant is guilty and eradicates the impartiality of the judge.

Judge Karen J Asphaug

Judge Karen J Asphaug

Defendants also have a Constitutional right to call witnesses in order to raise a defense. Judge Asphaug did not allow several witnesses to be called.

Long also says that it is “prosecutorial misconduct” for Dakota County to insinuate that Sandra Grazzini-Rucki is a bad mother, or is guilty of any crime, because she sought to call her two daughters as witnesses. Long comments, “It is not okay to say something that does suggest guilt DOES suggest guilt.” Long says that a defendant “is in a fight for their life” and has a right to raise a defense, and to call witnesses as part of that defense. Calling a witnesses does not suggest or prove either innocence or guilt, and is a crucial part of ensuring a fair trial.

Assistant Dakota County Attorney, Kathryn Keena

Assistant Dakota County Attorney, Kathryn Keena

For thought – Assistant Dakota County Attorney, Kathryn Keen,a called the son N.R. as a witness, and was not subjected to similar speculation or accusation that she was harming a child.

Michael Volpe says:What this story is really is the story of an abuser who is being covered up by major parts of the State of Minnesota.

This is a very important discussion, to get the full benefit of what was discussed please visit and listen to The Long Version, podcast: The Long Version Podcast

Dakota Co. Courthouse

 

(2011) Witness Says: David Rucki is a Very Angry Individual Who Rages… Expresses Concern for Sandra and Children

A witness (name omitted to protect privacy) to David Rucki’s abusive and violent behavior wrote a letter in 2011 (below) to share some of his experiences, and to voice concerns for the safety of Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and the children.

victimletter

This letter supports the concerns raised by Sandra and supports the allegations of abuse raised by the Rucki children, who report a similar pattern of abusive and threatening behavior from David.

 

The witness reports that he felt so frightened of David Rucki that he applied for, and received, a restraining order in 2009: (2011) Judge Knutson Orders Reunification Therapy with David Rucki and Children, while HRO in place

Also note that the witness  heard David verbally abusing Sandra on a cell phone call, and “He truly berated her about being a poor mother“. This behavior matches the verbal abuse heard on voicemail messages that David left to his teenage son, Nico. The voicemail messages also include comments denigrating Sandra, and criticizing her ability to care for her children. That means you have two independent statements, from two different times, describing the SAME behavior from David. Rucki Enraged: Voicemail Transcripts Reveal Threats, Emotional Abuse Against Son

The witness also says “As one who does biblical counseling, I am convinced he (David Rucki) needs anger management treatment.” In fact, David was ordered into anger management on numerous occasions.

Judge David Knutson awarded David Rucki sole custody of the 5 children in November 2013, despite a long  history of abuse, rage and anger problems present in David. Just 7 months later, in June 2014, David was so offended by a fellow motorist that he stalked a vehicle, waited until the motorist got out of his car, and brutally beat him.  David was convicted of disorderly conduct and referred to anger management again.

See Condition #4 – Anger Management

Almost a year later, in November 2015, the Rucki girls are “recovered” after running away from the abuse, and dysfunction that their father brought into their life.  The girls bravely reported the abuse, and clearly stated that they are afraid of their father, and  would prefer to remain in foster care.  And at the time, David was still on probation for the road rage conviction – which should have demonstrated that he posed a risk of harm to the children.

Yet the Courts continue dismiss the Rucki girls’ concerns, and push for reunification therapy aka reprogramming. What kind of “therapy” forces children to live with an abuser, and forces children to accept abuse without question, to just take it?

I am pointing all of these facts out to show you, the Reader, that multiple sources, across time, describe the SAME kind of abusive and violent behavior from David Rucki. Clearly he has a propensity towards violence.

REMEMBER:   Domestic Violence manifests as a re-occurring pattern of behavior to maintain power and control over a partner or children and/or other family members. The presence of fear or trauma in a partner or in children is a telltale sign that abuse has occurred in a family.

Helpguide.org: Domestic Violence and Abuse – Signs of Abuse and Abusive Relationships

Is this a case of “parental alienation”?

Think about it… David Rucki has a documented history of anger problems, rage and violent behavior with related criminal charges, and police involvement, going back at least 16 years (figuring the witness said a “decade” of living next to David)!

Why won’t the Courts listen to the Rucki children? All they are asking for is to live in a safe home, free of violence. Is that too much to ask? 

When home doesn’t feel like home anymore… (Public Domain: http://www.pd4pic.com)

Please also read Michael Volpe’s investigation into the Grazzini-Rucki case, the history of abuse, and how this case was handled by the family court system for additional information, and insight: Chaos and horror after courts step in for Rucki family by Michael Volpe, Communities Digital News