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??

 

Advertisements

Beware! Blog Post May Be A Threat: Michael Volpe On HRO Filed Against Dede Evavold

Beware, the next blog post may be a threat to someone’s safety by Michael Volpe

All rights reserved under the 1st Amendment regarding free speech

Beware, the next blog post may be a threat to someone’s safety.

That’s the allegation made in an ex-parte restraining order filed by David Rucki against Dede Evavold.

Respondent (Evavold) continues to post information about my family, photos of my family, myself and other members of my family,” Rucki said in his ex-parte harassment restraining order application, “Respondent also continues to make allegations which are false but may incite others against me. My children are frightened for their safety and feel their privacy has been violated.

The application continued, “This is a proven pattern that has been going on for years.”

Rucki does not specify what Evavold has said which is harassing or threatening; an email to Rucki’s attorney, Lisa Elliot, was left unreturned.

Evavold has a blog called Red Herring Alert, where she writes about the Rucki case among other blog posts.

This is not the first time David Rucki has used the legal system to try and shut Evavold’s blogging down. In the Summer 2016, his then attorney, Marshall Tannick, sent Evavold a letter threatening a lawsuit if she didn’t remove her blog immediately.

I am writing to you on behalf of David Rucki,” began a letter from Tanick to Evavold from June 7, 2016, “and his daughters, Samantha and Gianna, with regard to the matter relating to the removal and concealment of the girls and related incidents that have occurred during that episode and thereafter.

There are various civil claims arising from your involvement in this matter.”

Tannick did not respond to an email for comment and it’s not clear if he is representing him regarding the restraining order.

Evavold did not respond to the letter at the time and continued blogging.

On April 18, 2013, Rucki’s two oldest daughters- Samantha and Gianna- ran away from home and stayed for approximately two and half years with strangers- Doug and Gina Dahlen- after a judge- David Knutson forced them to live with Rucki’s sister- Tammy Love; even though all five Rucki children complained vociferously at the time that David Rucki and his family were violent.

Rucki has lived in the Minneapolis suburb of Lakeville throughout the process.

Evavold was one of four people convicted in relation to this disappearance after she recommended to the girls’ mother- Sandra Grazzini-Rucki- that she take her two daughters to live with the Dahlen’s; the Dahlen’s pled guilty for their role in hiding the two girls earlier in 2017.

Ironically, David Rucki is no stranger to restraining orders as nine people- his five children, his ex-wife, two neighbors, and an in-law- all successfully took out a restraining order against him after threatening and stalking behavior.

This case has been covered internationally and Rucki has conducted hundreds of interviews, making his pleas for privacy curious.

Rucki has a long history of violence including: includes: a bar fighta road rage incidentincidents of stalkingmultiple violations of restraining orders, and choking his wife with an organ leg.

The trial judge- Karen Asphaug- disallowed any mention of his criminal history; when his ex-wife testified at her trial she wasn’t even allowed to allude to the restraining order she and her children took out against him.

The four defendants argued they hid the girls because they feared for their safety in Rucki’s care; Rucki once chased after his daughter on her birthday, according to a police report and stuck a gun in his son’s head according to a Child Protective Services report.

Not surprisingly, Asphaug also granted him this restraining order ex-parte, which means without the other parties- in this case Evavold- knowledge.

Normally, an ex-parte restraining order is only granted in cases where someone is under immediate threat of physical danger and the granting of a restraining order based on blog posts should raise first amendment issues.

I contacted Brandon Stahl (Minneapolis Star Tribune), Laura Adelmann (Sun-Current), Michael Brodkorb, Elizabeth Vargas, Sean Dooley, and Beth Mullins (the last three the team behind the controversial 20/20 broadcast on this case which ignored Rucki’s documented history of abuse)- but none provided a response.

Adelmann, it was recently revealed, approached the jury during Sandra Grazzini-Rucki’s trial and asked if any would like to be interviewed after the trial was over; her behavior is now the subject of a jury tampering allegation.

Asphaug appears to be David Rucki’s personal judge. She presided over each of the four criminal trials in this case- Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, Dede Evavold, Dough Dahlen, and Gina Dahlen.

Asphaug ruled to disallow nearly all of David Rucki’s criminal history and forced Gina Dahlen to testify in multiple trials even though she was a defendant still awaiting her trial.

The 1st Judicial District, where Asphaug sits, would only say that judges are chosen to a case “by statute” but would not explain how Asphaug wound up repeatedly on Rucki’s cases.

A phone call and email to Lissa Linne, a public affairs officer for Minnesota Courts, was left unreturned.

A call to Asphaug’s law clerk, Jennifer Williams, was also left unreturned.

Asphaug taking over legal proceedings related to Rucki continues a pattern.

Judge David Knutson placed himself on every legal case related to the Rucki’s when he took over their divorce in 2011.

The above referenced matter has been assigned to the Honorable Judge David Knutson,” a letter written by Knustson’s clerk in August 2011 stated, “all future matters shall be scheduled in front of Judge David Knutson.”

Knustson proceeded to issue approximately 4,000 orders, almost all regulating Sandra Grazzini-Rucki’s behavior; he gave 100% of a multi-million estate to David Rucki and forcibly- under the threat of jail- removed Sandra Grazzini-Rucki from her home, and awarded David Rucki sole custody of his children, despite his documented history of violence.

Sandra Grazzini-Rucki has not seen any of her five children since early 2013.

Evavold has twenty days to challenge the restraining order.

The terms of the restraining order forbid Evavold from speaking about the Rucki family in public or approaching the family; the restraining order appears to be overkill as the terms of Evavold’s probation already forbid all this.

Evavold’s probation is overseen by Judge Asphaug, though she’s yet to violate her probation.

Evavold has four months left to serve on her prison term, but like Grazzini-Rucki, Asphaug has ordered her to serve it over the next six years.