Missing in Minnesota
“UPDATE: Dede Evavold loses appeal of her criminal conviction
The Clerk of Appellate Courts has rejected Dede Evavold’s petition for review to the Minnesota Supreme Court because Evavold’s petition was not properly filed.”
Missing in Minnesota
“UPDATE: Dede Evavold loses appeal of her criminal conviction
The Clerk of Appellate Courts has rejected Dede Evavold’s petition for review to the Minnesota Supreme Court because Evavold’s petition was not properly filed.”
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia with additions from Red Herring Alert
Michael Brodkorb is (WAS) a Minnesota Republican activist, a former deputy chair of the Republican Party of Minnesota, former communications director for the Republican caucus in the Minnesota Senate, under Senator Minority Leader David Senjem and later to Amy Koch when she was the majority leader of the state senate, and the creator of the blog Minnesota Democrats Exposed In his role as an aide to Senjem and Koch, he is credited with helping to engineer the Republican takeover of the state senate in 2010. He and Koch were described as “the two most powerful people in the Minnesota Senate.”
Brodkorb served as deputy chair of the Minnesota Republican Party from 2009 to 2011, when he resigned to work for the congressional campaign of Minnesota state senator Mike Parry. Brodkorb abruptly resigned both from his position in the Senate and his position with the Parry campaign in December 2011.
Weeks later, Koch resigned her post as Majority Leader after admitting an “inappropriate relationship” with a male staffer. Brodkorb was fired the next day. MINNESOTA DEMAGOGUES EXPOSED: SENIOR GOP STRATEGIST AND SENATOR COMMIT ADULTERY?
Brodkorb announced his intention to file litigation against the State of Minnesota, the Minnesota Senate and Secretary of the Senate Cal Ludeman over his termination from the Minnesota Senate. Lawyers representing Brodkorb have announced additional claims against the State of Minnesota, the Minnesota Senate and Ludeman over allegations that Ludeman disclosed private unemployment data about Brodkorb in an interview with Minnesota Public Radio. Brodkorb’s attorneys also announced plans to sue for defamation per se over statements Ludeman made in a press release where he accused Brodkorb of attempting to “extort payment from the Senate.”
On May 25, 2012, the Minnesota Senate released legal bills showing they had spent $46,150 to the first 3 months of 2012 to prepare a defense to Brodkorb’s suit. An analysis of the bill by the Associated Press showed the bulk of the $46,150 owed was due to attorneys retained by the Minnesota Senate repeatedly meeting with Ludeman.
On June 19, 2012, the Minnesota Senate announced additional legal bills in the amount of $38,533, bringing the total legal costs incurred by the Minnesota Senate due to the termination of Brodkorb to almost $85,000 since the end of the May 2012. (Click to view)→ Brodkorb, Minn. Senate settle lawsuit for $30,000
On January 23, 2013, Brodkorb was injured in a single-car crash on Interstate 35E when his vehicle hit a concrete wall. He pleaded guilty to driving while intoxicated and was ordered to pay a $500 fine.(Click to view) → Brodkorb DUI
Michael Brodkorb says he was victim of a plot against Sen. Amy Koch. I get it, I was Michelle MacDonald’s campaign manager when she ran for MN Supreme Court in 2014 and learned the dirty world of politics in a baptism by fire! One would think however, that you wouldn’t pull the same dirty tricks on other victims of the establishment but I guess when you’ve sold your soul, compassion isn’t very high on the list.
For those of you that aren’t regular readers, let me explain Michael Brodkorb’s role in my Case No.19HA-CR-15-4227 which resulted in 6 felony convictions for one alleged “crime” of parental deprivation. (Not kidnapping or abduction which is what the media would have you believe).
Also, there is an affirmative defense for parental deprivation, but when evidence is withheld and suppressed, the defense is useless. 609.26 DEPRIVING ANOTHER OF CUSTODIAL OR PARENTAL RIGHTS
Subd. 2. Defenses. It is an affirmative defense if a person charged under subdivision 1 proves that: (1) the person reasonably believed the action taken was necessary to protect the child from physical or sexual assault or substantial emotional harm.
Michael Brodkorb was a blogger for the Star Tribune from April 2014 through May 2016. He flipped from a republican to a democratic mouthpiece for the fake “less liberal” Star Tribune. Brodkorb became obsessed with demonizing and discrediting Michelle MacDonald when she ran for Supreme Court in 2014 against incumbent David Lillehaug (appointed by Governor Dayton). She won the Republican Party’s endorsement but narrowly lost to Lillehaug. The Star Tribune reported that her selection became an embarrassment when MacDonald’s contentious 2013 arrest on suspicion of drunken driving came to light. Never mind the forensic facts of the case:
MacDonald also filed a complaint against the GOP and several party leaders. She alleges the party threatened her and spread false information about her campaign in an effort to get her to exit the race. She said the party was in violation of the Fair Campaign Practices Act. Shocker, the complaint was dismissed by a judge with the Office of Administrative Hearings.
Oh, and by the way, Attorney Michelle MacDonald filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against Judge David Knutson in Dakota County, That was shortly before the media suddenly took an interest in the case I was involved in and after she applied for an opening in the MN Supreme Court. MacDonald was the pro bono attorney for the mother in the companion case and filed the suit on her behalf. Judges however, have unlimited immunity from civil prosecution and the case was dismissed. MacDonald was also arrested during the custody trial that was presided over by Judge Knutson for taking a picture during a break. The unyielding attacks against MacDonald continue to this day.
Michael Brodkorb became the main “reporter” in our cases after we were charged and thus began the relentless harassment and stalking in the name of “journalism”.
In September 2015, Michael Brodkorb surreptitiously recorded a conversation he had with me as a Star Tribune reporter and had it turned over to the Lakeville PD. This was prior to my charges in November 2015.
Excerpt from Evavold Audio
Michael Brodkorb: No, let me just say. I knew David Knutson when he was a state senator, the last time I saw Knutson was, I think in 2007 when Pawlenty was inaugurated for his second term. So that’s the last time I’ve ever seen him that I remember. I have tried repeatedly to interview him, to speak with him, about this case. The person that I’ve probably tried to interview the most, has been David Knutson and anyone affiliated with the court system. I’ve gone down to the court, I’ve called him and I’ve done everything I could to try to get him to speak on the record. I’ve spoken with his clerk and I’ve spoken with everyone that I could possibly think of to try to get him to speak. There is no way and I believe this, if someone reviews the matters involved in this case and doesn’t immediately come to the conclusion that there are problems in the family court system, they are purposely trying for there not to be a problem with the court system, because a blind person could see that.
(I know you’re reading this Mr. Brodkorb so, I think you may want to reconsider your pervasive defamatory posts you are writing about me and refer back to 34′:50″ into the audio that was provided to Lakeville PD).
At any rate, it’s around that time that Brodkorb became a pen for hire to harass and intimidate witnesses, interfere with the legal process and lie with impunity during our trials. Michael Brodkorb currently has a blog that is now entirely dedicated to demonizing and discrediting me to change the narrative in this case and shift the focus away from the true facts. He also added Allison Mann as a contributing author. Who is Allison Mann? Mann is a paralegal with Elliott Law Office and lives in Lakeville, Minnesota. Elliott Law Offices provides legal services to the father involved in this case, but Brodkorb states. “Elliott Law Office is not affiliated with Missing in Minnesota.” Okay, and I’ve got prime swampland to sell you! Also, Allison Mann has been the photographer of the numerous photos taken prior to my false court hearings on my false charges.
For those of you that are new to this site, I was served with a harassment restraining order (HRO), 3 charges for violating the order and a probation violation for allegedly “referencing the family” involved in my case. Protecting reputation is not a government interest and preventing blogging is not a government interest. Suppressing speech rarely is justified by an interest in deterring criminal conduct, and in any event the justification “must be far stronger than mere speculation about serious harms” and supported by “empirical evidence” Barnicki v. Vopper, 532 U.S. 514. 530-32, 121 S.Ct 1753, 1763-64, 149 L Ed 2d 787 (2001) (citing U.S. v. Treasury Employees, 513 U.S. 454, 475 (1995))
The malicious HRO is legally meritless and in actuality, a false police report was filed against me. §609.505 Falsely reporting a Crime Subdivision 1. False reporting. Whoever informs a law enforcement officer that a crime has been committed or otherwise provides information to an on-duty peace officer, knowing that the person is a peace officer, regarding the conduct of others, knowing that it is false and intending that the officer shall act in reliance upon it, is guilty of a misdemeanor. A person who is convicted a second or subsequent time under this section is guilty of a gross misdemeanor. When you’re above the law however, it just doesn’t matter!
False claims of an immediate and present danger were also made to obtain an ex-parte HRO..Clearly, this is just a retaliatory SLAPP suit in disguise of false criminal conduct with the intent to intimidate, censor, disparage, burden, and punish me for exercising my free speech right to discuss my case and defend myself against the slanderous information being written about me. I get that the overall goal is to silence any further public debate about the corruption that took place in my false criminal case as well as the false companion criminal cases.
As I’ve posted before, SLAPP stands for “Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation.” It refers to a lawsuit filed in retaliation for speaking out on a public issue or controversy. You might be “SLAPPed” for actions such as posting a blog entry, posting a comment on another person’s blog, writing a letter to the editor of a newspaper, testifying before the legislature, reporting official misconduct, or circulating a petition. Often, SLAPPs are brought by corporations, developers, or government officials against individuals or community organizations that oppose their actions.
What’s amazing is that Michael Brodkotb was served with a restraining order by a co-defendant during these trials due to real repeated, unwanted and intrusive stalking behaviors (i.e. following and laying in wait to take photos, posting information and spreading false information on the internet to incite others against her).
This is a comment submitted by Pat Terry on MinnPost regarding the HRO against Brodkorb: “Until there has been a full contested hearing on the matter, this is a non-story and to suggest that Brodkorb’s actions were somehow inappropriate based on an ex-parte hearing involving someone who is quite literally a court-certified liar through her felony conviction, is really unfair.”
The HRO was dismissed but Brodkorb makes the statement, “The chilling effect is that if someone doesn’t like coverage,” he said, “they could go to a courthouse and file what I believe to be a fraudulent document with fictitious information to game the system.”
“I can’t police the Internet. I’m not responsible for what – how people react rawly and aggressively to someone who has been convicted of six counts of deprivation of parental rights. And I’m very responsible in what I write in my content that I’ve written. Sandra has attempted to hold me accountable for other type of activity that appears on the Internet that I that I have no responsibility to police or address. I have a responsibility to watch what I say and how I communicate. But, and make sure it is done in an truthful honest way. And I’ve done so in the entirety in this case. … It’s a classic case of someone crying “Wolf!” Of Chicken Little the sky is falling. And eventually what she becomes is not a responsible and credible critic. Or someone who can be trusted to accurately document what’s going on. … Over the course of my reporting, have people said “I don’t want to comment.”? Sure. I don’t want to comment. And I move on to the next thing. … All for someone who just wrote the stories and approached it from an investigative stand point. … There are precious resources for the court. And we just can’t be wasting their time and money.” AM950RADIO @AM950 Radio [PODCAST]@MattMcNeilShow – Sep 16
We can however keep the taxpayers on the hook by wasting the precious court resources for a personal vendetta against me but I forgot. . . I’m not given special treatment – only special punishments!
A court also dismissed a libel suit against Brodkorb and his blog in 2007 in a case that was described as “breaking new legal ground in the world of blogging”.
A judge threw out a libel suit this week against one of Minnesota’s most popular conservative bloggers, issuing a ruling that put the political Web site on the same legal ground as newspapers and broadcast news outlets.
Michael Brodkorb, a political operative behind minnesotademocratsexposed.com, expressed relief at the dismissal.
“I think this goes back to what I said from the beginning, that this was a frivolous lawsuit and the court agreed with me,” he said. “I’m glad that it’s over.”
Below are some of the defamatory posts that Michael Brodkorb and Allison Mann have put on their blog: This really is psychological projection at its finest!
“Michael Brodkorb is nothing but a political operative consciously discrediting, demonizing, and distorting the good guys for his own financial gain…” ~ Dede Evavold
“I’m not into exposing anyone or the “gotcha” stuff…” ~ Michael Brodkorb
Blogger, Dede Evavold, of “Red Herring Alert” recently published an article Inverting Reality (Red Herring Alert) exposing blogger Michael Brodkorb’s coverage of the Grazzini-Rucki case as propaganda, and citing specific incidents where he engaged in harassment and defamation against her, under the guise of “journalism”.
“Inverting Reality” also discusses Brodkorb’s troubled past , documenting a long history of out of control behavior – a domestic violence incident involving his wife, a sexual fling with Senate Majority Leader Amy Koch that ended his political career, and driving while intoxicated, crashed his car and nearly killed himself. In another embarrassment, in 2011, Brodkorb made secret recordings of conversations with his GOP bosses regarding his firing (after his tryst with Amy Koch was exposed) . The recordings revealed, among other things, that Brodkorb was struggling with his mental health – which could explain his erratic behavior.
Brodkorb also has a reputation for inciting fights within ranks of the Republican party, among his own team , where he was known for screaming fits and personal attacks against others, it said his eruptions could leave fear in his wake..” (The Fall of Michael Brodkorb) Another Republican, retired Army Lt. Col. Joe Repya, described Brodkorb as “a ‘thug’ with ‘an intimidating personality’ who ran roughshod over party members, elected officials and even volunteers…’You have to understand how frightened people within the party became of Michael Brodkorb..’” (Michael Brodkorb: Admired, feared and, above all, Republican )
Brodkorb has also been described as “always pushing the limits..” Brodkorb, once one of the most powerful people in the Senate, used his political knowledge and connections as ammo in carefully crafted blogs designed to attack political targets. Democrats denounced Brodkorb as a “Republican operative” paid to write hit pieces on their candidates. For his work, Brodkorb was paid very well. Initially Brodkorb began blogging anonymously on Minnesota Democrats Exposed (created in 2004) but in a fit of rage, he accidentally exposed his identity while posting online, and reluctantly, was forced to admit to his clandestine activities. Brodkorb says about MDE,”When you’re writing Minnesota Democrats Exposed you’re waking up every day and looking for a target. Even though that kind of thing drives traffic, it’s not a very fulfilling way to write...” (‘I’m done with partisan politics’: a Q&A with Michael Brodkorb) Due to the insulting content of MDE, Brodkorb was sued for libel – dismissed by a court in 2007. Complaints continued to be raised against Brodkorb to this day.
In the end it seems both the Democrats and the Republican got the last laugh – as Brodkorb’s antics resulted in his political career going up in flames.
Setting politics aside, what is really at issue here is Brodkorb’s character, and pattern of bullying that continues to this day, now manifesting in rage towards Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, co-defendant Dede Evavold, and supporters. The venom to which Brodkorb spews on social media rants, and articles, has led many believe that he works on David Rucki’s payroll.
Indeed, all of Brodkorb’s articles on the Grazzini-Rucki case portray Rucki in a sympathetic light and have ignored or minimized Rucki’s lengthy criminal history, as well as the extensive evidence of the abuse Sandra and the children suffered at Rucki’s brutal hands. There is only one side that Brodkorb portrays – and that is of David Rucki.
Let’s take a deeper look…
Brodkorb: “It Was All About Search and Destroy…”
History is known to repeat itself, and only history can be trusted to tell the truth about Michael Brodkorb.
In 2004, Brodkorb begins blogging on Minnesota Democrats Exposed. Tactics used on MDE are eerily similar to those used by Brodkorb today, in his coverage of the Grazzini-Rucki case, “ When I was writing Minnesota Democrats Exposed, it was all about search and destroy, writing sensational headlines, driving traffic and making mountains out of molehills. It was something I got out of my system…” (‘I’m done with partisan politics’: a Q&A with Michael Brodkorb)
Brodkorb’s search and destroy tactics paid off, he became indispensable to political candidates seeking to dig up dirt on opponents, and dedicated his blog to mud slinging. For his work, Brodkorb was paid generously. In November 2006, Brodkorb was the highest paid blogger in the state of Minnesota, generating $55,200 a year to work for the campaign of Rep. Mark Kennedy under the guise of “part time press consultant”. Brodkorb achieved this feat by a narrow margin – Sen. Hillary Clinton, in the #1 position, paid her blogger just $4,800 more than what Brodkorb was earning. (Highest-Paid Campaign Bloggers: Clinton, Kennedy, Santorum)
Brodkorb strongly denied that he has ever been paid to blog, but that has proven to be just another one of his many lies. (Bloggers proliferate on campaign rolls)
A blog (from February 2006) documents Brodkorb’s long history working as a paid operative, “Over the past two years, John Kline’s campaign paid $10,000 to Weber Johnson PA, a political consulting firm run by the brother of former Republican Congressman Vin Weber. Oddly enough, the source of many anonymous attacks on Kline’s opponent Coleen Rowley have come from a blogger who is employed by Weber Johnson PA…” (Kline’s $ To Company That Pays Anonymous Blogger’s Salary? ) WHO led these anonymous attacks? None other than Michael Brodkorb.
Another example, from an expose written in Feb 2012( Brodkorb paid from GOP Senate Victory Fund) reveals that “…the Republican Senate Victory Fund paid Michael Brodkorb $7,500 for consulting work on January 31, 2011, as documented in a just-filed campaign finance report. This was in addition to $20,625 in late 2009, and $16,875 paid to Brodkorb for research in 2010. In sum, Brodkorb was paid $45,000 in in sixteen months from the Senate Victory Fund. These payments were in addition to Brodkorb’s state employee salary as a Senate staffer…” Brodkorb earned about $90,000 a year in his job as communications chief for Republicans at the Capitol.
Michael Brodkorb made a name for himself, and a career, by playing dirty. Pay Brodkorb enough, he will say anything. He rewrites facts and distorts information. He resorts to personal attacks and defamation without remorse. Brodkorb is not an independent source – he is a check book journalist who cannot be trusted.
An Experiment Gone Horribly Wrong
During the period Brodkorb covered the Grazzini-Rucki case for the Tribune, he was contracted as “just experiment”. Terry Sauer, the Tribune’s assistant managing editor for digital, gave a temporary offer to Brodkorb to write political editorials to balance the Liberal editorials published by the paper. The Tribune did not contract Brodkorb to write about the Grazzini-Rucki case; Brandon Stahl had already begun to to cover the case, and at the time was a popular reporter in Minnesota. Brodkorb’s assignment with the Tribune quickly turned into an obsession with Sandra Grazzini-Rucki that spun out of control when he became the mouthpiece for David Rucki, and began to suppress critical facts and evidence in the case to cover up the abuse of Sandra and the children, as well as the illegal activities of the court.
Brodkorb admits that he was attracted to David Rucki from their first meeting in April 2015 (Why I Wrote About the Rucki Case ) “Meeting David Rucki was one of my most emotional moments in writing about the case…. Physically, David is a big man – tall and broad. But his face looked lost and sullen. You could see the pain and sadness as he spoke about his missing daughters.
At one point, I was so overcome I had to excuse myself from our table at a restaurant in Minneapolis. I went to the restroom, splashed cold water on my face and took a moment to compose myself.”
An amber alert was never issued for the missing Rucki teens, and the police had stopped searching for them; presuming, correctly, that they were runaways. In their absence, David Rucki was given custody of all five children; at the time of the custody order he was on probation for violating a protective order against ex-wife Sandra. Rucki had also been ordered into anger management numerous times, which did nothing to quell his rage. Judge David Knutson, family court judge, ignored abuse allegations raised by the Rucki children and the evidence supporting their cries for help. The courts should have protected the Rucki children but, instead, sent them into the custody of a dangerous abuser, whom they have not been able to escape from. You will never hear about any of these facts in Brodkorb’s reporting.
For what Brodkorb had previously been paid, the Tribune wasn’t offering much. Sauer says he paid Brodkorb a modest salary – just “hundreds a month” – apparently he wasn’t worth even that! Brodkorb’s political articles failed to gain public interest; and his involvement in the Grazzini-Rucki case became the subject of controversy. The Tribune had enough of this “experiment” and in May 2016, ended their contract with Brodkorb. Sauer said about cutting ties with Brodkorb, “It really is all about us moving in another direction with the budget we’ve got.” (Brodkorb on the end of his Star Tribune blog: ‘It was never meant to be a forever thing’)
Apologetically Sauer offers to give Brodkorb a job reference.. is that sincere or just lip service? How many times do girls break up with their boyfriends and offer to “just be friends”. Same thing.
A Village Missing It’s Idiot in Minnesota
For the past several years, Brodkorb has spent long days and nights in front of a blinking screen, obsessively covering the Grazzini-Rucki case, while life goes on around him.
Blogger Dede Evavold, of Red Herring Alert, a victim, reflects, “Brodkorb became a pen for hire to harass and intimidate witnesses, interfere with the legal process and lie with impunity during our trials.
Michael Brodkorb currently has a blog that is now entirely dedicated to demonizing and discrediting me to change the narrative in this case and shift the focus away from the true facts.
He also added Allison Mann as a contributing author. Who is Allison Mann? Mann is a paralegal with Elliott Law Office and lives in Lakeville, Minnesota. Elliott Law Offices provides legal services to the father involved in this case, but Brodkorb states. ‘Elliott Law Office is not affiliated with Missing in Minnesota.’ Okay, and I’ve got prime swampland to sell you! Also, Allison Mann has been the photographer of the numerous photos taken prior to my false court hearings on my false charges…” Inverting Reality (Red Herring Alert)
Has Brodkorb been paid for his coverage of the Grazzini-Rucki case, and online attacks against Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and supporters?
Let’s Take a Look at Brodkorb’s Record:
*History of working as a blogger paid to write propaganda, and generate attacks against targets. Lies about receiving payments for writing blogs.
*Strong interest in Judge David L. Knutson, family law judge assigned to Grazzini-Rucki case. Previous connection to Knutson while working in the Senate.
*Has an emotional breakdown after meeting David Rucki, flees to the bathroom to splash cold water on himself in order to compose himself.
*Contracted to write political commentary for the Star Tribune then radically shifts focus to cover Grazzini-Rucki case, at a time that case was already being covered by a well-known reporter.
* Admitted has no prior interest in investigating missing children when becomes focused on Grazzini-Rucki case.
*Interfering in active police investigation while covering Grazzini-Rucki case for Star Tribune. One example – speaking to a witness, who was sought for questioning by police, and influencing her testimony before the police were able to talk with her.
*Attaches himself exclusively to David Rucki at all court hearings.
*Coverage of Grazzini-Rucki case is one sided, always supportive of David Rucki. Suppresses documentation and evidence that is contrary to the narrative he pushes.
*Lying, exaggerating or distorting information about Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, Dede Evavold, and supporters.
*Exclusively focuses on Grazzini-Rucki case and no other case involving family court issues.
*Devoted a blog to coverage of Grazzini-Rucki case in a similar fashion to previous blogs he created to attack political opponents. The public is not given all the facts or evidence available in the case.
*Brodkorb’s blog is the only blog that has not been threatened with legal action by David Rucki to stop reporting on the Grazzini-Rucki case.
*Brodkorb’s blog is the only blog that has not been criticized or threatened with legal action by Judge Karen Asphaug, and Dakota County, for its coverage of the Grazzini-Rucki case.
*The Carver County Corruption blog was shut down after Rucki and his high buck attorney, Marshall Tanick, threatened legal action against the blog owner. When clicking on old links to Carver County Corruption, the site opens to Brodkorb’s blog devoted to the Grazzini-Rucki case.
*Allison Mann, paralegal with Elliott Law Office, contributing author to Brodkorb’s blog
*Brodkorb’s work and efforts serve only to promote David Rucki’s interests.
Jaw-Dropping show with Fletcher Long and Michael Volpe on the Grazzini-Rucki case reveals layers of corruption, abuse cover-up
Date: January 10, 2017
Fletcher Long and Michael Volpe discuss a variety of topics that include:
1) Michael Brodkorb’s questionable involvement in the Grazzini-Rucki case; and close relationship with David Rucki. Michael Brodkorb is a political blogger and supporter of David Rucki, that has been following and publicly commenting on the Grazzini-Rucki case.
Fletcher Long reads a provocative e-mail that he received from Brodkorb. Long says about the letter, “I never had a member of the news media make an editorial and rather impassioned plea on behalf of the subject of his story.”
And “This guy has lost his objectivity… His advocation of David Rucki was unseemly, off putting and unexpected…”
Michael Volpe responds that Brodkorb speaks as if he is David Rucki’s attorney or public relations person rather than an independent media person covering the story.
Brodkorb is fixated on the Grazzini-Rucki case, covering it exclusively and not covering any other case or other news story. Brodkorb says he attends all hearings and has read all publicly available documents. Yet Brodkorb’s coverage of the case omits mention of David Rucki’s criminal record, his violent behavior, and allegations of abuse raised against him.
Is Brodkorb really just a blogger or is something more going on??
2) Due Process Violations during the custody trial of Sandra Grazzini-Rucki (Sept 11-12, 2013), an incident where her attorney, Michelle MacDonald, was strapped in a wheelchair and forced to represent her. Sandra was told by a court officer that court was adjourned and held left (with her files) when Attorney MacDonald’s horrifying ordeal began.
Michelle MacDonald says about the incident,”I sued a judge in Federal court on behalf of a client for civil rights violations. (See Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, et al v. (Judge) David Knutson, United States District Court no. 0:13-CV-02477-SRN; and Petition for Writ to the United States Supreme Court, docket no. 15-220.)
The next day, that same judge made me participate as her attorney in a child custody trial — in handcuffs and a wheelchair, with no shoes, eye glasses, files or client — and missing children. So far, he has gotten away with it. I will make certain there is oversight, accountability and reform of our judicial system.” Supreme Court Associate Justice 6, Michelle MacDonaldl
The court ordered issued from this outrageous custody ruling became the basis on which Sandra was later convicted for deprivation of parental rights.
Volpe states that judges in the appeals court continue to make excuses for Judge David Knutson, even as he breaks the law, which in turn, help Judge Knutson avoid responsibility for his actions. “The reason why the Knutsons of the world can do this is because there are appeals court judges who look the other way when this kind of corruption happens.”
3) Volpe and Long also analyzes a 99 page collection of documents posted on the “Justice for Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and Children” blog: druckipolicereports
The collection of documents includes records of David Rucki’s criminal history, protective orders filed against him, police reports regarding incidents of Rucki’s violent behavior, documentation of stalking, photographs, and a letter written in support of Sandra by a witness to Rucki’s violent behavior. The information contained in the document spans 3 counties, and goes back more than 20 years; establishing a clear pattern of Rucki’s violent and threatening behavior.
Within the documents, Volpe uncovers criminal records that connect Judge Karen Asphaug to David Rucki, who appeared as a defendant in her court, on two separate occasions to answer to charges.
On each case Judge Asphaug ruled in Rucki’s favor in what Long says are “curious and extraordinary ways which would tend to suggest a bias in his favor”.
In another case, Rucki appeared before Judge Karen Asphaug as a criminal defendant for a violation for an order for protection; the order was filed by Sandra. Volpe argues that years later, in Sandra’s criminal case, Judge Karen Asphaug would not allow evidence of past abuse, and would not allow evidence of Rucki’s criminal record. Judge Asphaug benefited when the evidence was suppressed because her own involvement in prior cases could be concealed, and she could conceal her own knowledge of the abuse that occurred. After suppressing the evidence, Judge Asphaug then claims there is no evidence of abuse.
Long says Judge Asphaug should not be appointed to Sandra’s criminals case because she has too much intimate knowledge, including knowledge about the victim.
A similar pattern has occurred with Judge David Knutson, who presided over a hearing in which a relative of Sandra’s filed a restraining order against Rucki after he threatened to kill him. Judge Knutson dismissed the order for protection, and later went on to preside over the Grazzini-Rucki family court case. Keep in mind that David Rucki personally asked Judge Knutson to be appointed to the family court case after he contest the original judgement and decree.
Judge Knutson was initially appointed to the criminal trial of Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, where he set her bail at $1 million dollars. Judge Knuston got off the criminal case and appointed Judge Karen Asphaug to fill the vacancy.
“This shows the level of corruption in this case…” Michael Volpe says about the two judges who had prior experience with David Rucki, always ruled in his favor, who were later instrumental in convicting ex-wife Sandra of criminal charges, and always ruling against her.
4) The outrageous complaint filed against Michelle MacDonald, filed by Judge Knutson who criticized MacDonald performance in court during the custody trial where he alone impeded her work. MacDonald is facing a 2 month suspension.
Listen to this valuable, and informative show! You will hear information on the Grazzini-Rucki case that major news outlets refuse to cover.
You will also be given valuable insights on the case that will deepen your understanding of the legal system, your rights and help you to identify an out of control judge.
Small town, Lakeville police, traveled an estimated 191 miles one chilly day, November 18, 2015, to a horse ranch in a quiet corner of Minnesota. Greeting them in the gravel driveway were Star Tribune reporters, who had been waiting 3 hours to break the biggest story their podunk paper had seen since the 1991 Halloween Blizzard covered trick-or-treaters in 8.2 inches of ghostly white snow. Star Tribune cameras were on the scene to catch every dramatic minute as the runaway Rucki sisters were discovered after a multi-agency search warrant.
Even outside their jurisdiction, Detective Jim Dronen and Kelli Coughlin were territorial over this case – that of the runaway Rucki sisters, who went missing in April 2013 to escape an abusive home that family court would not protect them from. These two detectives would accomplish what Judge Knutson could not do despite 3,400 court orders issued against the mother, Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, who was left homeless, destitute and torn from the children who were “my world” after the court’s illegal actions. What reunification therapist James Gilbertson tried but failed at, as he recommended “unconventional” methods of therapy such as forcing the children to sit in at court hearings, and forcing the children to have a face-to-face visit with their father the day he was due in court for violating a no contact order (no contact meaning with the children). What Guardian ad Litems Julie Friedrich and Laura Miles attempted by denying the abuse and shoving the truth down their throats, as they gagged – these children were going back into the care of their abusive father.
Was the interrogation method used on Doug Dahlen coercive, fraudulent? And were coercive methods used on the teenage Rucki sisters? A new video from Lion News offer a glimpse into the interrogation of Doug Dahlen.
Police can use a variety of methods to get information or elicit a confession – they can lie, exaggerate and even use some forms of trickery to obtain information from a subject, to get a confession. The one thing police can not do is coerce a confession. Coercion is defined as physical or psychological force, threats or intimidation. Similarly, trickery that results in a false confession is not allowed.
The Lion News Video (below) offers excerpts of the police interviews from the Rucki investigation, as well as an excerpt of a police interview between Detective Dronen (#4816) and Doug Dahlen that occurred on November 18, 2015.
Doug is one of the defendants in the high-profile Grazzini-Rucki case, who, along with his wife, sheltered the runaway Rucki girls at his therapeutic horse ranch for over 2 years.
This interview occurred AFTER the Rucki girls were found living at the Ranch.
(4:11) Doug Dahlen calls wife, Gina, “Hello… Hey.. Did you get my message? Can you come home? Um police are here and they’re talking about what they’re going to do with the Girls. They can stay here ’til get this sorted out or whether they have to go and stay somewhere else or what. They um the mom’s in jail and they’re saying if the Girls go in and take care of this, that they can get their mother out of jail and uh hopefully get this straightened out. As of now I don’t really think they know what they’re going to do with them…”
COERCION: A person who has power over another compels someone to act or make a choice by force, threat or overcoming their own individual will. Coercion can involve fraud to compel someone to do something they would not ordinarily do.
It is coercive to tell Doug Dahlen, and the Girls (if they were given a similar message) that if they “straighten this out” i.e. talk to police, and tell police what they want to hear, that their mother (Sandra Grazzini-Rucki) can get out of jail. Another implied threat is the unanswered question on where the Girls will go – that cooperation may result in the Girls being able to stay at the Ranch. Notice also that Doug is talking to police without the benefit of an attorney.
Both of the Rucki sisters were minors at the time they were found, and were in a vulnerable state. For the last 2 years, the Girls considered the Dahlens as family, and grew accustomed to their life on the Ranch. The Girls had ample opportunity to leave, and return to their father, but chose to stay. Now these Girls were losing their home – for a second time in their life, a traumatic upheaval (the first when Sandra was forced out of the home, and their lives in Sept. 2012). Where were the Girls going – they could not stay with the Dahlens, and threatened to run away if returned to father, David Rucki, That is what makes this coercive – applying pressure, and compelling testimony under duress; especially on vulnerable teen girls. The fraud is stating that testimony could get Sandra Grazzini-Rucki out of jail, that simply would not happen, and police knew it.
NO child should be placed in this type of situation by police. There are organizations that specialize in conducting forensic interviews with children and vulnerable adults that could have been utilized. These organizations typically offer family counseling and community resources as well. An age appropriate, trauma informed approach could have assisted the police investigation in a way that would minimize stress on the Girls, and allow them to be heard. But that never happened. Instead the Lakeville police pushed their agenda… and silenced the Girls as so many in Dakota County had done before.
Another element of psychological coercion… and testimony from Doug that supports the Girls were abuse victims.
(5:58) Detective Dronnen states, “You said when the girls first got here, they were afraid?”
Doug, “Beyond afraid. They were terrified. I’ve never seen a kid so scared. I can’t emphasize that to you… I’ve seen kids in pretty rough shape, I’ve never seen one that was truly afraid for their life until I saw them.”
Detective Dronnen, “Did they ever tell you why they were afraid?”
Doug, “No, one time I went in and S.R. was curled up in the bathroom, in a fetal position, sobbing uncontrollably. ” <– This is called REGRESSION, and is a sign of severe trauma or abuse. Regression is the act of returning to an earlier stage of behavioral or physical development; this can occur because trauma not only affects the mind and emotion, but is also stored in the body, at a cellular level. Trauma also affects body chemistry.
Detective Dronnen, “Did she ever talk about anything that happened at home?”
Doug, “Just how terrible it was. Never gave much for details… ” Doug goes on to say S.R. did not like “being touched by a man”, even in common social interactions. <– Note S.R. may have found someone else to confide in; if she had an aversion to men it makes sense that she would not trust or open up to a man, even Doug.
In the next excerpt, Detective Dronen gives Doug Dahlen his version of what happened with the Grazzini-Rucki divorce and custody case, and omits all mention of domestic abuse and child abuse allegations or David Rucki’s criminal history. This is done intentionally! Detective Dronen is controlling the interview, and feeding information to Doug with the intent of changing his perspective, and ultimately changing testimony that may support that abuse happened to the Rucki girls.
Keep in mind Detective Dronen previously dismissed an OFP violation against David Rucki wiped it completely from MNCIS. Dronen personally knew about the abuse allegations, and purposely withheld this information when giving his version of the Grazzini-Rucki divorce and child custody dispute to Doug.
Doug sounds incredulous as he is listening, and relies on past experience to weigh Detective Dronen’s words. When Doug brings up his own experiences with a stressful divorce, Detective Dronen adapts Doug’s comments to supportive the narrative he is pushing.This means Dronen is shaping Doug’s perspective, and changing his recollection on a past event. This type of questioning is extremely damaging because Detective Dronen is feeding information, ideas and emotions into Doug that were not previously there. Doug has no one else to offer additional information, he is reliant solely on Dronen.
Detective Dronen tries to sell Doug his version of events – that parental alienation had occurred, that Sandra is mentally ill and completely withholds any information about the allegations of abuse. If this sounds plausible, you too maybe a victim of psychological coercion.
Key elements of psychological coercion involve
Psychological coercion does not leave a bruise or a mark but it’s impact can not be underestimated.The intense pressure of psychological coercion can and does weaken a person’s will power and limit their ability to make free choices. The victim is unable to use discernment, judgement or call on help as they normally would had they not been manipulated. According to one expert, The Neurotypical Suite, “The cumulative effect of psychological coercion can be an even more effective form of undue influence than pain, torture, drugs or the use of physical force or threats.”
Police need to use the power invested in them carefully and avoid any actions or behavior that is or could be interpreted as coercive.
Statements that are made under coercion are not made through an exercise of free will. If Doug Dahlen – or the Rucki girls – were told by Detective Dronen, or any member of the Lakeville police, that if they “straightened things out” and gave a statement to police, Sandra Grazzini-Rucki could “get out of jail” that is coercion. It is eliciting a statement based on fraud, and is applying duress with the underlying message of if you do not comply, she will remain in jail. To excuse this behavior as being part of the job, as policeman, opens the door to abuses of power – abuses of power have destroyed the Grazzini-Rucki family, and if not exposed and stopped, anyone of us could become a victim next.
Note: This video include slides that are somewhat editorialized, the audio content is what applies to this article, plz use discernment.
“I honestly believe Judge Knutson is psychotic, that I have no doubt. I’ve sat in his courtroom, the guy is absolutely crazy. I believe there needs to be a lot of changes in family court as well….”
“If David Rucki is as crazy as these Girls say he is, then I don’t know what he is capable of...” ~ Lori Musolf, prosecution witness
Lawless Lakeville, Dakota County, Minn: Lion News has released a shocking audio of the Lakeville police interview between Detective Dronen and Lori Musolf, witness for the Prosecution in the Grazzini-Rucki case. This interview covers a variety of subjects including abuse allegations, family court failures, and interference in the investigation of the runaway Rucki girls by Michael Brodkorb.
During the interview Detective Dronen admits that confidential information about the open investigation into the disappearance of the Rucki girls had been obtained by Brodkorb. Dronen was concerned because Brodkorb was contacting witnesses without the knowledge or consent of the Lakeville police, who were handling the investigation. Lakeville’s investigation into the missing Rucki girls became contaminated as Brodkorb contacted witnesses before the police could secure the information and then leaked sensitive details in his articles, which were widely distributed.
Additional testimony from Doug Dahlen reveals that the Star Tribune reporters, Brandon Stahl and Michael Brodkorb, knew ahead of time that police would raid the ranch to take the Girls. Dahlen states that reporters from the Star Tribune were calling the Grant County Courthouse a day ahead of time, and were asking when a warrant would be served. This leak of information, and the inappropriate involvement of the Star Tribune has created an unsafe environment for the Rucki girls, whose safety and well-being came second to the media sensation their “recovery” would generate.
Ironically, Brodkorb blasted all the adults who “did nothing” while the Rucki girls were missing – and now he qualifies as one of those adults, seeing that he had knowledge of where the Girls were staying for at least 24 hours and did nothing to notify local police or intervene. This happening while Brodkorb admits father, David Rucki, was an emotional wreck over the disappearance of his daughters. So Brodkorb also lied to Rucki and did not disclose to him that he knew where the Girls were, and let him suffer. All of this so Brodkorb could break the the story that would make his comeback after an adulterous affair, and a drinking problem destroyed his political career and nearly ended his life.
Also in the interview, Musolf discloses that Sandra Grazzini-Rucki was afraid of ex-husband David Rucki, and specifically stated “she acted like she was terrified of this man” and “she thought he would kill her if he had the chance“. Musolf comments that Sandra used burner phones because she was afraid Rucki would track her down (a tracking device was placed in the wheel well of a friend’s vehicle. Police traced that device back to Rucki’s house). The behaviors Musolf describe in Sandra are common in women who have suffered abuse. In the criminal trial, it was portrayed that Sandra used burner phones to avoid arrest for the disappearance of her daughters. Evidence suggests otherwise, yet Prosecuting Attorney Kathryn M. Keena promotes a lie. This is prosecutorial misconduct.
Musolf candidly expressed fear of Rucki and stated she “did not trust David Rucki” and was concerned that he would harm her because she assisted his daughters in running away, and was a friend of Sandra. This is coming from a prosecution witness who testified against Sandra, yet is also building her case. Sandra plead the affirmative defense in charges that she hid her daughters from Rucki, meaning she took action to protect her children from imminent harm or abuse. Sandra was found guilty of felony deprivation of parental rights; critics argue she could not prove abuse happened yet evidence that abuse did happen continues to mount even after Sandra’s conviction.
In a bizarre twist. Musolf tells Detective Dronen that she believes that the Rucki girls have “alot of psychological” and should not be placed with either parent when they are found. What is so unbelievable is that Musolf is a self-proclaimed victim advocate. Musolf’s attitude and actions could pose a risk of harm to an abuse victim or other vulnerable person because she shows no understanding about abuse, and its effects on children. Also troubling is that Musolf is basically stating that Sandra, the victim, has said or done something that is comparable to the horrific abuse Rucki inflicted on his family. NO victim of abuse could ever do anything to justify the abuse inflicted on them. If a so-called “advocate” does not understand that, what is she really advocating for? Detective Dronen agrees with Musolf, and says he thinks the Rucki girls should become wards of the state to get the help they need.
Wards of the state? The “help” the county offered has done nothing but bring pain and upheaval to the Grazzini-Rucki family. How much more damage will Dakota County inflict on Sandra and her children? .
Help raise awareness, and fight for a worthy cause – please comment, like, repost and share.
Note: Musolf is the only person who has not been criminally charged for her role in assisting the runaway Rucki girls. Musolf remained in contact with the Rucki girls in the days after they ran away and arranged their interview with Fox 9. During the Fox 9 interview, both Girls disclosed allegations of abuse committed by their father and expressed fear of him. Musolf was listed as a witness for the Prosecution in the Sandra Grazzini-Rucki criminal trial but did not testify in court.
Special thanks to Lion News for posting this video 🙂
Michael Brodkorb, former reporter with the Star Tribune, and online commentator, gives himself credit for helping to locate the runaway Rucki girls – but does the end justify the means? Explosive new evidence from Lion News describes, and includes evidence, that Brodkorb has significantly interfered in the Grazzini-Rucki case, including direct interference while the investigation of the runaway Rucki girls was still active. Evidence also suggests that Brodkorb has a close relationship with David Rucki that has given him access to confidential information, which was then used by Brodkorb to manipulate the public opinion in Rucki’s favor. Lakeville Police Refuse To Take Criminal Complaint from Dede Evavold
While working for the Star Tribune, Brodkorb says his contract ”...allowed me to write about any topic I wished…” Brodkorb initially wrote about politics then began to focus exclusively on the Grazzini-Rucki case. After being booted from The Star Tribune, Brodkorb began a blog, exclusively dedicated to the Grazzini-Rucki case. Much of Brodkorb’s comments on the blog include emotional outbursts, rambling opinions and inflammatory statements about Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and her attorney, Michelle MacDonald. The tone and content of this blog are one sided, and do not include or discuss any of the volumes of evidence showing the Rucki children were abused by their father. How can Brodkorb determine that the Rucki children were not abused when he is not even willing to look at the evidence that suggests abuse did occur? The public has a right to see all sides of the case but instead are being fed a narrative by Brodkorb that does not match the facts.
Lion News Raises the Following Allegations Against Michael Brodkorb:
1) Talking to a witness wanted for questioning by police BEFORE police could contact this person. Lion News offers new information proving that Brodkorb pursued contact with the witness even after he was asked to stop. Brodkorb then lied to Detective Dronen by saying he would not contact the witness – then does anyways. Did the pressure Brodkorb apply to this witness contribute to why she changed her testimony – or fuel the hate the witness now professes for Sandra?
Lori Musolf: So on Sunday this past Sunday this blogger who has been blogging the story called me. And started asking me questions. I have no idea who this guy even is.
Detective Dronen: Okay
Lori Musolf: Michael
Detective Dronen: Brodkorb?
Lori Muslof: Yes! And I refused to tell him anything. I just told him that I want nothing to do with this. I have not had anything to do with these people in a couple years. And I want absolutely nothing to do with it. And he was insistent. And I continued to tell him I want nothing to do with this. And I hung up. Okay? … 8:30/41:24 from 13001278 Loralie Musolf.mp3
Lori Musolf: Just so you know, I think this blogger is … I don’t know if you’ve talked to this blogger at all.
Detective Dronen: I have from time to time.
Lori Musolf: Okay.
Detective Dronen: I talked to him on Monday. The interesting thing is that he told me on Monday that he wasn’t going to call you.
Lori Musolf: Yes he Detective Dronen: Apparently he already had. So.
Lori Musolf: He already had. He called me Sunday. 2:54 p.m. I even have it in my notes. Yes, he had called me on Sunday. He had tried calling me I think it was on Friday and I totally avoided his phone call.
Lori Musolf admits that she did talk to Brodkorb, and credits him for changing her perspective on the Grazzini-Rucki case. Which means Brodkorb influenced a witness, and affected her testimony, before she spoke to police. Lori’s testimony was used to help build a case against Grazzini-Rucki, this information suggests that her testimony may have been tampered with, and not accurate. Potential State Witness Wrote Letter to Judge Knutson – Criticizing Court’s Failure to Protect Rucki Children from Abuse
Lori has maintained contact with Brodkorb and frequently comments on his social media.
2) A close relationship exists between David Rucki and Michael Brodkorb that goes beyond professional courtesy. Recent evidence from Lion News suggests that relationship has influenced articles written by Brodkorb, who used his blog to promote Rucki’s narrative (propaganda). Brodkorb’s interference compromised both the case of the runaway Rucki girls and Sandra’s criminal case.
Brodkorb has been intensely following the Grazzini-Rucki case for over a year, and posting on social media and blogs that swing in favor of Rucki. Brodkorb does not hide his strong feelings for Rucki, in an intensely intimate passage he writes, “When I first met David, I was so overcome with emotion I had to excuse myself from our table at a restaurant in Minneapolis. I went to the restroom, splashed cold water on my face and took a moment to compose myself. “
Brodkorb despises Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, evident by the wrath he writes in posts about her. In one post, Brodkorb shamelessly exploits the tragic death of Jacob Wetterling to drum up interest for his own blog, exclusively dedicated to the Grazzini-Rucki case. In an article, Brodkorb compares Rucki to Patty Wetterling, even going so far as to say that Rucki’s “unimaginable pain” when his daughters ran away and went missing for 2 years, is comparable as what Patty Wetterling has experienced at the death of her young son. Brodkorb goes on to compare Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and her attorney, Michelle MacDonald, to the pedophile monster, Danny Heinrich, that murdered Jacob and molested countless other boys. How the disappearance of Jacob Wetterling helped find the Rucki sisters
Brokorb glosses over allegations of physical, emotional and psychological abuse against Rucki, and the pain the Rucki children have endured. Is David Rucki really someone you would compare to grieving mother, Patty Wetterling? In a CPS report, S. Rucki reports, “She was 12 when her parents divorced. Home life was awful prior to the divorce. They tip-toed around Dad and he was physically abusive to Mom. Dad ripped the leg off the organ and ran after Mom. She would have bruises here and there. Dad was rough with S on a few occasions and he would grab her a few times and shook her… Only when they were not with Dad (living with Mom) was there no more tip-toeing and no more yelling. S said it felt good and free in her own house.” https://www.scribd.com/doc/316692570/SamiRucki
Brodkorb defends his writing saying he has “free speech” and claims protection as a “journalist”. Sandra has recently filed a harassment restraining order against Brodkorb. Brodkorb has admitted online that he intends to violate the order and may have already has because Twitter posts indicate that he was interviewed by police. Brodkorb continues to post comments and pictures about Sandra, and even has disclosed sensitive information. Brodkorb’s exploitation of both of these tragedies is horrific, and should be treated as libel – not protected as “journalism”.
Another crucial piece of evidence that demonstrates the close connection between Brodkorb and Rucki, is posted on Lion News. Brodkorb secretly recorded a conversation with Dede Evavold, friend of Sandra who is also charged in connection of the disappearance of the runaway Rucki girls. Evavold obtained a copy of the audio, and other evidence, after filing complaints against Dakota County Attorneys James Backstrom, Phil Prokopowicz, and Kathryn Keena. The audio was labelled “13001278 Evavold audio given by D. Rucki.MP3 “. Meaning Brodkorb recorded this conversation then handed it over to Rucki. What journalist reveals their sources to anyone – let alone to the subject of their investigation? What journalist hands over information they have gathered in the course of an investigation? Clearly Brodkorb has made a deal with Rucki.
In part of the audio, Brodkorb alludes to having a previous connection to Judge David Knutson: “Michael Brodkorb: No, let me just say. I knew David Knutson when he was a state senator, the last time I saw Knutson was, I think in 2007 when Pawlenty was inaugurated for his second term. So that’s the last time I’ve ever seen him that I remember. I have tried repeatedly to interview him, to speak with him, about this case. The person that I’ve probably tried to interview the most, has been David Knutson and anyone affiliated with the court system. I’ve gone down to the court, I’ve called him and I’ve done everything I could to try to get him to speak on the record. I’ve spoken with his clerk and I’ve spoken with everyone that I could possibly think of to try to get him to speak…” Has Brodkorb maintained contacts in the court system? Perhaps so – Brodkorb has admitted in one article,”The contacts I had made in the political world ended up being very helpful in generating leads on the Rucki case.”
Brodkorb also acknowledges there are serious problems existing in the family court system, “There is no way and I believe this, if someone reviews the matters involved in this case and doesn’t immediately come to the conclusion that there are problems in the family court system, they are purposely trying for there not to be a problem with the court system, because a blind person could see that.” Brodkorb goes on to say that he does not believe the Rucki girls ran away, and has a strong suspicion that Sandra has been helping them.
In her criminal trial, Sandra argued the affirmative defense – claiming her actions were taken to protect her children from imminent harm. What loving parent wouldn’t act to protect their children from abuse? This tragedy could have been avoided had Judge Knutson, and the Dakota County court and social service taken concerns of abuse seriously, and worked to protect the children – not enable the abuser.
3) Allegations of Witness Tampering – On June 24, 2016, Dede Evavold attempted to file a complaint with Lakeville police, accusing David Rucki and Michael Brodkorb of witness tampering in the Sandra Grazzini-Rucki case. Dede says officers with the Lakeville police quickly walked away and refused to take her complaint, which she documents with photographs. Officers were ordered by Deputy Chief John Kormann not to take the complaint.
The incident happened on June 12th when Dede received a letter in the mail from David Rucki, via his high buck attorney Marshall H. Tanick at Hellmuth and Johnson PLLC (how does a recipient of public assistance afford these expensive legal services??) that raised several allegations against her, which could result in criminal charges or civil damages. Dede writes, “After returning home on Sunday, June 12, 2016 I found what I consider a harassing and threatening extortion letter in my mailbox. The extortion letter was from David Rucki’s attorney Marsahll H. Tanick, Attorney at Law, Hellmuth & Johnson, PLLC. I had a reasonable suspicion the wild, outrageous and unsubstantiated claims contained in the harassing and threatening extortion letter were meant to intimidate me into deleting the blog, Red Herring Alert, that I shared with Susan Carpenter. I also had a reasonable suspicion that Rucki’s harassing and threatening extortion letter was designed to coerce me into changing not only my plea but to coerce me into changing my testimony in Sandra’s rigged case.” The same letter was sent to S.C. and Lea Dannewitz, owner of the Carver County Corruption blog. In response, Lea deleted her blog, and denied involvement with any posts written about Rucki. S.C. responded by stepping down from her role in the Red Herring Alert blog and deleting any posts connected to her. It is clear that both were frightened of Rucki, and his threats against them.
Just two days after Rucki’s attorney sent this letter, Brodkorb raised his poisoned pen and took to the internet to dish the breaking news that rocked entire State of Minnesota like an atomic bomb… “Facing potential civil litigation in Rucki case, owner deletes blog.” Really – is that news worthy? No wonder Brodkorb lost his job the Star Tribune, his obsessive interest in the Grazzini-Rucki case has caused him to lose touch with reality! What is interesting about this article is that Brodkorb gained access to the attorney letter Rucki sent out, which was not made publicly available. Brodkorb also knew details about the letter which had not been released – such as the name of the firm Rucki retained, and that “others” were sent this same letter. Brodkorb also cited portions of the letter in his article.
Dede also questions how Brodkorb obtained this letter, “ How is it possible that former Star Tribune hack Michael Brodkorb magically & mysteriously knew that Lea received a private harassing and threatening letter from David Rucki? How is it possible that former Star Tribune hack Michael Brodkorb magically & mysteriously knew that Lea would pick that time to delete her blog? It couldn’t be a coincidence if Star Tribune hack Michael Brodkorb is knowingly and intentionally delivering Star Tribune work product to David Rucki, could it? “
What makes this letter, and subsequent blog article posted by Brodkorb, witness tampering is that threat of legal action, and the public humiliation of Lea Dannewitz, was being used to pressure Dede and other bloggers into remaining silent about the Grazzini-Rucki case. Dede felt that Rucki, and Brodkorb, were threatening her to delete the Red Herring Alert blog, and to change her testimony in the Grazzini-Rucki case. Rucki had successfully employed these bullying and coercive tactics on others – Lea is one example, his son N. Rucki another, and audio from a police interview shows the same tactics were used on runaway daughter S. Rucki to attempt to get her to change her testimony. The Lakeville police has an obligation to take Dede’s complaint, and given the evidence she has provided, as well as the history behind it – this complaint should be investigated.
The irony in all of this is that Brodkorb defends his own blog and social media posts as “journalism” and “free speech” but at the same time is gleefully reporting that the blogs of other people are being threatened with legal action, and taken down. It does not appear that Brodkorb supports free speech at all.
Brodkorb’s writing serves to protect David Rucki as well as Judge Knutson and the Dakota County court system, who has destroyed the Grazzini-Rucki family, and enabled abuse to continue. Judge Knutson and the family court has worked to cover up their illegal actions and hide the fact that abuse did occur in this family; they use press coverage to continue their lies, and to elicit public sympathy.
In turn, Brodkorb receives recognition and is able to salvage his tarnished reputation by being the reporter who broke the story, by playing the hero.
The sad ending is that Sandra and the Rucki children were once a closing, loving family who now have been forcibly separated and without contact for over 3 years. Sandra’s dream was to be a mother to a large family, and to devote her life to her children – that dream was shattered first by domestic violence and then by a corrupt family court system. The Grazzini-Rucki family has been decimated by the illegal and unjust actions of Judge Knutson, and Dakota County. The Rucki children are growing up in a home where they are potentially endangered; so much so that 4 out of 5 children have ran away from their father at least once, and threatened to run away again (the two older girls succeeding in April 2013). The Rucki children have begged to return to their mother – their pleas havebeen ignored. It is reprehensible that the courts of Dakota County would order the Rucki children into “reunification therapy” with an abusive father while, at the same time, alienating the children from the healthy parent, their primary caregiver, Sandra. These children are growing up without their mother, a loss that can never be replaced.
Every level of the court and legal system has failed to protect the Rucki children. Their mother, Sandra, may be sent to prison for trying to protect them. She will have a felony record while the abuser goes unpunished. This is the story that should be told. Instead of reading Brodkorb’s nonsense, PLEASE read, like, re-post and share the courageous voices who speak out about abuse and family court failures. Share the articles that expose the truth about the Grazini-Rucki case, in doing so you can help reveal the evidence the court has denied, and obtain justice for the Grazzini-Rucki family.