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

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

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

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

___________________

Probation Violation Hearing

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

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

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

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

Stay tuned for the outcome. . .

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

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

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

        Minnesota Department of Corrections

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

        2.         Offense information: fill out completely.

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

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

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

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

        7.         Special conditions: fill in completely.

        8.         Victim: fill in completely.

        9.         Education/training: fill in completely.

        10.       Employment/military: fill in completely.

        11.       Family data: fill in completely.

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

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

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

Advertisements

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???”

 

Millionaire Rucki Seeks Court Filing Costs from Homeless, Destitute Ex-Wife

That David Rucki would file a motion to compel homeless, destitute ex-wife, Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, to pay for his own court costs in legal proceedings that have destroyed her life.. is the same as charging for the nail he is driving into her coffin.

This is no different than what Saddam Hussein would do to his victims.. shoot them dead and then charge the family for the bullet.

Though the court has ruled Sandra Grazzini-Rucki too poor to pay for her own filings, her ex-husband’s attorney thinks she should pay for his.

The latest from journalist Michael Volpe…

 

Lisa Elliott, the long-time attorney for David Rucki, filed a notice for a taxation of costs- meaning she wants the other side to pay for the costs of filing- with the appeals court.

Attorney Lisa Elliot

In her response, Grazzini-Rucki’s attorney, Michelle MacDonald explained to the court that her client is a pauper.

Appellant, Sandra Sue Grazzini-Rucki, hereby objects to the taxation of costs and disbursements dated September 1, 2017,” MacDonald said in her response, “on the ground that: Appellant was granted informa pauperis status and is a pauper.”

By granting Grazzini-Rucki informa pauperis status the court has deemed Grazzini-Rucki too poor to afford to pay for her own filing fees and they are thereby waived; but that hasn’t stopped Elliott from demanding she pay for her client’s filing fees.

David Rucki

MacDonald, after receiving a $5,000 retainer in early 2013, has been working on Grazzini-Rucki’s custody case pro-bono; she was once forced to conduct part of a custody trial while handcuffed to a wheelchair.

The latest filing follows a similar filing by Elliott in late August asking the court which handled her client’s divorce to order Grazzini-Rucki to pay for all the filing fees- in excess of $3,000- she accrued in that court.

The series of events defy logic.

Late last month, the same appeals court upheld a previous ruling by Judge Maria Pastoor which ordered Grazzini-Rucki to pay her ex-husband nearly $1,000 in child support.

That appeal’s decision was authored by Judge Jill Flaskamps Halbrooks.

David Rucki is a multi-millionaire who received 100% of the marital estate- which included a business, four homes, and nine classic cars- by an order of Judge David Knutson despite the standard in all divorce that distributions of marital estates be “equitable”.

Realty Listing Photos Ireland Place

While the court on one hand has recognized Grazzini-Rucki’s pauper status, the same court has ordered her to pay child support to a multi-millionaire even though she is homeless, penniless and jobless, rendered that way by the same court which is now ordering her to pay child support.

Lisa Elliott has refused to respond to repeated emails for comment.

Beau Berentson, public affairs officer for the Minnesota Courts, also did not respond to an email for comment.

___________________

Beau Berentson, Director of Communications and Public Affairs at the Minnesota Judicial Branch, receives his salary from the tax payers of Minnesota… and it is his job to answer your questions or comments, including those about the Grazzini-Rucki case.

Contact: Beau Berentson
Court Information Office
Director of Communications and Public Affairs
(651) 296-6043 (phone)
(651) 297-5636 (fax)

Send e-mail via contact form at: Minnesota Court Information Office

Or: beau.berentson@courts.state.mn.us

Judge David Knutson Retaliates Against Red Herring Alert

Public Domain: https://www.pexels.com

And for anyone who would dare press the complaints and issues beyond the initial “status quo guardians”, demonization, discrediting and economic retaliation are used to neutralize these voices of discontent and dissent…” ~ Don Mashak~ Political Google Site

Breaking News… Corrupt in Dakota County, Judge David L. Knutson retaliates against blogger and co-defendant in the Grazzini-Rucki case, Dede Evavold.

Judge Knutson issued a probation violation summons the very same day Evavold published an article Secrecy Is The Freedom Tyrants Dream Of criticizing the lack of transparency, and accountability in the judicial system.

The article mentioned Judge Knutson as an example, and included copies of a complaint previously raised against him. The article also suggested that Judge Knutson be removed from the bench or impeached.

Judge David Knutson — who has played role both in the Grazzini-Rucki criminal trial and the divorce of Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and David Rucki — issued a probation violation summons against Evavold for publishing articles on a blog called “Red Herring Alert”. The violation stems from a court order prohibiting Evavold to mention the name of the Grazzini-Rucki family in social media for the length of her probation, an estimated 8 years!

Red Herring Alert is a blog that includes contributions from many authors, and there is no evidence that Evavold actually created or published the content in question.

Dede Evavold is not a criminal – she is a wife and a mother, who as a hobby, enjoys writing about current events and political news.

Evavold’s life was turned upside down after being convicted of 6 felonies, and sentenced by Judge Karen Asphaug (November 10, 2016) for felony parental deprivation for her role in assisting two teens S.R. and G.R. who were desperate to escape an abusive father (and paternal aunt) and feared for their lives after the courts and police failed to protect them. S.R. and G.R. openly stated they would run away with or without help and remained in hiding for over 2 years. When given opportunities to return to the care of their father, David Rucki, both girls refused, due to safety concerns. Witnesses say the behavior and emotional state of both S.R. and G.R. is consistent with abuse: Multiple Witness Reports: Rucki Sisters Fearful of Father, Felt Safe at Ranch

Judge David L Knutson

Judge Knutson ignored their cries for help of all five Rucki children and court ordered them into reunification therapy, and then the sole custody of, the identified abuser, father, David Rucki. At the time of the custody order, Rucki was on probation for a violation of a protective order, stemming from an incident involving ex-wife, Sandra. Sandra says she is being stalked, harassed and threatened by Rucki.

Judge Knutson made his ruling despite overwhelming evidence of Rucki’s propensity towards violence, and evidence supporting abuse of the children had occurred. For example, during a “telephonic conference” held on  September 7, 2012, Judge Knutson admitted that he was aware of allegations of sexual abuse involving the girls. Instead of protecting the children, Judge Knutson ordered their mother, Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, from the home and worked to reunite the children with their abusive father. Just a few months later, the Rucki children personally met with Judge Knutson in chambers, and disclosed allegations of abuse. Immediately after disclosure, Judge Knutson ordered the Rucki children into visiting Rucki and placed a bailiff at the door to prevent their escape.  Judge Knutson then ordered that the conference with the children be sealed, in an apparent cover up.

Judge Knutson is involved in every aspect of the Grazzini-Rucki case, and acts outside the law in such an extreme way that it could be said that he is David Rucki’s hired thug. Judge Knutson was involved in criminal cases against David Rucki, giving preferential treatment. Judge Knutson was involved in both the the divorce and criminal trial. Judge Knutson assigned himself to Sandra Grazzini-Rucki’s criminal case and gave her a million dollar bail in Novmber, 2015.  Judge Knutson is also connected to all of the judges appointed to every level of this case – including a connection to Judge Karen Asphaug, who is now presiding over the criminal trials of both Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and Dede Evavold.

Dede Evavold and Sandra Grazzini-Rucki

Dede Evavold has a constitutionally protected right to express her views, and should not be punished for the exercise of her 1st Amendment right to free speech. That Judge Knutson would take these actions against her, and be allowed to do so, shows just how corrupt the courts, and judicial system, in Dakota County really are. 

Beyond that, the public and people of Minnesota should also be expressing concern about the lawless and dangerous actions of Judge Knutson; who has court ordered five children into the care and custody of a dangerous abuser and destroyed the mother who sought to protect them.

That Dede Evavold is speaking out, despite enormous pressure against her to remain silent, and threats of jail, is courageous. To remain silent on this issue would mean complicity in the abuse of the Rucki children, and enable the destruction of Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, a loving, mother, who is being persecuted for her efforts to keep her children safe from harm after the family court system failed to protect them.

Hear more from Dede in her interview on Village Connection Radio: DEDE EVAVOLD, PAYING FOR BEING AN ACTIVIST FOR CHANGE

 

Read More About Judge David Knutson:

Commentary: Bailiffs Acting Like Judge Knutson’s Personal Thugs

Did judges in Sandra Grazzini-Rucki case previously fix husband’s cases?

2013 Complaint Against Judge David L. Knutson Alleges Misconduct, Malice

Never Forget: Judge Knutson – Stayed Sentence for Child Rapist

Homeless, Destitute Sandra Grazzini-Rucki Ordered to Pay Nearly $1k Month to Millionaire Ex Husband

The latest coverage on the #grazzinirucki case from journalist Michael Volpe….

Sandra Grazzini-Rucki maybe homeless, jobless, and penniless but that doesn’t mean should not be paying child support to her multi-millionaire ex-husband.

The court acknowledged that Sandra Grazzini-Rucki is currently earns no money but used the concept of imputed income to justify its ruling.

Imputed income allows judges to base child support based on an income level the judge deems is reasonable even if the party is not currently earning that living.

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

That was the peculiar ruling from the Minnesota Court of Appeals authored by Judge Jill Flaskamp Halbrooks.

Judge Halbrooks upheld a decision by Judge Maria Pastoor of the Minnesota’s First Judicial District who ordered Grazzini-Rucki to pay her ex-husband, David Rucki, $975 per month in child support.

Jill Flaskamp Halbrooks

David Rucki is a multi-millionaire who received 100% of the marital estate along with sole custody of their five children in an even more bizarre ruling by Judge David Knutson.

Judge David L Knutson

Pastoor’s original ruling was even more bizarre because she made the ruling while Grazzini-Rucki was incarcerated for helping to hide her two oldest daughters after David Knutson forced them into the custody of her ex-husband’s sister, who the two girls insisted was abusive to them.

Grazzini-Rucki argues that the CSM erred by imputing potential income to her because the CSM (1) disregarded her actual income, (2) failed to make a proper statutory analysis, and (3) improperly adopted a level of income determined by the district court in a prior order. A CSM must calculate a parent’s income based on her potential income.” Judge Halbrooks stated in the order, justifying how a homeless woman can be forced to pay child support.

Judge Halbrooks continued: “Grazzini-Rucki asserts that she had no ability to pay child support because her employment with the airline was ‘in flux’ and that the CSM made ‘vague, generalized and conclusory findings’ that did not justify imputing income under Minn. Stat. § 518A.32, subd. 1.5 But these assertions misconstrue the record, particularly the evidence admitted during the September 2016 hearing. The CSM found that after Grazzini-Rucki was released from jail, she submitted a document in March 2016 that stated that she currently worked as a flight attendant Grazzini-Rucki testified, and the CSM acknowledged, that her status of employment was unknown at the time of the September 2016 hearing. But Grazzini-Rucki did not provide any evidence that her employment status had changed or that her employment had been terminated after March 2016.

While Grazzini-Rucki is technically still employed by American Airlines she is not allowed to earn any money unless and until her felony convictions are expunged.

The court acknowledged that Sandra Grazzini-Rucki is currently earns no money but used the concept of imputed income to justify its ruling.

Imputed income allows judges to base child support based on an income level the judge deems is reasonable even if the party is not currently earning that living.

In this case, Judge Pastoor and Judge Halbrooks have concluded that, despite having six felonies on her record, Sandra Grazzini-Rucki should be able to find work which pays her in excess of $40,000 per year.

Sandra Grazzini and her ex-husband David Rucki owned a trucking company during their marriage which generated millions in income, but Judge David Knutson, who presided over much of their divorce, ordered David Rucki to get 100% of their marital estate while ordering Sandra Grazzini-Rucki to pay child support after he also ordered sole-custody to go to David Rucki.

Judge Knutson ordered David Rucki to receive sole custody despite overwhelming evidence he is violent:  a bar fighta road rage incidentincidents of stalkingmultiple violations of restraining orders and choking his wife.

A child protective services report stated that his son, Nico, claimed that David Rucki stuck a gun to his head when he was eight years old.

Screenshot ABC 20/20

To add insult to injury, Lisa Elliott, David Rucki’s attorney, filed a motion on August 15, 2017, asking for Sandra Grazzini-Rucki to pay for all the filing fees- $3563 in total- which Elliott accrued since entering the case in 2011.

Attorney Lisa Elliot. Source: redherringalert.wordpress.com

Elliott did not respond to an email for comment.

Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and David Rucki reached what appeared to be an amicable divorce in May 2011, with David Rucki representing himself.

The judge who initially signed the divorce decree, Judge Tim Wermeger, even stated: “The parties were able to settle all issues arising out of the dissolution of the marriage including: child custody and support, spousal maintenance, disposition of real and personal property, and the payment of debts and attorney fees.”

Lisa Elliott joined the case a month after this divorce decree- which is supposed to end a divorce- was signed and the divorce has gone on in perpetuity since her arrival.

Judge David Knutson placed himself on the divorce shortly after Elliott’s arrival; Elliott and David Rucki claimed he was somehow defrauded in the initial eleven page divorce decree.

The Minnesota Court of Appeals would not make Judge Halbrooks available for an interview, saying she cannot discuss her cases.

Beau Berentson, public affairs officer for the Minnesota Court System, did not respond to an email for comment.

 

Minnesota Appellate Court Cover Up: Corruption Continues in Grazzini-Rucki Child Support Ruling

(Dakota County, MN: August 21, 2017) – Minnesota Appellate Court defends ruling of Dakota County Magistrate Maria K. Pastoor to order homeless, destitute Sandra Grazzini-Rucki to pay nearly $1,000 a month in child support to multi-millionaire ex-husband, David Rucki. Appellate Court says Magistrate Pastoor’s ruling was “reasonable” and “did not constitute an abuse of discretion”.

Sandra admitted in a recent interview that she relies on couch surfing and eat cold cans of Spaghetti-O’s in order to survive. She has been turned away from shelters because many in Minnesota are afraid of Rucki (who has harassed and threatened supporters of Sandra). Every day Sandra lives in uncertainty.. And she should be concerned, because the child support ruling has been upheld by the Appellate Court, it could be used as grounds to issue an arrest warrant for child support, and throw Sandra into  jail. 

In comparison, David Rucki lives in a castle-like home in a wealthy suburb of Lakeville and enjoys a luxury lifestyle.

Rucki has used one of the many classic cars he owns to stalk Sandra.

Stalking – David Rucki driving his classic Cadillac

And at one point, Rucki retained at least two attorneys – costing him nearly $1,000 per hour (the other attorney, Marshall Tannick was retained to intimidate bloggers to stop reporting on the Grazzini-Rucki case). Not bad for a welfare recipient!

Responsive Affidavit, Lisa Elliot, 7/2/2015, shows David Rucki pays an hourly rate of $310 for her services

 

Judicial Cronyism in Grazzini-Rucki Case

Sandra Grazzini-Rucki will never receive a fair trial in Minnesota due to the high levels of judicial corruption and cronyism that have inappropriately influenced her case at every level, and resulted in real violations of her due process and Constitutional rights and caused significant harm.

This is just a small example of the judicial corruption and cronyism occurring in the Grazzini-Rucki case, there is much, much more to this story…

Judge Jill Flaskcamp Halbrooks, who made this recent appellate decision, has been on nearly all of the Grazzini-Rucki appeals – for both civil and criminal cases — and has ruled against Sandra in each and every case.

Judge Jill Flaskamp Halbrooks

Judge Flaskcamp Halbrooks previously was a member of the Minnesota Board on Judicial Standards with Judge David L. Knutson, the family court judge on the Grazzini-Rucki case. 2015 Board on Judicial Standard Members and Staff

Child Support Magistrate Pastoor also shares a prior professional relationship to Judge David L. Knutson. Magistrate Pastoor identifies herself as a feminist and a defender of abused women, even though she has vocally supported and enabled identified abuser, David Rucki.  Battered from the Bench: Magistrate Pastoor Advocates for Legal Protection of Abused Women, Does Opposite in Grazzini-Rucki Child Support Case

Overwhelming evidence exists that Rucki abused Sandra and the children including The definitive dossier documenting David Rucki’s violence: 99 pages of police reports, orders for protection, letters, affidavits, and more…

Judge David L Knutson

The rulings of Judge David L Knutson caused Sandra to become homeless, destitute and estranged from her children. Judge Knutson re-opened the Grazzini-Rucki case after the divorce was finalized and ignored testimony from Rucki that he was initiating the re-opening of the divorce to commit financial fraud. Read More: David Rucki “Paper Divorce” Scam/

Rucki admitted in court that he was seeking a “paper divorce” and Judge Knutson determined that Sandra was not aware of her husband’s intentions at the time of the divorce. Despite this, Judge Knutson acted as a co-conspirator in the “paper divorce” fraud when he ordered that 100% of the marital property be awarded to Rucki to include four homes, several vehicles, all the furniture and household property, the bank accounts, the trucking business…everything including Sandra’s personal belongings and photos of the five Rucki children. Knutson also ordered that any and all income that Sandra should earn or save would be turned over to Rucki for the rest of her life. Sandra’s savings and even her retirement fund have been stolen by court order and turned over to Rucki. Sandra and the children’s portion of a family trust left to them by her parents was also plundered and turned over to Rucki.

In fact, Rucki has been so enriched by the divorce that he is in a better place financially now than when married. And yet Rucki claims he is impoverished and in need of financial assistance!

Read More: Multi-Millionaire Rucki claims pauper status in court

Courts Acknowledge Grazzini-Rucki is Homeless

Several Minnesota courts as well as Dakota County Prosecutor Kathryn Keena, and a former probation officer, have established that Sandra is, indeed, homeless.

In fact, when Sandra was discharged from probation by Judge Karen Asphaug, and put on court monitoring in November 2016, she was released without having been required to provide an address or phone number because the court believed she is homeless.

Sandra also qualifies for informa pauperis status on both her family court and criminal cases (this means “in the form of a pauper” and allows court filing fees and certain costs to be paid when a party is determined indigent).

David Rucki: Welfare’s Trust Fund Baby

David Rucki is a trust fund baby who is the beneficiary of the Rucki family trust, he has made millions in the trucking industry and only is successful in claiming that he is impoverished because Dakota County refuses to make Rucki comply with the normal income verification or reporting required when applying for public assistance.

A traffic ticket Rucki received in August 2016 indicates that he has continues to have access to, and use, a checking account from the defunct Rucki Trucking, which has been out of business since 2014.That Rucki has access to and is actively using a bank account that once held millions of dollars – should be a red flag. Rucki Trucking netted millions while in business; the company and it’s trucks have since been re-named TL Rucki Trucking and transferred into the name of Rucki’s sister, Tammy Jo Love.

 

In addition, court records list Rucki’s home address as being in Farmington, which shows he has use of two separate homes.

Tax records indicate the home in Farmington is worth $236,000 and is a home with 4 bedrooms, 2 baths, that has recently underwent extensive remodeling. Rucki claims to be using the Farmington property as a rental property, generating income that was never considered when calculating child support.

David Rucki’s property in Farmington, MN

Rucki’s second home in Lakeville is worth $475,000 – he claims he lives at this address. The Lakeville home is the subject of a previous complaint of mortgage fraud that resulted from Rucki’s “paper divorce” scheme, no charges were ever filled although the activity on the property is certainly unusual and should have triggered investigation. mortgagefrauda

Yet the Appellate Court found no grounds for “abuse of judicial discretion“.. how is that even possible??

 

Diesel Therapy: Sandra Grazzini-Rucki’s Torturous Journey on Prison Transport

If you even possibly imagine how bad being locked down for 23 hours a day in a cell with a woman who just killed somebody could be, transport was a thousand times worse...” Sandra Grazzini-Rucki

A recent interview of Sandra Grazzini-Rucki on F.A.C.E. U.S. describes her torturous journey on prison transport that involved nearly a month of being shackled hand to foot, and placed in a dog cage, as she was driven in a jagged route from Florida to Minnesota from October-November 2015 after a sealed warrant was issued for her rest. At the time of transport, Sandra had no prior criminal history, and was not convicted of any crime.

Listen Here: The Grazzini-Rucki Story as You’ve Never Heard Before  

Diesel Therapy” – The Dangerous Route of Prison Transport

Prison transport is often referred to as “diesel therapy”, nicknamed for the exhaust fumes that permeate transport vans. Diesel therapy is notorious for its extreme and degrading treatment of prisoners where neglect as well as physical and mental abuse is common. Trips can last weeks and months at a time; in which prisoners at held at the mercy of their captors.

In the United States, tens of thousands of suspects and fugitives, many who have not been convicted of a crime (like Sandra at the time of this transport) are transferred from jails and prisons into the care of private companies that handle transport, and operate with almost no oversight or accountability. Transport companies are usually paid per mile, and guards are generally paid only for their time on the road, so they have an incentive to pack vans tightly and take as little breaks as possible. Numerous investigations into the prison transport industry have revealed rampant abuse and neglect of prisoners, and in some cases prisoners actually die from the inhumane conditions, abuse or vehicle crashes/accidents.

On prison transport trips, violent and repeat felons are often transported alongside suspects (and may be chained together). Even something as simple as a child support warrant could land you into diesel therapy, shackled next to a child predator or drug lord. The lack of security on prison transport is also a concern – in some cases prisoners have escaped from transport, or have attacked guards or other prisoners. Sexual assault of female prisoners is also routinely reported on transport – with perpetrators identified as guards, drivers or even other male prisoners. Once inside the prison system, there is little or no recourse for prisoners to file grievances, and they risk retaliation for raising concerns.

At an emotional moment in the show, Sandra’s distress can audibly be heard as she struggles to put into words the abuse she suffered in jail and transport, “About after about 6 days of what was going on.. I don’t know if people really want to know what goes on, because you don’t know what goes on in jails, but people know that people that aren’t really that type of people and they take full advantage of it..and if they feel they got somebody in there that may be proper they will do whatever they can to make it worse for them… And that’s what they did to me. They took advantage of the fact that … whatever..” Sandra is not able to talk further… perhaps she is afraid to say anymore.

From American Mom to Fighting for Survival

How Sandra went from former beauty queen and mother to being criminally charged for her efforts to protect her children from abuse is a journey that has transported her from “a basic American mom” to a woman who is now fighting for her survival.

In her former life Sandra lived in Lakeville, a rural suburb in Minnesota, where she was a stay-at-home mother of 5 children. She also worked as a flight attendant. Sandra is a former beauty queen who is known not just for being attractive but having a beautiful heart as well. She actively volunteered in her community, opened her doors to the neighborhood children to stop by and devoted her life to the care of her 5 children.  Sandra has said it was her dream to be a wife and mother, and that“my children were my world”. However, she did not anticipate that her husband would be an abusive monster with a lengthy criminal history, who would also physically and mentally abuse the children she so loves.

So how did Sandra become destitute, homeless, and now, a 6 time felon who is permanently banned from seeing her children for the rest of their lives? The answer will shock you: she sought a divorce. David Rucki, ex-husband, is a wealthy, well-connected abuser, who has continued to batter Sandra through the family court and legal system. The Grazzini-Rucki family court and criminal case has been overwhelmed with corruption, abuse of judicial power and laws that are routinely broken…the victims in this are the 5 Rucki children who continued to be trapped in an abusive home, and Sandra, whose life remains endangered by the court system that should have protected her and the children.

Sealed Warrant Used to Ambush Sandra Grazzini-Rucki

Now, shocking new details emerge about the initial arrest of Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and the inhumane treatment she received during transport.

Some background needed to understand this story – A nationwide warrant for Sandra’s arrest was submitted by Dakota County Prosecuting Attorney Kathryn M. Keena and not only approved but put under a seal on August 12, 2015. Sandra was charged with 3 counts of felony deprivation of parental rights, a seal means the warrant was kept secret. The seal was to last until Sandra is arrested, and returned to Minnesota. A sealed warrant also means that Sandra was not notified that a warrant was issued against her – and given absolutely no chance to voluntarily turn herself in.

Assistant Dakota County Attorney, Kathryn Keena

Despite the seal, information regarding the warrant was leaked to a local reporter from an unknown source. Whoever leaked the warrant committed an illegal act, though the reporter did nothing illegal by receiving or publishing the information.Sandra was not living in Minnesota at the time of the warrant, and is not aware of the news reports. Dakota County Sheriff Tim Leslie claims the leak was just a “glitch”. Dakota County’s mishanding of Sandra’s arrest warrant is NOT just a “glitch” – it is a serious error that has violated Sandra’s due process rights and resulted in egregious harm being inflicted upon her.

Since the warrant was leaked into the press, there was no legitimate reason for it to remain sealed. But that is not what happened in Dakota County – after the warrant is leaked, it is then re-sealed, making it impossible for Sandra, or her attorney, to be notified of its existence. Providing Sandra with a notice to appear in court would have been appropriate in this case, and easier than what happened next. Instead, Dakota County relentlessly pursued Sandra.

Sandra was apprehended by U.S. Marshalls, in Florida on October 18, 2015. She was temporarily held in jail then transported across the country to be brought back to Minnesota to answer to criminal charges. The story continues… Pt. II Diesel Therapy: Sandra Grazzini-Rucki’s Torturous Journey on Prison Transport