Beaten Before Born: Sandra Grazzini-Rucki Assaulted While Pregnant – Rucki Wanted to Kill Baby Because He “Wasn’t Perfect”

Source: ABC 20/20 Screen Shot

David Rucki is so violent, and so abusive that he beat ex-wife Sandra Grazzini-Rucki while pregnant, and assaulted his unborn before the child even took his first breath. As a result of the beating, the child was born prematurely (and suffers with permanent health problems).

This, according to, statements Sandra Grazzini-Rucki made during a heart-wrenching episode of Fighting B.A.C.K. (Aired: 6/19/2017) During the episode, Sandra also reveals that Rucki threatened to harm her children as a way to gain control over her through fear and intimidation.

 

The shocking revelation came when Sandra responded to a guest who was describing her own situation with domestic violence, and how her child was affected. The guest says her abusive ex used her child as a weapon, and would even retaliate by hurting the child, as a way to intimidate and control her. Sandra said that hearing the guest’s story reminded her of the violent marriage she escaped from.

The National Institutes of Health reports that over 300,000 pregnant women in the U.S. are victims to domestic violence, with domestic violence being the leading cause of death among U.S. women of childbearing age.

(Note: This article contains additional information on these incidents, as provided by a confidential source – which are told in the first person voice to illustrate Sandra’s horrifying experience, and told in this way raise awareness of the impact of domestic violence experienced during pregnancy)

Rucki’s Assault on an Unborn Baby: “I was kicked repeatedly in the stomach (because) he was ‘not a perfect child’…”

Imagine the horror Sandra surely experienced and felt: 

Lying on a gurney, hands desperately clutch swollen belly, trying to hold back contractions… as she fades in and out of consciousness, she pleads,”No, no, it’s too soon…”

How would she explain the bruises this time? The violent assault against her unborn left her belly black and blue, bleeding on the inside… she realized too late that she married a demon in the flesh. Raging he stood over her kicking again and again… spit flying from his mouth as he screamed and swore..

Loud voice, someone shouting her name… she screamed and threw her arms out… The beep-beep of a fetal monitor going wild… She struggled to open her eyes, not comprehending, plastic IV tubing twisting as she fought… frightened by the sound of her name being called. Was she safe?

Signs of life.. a faint and erratic heart beat … tiny, seashell shaped knees raised to chest then violently kick out… Even the hospital could not protect her once he realized the baby he tried to kill was now fighting back.

(28:21) Sandra says: “When my youngest child was born, he (David Rucki) was under the belief that this was not going to be a ‘perfect child’ when I was kicked repeatedly into the stomach and went into pre-term labor, and gave birth, and he (Rucki) said, I want him gone rather than have a kid that’s not perfect because it’s more about me than it is about him…”

The child has been permanently affected by the assault inflicted on him while in the womb, and will suffer with lifelong health issues.

Rucki Threatens to Chop Baby Up in a Ceiling Fan

All she wanted was to be a wife and mother, to have a home filled with laughter and children. Instead the children tip-toed through the rooms like ghosts – vainly trying to remain silent and unseen, as if they could avoid their father’s rage.

The children… where were the children? So much they should not see… the violence, the tears… the fake apologies… Hiding somewhere in the house. Hands slammed over their small ears. Tears filling their eyes. They feared not the mythical monster in the closet that most children imagine but the very real monster in the house, their father.

(28:06) Sandra says: “When my oldest child was 3 months old, my ex-husband David Rucki grabbed him from the bassinet, held him up to a ceiling fan and said, ‘You will do as I say or he is going into the fan…’”

(29:03) Sandra says: “Sometimes when you talk about things it reminds me of things that David Rucki did and yet these are the men that have our children… You talk about this and I know, I will never forget when David held the baby up to the ceiling fan and said ‘You do what I say or he’s (chokes on words) .. they have no concern for the child, it’s more of a control issue…”

Rucki Promised to Change But Then Threatened to Kill Sandra, and the Children

Runaway Rucki Teen, G.R. also stated,…He showed anger like, ‘I’m going to kill you…’ “ (Social Service Report, November 2015:  Social Worker Recommended – Protective Care for Rucki Girls, Supervised Visits With Father Due to Safety Concerns)

Sandra says during the marriage, Rucki repeatedly promised to change but always resorted back to his abusive behavior. Sandra says Rucki even threatened to kill “your children” if she did not comply with his demands.

Sandra says physical, mental and sexual abuse existed in the generations of the Rucki family and influenced David Rucki’s abusive behavior and attitude towards his own children. David Rucki promised Sandra that he would not abuse his own children the way he was abused by his father, and the way he witnessed his father abuse his sisters. Cut from the same fabric, David Rucki, in the end, turned out to be just as abusive, and dangerous to his own children as Fred Rucki was to him, and his sisters.

Family Court: The Two Options That Trap Victims of Domestic Violence

Judge David L Knutson (Dakota County, MN)

I think that is so sad that as a parent in an abusive relationship, why is it that your two options are: stay, being abused, have your child grow up in this environment filled with insecurities, tension and violence or leave and risk losing your child and continuing to suffer… – Comment from “Fighting Back” Guest, a Mother also involved in family court who lost custody of her baby to an alleged abuser

Sandra says that her children went to everyone asking for help and that every level of the system has failed to protect them.

Instead of protecting children, family court Judge David L Knutson, Dakota County, has assisted David Rucki in every step through the legal process to continue to abuse, torment and attempt to kill Sandra by making it impossible to survive. Judge Knutson has also endangered the lives of all 5 Rucki children by placing them under the care, custody and ultimately the control of David Rucki. Even as adults the Rucki children have been unable to escape their father and live independent lives of their own due to his violence against them.

For More Info on Grazzini-Rucki Case: Dakota County Corrupt Courthouse Event: Tour Infamous Court at Center of the Grazzini-Rucki Case

Advertisements

Michael Volpe Reveals: Rucki Hires High Buck Attorneys in Lawsuit To Say He is Not Dangerous or Abusive

David Rucki

Michael Volpe reveals another twist to the Grazzini-Rucki case in his latest article: David Rucki Claims Pastor and It’s Church Helped Hide His Daughters

David Rucki filed a lawsuit seeking $250,000 in damages against several people and entities including a church and it’s pastor, and even the pastor’s wife, (as the lawsuit states) for making false claims that he is dangerous, when he is not, and encouraging his daughters to “leave their home”.

Rucki may spend nearly that amount on attorney’s fees alone – high buck Marshall Tanick and Lisa Elliott have been retained to represent Rucki in this lawsuit; the estimated costs of their services exceeds $1,000 per hour. It has not been explained how Rucki can afford legal representation from two attorneys, considering he claims that he is impoverished and is receives welfare.

From Volpe,“Even more shockingly, Rucki continues to qualify for public assistance while being able to hire two attorneys simultaneously.

David Rucki, who received 100% of the marital assets including four homes, nine cars, and a multi-million-dollar business along with sole custody of their five children, still qualified for public assistance through this very program.

‘The Father receives child support services from Dakota County for the joint children pursuant to the Title IV D of the Social Security Act,” said Judge Maria Pastoor in 2016, using this assistance as justification for ordering Sandra Grazzini-Rucki to pay $975 per month in child support…'”

Volpe’s investigation of the case has revealed that,”..there is overwhelming evidence that almost anyone is in danger being in David Rucki’s presence.. And includes details of Rucki’s long history of violent, and criminal behavior, including,”Ten different people- his ex-wife, five children, two neighbors, in-law, and mailman- all previously successfully took out a restraining order against him.. If this lawsuit goes forward, more information concerning Rucki’s propensity towards violence, and the abuse of his family, are expected to emerge.

Rucki claims the defendants, which include, Dede Evavold and ex-wife Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, compelled then teenage daughters S.R. and G.R. to “leave their home” and stay on a ranch for abused children by using “false statements” and “false threats” that their father, Rucki, is violent and would hurt them.

According to Volpe,“Plaintiffs Gianna and Samantha were compelled by Defendant Grazzini-Rucki to leave their home from the care of their paternal aunt and to go with Grazzini-Rucki to St. Cloud Sauk Center and White Horse Ranch based on false statements and false threats that they would be subjected to harm by Plaintiff Rucki if they did not do so.” The lawsuit further states.

The lawsuit does not explain why this random church, its pastor and wife would go along with this scheme if indeed the girls were being manipulated into staying there by false threats…”

Both S.R. and G.R. stated the reason they ran away because the family court failed to keep them safe from their abusive father, Rucki, and they felt endangered in the current custody arrangement. Statements made by S.R. and G.R. have been consistent, and have not changed, until Rucki sent them out of state, under the watch of a guard, for “reunification therapy”. S.R. later admitted during a police interview that Rucki “pressured” and “guilted” her into recanting abuse allegations.

The lawsuit filed by Rucki states the defendants failed to notify authorities that S.R. and G.R. were staying on the ranch in violation of a court order.  Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and co-defendants Dede Evavold as well as Doug and Gina Dahlen have all been charged with felony deprivation of parental rights, and convicted, for their role in assisting the girls.

The church, and it’s pastor, named in this lawsuit have never been implicated nor charged in connection with the disappearance of S.R. and G.R., who ran away in April 2013 and stayed on the Dahlen’s ranch until November 2015.

Another woman who assisted the runaway Rucki teens, Lori Musolf, has avoided criminal charges entirely. Musolf had extensive conversations with the runaway Rucki sisters in the days after their disappearance. Musolf also arranged the interview, and acted as a go between, for the Rucki sisters to appear on Fox 9 with Trish van Pilsum. She also failed to notify authorities. Will Rucki name Musolf in the lawsuit and seek damages against her???

Stay tuned for developments…

Read More:

Explosive Rucki police interview adds new wrinkle to story

Multiple Witness Reports: Rucki Sisters Fearful of Father, Felt Safe at Ranch

Why Hasn’t Lori Musolf Been Charged for her Role in Assisting Runaway Rucki Sisters?

 

Media Blackout in Grazzini-Rucki Case – AP Overlooks History of Abuse in Coverage of Criminal Appeal

(Dakota County, Minnesota: 11/6/2017) Don’t let the media blackout leave you in the dark…read here information and documentation of abuse and court failures in the Grazzini-Rucki case suppressed by mainstream media.  

Recent coverage of Sandra Grazzini-Rucki’s criminal appeal by the Associated Press gained nationwide attention in a report that was sanitized, and omitted crucial information (much of this information is publicly available, and posted online) including:

*the history of domestic abuse in the Rucki family

*abuse the Rucki children suffered at the hands of their father, David Rucki Rucki social service records

Family Crisis Main Reason Children Run Away

*David Rucki’s long history of violent and criminal acts druckipolicereports

*the failures of Judge David L. Knutson, and the Dakota County family court to protect the five Rucki children from abuse The court created horror of the five Rucki children

*Judge David L. Knutson’s response when abuse allegations were raised was NOT to protect the Rucki children but to force them into a relationship with the abuser, David Rucki. The“deprogramming” and “reunification therapy” ordered by Judge Knutson further traumatized the children Letter by S.R. 2013

ALL of which created a crisis that caused the two Rucki teens S.R. and G.R. to run away back in April 2013, and led to subsequent criminal charges against mother, Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, for her role in assisting the girls.

Never once does the AP mention that S.R. and G.R. spoke out on numerous occasions, stating the reason why they ran away on April 13, 2013, was because of the abuse they suffered from their father, and because of the court’s actions against them.

Never once does the AP mention that Sandra raised the affirmative defense during her criminal trial, and that by law if she could prove her actions were taken to protect her children from imminent harm, they would be not considered criminal. Only after Judge Karen Asphaug suppressed 75% of defense evidence, did it become impossible for Sandra to prove the affirmative defense… meaning the jury convicted Sandra after being deprived of the facts (an issue also raised on appeal).  Dakota County disallows nearly all Sandra Grazzini-Rucki’s evidence and only then is she convicted

Judge Karen Asphaug (Twitter)

Instead, what you see from the AP report is a cherry picking of the facts that leaves readers in a very similar situation as the jury faced in the Grazzini-Rucki criminal trial.. left to make conclusions about Sandra, and this case, without having all of the information or facts available. This is very dangerous considering.. In a criminal case, this can lead to the innocent being found guilty. When incomplete or misleading information is presented as factual news, it creates propaganda. And the children at the heart of this case still remain unprotected.

The Criminal Appeal: Conviction Upheld

The Minnesota Court of Appeals upheld the criminal conviction of Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, found guilty of 6 counts of felony deprivation of custodial rights, for her role in assisting her two teenage daughters S.R. and G.R. who ran away in April 2013 after the family court failed to protect them from abuse.

The girls remained in hiding for 2 years, living on a therapeutic horse ranch. When given opportunities to return to the care of their father, S.R. and G.R. refused, citing fear for their safety. Witnesses who interacted with the girls during this time confirmed that their behaviors were consistent with abuse, and both appeared highly fearful – especially at the mention of their father. Multiple Witness Reports: Rucki Sisters Fearful of Father, Felt Safe at Ranch

Family court records reveal that S.R..and G.R. raised allegations of physical, emotional and sexual abuse throughout proceedings. Not only was Judge David L. Knutson aware of the abuse, but after personally speaking to the Rucki children in chambers, he sealed the proceedings to suppress the abuse allegations they raised. Judge Knutson refused to take action to protect S.R. and G.R., or any of the other Rucki children, and called them “liars” and accused them of being “brainwashed”. S.R. criticized Judge Knutson in a June 2016 interview with police saying, “I’m not a fan of Judge Knutson, I don’t want to hear about that guy, he’s a dick. Honestly, he made such bad decisions… The decisions made by whoever in the court were so horrendous that they shouldn’t even be allowed to do it anymore. You can’t make a mistake like this, and ruin people’s lives, and think it’s ok..” Pressured, Threatened S. Rucki Bravely Speaks Out Against “Horrendous” Family Court

Judge David L Knutson (Source: Twitter)

Sandra made every legal effort to protect her children – fighting all the way to the Supreme Court – to no avail. Sandra encountered a new abuser in the court system – in judges David L. Knutson and Karen Asphaug who sympathize with, and enable, her violent ex-husband, David Rucki, in his continued legal assaults against her. As a result, Sandra is now homeless, destitute and forcibly separated from the children she loves. For the Rucki children, who have been court ordered to live with an abuser, their future remains uncertain.

The Criminal Appeal: Sentencing Overturned

The Appellate Court upheld the conviction but did find error in the actions of Judge Asphaug during sentencing. The Appellate Court ruled that Judge Karen Asphaug erred when ordering Sandra to annual stints of sentence-to-serve as well as serving yearly jail time on the anniversary that S.R. and G.R. were found, lasting until the year 2022. Judge Asphaug also ordered that Sandra would not be eligible for early release from probation. If fully imposed, the sentence ordered by Judge Asphaug would far exceed the maximum jail time allowed under sentencing guidelines.

After sentencing, Sandra petitioned the court to execute her sentence – meaning serve all of her time at once but was denied by Judge Asphaug.

In a November 2016 court hearing, Prosecutor Kathryn Keena and a Dakota County probation officer also recommended that Sandra be allowed to execute her sentence. Again, Judge Asphaug refused and in an unusual move, dismissed the probation officer from Sandra’s case.

Assistant Dakota County Attorney, Kathryn Keena

The Appellate decision will now allow Sandra to execute her sentence, and with time served she could face up to 42 days in jail as the remainder of her sentence.

David Rucki, who caused real harm to Sandra and the children, remains unpunished; largely due to the protection he has received from the Dakota County judges.

Public Domain Image: Pixaby

 

Dakota County ADMITS Charging Evavold with Probation Violation Despite No Proof of Wrongdoing

Dakota County ramps up efforts to silence blogger Dede Evavold, of “Red Herring Alert”, despite Freedom of Speech protections guaranteed by the Constitution.Shocking revelations from the largely redacted evidence that Evavold received in the case reveal that Dakota County is issuing a probation violation against her, and threatening  jail, when there is no proof to suggest that Evavold did anything wrong..7/19/2017, Gilbertsen, John P: “I was able to locate a speicif article reference by the victim (David Rucki) and it did contain information and commentary on the victim(s), much what was negative and sensationalistic in nature. However, I was unable to determine who in fact runs the blog, as the postings are under Aliases which do not clearly identify the person posting…

And,“When I reported back to Supervisor Griffin I indicated I did not feel there was information that we could glean that make it clear Ms. Evavold is the writer or runs the blog..”

All charges against Dede Evavold in this fraudulent HRO should be dropped – there is no evidence of harassment, and no evidence that she is responsible for the posts in question.

___________________

Probation Violation Hearing

My contested probation revocation hearing is scheduled tomorrow (Nov. 2nd) in Hastings. This is just continued misconduct of public employees by intentionally and unlawfully attempting to harm me under the color of official authority. Even if I wasn’t falsely convicted, this would not be lawful or justified! 

“It is unjust for an accused to be troubled for an unreasonable length of time with the physical, emotional and material burdens of endless criminal prosecution.” As a matter of Fact By Sara Soliven De Guzman 

Below is a portion of evidence I recieved that is redacted to the point that it is meaningless. Apparently, all items required to be disclosed have been provided to me. On the Contact Detail page 12, it states that “this blog appears to be a conspiracty blog, though much of the attention appears to revolve around the case in which Ms. Evavold is one of the conspirators.” (Exactly, am I gagged from discussing my own case???)

“The most disturbing item of note was a video of the police interview of one of the apparently juvenile victims. It appears posting this item possibly may be a violation of privacy laws, particularly as the victim was a juvenile.” First of all, the victim was an adult when she was forcibly brought into the Lakeville Police Dept. to recant her testimony. This resulted in the addition of 4 more felonies against me instead of dismissal of the case. Secondly, this was posted prior to my trial and false conviction. The fact that the community corrections supervisor was troubled by the video and not the fact that witness tampering occurred and charges were trumped up against me, is extremely troubling to me.

Stay tuned for the outcome. . .

 Also Read:
  1. DISCLAIMER: THIS IS NOT INTENDED TO GIVE LEGAL ADVICE, IT IS INFORMATIONAL IN NATURE AND BASED ON ARTICLES THAT ARE ON LINE; TOTALLY SEPARATE FROM THE FORUM: FIRST: I do not understand why, the hearing/probation is in Hastings? Next, any criminal case where the alleged person, who is the defendant may have the case moved to their home or district. Change of venue…the defendant has the right to ‘discovery’ that is in the law, i.e. state constitution…As to the age of the tagged juveniles; Associated press clearly states the ages of two missing females
    Associated Press 11/19/2015 sixteen and seventeen… mathematically they are eighteen plus…as of today…this smacks of “‘An ex post facto law (corrupted from Latin: ex post facto, lit. ‘out of the aftermath’) is a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences (or status) of actions that were committed, or relationships that existed, before the enactment of the law. In criminal law, it may criminalize actions that were legal when committed; it may aggravate a crime by bringing it into a more severe category than it was in when it was committed; it may change the punishment prescribed for a crime, as by adding new penalties or extending sentences; or it may alter the rules of evidence in order to make conviction for a crime likelier than it would have been when the deed was committed. Conversely, a form of ex post facto law commonly called an amnesty law may decriminalize certain acts. A pardon has a similar effect, in a specific case instead of a class of cases. Other legal changes may alleviate possible punishments (for example by replacing the death sentence with lifelong imprisonment) retroactively. Such legal changes are also known by the Latin term in mitius.
    A law may have an ex post facto effect without being technically ex post facto. For example, when a previous law is repealed or otherwise nullified, it is no longer applicable to situations to which it had been, even if such situations arose before the law was voided. The principle of prohibiting the continued application of such laws is called nullum crimen, nulla poena sine praevia lege poenali, especially in European Continental systems. This is related to the principle of legality.
    Some common-law jurisdictions do not permit retroactive criminal legislation, though new precedent generally applies to events that occurred before the judicial decision. Ex post facto laws are expressly forbidden by the United States Constitution in Article 1, Section 9, Clause 3 (with respect to federal laws) and Article 1, Section 10 (with respect to state laws). In some nations that follow the Westminster system of government, such as the United Kingdom, ex post facto laws are technically possible, because the doctrine of parliamentary supremacy allows Parliament to pass any law it wishes. In a nation with an entrenched bill of rights or a written constitution, ex post facto legislation may be prohibited.” Wikipedia, under the creative commons licensing…2017. NO, they from Dakota County did not provide you with complete discovery…I was accountant for scientist and it was mandatory to provide full disclosure…when, a transaction was changed, the accountant can only draw a thin line through and required by FASB to initial each error or correction…in addition, any CR by law is required to transcribed hearings “verbatim.” Since this situation is extensive, I am limiting my feedback. However, I am seeing/ reading allot of RED FLAGS ARE POPPING UP…. IN ADDITION: NEWSWEEK PRESENTED THE ARTICLE: Did the Missing Rucki Sisters Want To Be Found?
    By Max Kutner On 11/21/15 at 4:25 PM, THIS CAN BE BROUGHT UP BY CORTANA…GOOGLE…WHY ARE THEY NOT IN COURT OR FACING LAWSUITS FOR LEAVING THESE ARTICLES UP FOR DISCOVERY ON THIS DATE…11/1/2017. This whole thing smacks of ‘crisis creating and persecution.’ Read NewsWeek article…they boldly reveal many details, including this ‘site.’ When this issue came about involving the blogger being charged with a crime…now…with the revocation…they are arbitrarily stacking your criminal points so you go to prison…plus costing taxpayers money on frivolous actions. These kids they are arbitrarily defining would be charged as juveniles in court as “truant.” IFF, they had committed any other crime they would have been prosecuted as such…..WHY WOULD THEY EMAIL YOU THIS INFORMATION? In a court of law, they required hard copies of any or all documents and or evidence that fits under the criteria for the “chain of evidence.” AS POPS USED TO SAY….SOMETHING IS ROTTEN IN DENMARK…FISH IS NOT THE SKUNK IN THIS CASE…

    • Per the Intrastate Case Transfer Policy under Section A, subsection 4.B; any felony offender assessed low risk with other than financial, same similar, abstain conditions are ineligible for transfer.

      • I could not find what you tagged as Intrastate case transfer policy with SECTION A. subsection.4.B. in Minnesota.
        http://www.doc.state.mn.us/DocPolicy2/html/DPW_Display_TOC.asp?Opt=206.020.htm |http://www.doc.state.mn.us/DocPolicy2/html/DPW_Display_TOC.asp?Opt=201.020.htm
        What, I do know is that any case adjudicated is to follow the guidelines under Minnesota Department of Corrections. their authority is based on listed MN. Statutes. Change of venue would occur in/before the actual determining adjudication.

        Minnesota Department of Corrections

        Division Directive:                 201.020                       Title: Post-Sentencing Activities
        Issue Date:                             9/6/11
        Effective Date:                      10/4/11

        AUTHORITY:           Minn Stat. §§ 609.165; 609.14; 243.05, subd. 1(d), subd. 1a, subd. 6; 243.166, subd. 4(b); 244.20; 244.24; 244.057; 256J.26; 243.1605
        Minnesota Rules of Criminal Procedure 27.04

        PURPOSE:    To safeguard the community and meet the program needs of offenders.

        APPLICABILITY:    All Minnesota Department of Corrections (DOC) field services staff.

        DIRECTIVE: Agents must supervise offenders in accordance with this directive.

        DEFINITION:
        Recreation/leisure activities – pro-social activities that contribute to the optimal development of each individual by improvement of recreation skills, health, well-being, and quality of life.

        PROCEDURES:
        A.        Case assignment: upon receipt of either a transcript of sentencing or a court’s notice to the department, the designated field services staff activates a case file and assigns an agent.  The assigned agent is responsible for the case until the case is discharged, revoked, or officially transferred to another agent.

        B.        Face sheet/post-sentence investigation: the agent completes a face sheet or post-sentence investigation (court service tracking system (CSTS) merge documents) for cases that did not receive a pre-sentence investigation within 30 days of the notice of sentencing or court notification.  Each section must be completed as follows:
        1.         Client information: fill out completely.

        2.         Offense information: fill out completely.

        3.         Prior record: a chronological list of prior convictions including date of offense, offense, location, and disposition.

        4.         Offense/official version: an official statement of the offense summarized to include the basics (who, what, when and how the offense occurred).  It is not permissible to attach a complaint or other document in lieu of the official version.

        5.         Defendant’s version: the defendant’s statement of the offense.

        6.         Disposition: the sentence, including all special information, imposed by the court.

        7.         Special conditions: fill in completely.

        8.         Victim: fill in completely.

        9.         Education/training: fill in completely.

        10.       Employment/military: fill in completely.

        11.       Family data: fill in completely.

        C.        Probation agreement: the agent must complete the Probation Agreement (CSTS merge document) immediately after the offender is placed on probation, but no longer than 30 days following sentencing.  If the offender moves to another area before the Probation Agreement can be prepared and executed, the agent must send the prepared, unsigned agreement (along with a Transfer Investigation Request) to the agent in the receiving area for execution of the Probation Agreement.  The format for the Probation Agreement is as follows:
        1.         Heading: fill out completely.

        2.         Special conditions: list the special conditions imposed by the court.  The special conditions must be typed on the agreement before it is signed and witnessed.

        D.        Case recordings: agents must promptly document all contact with and about an offender by recording a chronological entry in the CSTS preceded by the appropriate codes identifying the type of contact conducted.

(Repost) Inverting Reality – Red Herring Alert

Inverting Reality – “Red Herring Alert”

Who is Michael Bernard Brodkorb?

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia with additions from Red Herring AlertRepublican Party of Minnesota - Wikipedia
Michael Brodkorb is (WAS)Minnesota Republican activist, a former deputy chair of the Republican Party of Minnesota, former communications director for the Republican caucus in the Minnesota Senate, under Senator Minority Leader David Senjem and later to Amy Koch when she was the majority leader of the state senate, and the creator of the blog Minnesota Democrats Exposed In his role as an aide to Senjem and Koch, he is credited with helping to engineer the Republican takeover of the state senate in 2010. He and Koch were described as “the two most powerful people in the Minnesota Senate.” 

Image result for mike parry mn senate picture

Mike Parry leg.state.mn.us

Brodkorb served as deputy chair of the Minnesota Republican Party from 2009 to 2011, when he resigned to work for the congressional campaign of Minnesota state senator Mike Parry. Brodkorb abruptly resigned both from his position in the Senate and his position with the Parry campaign in December 2011.

Weeks later, Koch resigned her post as Majority Leader after admitting an “inappropriate relationship” with a male staffer. Brodkorb was fired the next day. MINNESOTA DEMAGOGUES EXPOSED: SENIOR GOP STRATEGIST AND SENATOR COMMIT ADULTERY?

Michael Brodkorb domestic dispute: Wife called 911 because “the level of anger in Michael’s voice scared both her and their three children.

The fall of Michael Brodkorb

Amy Koch Affair: Michael Brodkorb, Fired Minnesota GOP Staffer, Threatens To Expose More Affairs

Image result for Cal Ludeman

Cal Ludeman MN Legislative Reference Library

Brodkorb announced his intention to file litigation against the State of Minnesota, the Minnesota Senate and Secretary of the Senate Cal Ludeman over his termination from the Minnesota Senate. Lawyers representing Brodkorb have announced additional claims against the State of Minnesota, the Minnesota Senate and Ludeman over allegations that Ludeman disclosed private unemployment data about Brodkorb in an interview with Minnesota Public Radio. Brodkorb’s attorneys also announced plans to sue for defamation per se over statements Ludeman made in a press release where he accused Brodkorb of attempting to “extort payment from the Senate.”

On May 25, 2012, the Minnesota Senate released legal bills showing they had spent $46,150 to the first 3 months of 2012 to prepare a defense to Brodkorb’s suit. An analysis of the bill by the Associated Press showed the bulk of the $46,150 owed was due to attorneys retained by the Minnesota Senate repeatedly meeting with Ludeman.

On June 19, 2012, the Minnesota Senate announced additional legal bills in the amount of $38,533, bringing the total legal costs incurred by the Minnesota Senate due to the termination of Brodkorb to almost $85,000 since the end of the May 2012. (Click to view)→ Brodkorb, Minn. Senate settle lawsuit for $30,000

Fired Senate staffer Michael Brodkorb tells of ‘palace coup’                                         Gallery For > Dui Logo

On January 23, 2013, Brodkorb was injured in a single-car crash on Interstate 35E when his vehicle hit a concrete wall. He pleaded guilty to driving while intoxicated and was ordered to pay a $500 fine.(Click to view) → Brodkorb DUI   

Michael Brodkorb talks scandal, lawsuit, and new leases on life: The City Pages interview

term photo

Amy Koch MN Legislative Reference Library

Amy Koch, former state Senate leader, breaks silence about her downfall

The Return of Amy Koch?

Michael Brodkorb says he was victim of a plot against Sen. Amy Koch. I get it, I was Michelle MacDonald’s campaign manager when she ran for MN Supreme Court in 2014 and learned the dirty world of politics in a baptism by fire! One would think however, that you wouldn’t pull the same dirty tricks on other victims of the establishment but I guess when you’ve sold your soul, compassion isn’t very high on the list.

For those of you that aren’t regular readers, let me explain Michael Brodkorb’s role in my Case No.19HA-CR-15-4227 which resulted in 6 felony convictions for one alleged “crime” of parental deprivation. (Not kidnapping or abduction which is what the media would have you believe).

Also, there is an affirmative defense for parental deprivation, but when evidence is withheld and suppressed, the defense is useless.   609.26 DEPRIVING ANOTHER OF CUSTODIAL OR PARENTAL RIGHTS
Subd. 2. Defenses. 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.

Michael Brodkorb was a blogger for the Star Tribune from April 2014 through May 2016. He flipped from a republican to a democratic mouthpiece for the fake “less liberal” Star Tribune. Brodkorb became obsessed with demonizing and discrediting Michelle MacDonald when she ran for Supreme Court in 2014 against incumbent David Lillehaug (appointed by Governor Dayton). She won the Republican Party’s endorsement but narrowly lost to Lillehaug. The Star Tribune reported that her selection became an embarrassment when MacDonald’s contentious 2013 arrest on suspicion of drunken driving came to light. Never mind the forensic facts of the case:

Today, people are having to spend so muc by Michael Hudson @ Like Success

Michelle MacDonald

Michelle’s case was a traffic stop, and more accurately an unlawful pullover.  Michelle did not have any alcohol on the night she was stopped without probable cause.

  1. After dialogue with the officer about the reason for the stop, she was not asked to take a Breathalyzer or perform a field sobriety test.
  2. She asked to see a judge pursuant to Minnesota Statute 169.91 because it was obvious this officer was using questionable measures to fill his quota and was clearly abusing his power and authority. Any citizen can invoke this statute however, as can be seen from this incident, the system does not take kindly to exposing those who are not playing by the rules.
  3. Michelle was held and released from the Rosemount Police Station with NO CHARGES filed against her.
  4. On her own initiative, she went directly to a hospital for a drug and alcohol blood test to put to rest any questions about this incident. The tests came back zero alcohol and zero drugs. 
  5. Michelle filed an employee complaint against the Police Officer who unlawfully pulled her over.
  6. In response, she received a Citation in the mail with five criminal charges against her including charges for driving under the influence.
The Result: Jury convicts Michelle MacDonald of test refusal and resisting arrest.

MacDonald also filed a complaint against the GOP and several party leaders. She alleges the party threatened her and spread false information about her campaign in an effort to get her to exit the race. She said the party was in violation of the Fair Campaign Practices Act. Shocker, the complaint was dismissed by a judge with the Office of Administrative Hearings.

Oh, and by the way, Attorney Michelle MacDonald filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against Judge David Knutson in Dakota County, That was shortly before the media suddenly took an interest in the case I was involved in and after she applied for an opening in the MN Supreme Court. MacDonald was the pro bono attorney for the mother in the companion case and filed the suit on her behalf. Judges however, have unlimited immunity from civil prosecution and the case was dismissed. MacDonald was also arrested during the custody trial that was presided over by Judge Knutson for taking a picture during a break. The unyielding attacks against MacDonald continue to this day.

Michael Brodkorb became the main “reporter” in our cases after we were charged and thus began the relentless harassment and stalking in the name of “journalism”.

In September 2015, Michael Brodkorb surreptitiously recorded a conversation he had with me as a Star Tribune reporter and had it turned over to the Lakeville PD. This was prior to my charges in November 2015.

 Excerpt from Evavold Audio

Police Logo

Michael Brodkorb: No, let me just say. I knew David Knutson when he was a state senator, the last time I saw Knutson was, I think in 2007 when Pawlenty was inaugurated for his second term. So that’s the last time I’ve ever seen him that I remember. I have tried repeatedly to interview him, to speak with him, about this case. The person that I’ve probably tried to interview the most, has been David Knutson and anyone affiliated with the court system. I’ve gone down to the court, I’ve called him and I’ve done everything I could to try to get him to speak on the record. I’ve spoken with his clerk and I’ve spoken with everyone that I could possibly think of to try to get him to speak. There is no way and I believe this, if someone reviews the matters involved in this case and doesn’t immediately come to the conclusion that there are problems in the family court system, they are purposely trying for there not to be a problem with the court system, because a blind person could see that.

(I know you’re reading this Mr. Brodkorb so, I think you may want to reconsider your pervasive defamatory posts you are writing about me and refer back to 34′:50″ into the audio that was provided to Lakeville PD).

Image Courtesy of Sira Anamwong freedigitalphotos.net

At any rate, it’s around that time that Brodkorb became a pen for hire to harass and intimidate witnesses, interfere with the legal process and lie with impunity during our trials. Michael Brodkorb currently has a blog that is now entirely dedicated to demonizing and discrediting me to change the narrative in this case and shift the focus away from the true facts. He also added Allison Mann as a contributing author. Who is Allison Mann? Mann is a paralegal with Elliott Law Office and lives in Lakeville, Minnesota. Elliott Law Offices provides legal services to the father involved in this case, but Brodkorb states. “Elliott Law Office is not affiliated with Missing in Minnesota.” Okay, and I’ve got prime swampland to sell you! Also, Allison Mann has been the photographer of the numerous photos taken prior to my false court hearings on my false charges.

For those of you that are new to this site, I was served with a harassment restraining order (HRO), 3 charges for violating the order and a probation violation for allegedly “referencing the family” involved in my case. Protecting reputation is not a government interest and preventing blogging is not a government interest. Suppressing speech rarely is justified by an interest in deterring criminal conduct, and in any event the justification “must be far stronger than mere speculation about serious harms” and supported by “empirical evidence” Barnicki v. Vopper, 532 U.S. 514. 530-32, 121 S.Ct 1753, 1763-64, 149 L Ed 2d 787 (2001) (citing U.S. v. Treasury Employees, 513 U.S. 454, 475 (1995))

The malicious HRO is legally meritless and in actuality, a false police report was filed against me. §609.505 Falsely reporting a Crime Subdivision 1. False reporting. Whoever informs a law enforcement officer that a crime has been committed or otherwise provides information to an on-duty peace officer, knowing that the person is a peace officer, regarding the conduct of others, knowing that it is false and intending that the officer shall act in reliance upon it, is guilty of a misdemeanor. A person who is convicted a second or subsequent time under this section is guilty of a gross misdemeanor. When you’re above the law however, it just doesn’t matter!

False claims of an immediate and present danger were also made to obtain an ex-parte HRO..Clearly, this is just a retaliatory SLAPP suit in disguise of false criminal conduct with the intent to intimidate, censor, disparage, burden, and punish me for exercising my free speech right to discuss my case and defend myself against the slanderous information being written about me.  I get that the overall goal is to silence any further public debate about the corruption that took place in my false criminal case as well as the false companion criminal cases.

As I’ve posted before, SLAPP stands for “Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation.” It refers to a lawsuit filed in retaliation for speaking out on a public issue or controversy. You might be “SLAPPed” for actions such as posting a blog entry, posting a comment on another person’s blog, writing a letter to the editor of a newspaper, testifying before the legislature, reporting official misconduct, or circulating a petition. Often, SLAPPs are brought by corporations, developers, or government officials against individuals or community organizations that oppose their actions.

What’s amazing is that Michael Brodkotb was served with a restraining order by a co-defendant during these trials due to real repeated, unwanted and intrusive stalking behaviors (i.e. following and laying in wait to take photos, posting information and spreading false information on the internet to incite others against her).

This is a comment submitted by Pat Terry on MinnPost regarding the HRO against Brodkorb:  “Until there has been a full contested hearing on the matter, this is a non-story and to suggest that Brodkorb’s actions were somehow inappropriate based on an ex-parte hearing involving someone who is quite literally a court-certified liar through her felony conviction, is really unfair.”

The HRO was dismissed but Brodkorb makes the statement, “The chilling effect is that if someone doesn’t like coverage,” he said, “they could go to a courthouse and file what I believe to be a fraudulent document with fictitious information to game the system.”Protective Orders | Restraining Orders | Present Danger of Abuse or Harassment

“I can’t police the Internet. I’m not responsible for what – how people react rawly and aggressively to someone who has been convicted of six counts of deprivation of parental rights. And I’m very responsible in what I write in my content that I’ve written. Sandra has attempted to hold me accountable for other type of activity that appears on the Internet that I that I have no responsibility to police or address. I have a responsibility to watch what I say and how I communicate. But, and make sure it is done in an truthful honest way. And I’ve done so in the entirety in this case. … It’s a classic case of someone crying “Wolf!” Of Chicken Little the sky is falling. And eventually what she becomes is not a responsible and credible critic. Or someone who can be trusted to accurately document what’s going on. … Over the course of my reporting, have people said “I don’t want to comment.”? Sure. I don’t want to comment. And I move on to the next thing. … All for someone who just wrote the stories and approached it from an investigative stand point. … There are precious resources for the court. And we just can’t be wasting their time and money.” AM950RADIO @AM950 Radio [PODCAST]@MattMcNeilShow – Sep 16

We can however keep the taxpayers on the hook by wasting the precious court resources for a personal vendetta against me but I forgot. . . I’m not given special treatment – only special punishments!

A court also dismissed a libel suit against Brodkorb and his blog in 2007 in a case that was described as “breaking new legal ground in the world of blogging”.

Judge tosses libel suit against conservative Minnesota blogger

A judge threw out a libel suit this week against one of Minnesota’s most popular conservative bloggers, issuing a ruling that put the political Web site on the same legal ground as newspapers and broadcast news outlets.

Michael Brodkorb, a political operative behind minnesotademocratsexposed.com, expressed relief at the dismissal.

“I think this goes back to what I said from the beginning, that this was a frivolous lawsuit and the court agreed with me,” he said. “I’m glad that it’s over.”

Below are some of the defamatory posts that Michael Brodkorb and Allison Mann have put on their blog: This really is psychological projection at its finest!

If that were true Brodkorb, don’t you think I would have been charged with assaulting a police officer? Interesting that there isn’t any audio or video of my home invasion by the Lakeville PD! What really happened? Inquiring minds want to know don’t they?

Michael Brodkorb is nothing but a political operative consciously discrediting, demonizing, and distorting the good guys for his own financial gain. Again, the real goal is to use the minions and legal system to continue to stalk, harass and intimidate me by dragging me to court, wasting my time on frivolous and false accusations and damaging my reputation. Nothing lasts forever though and all will be revealed whether or not I’m silenced.
Just how far will Dakota County go to silence me? Only time will tell, but if you want to know how over the top the persecution is, take a look at the judges and attorneys involved in attempting to stop any true reporting on this case.

Any questions?

Michael Brodkorb Exposed: “Search and Destroy” Blogger

Michael Brodkorb is nothing but a political operative consciously discrediting, demonizing, and distorting the good guys for his own financial gain…” ~ Dede Evavold

I’m not into exposing anyone or the “gotcha” stuff…” ~ Michael Brodkorb

Blogger, Dede Evavold, of “Red Herring Alert” recently published an article Inverting Reality (Red Herring Alert) exposing blogger Michael Brodkorb’s coverage of the Grazzini-Rucki case as propaganda, and citing specific incidents where he engaged in harassment and defamation against her, under the guise of “journalism”.

Inverting Reality” also discusses Brodkorb’s troubled past , documenting a long history of out of control behavior – a domestic violence incident involving his wife, a sexual fling with Senate Majority Leader Amy Koch that ended his political career, and driving while intoxicated, crashed his car and nearly killed himself. In another embarrassment, in 2011, Brodkorb made secret recordings of conversations with his GOP bosses regarding his firing (after his tryst with Amy Koch was exposed) . The recordings revealed, among other things, that Brodkorb was struggling with his mental health – which could explain his erratic behavior. 

Brodkorb also has a reputation for inciting fights within ranks of the Republican party, among his own team , where he was known for screaming fits and personal attacks against others, it said his eruptions could leave fear in his wake..(The Fall of Michael Brodkorb) Another Republican, retired Army Lt. Col. Joe Repya, described Brodkorb as “a ‘thug’ with ‘an intimidating personality’ who ran roughshod over party members, elected officials and even volunteers…’You have to understand how frightened people within the party became of Michael Brodkorb..’ (Michael Brodkorb: Admired, feared and, above all, Republican )

Michael Brodkorb, source: startribune.com

Brodkorb has also been described as “always pushing the limits..” Brodkorb, once one of the most powerful people in the Senate, used his political knowledge and connections as ammo in carefully crafted blogs designed to attack political targets. Democrats denounced Brodkorb as a “Republican operative” paid to write hit pieces on their candidatesFor his work, Brodkorb was paid very well. Initially Brodkorb began blogging anonymously on Minnesota Democrats Exposed (created in 2004) but in a fit of rage, he accidentally exposed his identity while posting online, and reluctantly, was forced to admit to his clandestine activities. Brodkorb says about MDE,”When you’re writing Minnesota Democrats Exposed you’re waking up every day and looking for a target. Even though that kind of thing drives traffic, it’s not a very fulfilling way to write...” (‘I’m done with partisan politics’: a Q&A with Michael Brodkorb) Due to the insulting content of MDE, Brodkorb was sued for libel – dismissed by a court in 2007. Complaints continued to be raised against Brodkorb to this day. 

 In the end it seems both the Democrats and the Republican got the last laugh – as Brodkorb’s antics resulted in his political career going up in flames.

Setting politics aside, what is really at issue here is Brodkorb’s character, and pattern of bullying that continues to this day, now manifesting in rage towards Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, co-defendant Dede Evavold, and supporters. The venom to which Brodkorb spews on social media rants, and articles, has led many believe that he works on David Rucki’s payroll.

Indeed, all of Brodkorb’s articles on the Grazzini-Rucki case portray Rucki in a sympathetic light and have ignored or minimized Rucki’s lengthy criminal history, as well as the extensive evidence of the abuse Sandra and the children suffered at Rucki’s brutal hands. There is only one side that Brodkorb portrays – and that is of David Rucki.

Let’s take a deeper look…

Brodkorb: “It Was All About Search and Destroy…

History is known to repeat itself, and only history can be trusted to tell the truth about Michael Brodkorb.

In 2004, Brodkorb begins blogging on Minnesota Democrats Exposed. Tactics used on MDE are eerily similar to those used by Brodkorb today, in his coverage of the Grazzini-Rucki case, “ When I was writing Minnesota Democrats Exposed, it was all about search and destroy, writing sensational headlines, driving traffic and making mountains out of molehills. It was something I got out of my system… (‘I’m done with partisan politics’: a Q&A with Michael Brodkorb)

Brodkorb’s search and destroy tactics paid off, he became indispensable to political candidates seeking to dig up dirt on opponents, and dedicated his blog to mud slinging. For his work, Brodkorb was paid generously. In November 2006, Brodkorb was the highest paid blogger in the state of Minnesota, generating $55,200 a year to work for the campaign of Rep. Mark Kennedy under the guise of “part time press consultant”. Brodkorb achieved this feat by a narrow margin – Sen. Hillary Clinton, in the #1 position, paid her blogger just $4,800 more than what Brodkorb was earning. (Highest-Paid Campaign Bloggers: Clinton, Kennedy, Santorum)

Public Domain: hdwallpaper20.com

Brodkorb strongly denied that he has ever been paid to blog, but that has proven to be just another one of his many lies. (Bloggers proliferate on campaign rolls)

A blog (from February 2006) documents Brodkorb’s long history working as a paid operative, “Over the past two years, John Kline’s campaign paid $10,000 to Weber Johnson PA, a political consulting firm run by the brother of former Republican Congressman Vin Weber. Oddly enough, the source of many anonymous attacks on Kline’s opponent Coleen Rowley have come from a blogger who is employed by Weber Johnson PA…”  (Kline’s $ To Company That Pays Anonymous Blogger’s Salary? ) WHO led these anonymous attacks? None other than Michael Brodkorb.

Another example, from an expose written in Feb 2012( Brodkorb paid from GOP Senate Victory Fund) reveals that “the Republican Senate Victory Fund paid Michael Brodkorb $7,500 for consulting work on January 31, 2011, as documented in a just-filed campaign finance report. This was in addition to $20,625 in late 2009, and $16,875 paid to Brodkorb for research in 2010. In sum, Brodkorb was paid $45,000 in in sixteen months from the Senate Victory Fund. These payments were in addition to Brodkorb’s state employee salary as a Senate staffer…Brodkorb earned about $90,000 a year in his job as communications chief for Republicans at the Capitol.

Michael Brodkorb made a name for himself, and a career, by playing dirty. Pay Brodkorb enough, he will say anything. He rewrites facts and distorts information. He resorts to personal attacks and defamation without remorse. Brodkorb is not an independent source – he is a check book journalist who cannot be trusted.

An Experiment Gone Horribly Wrong

During the period Brodkorb covered the Grazzini-Rucki case for the Tribune, he was contracted as “just experiment. Terry Sauer, the Tribune’s assistant managing editor for digital, gave a temporary offer to Brodkorb to write political editorials to balance the Liberal editorials published by the paper. The Tribune did not contract Brodkorb to write about the Grazzini-Rucki case; Brandon Stahl had already begun to to cover the case, and at the time was a popular reporter in Minnesota. Brodkorb’s assignment with the Tribune quickly turned into an obsession with Sandra Grazzini-Rucki that spun out of control when he became the mouthpiece for David Rucki, and began to suppress critical facts and evidence in the case to cover up the abuse of Sandra and the children, as well as the illegal activities of the court.

Brodkorb admits that he was attracted to David Rucki from their first meeting in April 2015 (Why I Wrote About the Rucki Case )Meeting David Rucki was one of my most emotional moments in writing about the case…. Physically, David is a big man – tall and broad. But his face looked lost and sullen. You could see the pain and sadness as he spoke about his missing daughters.

At one point, I was so overcome I had to excuse myself from our table at a restaurant in Minneapolis. I went to the restroom, splashed cold water on my face and took a moment to compose myself.”

An amber alert was never issued for the missing Rucki teens, and the police had stopped searching for them; presuming, correctly, that they were runaways. In their absence, David Rucki was given custody of all five children; at the time of the custody order he was on probation for violating a protective order against ex-wife Sandra. Rucki had also been ordered into anger management numerous times, which did nothing to quell his rage. Judge David Knutson, family court judge, ignored abuse allegations raised by the Rucki children and the evidence supporting their cries for help. The courts should have protected the Rucki children but, instead, sent them into the custody of a dangerous abuser, whom they have not been able to escape from. You will never hear about any of these facts in Brodkorb’s reporting.

For what Brodkorb had previously been paid, the Tribune wasn’t offering much. Sauer says he paid Brodkorb a modest salary – just “hundreds a month” – apparently he wasn’t worth even that! Brodkorb’s political articles failed to gain public interest; and his involvement in the Grazzini-Rucki case became the subject of controversy. The Tribune had enough of this “experiment” and in May 2016, ended their contract with Brodkorb. Sauer said about cutting ties with Brodkorb, “It really is all about us moving in another direction with the budget we’ve got.” (Brodkorb on the end of his Star Tribune blog: ‘It was never meant to be a forever thing’)

Apologetically Sauer offers to give Brodkorb a job reference.. is that sincere or just lip service? How many times do girls break up with their boyfriends and offer to “just be friends”. Same thing.

A Village Missing It’s Idiot in Minnesota

For the past several years, Brodkorb has spent long days and nights in front of a blinking screen, obsessively covering the Grazzini-Rucki case, while life goes on around him.

Blogger Dede Evavold, of Red Herring Alert, a victim, reflects, “Brodkorb became a pen for hire to harass and intimidate witnesses, interfere with the legal process and lie with impunity during our trials.

Michael Brodkorb currently has a blog that is now entirely dedicated to demonizing and discrediting me to change the narrative in this case and shift the focus away from the true facts.

He also added Allison Mann as a contributing author. Who is Allison Mann? Mann is a paralegal with Elliott Law Office and lives in Lakeville, Minnesota. Elliott Law Offices provides legal services to the father involved in this case, but Brodkorb states. ‘Elliott Law Office is not affiliated with Missing in Minnesota.’ Okay, and I’ve got prime swampland to sell you! Also, Allison Mann has been the photographer of the numerous photos taken prior to my false court hearings on my false charges…” Inverting Reality (Red Herring Alert)

Allison Mann: Paralegal Elliott Law Offices | Author: Missing in Minnesota (Source: Twitter)

Has Brodkorb been paid for his coverage of the Grazzini-Rucki case, and online attacks against Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and supporters?

Let’s Take a Look at Brodkorb’s Record:

*History of working as a blogger paid to write propaganda, and generate attacks against targets. Lies about receiving payments for writing blogs.

*Strong interest in Judge David L. Knutson, family law judge assigned to Grazzini-Rucki case. Previous connection to Knutson while working in the Senate.

*Has an emotional breakdown after meeting David Rucki, flees to the bathroom to splash cold water on himself in order to compose himself.

*Contracted to write political commentary for the Star Tribune then radically shifts focus to cover Grazzini-Rucki case, at a time that case was already being covered by a well-known reporter.

* Admitted has no prior interest in investigating missing children when becomes focused on Grazzini-Rucki case.

*Interfering in active police investigation while covering Grazzini-Rucki case for Star Tribune. One example – speaking to a witness, who was sought for questioning by police, and influencing her testimony before the police were able to talk with her.

*Attaches himself exclusively to David Rucki at all court hearings.

*Coverage of Grazzini-Rucki case is one sided, always supportive of David Rucki. Suppresses documentation and evidence that is contrary to the narrative he pushes.

*Lying, exaggerating or distorting information about Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, Dede Evavold, and supporters.

*Exclusively focuses on Grazzini-Rucki case and no other case involving family court issues.

*Devoted a blog to coverage of Grazzini-Rucki case in a similar fashion to previous blogs he created to attack political opponents. The public is not given all the facts or evidence available in the case.

*Brodkorb’s blog is the only blog that has not been threatened with legal action by David Rucki to stop reporting on the Grazzini-Rucki case.

*Brodkorb’s blog is the only blog that has not been criticized or threatened with legal action by Judge Karen Asphaug, and Dakota County, for its coverage of the Grazzini-Rucki case.

*The Carver County Corruption blog was shut down after Rucki and his high buck attorney, Marshall Tanick, threatened legal action against the blog owner. When clicking on old links to Carver County Corruption, the site opens to Brodkorb’s blog devoted to the Grazzini-Rucki case.

*Allison Mann, paralegal with Elliott Law Office, contributing author to Brodkorb’s blog

*Brodkorb’s work and efforts serve only to promote David Rucki’s interests.

More Soon…

 

 

A Call to Action: You Can Help Sandra Grazzini-Rucki Fight for Justice

CALL TO ACTION: Sandra “Sam” Grazzini-Rucki

You CAN Help Fight for Justice!

* Share links to websites, articles, radio show that discuss Sandra’s story and case on social media or in other groups/pages (see list of websites below) or with friends, family, networks.

* When sharing articles on Facebook about Sandra or commenting about the Grazzini-Rucki case, click “check in” and then type Dakota County Judicial Center

For instructions: How to Check In Facebook Places

* Use the hashtag #grazzinirucki #riggedtrial #evavold

*Tell others about the facebook pages supporting Sam and invite them to like and share

Sandra “Sam” Grazzini-Rucki Page: https://www.facebook.com/samgrazzinirucki/

Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and the World’s Last Custody Trial Facebook: Page: https://www.facebook.com/grazzinirucki/

*Write the Minnesota Governor’s office to share your thoughts on the case, or demand a full pardon. Plz cc to  Brian4Justice@yahoo.com: https://mn.gov/governor/contact-us/form/

*E-mail ABC 20/20 (See Suggestions in “Call to Action Letter” penned by Brian Kinter, below) to share your thoughts on the hatchet job 20/20 did covering the Grazzini-Rucki story in “Footprints in the Snow”. You may also consider sending 20/20 articles, docs or links to radio shows about Sanda’s case. Plz cc to  Brian4Justice@yahoo.com

– Reporter Elizabeth Vargas: elizabeth.a.vargas@abc.com
– Producer Sean Dooley: sean.dooley@abc.com
– Associate Producer Beth Mullen: beth.a.mullen@abc.com

*Contact officials involved in Grazzini-Rucki case to express your thoughts, or send articles and information, in support of Sandra. Plz cc to  Brian4Justice@yahoo.com

(See Suggestions in “Call to Action Letter” penned by Brian Kinter, below)

For additional info on how to write a letter, some tips:

How to Write a Letter of Protest by M.H. Dyer

Writing Letters to Elected Officials by Community Tool Box

THANK YOU!!

Where to Find Articles About the Grazzini-Rucki Case:

Justice 4 Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and Children- https://justice4grazziniruckifamily.wordpress.com

Red Herring Alert: https://redherringalert.wordpress.com

Michael Volpe, CDN News: https://www.commdiginews.com/?s=grazzini-rucki

PPJ Gazette – https://ppjg.me

CALL TO ACTION, For Sandra Grazzini Rucki (Suggestions from Brian Kinter)

It would be nice to reach out to those listed below and let them know that we are deeply concerned as to how they reached their conclusions.

My Letter, of which is attached below is what I am faxing, emailing and reading when I call them out.

I pray you would do the same.

In addition we are asking one and all to cc us , Brian4Justice@yahoo.com so that we can track the number of complaints.

We will then file a Freedom Of Information request to the below listed parties, asking them to give us the number of complaints lodged and a copy of each.

We will do this for future legal action.

For it seems logical that if we can get, 5,000, 10,000, or more complaints, that someone would have to give an explanation on how they derived at the decisions in which they reached.

CONTACTS:

Elizabeth Vargas-20/20 host elizabeth.a.vargas@abc.com

Sean Dooley- producer 20/20 sean.dooley@abc.com

Beth Mullen- 20.20 producer beth.a.mullen@abc.com

Beau Berentson, public affairs officer for the Minnesota Courts – beau.berentson@courts.state.mn.us

James Backstrom, Dakota County Prosecutor – attorney@co.dakota.mn.us,

Monica Jenson, public affairs officer for the Dakota County Prosecutor – monica.jensen@co.dakota.mn.us

Marybeth Schubert, public affair officer for Dakota County – marybeth.schubert@co.dakota.mn.us

Attorney General for Minnesota – attorney.general@ag.state.mn.us

Dave Oney, public affairs officer for the US Marshals Minnesota Court of Appeals (651) 296-2581 – dave.oney@usdoj.gov

Sample Letter

Here is an example of the letter I am faxing and emailing. This is but a portion.

“Ladies and Gentlemen, I would like an explanation as to how you can justify the vicious, vindictive actions you have taken against Sandra Grazzini Rucki??

From the very onset of the record anyone of sound mind can see that Judge Knutson’s mental capacity certainly needs to be called in to question. For it defies logic, that this professed legal scholar would award David Rucki the four homes and nine vehicles and leave Sandra homeless and with no vehicle.

How can there be two existing orders in place that contradict each other, one states Sandra can not leave the State, another says she can not remain in the State but has to adhere to all the State Courts Orders.

How can a Judge order 100% of her income to go to her ex-husband ??

How can you all sit idly by and watch this proliferation of abuse being delivered upon Sandra and not speak out against it???”