Listen in to “Punished 4 Protecting” with Francesca Amato-Banfield and guests Michael Volpe and Sandra Grazzini-Rucki discussing updates on her case and sharing audio testimony of one of the Rucki children describing abuse she suffered at her father’s hand, and the failure of the family courts to protect her. Michael Volpe calls this the “#Metoo moment of family court”. The audio can be heard at this link: S Rucki describes abuse at her father’s and courts hands.
Michael Volpe and Sandra also reveal shocking new allegations of mortgage fraud and RICO crimes being committed by ex-husband, David Rucki.
Here are the background documents referred to during this episode. Below is the docket for one of the trusts. Note that on November 1, 2017, there is an entry for “Petition for disbursement/release of funds”.
On the first page, who is the petitioner, David Rucki.
Michael Volpe says this is evidence that David Rucki is illegally taking money from a trust that he is not entitled to, “Here is a guy who has been embezzled from two trusts, this is just what we know, two trusts of Sam’s father meant for his children. And by the way he is effectively stealing from a dead man because her father is no longer alive...“
Below is a photo of the other trust. Of note is that it says FBO, or for the beneficiary of, Sandra Grazzini-Rucki. All the money 1636.28 shares have been withdrawn, but as Ms. Grazzini-Rucki notes in the interview, she’s received none of it. Where did it go?
Michael Volpe says about the Grazzini-Rucki case:
“What all of this is referred to is R.I.C.O. – racketeering influenced and corrupt organization, and that’s what you had. This entire divorce and if you go back to her (Sandra) parent’s guardianship, is one giant criminal conspiracy to embezzle, to hide abuse, to commit mortgage fraud, to get public officials to look the other way on all of it…it is no different than the rackets run by the Gambino family, it’s no different than any other R.I.C.O conspiracy..that’s how big this is and the F.B.I. should be involved…“
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.”
A letter in support of fit, loving mother Sandra Grazzini-Rucki who has been unjustly targeted by Dakota County, and the State of Minnesota, in a family and criminal court case that has completely destroyed her life and caused her not only to become homeless, but to go into hiding for fear of her safety. Please read below for more information on how you can contribute your own letter. Or leave a comment to this blog. Thank-you!
_______________
Like Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, I have 5 children, my children and I are victims of state-sponsored ‘case fixing’ and racketeering and an unbelievable level of oppression and terror, we have been separated for many years, and we face never-ending tyranny by the criminal elements in our government, due in large part to inaccurate news stories like your ‘Footprints in the Snow‘.
Here is a recent comment I made on YouTube videos in my ongoing effort to set the record straight here in Minnesota:
“DEAR MINNESOTANS:
Don’t be fooled.
“Parental Alienation” definitely exists and is definitely child abuse, but in this case it was used by David Rucki, his attorney Lisa Elliot, and especially by judge David Knutson and many other officers of the Dakota County courts as a smokescreen to dupe the public and hide their “case fixing” and racketeering and money laundering; nearly every case in Minnesota’s First Judicial District — family law, criminal, probate, etc. — has been “fixed” over the past few decades to maximize profits and federal funding. Billions of dollars have been extorted from Minnesotans and tens-of-billions of dollars have been stolen from American taxpayers. And Minnesota’s highest-authorities know all about it and look the other way because of all the money coming in to the state.
Do your own research. Look below the surface in the Sandra Grazzini-Rucki case. Find out what Knutson and the other “case fixing criminals” did to Sandra and her attorney, Michelle MacDonald — then you will know why they are falsely accusing Sandra of “parental alienation.”
It’s a total farce. And the farce is on you, Minnesotans.”
When I sent a one-page summary of my family’s ordeal, and 9 criminal complaints that I sent to Minnesota’s highest-authorities in a final attempt to stop the crime spree against my family, not knowing at the time that they are all involved in the treason. Needless to say, I received no responses or help for my suffering family, just like Sandra.
As stated in my complaints, I have evidence to prove hundreds of crimes by hundreds of officials. I was victimized in the same judicial district as Sandra. I have a growing list of other victims in this district who can attest to the crime sprees against Sandra, and me, and them, and many others who have been ripped off by “Minnesota’s case fixers.”
Please do a follow up show to correct your errors and expose the truth. I, and many others, would be happy to contribute.
A response to this email would be greatly appreciated.
Asking everyone to send emails to express your thoughts, and demand answers, in regards to injustices, and numerous violations of state law, and Constitutional rights committed in the family and criminal case of Sandra Grazzini Rucki.
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?
The injustice and tyranny in your Family Court has gone viral across the country and around the globe.
I am an activist in dozens of parents and children’s rights groups with hundreds of thousands of members. I also have many relatives and friends all over Europe and I am asking each and everyone I know to expose the dirty laundry that is so blatantly permitted by your Family Court and your judges.
Shame on anyone who is responsible for allowing a helpless mother and her children to suffer such atrocities all for profit.
* 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
*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:
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???”
“Most of you are aware of the fact that I was maliciously prosecuted and falsely convicted in the State of Minnesota vs Deirdre Evavold Case No.19HA-CR-15-4227
On July 31st, 2017, I was also served with a false harassment restraining order (HRO) signed by the very judge that presided over my criminal trial. Affidavit for HRO.
Anyhow, the restraining order was issued ex parte and the petitioner indicated that he is not requesting a hearing at this time. In order for me to access the courts for a hearing to have this harassing harassment order dismissed, I have to pay a $300 filing fee. I have already been charged thousands of dollars in court fees from the courtroom, to jail, to probation. This is the continued legal harassment that I am under because I refuse to accept the continued injustices being thrown at me…“
“The whole thing is about control.. if they (the court system) encounters a non-custodial parent like myself in pursuit of justice, they will do anything to keep truth off the records…” ~ John Hentges
(Originally aired 7/13/2017): Katherine Hine, host of “Hidden Truth Revealed” and guest John Hentges discuss the lawless family court system where corruption, fraud and abuses of judicial power are commonplace.
Hentges, a victim of family court in both Colorado and Minnesota, shares his story of how the “judges threw the law book out the door” during his divorce, and describes the devastating impact the injustice in the family court has inflicted on his life. Hentges says his divorce case was “fixed” and resulted in him becoming estranged from his 5 children, becoming impoverished (child support was imputed at more than 4x times higher than his actual earnings) and stripped of everything he owns – his home, business, personal vehicles, and even his premarital belongings and inheritance. Hentges was also arrested on false charges, and jailed, on 3 separate occasions.
Hentges also discusses what he believes is “criminal racketeering” occurring in the court system, where cases are fixed, and parents ensnared in the system, and even jailed, for financial incentives.
Hentges has continued to fight for justice, and since has founded Pro Se Alliance (a charity to help educate those are representing themselves pro se, or without representation, in legal matters) and The People’s Branch. He also discusses his ideas for court and judicial reform in this episode.
The last 15 minutes of the show (1:45 in timing) is a brief discussion of the Sandra Grazzini-Rucki case. Both Hentges and Grazzini-Rucki have family court cases in the 1st Judicial District in Minnesota.
The discussion includes:
How the court system “aided and abetted” to place the five Rucki children in the custody of an identified abuser; creating a situation so dangerous that the two oldest daughters ran away in order to protect themselves.
The retaliation attorney Michelle MacDonald faced for representing Sandra Grazzini-Rucki orchestrated “by the organized control crime that the controls the judiciary and the bar in Minnesota”.
That the State of Minnesota, and its leaders, have been provided with information, evidence and complaints concerning the Grazzini-Rucki case, and Hentges’ case, and others, and have failed to investigate or take action concerning systemic problems, and corruption, existing within the judiciary, and the family court system.
Hentges says about Judge David L. Knutson, the former family court judge on the Grazzini-Rucki case, “I hope he is listening or somebody is listening, I will do everything that I can to have that man put in prison for the rest of his life.”
Hentges is advocating for, and taking action, to request a formal investigation of 32 victims of family court, including that of Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, and his own, and additionally asking for whistle blower like protection with the U.S. Attorney General and the Department of Justice.
“In separate response briefs to pro se attorneys, the Dakota County Prosecutor’s Office has acknowledged jury tampering, misdirected an allegation of witness tampering, and refused to respond to address all allegations of judicial misconduct in the Rucki case.
The briefs from Dakota County Prosecutor James Backstrom were in response to briefs filed by Dede Evavold and Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, both representing themselves.
Dakota County Attorney James Backstrom
Evavold has been representing herself after the state ruled her too well off to receive an attorney while Grazzini-Rucki was represented but was so disgusted by her attorney’s brief that she filed one on her own.
Her attorney, Steven Russett, who was provided by the Minnesota Appellate Public Defender’s Office, did not respond to an email and voicemail for comment.
In the most startling admission, the prosecutors acknowledge- responding to Grazzini-Rucki- that a reporter approached the jury while they were in a common area during a lunch break and asked if any wanted to be interviewed when the trial ended.
The reporter’s name is Laura Adelmann, who works for the Sun Current, the hometown newspaper of Lakeville, Minnesota, where the Rucki’s live. “There was one occasion during trial in which it was it was reported to Judge Asphaug that a reporter (I.E. Laura Adelmann) had approached the jurors while they were eating in the common area of the courthouse and asked if she could interview them after the trial was over.” Backstrom’s brief stated.
This incident occurred on Friday July 18, 2016, while the trial was ongoing, and on Monday July 21, 2016, Judge Asphaug issued this statement to the court gallery.
“I also received information that a member of the press approached our jurors last week and asked if jurors would be willing to speak after the trial. It is- I am ordering that you may not approach the jurors in the common area of the courthouse. It is- it has a chilling effect. It concerns jurors don’t do it.” An email to Adelmann was left unreturned. A voicemail to her editor, Tad Johnson, was also left unreturned.
Judge Karen Asphaug
Though the trial was covered internationally there was not one story which referred to Asphaug’s statement while the trial was ongoing.
Emails to Karen Zamora and Brandon Stahl, who each covered parts of the trial for the Minneapolis Star Tribune, were left unreturned.
An email to Michael Brodkorb, who has boasted that he covered each day of the trial, was also left unreturned.
Emails to 20/20 host, Elizabeth Vargas, and her two producers, Beth Mullin and Sean Dooley, were also left unreturned; 20/20 covered parts of the trial though it’s not clear if they were there that day.
Beau Berentson said “Our office does not conduct legal research,” in an email.
But when asked if an investigation had been started or if anyone had been disciplined for allowing press to get so close to the jury- a major break in protocol according to everyone this reporter spoke with- Berentson did not respond.
While lawyers who spoke with this reporter said it was unprecedented that press would ever get so close to a jury during trial, they were split on its significance.
Michael McCray, a United States Department of Agriculture whistleblower and lawyer, said he believed that such an interaction would cause all sorts of thoughts to enter a jury’s head “not one will be about the merits of the case.”
Lee Dryer is a Nashville attorney and part-time judge.
“No trial is perfect,” Dryer said, but was less concerned since nothing about the case was discussed.
Dryer said he was more concerned with an allegation of witness tampering; Samantha Rucki, Grazzini-Rucki’s daughter who ran away, responded to Kelli Coughlin a Lakeville Police Department Detective, who asked her if she was at a police interview conducted approximately a month before her mother’s trial.
This police interview occurred approximately a month prior to her mother’s trial on June 30, 2016.
“They (her father and his sister) basically said I have to (go to the interview) and I have to be here and I have to recant everything I said and it’s going and that’s the way it’s gonna be- and they made me feel guilty about it and I started to cry.” Samantha responded when asked if she was at the interview of her own free will.
Judge Asphaug refused to allow the interview into Grazzini-Rucki’s trial, Samantha Rucki testified by Skype, with her aunt, grandmother, and attorney in the same room but not in camera, her father was listening in from outside the door.
David Rucki Facebook April 2016, Public Statement About Missing Daughters
Furthermore, Judge Asphaug would only allow a limited number of questions. Samantha then downplayed the abuse and claimed she ran away to get away from a bad divorce.
Dryer said that having Samantha testify by Skype raises sixth amendment issues, of a defendant confronting their accuser.
Judge Asphaug argued that Samantha was too fragile to see her mother, but child rape victims are forced to confront their alleged rapist if that rapist is to be convicted.
In their response brief, prosecutors argued that since they weren’t directly involved in the witness tampering, they shouldn’t be held responsible.
“Appellant (Evavold) fails to detail what misconduct Respondent (Dakota County Prosecutor) engaged in. In support of her argument, Appellant points to an interview that was conducted by law enforcement of SVR (Samantha). Appellant is under the misbelief that Respondent somehow coerced SVR into providing the statement and that SVR lied in the statement.”
The prosecutor’s brief only alludes to a police interview but does not detail what Samantha said in the interview.
Dede Evavold also argued that there was judicial and prosecutorial misconduct, charges not answered by Backstrom.
Judge Asphaug placed herself on Evavold’s, Grazzini-Rucki’s, and the Dahlen’s cases, and refused to recuse herself when each of the four defendants asked.
Furthermore, in 2010, she appears to have fixed a case for David Rucki.
On September 8, 2009, David Rucki went into a fit of rage against his neighbors while they were escorting approximately a dozen two and three-year-old children to the daycare facility they ran.
“Complainant stated his wife, two children, and six daycare kids ages three and under were in the driveway when suspect (David Rucki) approached. He stated the suspect threatened his wife, his son, and called them all assholes while standing in the cul-de-sac in front of their home. While I was speaking with the complainant, he informed me that the suspect drove by as we were speaking and put up his middle finger on his left hand at him. Complainant said that they have had on-going harassment type issues with the suspect and his dogs as a result of operating a home daycare facility. He said suspect’s dogs repeatedly come into his yard when daycare parents and kids arrive, barking and growling and the guests as the children are dropped off. He said they have tried to talk to the suspect in the past to mediate the situation, but that he no longer feels comfortable due to elevated language and behavior.”
Rucki was charged with disorderly conduct and the case came in front of Judge Asphaug. On the eve of trial, Asphaug dismissed the case for a lack of probable cause, an inexplicable decision which has never been explained.
Lack of probable cause applies to cases with little or no evidence not an incident witnessed by several adults and approximately twelve children. Furthermore, if a case is dismissed due to a lack of probable cause it would be during normal pre-trial hearings, not on the eve of trial, and there’s no evidence that any sort of motion was even filed to trigger this.
Asphaug proceeded to exclude approximately 90% of the evidence of abuse: including David Rucki’s police report, all Child Protective Services reports, all orders for protection against David Rucki, and letters, from Sandra Grazzini Rucki’s, Dede Evavold’s, and the Dahlen’s trials.
Backstrom’s office provided answers to most of the charges of judicial misconduct but not all.
For instance, in their reply brief, the prosecution claims that Grazzini-Rucki only referred to three items as being excluded: The Fox 9 Newscast from June 2013, the GPS tracker from when David Rucki placed a tracker under Grazzini-Rucki’s friend and advocate’s car, Michael Rhedin, and Social Services records.
Assistant Dakota County Attorney, Kathryn Keena
But while Grazzini-Rucki did complain about these, and their exclusion is significant, police reports, letters, and other recordings were also excluded; Sandra Grazzini-Rucki complained of clear judicial bias.
The prosecution downplayed in its brief the breadth of the evidence excluded during trial.
Backstrom’s office did not respond to emails for comment.”
Evavold Appeal 2017 is a compelling read that begins with the argument that Dede was wrongfully charged and convicted of parental deprivation and that, quote (p.5), “The affirmative defense did not need to be raised as there was substantial evidence supporting the affirmative defense. The state had all evidence that no crime was committed and that the girls ran away because of abuse...” That statement is validated by police reports that show when paternal aunt Tammy Love reported S.R. and G.R. as missing that she admitted the girls had run away because they were “upset because court ordered her and her sister to live with aunt…” Another police report dated 11/23/2015, the day the girls were found living at the Dahlen ranch again affirms they did run away of their own free will and would run again if forced to live with their abusive father,”Both girls made it very clear to me that if they were forced to go with their dad, they would run again…”
The appeal also argues:
*The State purposely ignored allegations and documentation indicating child abuse of S.R. and G.R. occurred.
*The State refused to investigate allegations of witness tampering because it would hurt its case to do so.
*Additional charges were filed against Evavold after S.R. was forced to recant her statements due to pressure and intimidation asserted against her by father, David Rucki, and paternal aunt, Tammy Love. S.R.’s story then changed from her original statements, which is witness tampering. The State should have never been allowed to proceed with prosecution due to witness tampering. (p.8-9)
*The Dakota County Attorney’s Office obstructed the discovery process and failed to provide all evidence available to Evavold. (p.12-21)
*Prosecutor Kathryn Keena attempted to force Evavold to plead guilty without allowing her to see all of the evidence of the case, which has been dubbed a “trial by ambush”. (p. 16-17)
*Judge Karen Asphaug should have recused herself from the case because she was involved with previous criminal proceedings involving David Rucki where she ruled in his favor, and then concealed her role in the cases. (p.21) (Also read this expose written by journalist Michael Volpe on the subject: Did judges in Sandra Grazzini-Rucki case previously fix husband’s cases? )
*Judge Asphaug assigned herself to all 4 criminal trials relating to the Grazzini-Rucki parental deprivation case, “this action led to knowledge of disputed facts and affected impartiality“.
(Side Note: Judge Asphaug’s husband David Warg is a former partner in a law firm with Judge Tim D. Wermager. Judge Wermager was the first judge assigned to the Grazzini-Rucki divorce. Wermager sworn in as judge)
*Due process violations prevented Evavold from getting a fair trial.
Michael Volpe, of CDN News, reports on a newly released police report from the Lakeville P.D. that reveals that runaway teens, Samantha and Gianna Rucki, fought against returning to their father after being discovered living on a therapeutic horse ranch after going into hiding for more than 2 years. The girls decided to run away after the family court system failed to protect them from an abusive father and placed them into a custody situation they felt was unsafe.
That Samantha and Gianna threatened to run away from their father’s care AFTER being discovered by police the supports defense raised by mother, Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, that she hid them for their safety (which is an affirmative defense). The girls demonstrated palpable fear of their father, David Rucki. It also validates the defense of Doug and Gina Dahlen who claimed both girls repeatedly threatened to run away if returned to their father, and they allowed the girls to stay on the ranch for their own safety, and that the girls were free to leave at any time but chose to stay of their own free will.
The police report, from November 21, 2015, was never seen before by Sandra who was charged with parental deprivation for her efforts to protect her daughters. As part of the discovery process, this police report should have been turned over to Grazzini-Rucki, and the 3 other defendants charged in this case.
According to Volpe: “If the Dakota County Prosecutor, whose office prosecuted the case, failed to provide this police report, this would be a “Brady violation” named after the U.S. Supreme Court Case Brady V Maryland, in which a conviction was overturned after prosecutors failed to provide exculpatory evidence, meaning, in this case, evidence favorable to the defense. In order for a legal proceeding to be just, all evidence must be shared with both sides…Ignoring Brady is not only an egregious violation of prosecutorial ethics…”
Volpe goes on to say: “Given this issue, under normal circumstances, Sandra Grazzini-Rucki’s conviction would have been thrown out. But nothing has been normal in this case.”
Upon being found at a therapeutic horse ranch belonging to Doug and Gina Dahlen on 11/18/2015, the Rucki sisters told police they would run away again if returned to the care of their father, David Rucki.
According to the police report: “Samantha and Gianna came down, and immediately told us that they would not go back to their father. We told them that our first concern was their safety. I did ask them about the last time that they had heard from their mother, and they told me that they would not say anything without a lawyer.” The report also indicated that Samantha has quote “issues with males”.
Arriving on scene was Detective Kelli Coughlin from the Lakeville police, who previously responded to an incident where Rucki swore and threatened a member of ex wife, Sandra Grazzini-Rucki’s family. The previous police report shows Rucki’s propensity towards violence, and the very real fear other people have of him. It also shows that Coughlin had knowledge of Rucki’s abuse violent behavior towards his family, and when the Lakeville P.D. pushed to return to the Rucki girls to a home they felt was unsafe, the Lakeville P.D. did so with full knowledge of the case, including abuse allegations.
The police report indicates the victim is fearful for his family and feels Rucki will follow through on his threats that include “I‘m coming after you and you won’t see me coming” and “It probably won’t be me (that will get you).” At the time of the incident, Sandra’s mother died the night before after an agonizing battle with cancer. While the family was still grieving Rucki fought to gain control of the family trust, and threatened and intimidated family members to stake a claim on something that was not legally or rightfully his. Rucki Police Report
Samantha and Gianna were assigned a social worker and also given a lawyer, both argued in court on behalf of the sisters that they their father and did not want to be placed in his care. The sisters stated they would attend therapy and not attempt to run away again if they were able to stay in foster care. Judge Michael Mayer of Dakota County denied the request, the sisters were sent to reunification therapy in rural California and then were placed backed into the custody of David Rucki, father, against their will.
Justice for Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and Children 