Conservative Law & Politics Interview with Michael Volpe and Sandra Grazzini-Rucki

Public Domain Image: https://publicdomainvectors.org

Conservative Law & Politics” with Lee Dryer interviews Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and Michael Volpe about her family court and criminal cases.  Hear about her lawyer trying a custody case strapped to a wheelchair and how a SWAT Team from the US Marshals served a bogus warrant. Also discussed is the 20/20 episode “Footprints in the Snow“.

Click on the videos below to listen.

Advertisements

Cataclysmic Cover-Up in Grazzini-Rucki Case: Retaliation Against Lawyer Michelle MacDonald

Source: Red Herring Alert – Cataclysmic Cover-Up


Read in its entirety 

Attorney Michelle MacDonald

 

EXCERPT: On the day that S.G.’s (Sandra Grazzini-Rucki) trial was set to begin, MacDonald filed a civil-rights lawsuit in federal court on S.G.’s behalf against the district judge personally, not in his official capacity. MacDonald then moved for the judge’s recusal from the case based on the pending federal lawsuit against him. The judge denied the motion, at which point MacDonald stated, “[a]nd you are telling me that you can be impartial in this trial, which you haven’t done since day one.” The referee found that this statement violated Minn. R. Prof. Conduct 8.2(a)6 and 8.4(d), because it was made with reckless disregard for the truth.   

“Even a thousand loud lies become powerless in front of one calm truth.” 

 

Apparently, this does not apply to county prosecutors:

Portions from Michelle MacDonald’s Brief:

The disciplinary proceedings against me were triggered by one letter by Judge David Knutson filed with the Lawyers Board in January 2014 (A.49).  His letter came after I filed a Federal Lawsuit against him on behalf of my  client, Sandra Grazzini-Rucki on September 11, 2013; after I was wrongfully arrested in his courtroom by deputies, on September 12, 2013 for taking a picture of the deputy; and after I  complained in four letters and attachments about Judge Knutson to the Board of Judicial Standards (A 35,39,42,46).

The Director claims in her Brief that my silence upon my arrest is actionable by the court (Director’s Brief at 17-20).  At the same time, the Director claims in her Brief that  I had no First Amendment right to make statements criticizing a Judge (See Director’s Brief at 20-26).

No matter the findings of the Referee, lawyers can criticize a judge and his decisions, whether in letters or court filings, without retribution by the Director or jeopardizing their license, because such statements are protected by the First Amendment and the doctrine of absolute privilege.

Upon close scrutiny of the testimony, Exhibits and rules, the Referee’s proposed findings of fact, even if true, and if applied correctly to the law, cannot support that my conduct violated the MRPC, warranting discipline (See generally Transcripts of Proceedings Volumes I and II; Director’s Exhibits 1-64, and Ms. MacDonald’s Exhibits 1-23).

Contrary to the Directors statement, the Referee found mitigating factors, and is required, to recognize them.  The Referee found that “Respondent offered testimony regarding her pro bono work, her work as a Referee in Hennepin County and her minimal prior disciplinary history as a mitigation of her misconduct (R. Test; R. Ex 120; A. 31).

Here, mitigating factors far outweigh the nature of the alleged misconduct.  For 30 years, I have been an attorney in good standing, serving as a conciliation/small claims court Judge, Hennepin County for 22 of those years (1999 to 2014); and Adjunct Referee/Arbitrator in family and civil court (1992-2011).  She received a Years of Service Recognition Award, Conciliation Court, Hennepin County.  Ms. MacDonald received the Northstar Lawyers, Pro Bono award 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016.

I have represented thousands of clients, before hundreds of Judges, including lead counsel on Sixty (60) appellate decisions, which include amicus briefs, appearances before the Appellate and Minnesota Supreme Court, and Petitions to the United States Supreme Court.

I am Founder, Volunteer President and Board Member of Family Innocence, a nonprofit dedicated to keeping families out of court: resolving conflicts and injustices peacefully (2011- present).

I am a founding member of Cooperative Private Divorce Project (Divorce without courts), with regular meetings since 2013 for family court reform to develop proposed legislation, Cooperative Private Divorce Bill HF 1348, which creates an administrative pathway to divorce that skips the court adversarial system.

I am founding member of Child Custody/Parenting Time Dialogue Group, with regular meetings since inception, 2013.

The Referee’s findings cannot serve as the basis for discipline or for depriving me of my occupational license for any period of time.  The evidence was protected by virtue of being contained in court pleadings and by the First Amendment and doctrine of absolute immunity.  Therefore, the Referee’s findings merit reversal.

So, if the Supreme Court states that MacDonald did not adequately represent her client, why aren’t Sandra’s family court orders Void Ab Initio? Just sayin. . .

I'm waiting to have a conversation with you Judy.....I'd love nothing more than to be able to put all of this behind us! You have to actually 'talk' to me to resolve this.

The majority of attorneys are willing to play the court game and don’t have the hutzpah to stand up for their clients or their profession.

This is another strong message from “the powers that be” that you better fall in line or you too will face suspension or disbarment. Clearly, attorneys are willing to practice fake law, in fake courtrooms, with fake judges, and fake media covering the fake outcomes.

Where are the attorneys willing to stand up for their colleagues and rank and file citizens to shut down this tyrannical court system? WAKE UP AND STAND UP FOR YOUR BROTHERS AND SISTERS BEING DESTROYED BY THE ABUSE OF POWER AND AUTHORITY, BECAUSE INEVITABLY YOUR TIME IS COMING!

Bundy Attorney Who Argued For Client’s Release Faces Disbarment Hearing-Law Violating Prosecutor In Bundy Randh Case Keeps Job

 TIM BROWN  

If this doesn’t show you how crooked the federal judicial system is, nothing will.

Ammon Bundy’s attorney in the Oregon Malheur Wildlife Refuge case, Marcus Mumford, had criminal charges filed against him after he was tased and tackled by federal marshalls for simply arguing for his client’s release in court.

Listen to his account of what happened.

Continue Reading:https://freedomoutpost.com/bundy-attorney-argued-clients-release-faces-disbarment-hearing-law-violating-prosecutor-bundy-ranch-case-keeps-job/

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

 

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???”

 

Quote: Judicial Immunity Should Not Be Used to Violate Law, Civil and Constitutional Rights

 

A quote about judicial immunity from attorney Michelle MacDonald: “I expect all judges to take the privilege of judicial immunity for suit seriously, rather than see immunity as permission to violate the law and civil and constitutional rights of our citizens, or their lawyers..

 

Tim Kinley of “Speechless Minnesota” on Grazzini-Rucki Case: “I have never, ever seen as much corruption in our courts…as I have in this case..”

Public Domain Image: http://allswalls.com. Edited by Justice Blog.

Tim Kinley, public access host of “Speechless Minnesota”, covering issues of family law reform, judicial accountability and all levels of politics in Minnesota says he was shut down from SCC Studio in White Bear Lake because of “politics” and “they didn’t want our message out there.” After 9 months, Kinley is back and stronger than ever!

During the 1st half of an episode of “Speechless” that originally aired on 3/8/2017, Kinley provides updates on the Grazzini-Rucki case.

Kinley says about the Grazzini-Rucki case,”This case, all together, not only with the civil side of the case to the criminal side of the case, is just unbelievable! I have never, ever seen as much corruption in our courts, so systemic, so obvious, so in your face, as I have in this case….this case enters into the most amount of legal issues that I’ve seen in any case, and it is so bad…”

Topics Discussed:

*Efforts to press for an investigation of the Grazzini-Rucki case in the Legislature

*Child support issues in the Grazzini-Rucki case

*Systemic judicial corruption existing at all levels of government in Minnesota and especially the judiciary, being exposed in the Grazzini-Rucki case

*Comparing judicial disciplinary actions in two similar cases in Minnesota and Nevada

“Speechless Minnesota” with Tim Kinley

Kinley says he has been petitioning the Legislature to do a case study, and go through this case “piece by piece” on the Grazzini-Rucki case “for the purpose only of understanding how a judge interprets their laws that they are writing.. and they will find out that a judge does whatever they want.”

Kinley argues that even if the law is changed a judge will continue to “do what they want” and they only remedy is increased judicial accountability.

To illustrate his point, Kinley compares the actions of Judge David L. Knutson and former Nevada judge, Conrad Hafen in two similar cases that were handled very differently in their respective states.

Judge David L. Knuston, is the family law judge appointed to the Grazzini-Rucki case. In September 2013, during the custody trial Sandra’s attorney, Michelle MacDonald, was found in contempt of court, and placed in handcuffed after taking a picture in the courtroom, which she had gotten permission to take.

While MacDonald was detained, Sandra was told that court was dismissed and then left the courthouse, taking the files with her. MacDonald was then ordered to continue with trial, while still in handcuffs and strapped to a wheelchair, without her client being present, without case files and without her glasses or shoes. MacDonald was finally released after spending more than 24 hours behind bars without being charged, booked or allowed a phone call. Lawyer Allegedly Tortured For Doing Her Job

Judge Knutson was never held accountable – federal lawsuits against him are dismissed under the guise of immunity, and The Board on Judicial Standards refuses to investigate (Knutson is now a member of the Board). In fact, Judge Knutson later filed a disciplinary complaint against Michelle MacDonald, who has been charged with making a false statement against a judge! Michelle MacDonald receives ‘minimal’ discipline

Kinley compares this incident to a case from Nevada involving disciplinary action taken against former family court judge Conrad Hafen, who has been barred for life from the court bench in Nevada as punishment for a series of courtroom confrontations, including ordering a defense attorney to be handcuffed when she wouldn’t stop arguing to keep a client out of jail. Hafen is also accused, in 3-4 separate incidents, of holding litigants in contempt of court but never making a record of that. Ex-judge banned from Nevada bench for handcuffing of lawyer

 Kinley applauds the State of Nevada for “willing to expose” out of control judges, and for enforcing judicial accountability… the same cannot be said for Minnesota.

Click on the video below to watch this riveting episode of “Speechless”

Fighting B.A.C.K. with Deborah (Goodman) Stacy: “I shouldn’t be tortured or punished for doing the right thing…”

Public Domain Image: http://www.magic4walls.com. Edited by Justice Blog.

That I couldn’t believe.. in essence they’re not letting you get divorced, all those years. And that bothered me because it’s almost like a violation of your civil rights. I have a right to get divorced. I have a right to move on with my life, how I chose to, and not be judged. I give 110% of myself to my children and I shouldn’t be tortured or punished for doing the right thing or for putting money away and making sure that I can provide for my children….why would they want to hurt children?” ~ Deborah (Goodman) Stacy commenting on the family court system in Rockland County

Listen Online: Fighting B.A.C.K. with Deborah (Goodman) Stacy – Screwed by Rockland Courts

Original Air Date: Monday, May 1, 2017

Tune in to “Fighting B.A.C.K.” with Sandra Grazzini-Rucki to hear the story of Deborah (Goodman) Stacy, a courageous mother of two children who has been fighting against injustice in the family court of Rockland County, New York for the last 7 years.

A temporary custody order was issued by Judge Berliner in 2010 but custody has never been finalized, the case continues to linger in the court system with Deborah and the children hanging in limbo. Deborah currently retains physical custody of the children but has not been officially granted any custodial rights (physical or legal custody). Andreas Lempa, ex husband, lives overseas and has no relationship with the children by his own choice”.

Topics discussed include: the outrageous and illegal actions of Judge Victor J. Alfieri Jr., misconduct by Family Law Guardians/Guardian ad Litem and retaliation against parents who raise complaints against family court and its judges, GALs and other professionals.

Judge Victor J. Alfieri, Jr.

UPDATE:

Journalist Michael Volpe just released an article about the Goodman case:

GOODMAN DIVORCE RULING ISSUED: HOUSEWIFE TOLD TO SPLIT ASSETS WITH EX-HUSBAND

Judge Berliner has recently issued an order in the Goodman case from a trial that happened over a year ago.

Deborah, a housewife, has been ordered to pay a $300,000 divorce settlement to be paid to ex-husband, Andreas Lempa.  Lempa earns a six figure income annually; he is ordered to pay child support but does not pay spousal support.

Deborah says Judge Berliner issued the settlement without considering all the facts, including that money now being considered as a marital asset is in fact part of her own savings, that existed before the divorce, making it a non-marital asset. .

In addition, Andreas admitted during a deposition that he moved money out of his own investment account before the hearing, giving it a low balance. The total balance of the investment account was not included in the equitable distribution of the divorce. even though he is clearly hiding assets. 

A reader comments on the article that, “‘I think a more appropriate title would have been “Housewife told to split HER assets with ex husband, who was allowed to suppress his.‘”

Deborah believes the court ruling was issued to punish her for speaking out about the problems existing in the Rockland County family court.

Also Read:

Facebook: Justice in Rockland Courts

SCREWED BY ROCKLAND COURTS — DEB GOODMAN TELLS HER STORY