Medical Exam of Sandra Grazzini-Rucki Points to Minnesota Jail Corruption

Sandra Grazzini-Rucki jailed for trying to protect her daughters from abuse endures further abuse, beatings, sexual assault and humiliation on prison transport, and in Minnesota’s jails.

Her bus made almost ten stops and on one stop she was chained to the wall in a cell for several days.

She was beaten and sexual assaulted on the transport and when she arrived back in Minnesota claimed a glitch was responsible for them claiming she was charged with child trafficking, kidnapping and gun running and reduced the charges to parental deprivation.

Grazzini-Rucki spent time in Ramsey and Dakota County Jail.

Asphaug gave her $500,000, claiming she was a flight risk, even though her warrant was clearly marked sealed.

In prison she received no care for any of her injuries and the prison even sent in a fellow prisoner to rough her up.

One of the nights she was being housed, Grazzini-Rucki said she received a new cell mate. Shortly after dinner, she said she became groggy and passed out.

The next thing she remembered she woke up in a pool of blood in her cell…”

Read the shocking new details exposed by journalist Michael Volpe: Medical Exam Points to Minnesota Jail Corruption

Advertisements

For Not Removing Blog Posts: Dede Evavold Held Without Bond

CC0 Creative Commons – Pixabay.com

Battle Over Free Speech Sends Blogger to Jail.. Dede Evavold dragged from her home in handcuffs, arrested and held without bail after a judge signs as a warrant for her arrest – her crime: posts about the Grazzini-Rucki case published on the “Red Herring Alert” blog were deemed to be “harassment”.

Evavold was previously ordered to remove the posts in question, which she did, and then was arrested after compliance with the court order.

It should be noted that the Grazzini-Rucki case has been publicly reported on for over 5 years, and gained national attention after being featured on ABC 20/20. The posts in question on “Red Herring Alert” included news about the case, and documents related to court involvement, allegations of abuse, and included statements/stories from people involved in the case. How this publicly available information constitutes “harassment” has not been explained.

The implications of Evavold’s case are far reaching… Dakota County is setting precedence to criminalize freedom of speech; meaning the court has established grounds to jail anyone for blogging, reposting articles or web links, and social media posts.

“To suppress free speech is a double wrong. It violates the rights of the hearer as well as those of the speaker.

~ Frederick Douglass

Dede Evavold is in jail, held without bond: her crime, not removing blogs fast enough for a court.

This blatant violation of Evavold’s first amendment rights appears to be just fine with all involved: the sheriff, the judge and the media which have been covering the Rucki story.

The whole bizarre scenario started with David Rucki’s attorney, Lisa Elliott, filed an emergency motion on February 12, 2018.

“Ordering Respondent to immediately remove the entire post titled ‘Beaten Before Born: Sandra Grazzini-Rucki Assaulted While Pregnant – Rucki Wanted to Kill Baby Because ‘Wasn’t Perfect.’, dated December 18, 2017, from the Red Herring Alert Blog and /or any subsequent revisions to the post along with any reposts and/or posts to Facebook and Twitter, which is a direct violation of Minnesota Statue § 609.748, Sub.1a;” The motion stated.
Remarkably, the original blog in question was re-printed from another blog; the story originated on Justice for Grazzini-Rucki children, where it remains today.

The motion was still quickly granted and Evavold was ordered to remove the blog post immediately.

The motion was granted even though Rucki has had glowing coverage from local media and national media like 20/20 and it’s not clear how a blog would “harass” him as he alleged.

An email to his attorney, Lisa Elliott, was left unreturned.

That order turned into an order to remove nearly ten blog posts and then dozens. When Evavold did not comply with the most recent order to remove dozens of blog posts, a warrant was issued for her arrest.

The arrest warrant was initiated by Elliott who filed an affidavit in early March 2018: “Respondent has failed to comply with this Court’s March 1, 2018 Order. THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: That the Dakota County Sheriff’s Department shall issue an arrest warrant immediately for the detention of the Respondent, Deirdre Elise Evavold, as outlined in its March 1, 2018 Order.”

Her request was quickly granted by a retired judge from Ramsey County, Kathleen Gearin, and an arrest warrant was issued on March 14, 2018; but Evavold, while free, said she was out of the state on a preplanned trip at the time the warrant was issued.

According to her neighbor, Evavold was picked up by a Stearns County Sheriff- Evavold lives in Stearns County- on Sunday March 18, 2018.

The Stearns County Sheriff, Don Gudmundson, said any potential violations of the 1st amendment must be taken up with the judge: “Mrs. Evavold can take those issues up with the Judge.  My lawful duty is in Court File 19AV-CV-17-1950 and Write of Attachment 19AV-CV-17-1950-1 which states ‘Hold Without Bond.’”

According to Minnesota statute, her violation- contempt of court- is punishable by a maximum of $250 fine and six months in jail, but as Sheriff Gudmundson stated, she is still being held without bond per the order of the judge.

Judge Gearin is retired and could not be reached; staff at Ramsey County Court and Dakota County Court- from where the warrant was issued- did not respond to messages to explain what appears to be a blatant violation of Evavold’s 1st amendment rights.

Staff at Dakota County did say that retired judges are brought in when there is a shortage of judges, and this would be the reason Judge Gearin presided over parts of this case.

Evavold’s neighbor, Angela Young, said that Evavold was arrested even though she handed the sheriffs her own affidavit of compliance with the order.

A subsequent email to the public affairs department at the Minnesota Courts was also left unreturned.

Remarkably, Michael Brodkorb, who runs Missing in Minnesota, accompanied the sheriffs as they arrested Evavold.

Sheriff Gudmundson did not respond as to how Brodkorb would know to be there for the arrest; Brodkorb has blocked my email and did not respond.

When the Rucki girls were found in November 2015, Brodkorb also accompanied police on that trip, even though the police were supposed to be executing a sealed warrant.

Evavold was convicted along with Sandra Grazzini-Rucki of helping hide Grazzini-Rucki’s daughters when they ran away from home in April 2015, after a court forced them to live with their father, despite insisting to the court that he abused them and their siblings.

PROTECT A CHILD – GO TO JAIL

Red Herring Alert: Protect a Child Go to Jail

PROTECT A CHILD – GO TO JAIL

The author of this diary is the grandmother of children who were placed into the full custody and control of their identified and confirmed rapist. Helen and her husband spent one and a half million dollars fighting for their grandchildren’s safety in a corrupt family court system. The mother was unable to write her story because she is still suffering from PTSD from being imprisoned for having challenged the authority of the wealthy father. She was tormented in prison for an entire year before she was released, thanks to a 20/20 investigation. Warning: graphic content.

My story is part of an attempt by Safe Kids International to raise awareness regarding divorce court judges covering up abuse and awarding custody to abusive fathers.

The DOJ Investigative Report explains-the nation’s divorce courts award custody to abusive fathers-while “good fit” mothers are court ordered supervised visits – or no contact.

The U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder’s-comments to the National Summit on Domestic Violence: Why are mothers who are victims of domestic violence losing custody of their children to the courts-even when their fathers have been abusive to them and their mothers?

I was driven mad by the horrific injustice.  I was compelled to save [not only] my grandchildren-but other abused children in the nation’s divorce courts.  To no avail.  Every night I pray [Lord give us the strength for this journey].  We are still on that journey.

During an intact marriage, physicians diagnosed child sexual abuse-based on five-year-old son’s torn bloody rectum. Father’s reaction to the diagnosis was to go into divorce court with a criminal attorney.

Child Protective Services/CPS opened our case on March 4th, closed March 5th due to custody issues.  Because when father was contacted by CPS, he stated the magic words [“There are custody issues”] which shuts down CPS investigations of child abuse.

The custody decision states: father is awarded sole custody based on parental alienation.  Parental alienation is used in the nation’s courts to cover up abuse – it has nothing to do with alienating behavior.  Minor’s attorney, Kevin Busch and custody evaluator Robert Shapiro recommended custody to father-based on parental alienation.

The physicians who diagnosed child sexual abuse-refused to testify.  Illinois law book POF 6 2D 353 explains: physicians fail to report child abuse for a myriad of reasons -from a fear of harming their practice to a fear of entanglement as a result of reporting.  Legislation has not achieved the desired goal-only a small percentage of cases are ever reported.]

At age 7 daughter drew and labeled a picture [Lynn Dad] of dad’s penis in Lynn’s mouth.  Lynn had blood in her panties-when mom picked her up for visits. CPS and police investigated.  The allegations were found credible and father was placed on no contact.

The court found: father sexually abused son and daughter-including, but not limited to, repeatedly sodomizing and forcing oral copulation.  The judge’s court transcript states: In the case at bar, the danger is extraordinarily disturbing sexual assaults perpetrated many times-skillfully concealed. CPS explained to mother that father is on “no contact” and has no legal standing, recommending mother go home to California.

However, despite CPS giving mother permission – mother was criminally charged with leaving the jurisdiction by Kane County Illinois Assistant State’s Attorney, Clint Hull. The jurisdiction law is based on the parent-child relationship – the only inquiry is the status of the parent left behind.

Despite a court appointed psychologist concluding it was emotionally destructive for Mac and Lynn to have contact with their father, the children were ordered back to father.  At which time, Mac + Lynn ran away. Mac [age 14] found a way to enroll in college-where he was a straight A student, studying law and psychology.

The National Center for Missing and Exploited children does not discern missing children running away from abusive fathers…from children being missing or exploited.

Mac and Lynn were hunted down.  Twenty U.S. Marshall’s broke down the front door…pointed semi-automatic rifles at skinny Mac and Lynn-pinned them on the floor-and handcuffed them. Mac and Lynn were brought into court where U.S. Marshals championed father and championed parental alienation.

READ MORE


20/20 actually did their job of investigative reporting and helped bring justice to this Illinois family.
I wish we could say the same about their coverage of our cases. As most of you are aware, 20/20 did a hit piece on the Grazzini-Rucki case entitled  Footprints in the Snow in April of 2016. They actually aided and abetted in the cover up of abuse in this case and have refused to make any corrections in their portrayal of this ongoing story. In fact, 20/20 actually asked an investigative reporter that has covered this case extensively, to refrain from sending any more documents that show the truth in this case.
Elizabeth Vargas was extremely biased and hostile when interviewing Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and very sympatheric toward the father in this case. The People Magazine article below shows the false secret network narrative that 20/20 had planned from the beginning. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest a “secret network” was involved in the Grazzini-Rucki case or involved in the disappearance of the eldest two daughters. In fact, both S.R. and G.R. openly admit they ran away due to safety concerns, and raised numerous abuse allegations prior to running away and after being found 2 years later. During all this time, their story is consistent, and does not change.

Elizabeth Vargas

 

Recently, 20/20’s Elizabeth Vargas announced her resignation from the show “to pursue new ventures”.

Here’s Vargas’ note to 20/20 staffers: 

To my 20/20 family,

I want you to hear some news about me, from me. I will be leaving ABC News, and 20/20 at the end of this historic 40th season. It has been a profound privilege to be the anchor of 20/20 for 14 years, and a true honor to work with each and every one of you. I am incredibly lucky to work alongside the very best in the business: the producers, editors, writers on this show, and the enormous team working every week to get our show on the air. I am so very proud of the stories we have told together.

I am sorry only to have to share this news with you as we celebrate the holidays. I had hoped to make this announcement after the first of the year.

This is not goodbye – I will be here through May, and cannot wait to do more work with all you in the months ahead.

Have a happy holiday with your families, and I will see you next year.

With gratitude,

Elizabeth

Stay tuned for more information on Elizabeth Vargas and 20/20.

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

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.

Press Release: Defying Death, Sandra Grazzini-Rucki’s Testimony

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Defying Death: Sandra Grazzini-Rucki Pleads for Lives of her Children, Demands Justice
Dakota County, Minnesota – February 15, 2018 – Sandra Grazzini-Rucki speaks out about domestic violence, and family court failures to protect victims of abuse and their children, in recently released video “Defying Death”. View here: Defying Death – Sandra Grazzini-Rucki
In the video, Sandra describes 20+ years of physical, sexual, emotional abuse, and cruelty, at the hands of her violent and controlling husband, David Rucki. After filing for divorce, the family court system became an extension of the abuse Sandra suffered. The judge presiding over the case, David L. Knutson, was chosen by Rucki, who had previous dealings with him in criminal court, and was given preferential treatment. In family court, Judge Knuston continued to favor Rucki and broke the law, and violated the Constitutional rights of Sandra in doing so. As a result of the over 4,000 orders Judge Knutson issued against Sandra, she is forcibly separated from her five children, homeless and destitute.
Judge Knutson and other court professionals failed to protect the children from abuse, and endangered their lives by giving custody to their father, perpetrator. The abuse Sandra, and the children, suffered is well documented (lengthy CPS file, police reports, statements from the children, recommendations from a social worker stating two of the children should be placed in foster care to protect them from Rucki, and more). When the children raised allegations of physical, sexual, and mental abuse from their father, Judge Knutson and court professionals not only ignored their cries for help but also pressured them to recant abuse. Two of Sandra’s daughters were so afraid for their lives that in April 2013, they ran away and went into hiding for two years. Sandra made national headlines after being charged for her role in assisting her daughters after they ran away. She plead the affirmative defense during her criminal trial, stating her actions were taken to protect her children imminent harm. Sandra was later convicted of parental deprivation after the judge presiding over her case (who also had past dealing with Rucki) suppressed 80% of evidence proving the abuse, which then prevented her from be able to prove her defense.
Sandra says Rucki is a risk to the community, and claims he has not only abused her children but has sexually abused another child. She points to Rucki’s lengthy criminal record, which includes violent offenses and numerous protective orders filed against him, to demonstrate what he is capable of. Sandra says Rucki should be criminally charged, and Judge Knutson, and others in the court, should be held accountable.
Sandra takes great risk in speaking out, in the video states she is “coming out of hiding”, meaning she fears retaliation for exposing the failures of family court, and the corruption in her case. Sandra continues to be stalked, harassed and threatened by Rucki and without protection from the legal system, her life remains in danger.
Defying death, Sandra has a message for her violent ex-husband, and the legal system that continues to protect and enable him, “You will not break me, I will not be silent. I will continue to fight. I will continue to speak out. I will continue to document and prove for the rest of my life, over and over, if I have to…but we are going to stop this, and in the end we will get justice.”
Source: The Coalition for Justice
E-Mail: defingdeath@protonmail.com

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/

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?