Allegations of Mortgage Fraud Surround David Rucki

(Dakota County, Minn, 1/21/2018) Michael Volpe investigates mortgage fraud in the Grazzini-Rucki case: David Rucki Commits Apparent Mortgage Fraud

By Michael Volpe

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The initial document which started this investigation was sent by Michael Brodkorb, who runs a blog dedicated to bad mouthing Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and anyone who supports her, to an Angie Young.

He sent it to Young because the initial document is signed A. Young and Angie Young is neighbors with Dede Evavold, a supporter of Grazzini-Rucki.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

As his divorce was heating up, David Rucki engaged in blatant and brazen mortgage fraud.

According to the tract search, on June 3, 2011, the mortgage on Rucki’s Lakeville home was satisfied, meaning it was paid off, but inexplicably, his house was then foreclosed on- only to have him or his agents buy it back at auction every time- and sold at auction four times.

Rucki continues to own the property with numerous dubious and potentially fraudulent entries.

In the first case, Deutsche Bank Trust is listed as a brand-new mortgagor, the one providing the loan, on June 30, 2012.

On October 11, 2012, as part of a foreclosure, Deutsche Bank Trust was removed as the mortgagor in pen on the property and Wallingford Capital was written in instead.

Lawton King at Deutsche Bank said the loan was being serviced by Ocwen which provided this statement: “This loan is not in our system. We also checked different variation.”

Deutsche Bank, and their public affairs officer Lawton King, did not provide any further details on what happened to the loan.

According to the same document, Wallingford Capital then assumed this loan of $140,365 at 4.75%, an unusually low rate for a property bought at foreclosure, but David Rucki continued to remain in the property. Wallingford Capital did not return a message for comment.

The law firm Shapiro and Zielke was listed as handling the sale; their managing partner, Lawrence Zielke, issued this statement.

“This was a public sale.  We do not control which party bids at sale. I suggest you consult with your own real estate lawyer so counsel can walk your through this process.   I have nothing further to say on this matter.”

But Sandra Grazzini-Rucki said she spoke with a realtor who tried to attend one of the four so-called foreclosure sales; the realtor said they were not allowed in and the sale was done privately, with no prior public announcement, and not publicly as is supposed to be done.

Zielke had no further comment.

Realty Listing Photos Ireland Place

In another case, Rucki’s attorney, Lisa Elliott, places an attorney’s lien on Rucki’s property in the amount of $60,000 on July 12, 2012.

Elliott, who has represented Rucki in his divorce starting around this time, did not respond to an email for comment.

She then transferred that lien to NJD Properties which then transferred the lien to Danmark Properties.

Brian Hoelscher represented NJD in the transaction: “I had a look at title and have attached the tract history.  Mr. Rucki’s attorney had a lien on the property from the divorce, the first mortgage went into foreclosure so my client bought the attorney lien to be in line to redeem as a junior creditor in the event that Mr. Rucki did not redeem as owner.  That is a typical transaction for my client.  I advised my client to get a confirmation from the debtor as to the validity of the attorney lien (which is the document to which you were referring that I drafted) since the lien is involuntary and without the confirmation could be contested and found ultimately worthless. 

“My client bought the lien and soon thereafter sold the position to Danmark Properties LLC.  Mr. Rucki redeemed as the owner and Danmark Properties LLC had a foreclosure sale to enforce the attorney lien.  Mr. Rucki again redeemed as the owner.  It looks like he still owns it subject to existing liens including the 2^nd mortgage in favor of Excel Bank recorded as Document No. 2263968 (unless that was paid but never satisfied of record) as well as other possible lien(s) and the mortgage he took out in 2015.  It doesn’t look like he avoided any of the liens so I am not sure where you got your information.  In any event, to the extent that anything nefarious was occurring, it certainly did not involve my client.”

But according to Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, this explanation makes no sense. First, Elliott had only started to represent David Rucki, it’s not clear how she even racked up $60,000 in fees if it had been less than a month. (It’s noteworthy that he now demands child support from the homeless Sandra Grazzini-Rucki)

Second, she said the divorce judge, Judge David Knutson, ordered that this lien be paid from the trust of her parents.

Knutson ordered 100% of the marital estate to go to David Rucki, ordered that Sandra Grazzini-Ruck pay child support and alimony, along with ordering that David Rucki receive sole custody of the children.

Knutson did not respond to an email for comment.

Finally, David Rucki is a multi-millionaire who should have no trouble paying a $60,000 debt.

Danmark properties then pops up again on the tract search as the purchaser of a loan at a foreclosure auction on December 18, 2013.

But David Rucki continued to live in the property throughout, he then purchased the property at another foreclosure auction on June 10, 2014.

In other words, he didn’t have money to pay for the monthly mortgage payment but somehow had enough money to purchase the entire mortgage.

Attorney Lisa Elliot

Then, Lisa Elliott transferred yet another lien to David Rucki on March 10, 2014. It’s not clear what lien this is as she had supposedly sold her lien to NJD Properties.

Danmark Properties did not respond to an email for comment.

Finally, David Rucki then transferred to mortgage to his parent’s trust on April 29, 2015, and that trust currently owns the property which he lives on.

He also owns three other homes.

The initial document which started this investigation was sent by Michael Brodkorb, who runs a blog dedicated to bad mouthing Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and anyone who supports her, to an Angie Young.

He sent it to Young because the initial document is signed A. Young and Angie Young is neighbors with Dede Evavold, a supporter of Grazzini-Rucki.

Young denied making the document and Brodkorb said: “You clearly received this document from Mrs. Evavold, as it contains the file I named and sent to Mrs. Young.

“Mrs. Young confirmed tonight that she did not author this document in 2013, and the authenticity of the underlying document is in doubt.

“This won’t stop you from publishing it again, but I cannot publish this document since the alleged author denies the document is truthful.”

But Young, in an interview with me, didn’t deny the document’s truthfulness but having put it together entirely.

Brodkorb had no comment on how a property could be foreclosed on so many times by a multi-millionaire and the numerous disappearing mortgages.

I also sent these documents to 20/20 and the President of ABC, Channing Dungey, without response, however less than a week after sending these documents Elizabeth Vargas surprised the media world by announcing she was leaving ABC after more than two decades with the network.

It’s not clear if the two events are correlated.

20/20 ignored a mountain of evidence of abuse in favor of painting Sandra Grazzini-Rucki as mentally unstable and not providing any evidence of abuse.

Grazzini-Rucki said a source in ABC said 20/20 made a secret deal with David Rucki about which questions he could be asked and even gave him editing power over the broadcast.

Vargas and the two producers- Sean Dooley and Beth Mullens- of the 20/20 broadcast of this story declined to respond to numerous emails when I raised this allegation.

Dungey also declined to respond to emails to confirm or deny this allegation. Lisa Elliott also did not respond to emails to confirm or deny this allegation.

Check out David Rucki’s mortgage fraud dossier here.

Check out the tract search on Rucki’s property here.

Million Parent March LIVE!!! Guest Host Brian Kinter, with Guest Sandra Grazzini-Rucki

Brian Kinter was invited to host “Million Parent March Live” and invited Sandra Grazzini-Rucki as his guest.

Sandra Grazzini-Rucki is a former airline stewardess, model, and mother of 5, until she got a phone call from some lawyer, forcing her out of her home of 19 years, telling her “you have 3 hours to get out, or you’re going to jail.”

During Sandra’s child custody trial, her lawyer was handcuffed to a wheel chair and tortured for 24 hours by order of Judge David L. Knutson.

Knutson is famous for taking the law into his own hands, saying, ‘This room is my playground, I can do what I want’. Knutson an appointed judge, has a family who has dominated politics in Minnesota for years. Knutson person practiced law for literally 7 minutes before being appointed, and he becomes chair person for the “Board of Judicial Standards”!

Knutson handed down 3482+ court orders against Sandra, and took it upon himself to be her personal probation officer.

You are not going to want to miss this, it’s right out of the twilight zone…a real place, located at the Dakota County Judicial Center.

More Info:

Million Parent March 2017

Million Parent March Live – Twitter

Another Day in Lawless Lakeville: Fraud & Financial Abuse Allegations Surround David Rucki

This article is a compilation of the allegations, and related documentation, that suggest millionaire David Rucki may be involved in financial abuse or fraud. Numerous complaints have been filed against Rucki related to these allegations but he has avoided investigation by any agency in the State of Minnesota, and has never been formally charged with any crime. Instead, county and state offices at every level of government have extended preferential treatment towards Rucki, and even have given him state aid without asking Rucki for any verification of income, or other standard proofs to determine eligibility. Rucki is receiving state aid while he resides in a luxurious house, owns 2 others homes, and owns an estimated 9 personal vehicles and 3 boats all registered in his name. Clearly Rucki lives well above the poverty level.

During divorce proceedings, Rucki appeared in front of Judge David L Knutson and admitted that he was pursuing divorce to commit a financial fraud. Judge Knutson ignored that a crime was being committed in his own courtroom and systematically began to punish the victim of David’s schemes – ex wife, Sandra Grazzini-Rucki. As a result of Judge Knutson’s extreme rulings, Sandra was forced out of her home and onto the streets. She has been forced to turn her wages and property over to Rucki, and unjustly removed from the lives of her children. Empowered by the legal system, Rucki continues to abuse Sandra; the power of the court has been used as a weapon against her, and the laws that should protect victims of domestic violence and their children, have been totally disregarded by Judge Knutson and the family court system.

Another example – in February 2015 Rucki called to ask a special favor from Detective Dronen, who then was was investigating the disappearance of the runaway Rucki girls. Rucki’s call did not offer anything to help locate his daughters but, instead, he asked Dronen to help collect $$ child support $$. Officer Jim Dronen reports, “On 2/20/15, I spoke with David Rucki. He advised me at the time that Sandra was behind several thousand dollars on her child support payments. I spoke with Katie Backstrom and James Donehower at Dakota County to see if they could provide me with any further information. I was advised that they could not release any specific information to me regarding the matter.” It is beyond the duties of a police officer to get personally involved with a child support matter.

Dronnen is extending special favors to Rucki, just as he did when dismissing an OFP against Rucki (2011). Minnesota Tough On Crime But Silent on Abuse

It also concerning that the Rucki children reported abuse to the Lakeville police on multiple occasions and those allegations were either dismissed or ignored – yet Dronen goes out of his way to help Rucki collect child support. The privileges extended to Rucki come at the expense of his own children. 

This is a man who has abused his ex-wife and children, and continues to financially prey on the public. Why is Dakota County, and the State of Minnesota protecting David Rucki?

 

A Compilation:

 

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

Source: 2011 Lakeville Hockey Scandals Lands David Rucki in the Penalty Box

 

2011 – Masterminded a “Paper Divorce” scam to take all of the proceeds of a family trust, and proceeds from her father’s life insurance policy, belonging to ex-wife, Sandra Grazzini-Rucki (this is non-marital property). During divorce proceedings, Rucki appeared in front of Judge David L Knutson and admitted that he was pursuing divorce to commit a financial fraud. Judge Knutson ignored that a crime was being committed in his own courtroom and systematically began to punish the victim of David’s schemes – ex wife, Sandra Grazzini-Rucki.

Money obtained in the “Paper Divorce” scam was funneled into real estate and business transactions with Rucki Trucking and T.L. Rucki Trucking. Rucki claims the businesses are not making any money, and then flushes additional sources of money, and/or conducts wire transfers, to infuse the business with additional cash reserves. The cash quickly disappears, which is to Rucki’s benefit because the money can not be traced, and it gives him the appearance of looking impoverished. Rucki gets away with this scheme because he is writing his own books, issuing his own paychecks, and has been enabled by Dakota County and the State of Minnesota, who refuse to investigate. Rucki admits to this behavior under oath, in various statements made in court. Why does Rucki need to disguise the origins of the profits he is making in Rucki Trucking and T.L. Rucki Trucking? And why does Dakota County and the State of Minnesota refuse to make Rucki comply with laws that require proof and income verification when applying for public assistance? Public assistance given to Rucki is being used to support his schemes, with Dakota County and the State of Minnesota becoming complicit because of their failure to hold Rucki accountable.

The way Rucki projects his problems onto ex-wife Sandra (and by extension her attorney or anyone he views as a ‘supporter’) is no different than his business schemes. — Rucki is blaming Sandra for his own actions to avoid responsibility. By portraying Sandra in a bad light, and generating attention towards her, he is able to disguise his own actions and behaviors as an abuser. For example, Rucki falsely accuses Sandra of financially wiping him out during the divorce. This is projection – abusers blame the victim for their own actions. p. 43 “Petitioner (Sandra) testified that she did not know what Respondent was talking about when he referred to an ‘in paper only’ divorce.” (Findings of Fact, Order Dated 9/21/2011, Judge Knutson). 

Speaking about the “Paper Divorce”Rucki said in court, August 2011, “..it (the divorce) wasn’t meant as a finality deal, it was just to get the business going again as a couple. I didn’t see the end coming, I didn’t think that was the end. That was the end to her, it wasn’t to me, so for her (Sandra) to say that we didn’t ever have a conversation, it was just to get the business up and rolling so we can generate income again.” That Rucki says “I didn’t see the end coming” while he ruthlessly exploits his ex-wife shows just how dangerous he is; not only for his abusive behavior but also for his total lack of conscience.

Source: David Rucki “Paper Divorce” Scam

 

2015 – Manipulating Detective Dronen or Something More?

Detective Dronen. Source: https://redherringalert.wordpress.com, sunthisweek

While his teen daughters were still missing, Rucki went to the Lakeville police department to confide in Detective Dronen about his money problems. David’s obsessive interest in financially devastating his ex-wife overrides even the welfare of his own children. 

Rucki admitted to Dronen that he was initiating lawsuits in order to seize money from Sandra’s portion of the family trust. According to the police report, “On 5/28/15, a hearing occurred in Hennepin County regarding funds from a Grazzini business that were to be distributed to the Grazzini children, including Sandra Grazzini-Rucki. David Rucki made me aware of the court proceedings and advised me that he and Lisa Elliott were attempting to get the funds to be paid to Sandra diverted to (unclear) er debts he and his parents incurred. He also advised me that Sandra’s share of the funds was approx $500,000. According to the information they had at the time, Sandra was to be representing herself at the hearing. Sandra failed to appear for the hearing, and David and his parents were awarded funds. A few days after the hearing, Michelle MacDonald filed an appeal of the decision on behalf of Sandra Grazzini-Rucki.”

At the time of this report, the runaway Rucki Girls, had been missing for two years. Rucki has portrayed himself as a distraught father who could barely function while the Girls were missing, why then did he waste valuable police time and resources by providing this information that is totally worthless to the investigation? What does this information offer the police to help find the missing Girls?

Rucki’s reports to police that Sandra does not pay child support, and that he is instigating a lawsuit against her family trust may be just another one of his scams. It is well-known that Rucki used funds from the Jacob Wetterling Foundation, and received support from the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, to pay for the costs of ‘reunification therapy’ for the runaway Rucki girls. Additional expenses covered included transportation, a security guard to escort the Girls to the reunification center, and a vacation following. Rucki is selling these sob stories in order to get organizations to provide financial support when clearly, he does not need it. Rucki can then hide behind the reputation of these organizations and their work, to hide the real cause on why the Girls ran away – abuse. This is the same pattern that Rucki uses when projecting his problems onto Sandra, and again follows a similar pattern of behavior in his questionable business practices.

Note: Sandra did not “fail to appear”, she was not notified about the hearing, and had no knowledge that it was taking place.

Attorney Lisa Elliot. Source: redherringalert.wordpress.com

2013 – Mortgage Fraud Allegations, Ireland Place. Rucki was accused of laundering money through real estate transactions. Other allegations include: Mortgage stacking, Title washing and Foreclosure fraud. Others accused involved: Robert Shingledecker, Sawbill Strategic, Inc., Attorney Lisa Elliott, Jacob Sellers, NJD Properties, LLC and Danmark Properties, LLC.

According to the complaint, “David Rucki and his attorney Lisa Elliot represented the estate in the foreclosure action. In 2012 and 2013 the defendants are alleged to have illegally washed the title of 19675 Ireland Place property of the original mortgage to make a new dollar mortgage obtained in the name of the above identified individuals and companies.  Proceeds of the stacked mortgage flowed into accounts controlled by David Rucki and other numerous parties, leads back to David Rucki and his attorney Lisa Elliot. This property is and has been in foreclosure (and foreclosed on), for sale (and sold 3 different times) in sheriff’s sale (and sold through sheriff’s sale) 7 different times in the last 10 months.”

Source: Red Herring Alert Ireland Place Mortgage Fraud Allegations & Documentation

Connection to Individuals Accused of Fraud or Scams Include:

K&K Contracting – Partnered with Dave Koehnen. In 2007, Koehnen, was the owner of a trucking company, that was under federal investigation for fraud, underpaying drivers and falsifying records on road projects. “According to the warrants, investigators sought evidence of conspiracy to defraud the federal government, making false statements in connection with federally funded highway projects and mail fraud.” http://www.twincities.com/2007/08/01/dakota-county-3-trucking-firms-accused-of-fraud/ Koehnen attempted to file bankruptcy on this business but the filing was dismissed after a Court determined that he failed to pay back taxes in the amount of $235,000 with the IRS and $98,000 with the Minnesota Department of Revenue. Koehnen also has a history of traffic violations, including charges related to violating trucking regulations.

 

Kang Contracting Corp – Partenered with Nelson K. The business address is listed in Oakdale but the payroll checks list Rucki’s Farmington house as the business address. Partnering with Nelson gave Rucki access to special contracts, including the Greenline project, meant for minority business owners.

This deal is far from 50/50 and it seems Nelson is getting the short end of the stick that Rucki is throwing at him, like a dog. Nelson is using his name to front Rucki’s business, and his status as a”minority” to gain access to a contract that Rucki would not otherwise be able to bid on. On paper it appears that Nelson owns 51% of the business but in reality, it is Rucki who has been greatly enriched by this deal.

Rucki is claiming pauper status, and collecting public assistance while he has grossed millions of dollars in income, owns multiple properties and is running businesses held in the names of other people. One of those people is Nelson K – who is supposed to be the majority owner of Kang Contracting Corp but receives very little of the benefit.

Compare the lifestyle of Rucki and Nelson – Nelson lives in a twin home, that is the registered business address of Kang Contracting. Rucki lives in a large, half a million dollar home in an exclusive neighborhood in Lakeville. Rucki additionally owns 2 other properties. Rucki owns multiple vehicles, including classic cars while Nelson drives an old beater. Nelson owns a larger percentage of the company but lives a more modest lifestyle and is not on state aid while Rucki owns 49% of the company, owns 3 homes and relies on state aid. When questions were raised about Kang Contracting, Rucki moved his business into another front, with Nelson carrying the name, Mermaids Investment Group.

2014 – Tammy Jo Love (sister), Allegations Medical Assistance Fraud. No action taken.

Allegations include: Receiving medical assistance (MA) benefits for the Rucki children who do not live with her, and do not qualify for MA. Abusing her license as a chiropractor to illegally gain access to Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and the children’s private medical information.

https://www.scribd.com/doc/312673149/Tammy-Jo-Love-Ma-Fraud-Report-to-Dhs

 

T.L. Rucki Trucking –T.L. Rucki Trucking is another one of Rucki’s front companies. T.L. uses same trucks as Rucki Trucking, the logo is the same, with just a T.L. added. Rucki benefits from Tammy’s status as a woman and a small business owner to gain access to special government contracts.

The business address to T.L. is registered to Tammy’s townhouse, which is being used as a vacation rental and cannot be a business office since it is being occupied by renters for most of the year. https://www.vrbo.com/502993

So where is Tammy really conducting business? Why the need to hide the real office behind T.L. Rucki Trucking?

This is just the tip of the ice burg… stay tuned for updates on the #grazzinirucki case

Sept 2016 Booking Schedule for Tammy Love’s Townhouse – She Claims This Property is the Business Property of T.L. Rucking Trucking Even While it is Being Rented Out, and Cannot Be Used as an Office

 

2011 Lakeville Hockey Scandals Lands David Rucki in the Penalty Box

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

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

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

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

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

Public Domain: http://publicdomainvectors.org

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

For More Info:

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

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

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

LHA 990 – 2009/2010

 

 

 

David Rucki “Paper Divorce” Scam

Dakota County, Minn, August 2016: Trucking contractor, David Rucki’s false statements and refusal to provide information about his finances in legal proceedings suggest an ongoing pattern of  fraud and financial abuse.

David Rucki (Fox 9)

False statements include: Rucki lied during the criminal trial of ex-wife Sandra Grazzini-Rucki when making claims that he was duped into signing a divorce settlement in 2011, claiming that he had no knowledge of what was happening. In truth, Rucki signed over a dozen documents, in front of numerous witnesses, and willingly entered into the original divorce settlement.

Rucki lied when stating that Sandra masterminded a “paper divorce” scam that stripped him of everything he owned. What did Rucki lose? He retained a multi-million dollar company and its assets, retained numerous vehicles and property and eventually won sole custody of all five children. The truth is that Sandra was forcibly separated from her children, left homeless and destitute, and stripped of her portion of the family trust (a non-marital asset) as a result of an unjust family court order. The entire proceeds of Sandra’s portion of the trust were turned over to Rucki. Rucki is also the beneficiary of his own, separate family trust; which has remained intact.

Assistant Dakota County Attorney, Kathryn Keena

During the criminal trial, Rucki’s lies about the financial aspects of the divorce were repeated by Prosecuting Attorney, Kathryn M. Keena. Keena had possession of the Grazzini-Rucki family court file, and either ignored or suppressed evidence to endorse Rucki’s sob story. Rucki’s lies about the “paper divorce” were used by Keena to discredit Sandra during the criminal trial. Keena portrayed Sandra as a vindictive ex-wife who would do anything to destroy poor Rucki, including financially wipe him out. Rucki is now claiming he suffered extreme emotional distress, and that Sandra should be given the harshest penalty possible. Keena attempted to impose an aggravated sentence against Sandra but was unsuccessful because the case does not meet the legal standard for aggravating circumstances. Keena Drops Aggravated Sentence Against Sandra Grazzini-Rucki/

Claims of Rucki’s victimization are not supported by fact. Court documents, and testimony from Rucki himself, reveal a much different story that what he has recently portrayed to the jury, and to the public about the “paper divorce”. Unmasked, Rucki’s claims are that of an abuser projecting his own heinous deeds onto a victim. David Rucki is a man who is willing to destroy his own family, and put his children through the pain of divorce, in order to benefit financially from a scam he alone concocted. Rucki calls this scam the “paper divorce”.

Rucki’s Sob Story: Fact or Fiction?

Public Domain: http://www.clipartkid.com

Prevailing themes in the Grazzini-Rucki divorce and custody dispute, and its aftermath, involve allegations of domestic violence, and financial fraud. What is lost in the court, and following media controversy is that abuse has impacted the Grazzini-Rucki family at every level, even financially.

David Rucki’s divorce sob story, and alleged financial ruin, was prominently featured in an article published by Laura Adelmann, reporter with the Sun This Week at the end of July 2016: Revealing testimony highlights Grazzini-Rucki trial  Adelmann offered “revealing testimony” from Sandra’s criminal trial, including testimony from Rucki who claimed he was victimized in divorce proceedings.

Testifying in the criminal trial, Rucki accuses Sandra of pushing for an “on paper only” divorce. However, in family court, Rucki admits the “on paper only” divorce was his idea. Rucki stated during a deposition on August 8, 2011 that a “paper divorce” was needed “to get the business going” and he “didn’t think it would be the end of his marriage” (abuse involves the exploitation of the victim). Findings from Judge Knutson (Re-Opening of the Judgement and Decree) also state that Sandra did not know about the “on paper” divorce and there was “no meeting of the minds”. In other words, Rucki conned Sandra during divorce proceedings.

Rucki lied during the criminal trial when testifying about the “paper only divorce” and assigned blame to Sandra. Rucki’s comments are significant because these false statements were used to paint Sandra as a vindictive ex-wife, which contributed to her being charged with 6 felonies. Prosecuting Attorney Keena had the Grazzini-Rucki family court file available to her, and referred to it during trial. Instead of presenting facts, Keena chose to present a lie in order to build her case and secure a win.

The Paper Divorce Scam

The “Paper Divorce” began with a mutually agreed upon divorce settlement and resulted in Rucki successfully contesting the divorce, claiming he did not read or see the documents and was tricked into signing by Sandra. At the same time as he claiming to be a victim, Rucki admits divorce had financial advantages for him, that it would benefit his business.

According to court documents, “Respondent (Rucki) alleged that the parties agreed to a ‘paper divorce’, which would allow Petitioner (Sandra) to access some funds from a trust while parties continued living as husband and wife.” Sandra’s portion of the family trust is a non-marital asset, Rucki is not entitled to it – there is not any stipulation in the trust documents that would allow Rucki to access funds as he described. Rucki not only felt entitled to the trust, but ruthlessly pursued it.

Is it plausible that David had no idea what was going on with the divorce, as he claims? Laura Adelmann reports: “Rucki also testified that he arrived home one day in 2011 to discover he was divorced, and Grazzini-Rucki called police who removed him from their Lakeville home. ‘I never went to a court proceeding or saw anything,’ David Rucki said. ‘I couldn’t figure it out.’ Adelmann also reports: “David Rucki testified he returned later that night and took photos of the divorce decree that awarded sole custody of their children to Grazzini-Rucki and severed his rights to the house, property and everything they owned.”  Rucki, a successful businessman and trucking contractor, has signed countless contracts and other legal documents throughout his career, and now is unable to understand his own divorce settlement? 

Source: Movato.com – David Rucki retained ownership of this home after the original divorce settlement. He has claimed the divorce left him with nothing – yet retained ownership of a business, and other assets.

A paper trail of court documents, and other evidence, indicate that Rucki was aware, and actively participating in the divorce proceedings that he now claims he knew nothing about. Rucki met with Sandra to discuss the terms of the divorce, he signed multiple documents and agreed to settlement on April 19, 2011. Rucki also signed a waiver of counsel and declined his right to legal representation. Dissolution was granted on May 12, 2011, Judge Wermager approved of the settlement.

Further, Rucki admits in court proceedings that he wanted the divorce to provide additional revenue for his business: “Respondent (Rucki) testified that Petitioner and Respondent had discussed getting a divorce ‘in paper only’ for financial purposes…” 

While Rucki’s story has changed numerous times about the “paper divorce”, Sandra’s has remained the same, “Petitioner (Sandra) testified that she did not know what Respondent was talking about when he referred to an ‘in paper only’ divorce.”(Findings of Fact, Order Dated 9/21/2011, Judge Knutson). Adelmann reports the same, “In court, Grazzini-Rucki denied she suggested getting a divorce on paper so she could access the trust funds.”

The only person who benefited from the “paper divorce” is Rucki. When it was no longer beneficial to be associated with this scam, he shifted the blame onto the victim, Sandra.

Adelmann reports: “The order also required David Rucki to pay $3,673 per month in child support and $10,000 per month in spousal maintenance, according to court documents. “It left me with zero,’ Rucki said. He said Grazzini-Rucki had earlier proposed they divorce ‘on paper only’  so she could access $1.5 million from a family trust.” Question – how does Rucki go from not knowing anything about the divorce, to reciting specific details that indicate he is aware of the terms of settlement? Once again, Rucki cannot keep his story straight!

Also notice that Rucki’s focus during his testimony about the “paper divorce”is on himself, and completely ignores the impact this would have on the children. In another example, taken from the August 8, 2011 deposition, Rucki says the fair way to handle the property division after the divorce is to “sell it all”. When asked where the children would live (if the house were sold), Rucki replies, “That is something we will have to figure out when the courts figure it out.” Rucki is totally unconcerned that his actions could cause the children to become homeless, and yet he portrays himself as the victim.

Rucki bankrolled his business on Sandra’s misfortune. Rucki’s own words, recorded in a transcript from August 8, 2011  “In order for me to get working again and to get a credit line back, right, was to get rid of the existing credit line that was there two hundred some – I don’t remember what the exact number is – hundred dollars, I don’t know what… She (Sandra) told me she can get the money, and I kept asking where; she never told me, and that she would pay off the credit line. Now that allows me to work and go after re-establishing getting a new credit line okay?

The kicker to this story was, she didn’t tell me that she was going to take the house (Ireland Place) that we used as collateral against the loan; so on May 12 that whole thing unraveled for me. Now she pays off, she is my godsend and paying off this terrible loan, and all of a sudden, she pulls the carpet from under me and takes the house; now I have nothing to back the loan, okay? That’s one of the problems I have with the bank right now, I have no collateralization.”. Rucki states later in the same transcript that Rucki Trucking “is almost defunct”.  Adelmann reports, “He also stated Grazzini-Rucki told him the trust has a provision that if she or other siblings were divorced and struggling financially, they could access some of its money and get some financial relief.” There is no provision in the trust documents that states what Rucki claims. Rucki was scrambling to establish another credit line, and preyed upon Sandra to do it. The same house, Ireland Place, is also connected to allegations of mortgage fraud.

Judge David L Knutson

Also concerning, is the response of the court. In the Re-Opening of the Judgement and Decree Judge Knutson found that: “Even if Respondent (Rucki) did have the opportunity to review the Judgement and Decree, Respondent (Rucki) testified that he thought parties were agreeing to a ‘paper divorce’. The mismatch between the parties’ intentions provides sufficient evidence of mistake to vacate the Judgement and Decree on these grounds alone. clearly, there was no meeting of the minds with respect to the Stipulated Judgement and Decree.” In his own words, and in front of Judge Knutson, Rucki admits he devised the “paper divorce” scam and used the courts to swindle Sandra out of her portion of the family trust. Rucki’s “intention” clearly involved fraud, and manipulaton. Judge Knutson ignores that a criminal act is taking place right under his nose, and then extends preferential treatment towards Rucki. The result has been disastrous for Sandra, the children, and now even the public is at risk. The term “the Rucki Divorce” is now being used to describe the legal precedent this case has created. 

Aftermath

Rucki is expected to make a victim impact statement at Sandra’s sentencing on September 21st – his words will weigh heavily on the sentence imposed against Sandra. Prosecuting Attorney Keena has already attempted to give Sandra an aggravated sentence, imposing a harsh penalty because, she claims, Rucki has suffered so much. Will society be safer with Sandra in prison? Or does the true danger exist in a court system that is willing to put an abuse victim, who sought to protect her children, in jail in order to protect a dangerous abuser?