(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.
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!
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 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…
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!
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.
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??