Shocking Details Emerge – Fraudulent HRO Filed Against Blogger Dede Evavold

Source: Realty Websites Shine Reality on Rucki’s Fraudulent HRO vs Dede Evavold

Public Domain: redherringalert.wordpress.com

Update on Dede Evavold HRO… one of the complaints against Evavold in the fraudulent HRO filed by Davd Rucki is that she posted pictures of Rucki’s home on social media.

Dede Evavold on HRO: When We Lose Free Speech

Turns out that, in fact pictures of both the Ireland Place property and the property in Farmington, owned by David Rucki, were previously posted online in a realty listing. The photos of both homes have existed online for many years, and were made publicly available even before Evavold’s criminal trial began. These pictures are now in the public domain. 

What’s next an HRO filed against the realtor, against Google??

See for yourself:

Fraud on Farmington Property

Movato – Farmington Home

At some point Rucki listed this home in Farmington for sale, and his realtor created a site including interior and exterior photos of the home. Rucki then de-listed the house… if he was so poor and in need of public assistance, why not just sell the home and use the proceeds to support his family?

Rucki continues to keep ex-wife Sandra Grazzini-Rucki listed on the mortgage to the Farmington home — even to this day. Why? Rucki admitted in court that he masterminded a “paper divorce” and with the help of Judge Knutson, worked to destroy Sandra by depleting all of her financial assets. What came next was a series of court motions that made it impossible for Sandra to financially support herself, more court orders were issued to ban Sandra from all contact with family so she would not be able to receive any help or assistance. The sum of the 4,000+ court orders issued by Judge Knutson is the attempted murder of a loving stay at home mother, who became a liability to her abusive husband when she sought a divorce, and exposed his abuse of her and the children to the family court.

Judge Knutson drafted a court order that gave David Rucki 100% of the marital property, including the Farmington home. Sandra has zero rights or ownership to the property. At the same time, Judge Knutson allowed Rucki to leave Sandra on the mortgage of the Farmington home so that she could be held financially liable for the property. The Farmington property supposedly is also being used as a rental property, meaning Rucki generates income on it. A homeless woman is now being held financially responsible for the mortgage of her millionaire husband’s second home… by order of Judge Knutson.

Sandra is destitute and homeless. She has slept in the darkest corners…places most could not imagine, with only the rats scampering across the dirty streets to witness her desperation.  Huddled in castaway clothing to keep her warm, Sandra clutches legal papers to her chest, hoping that one day the truth will be revealed and she will exonerated and set free from this hellish life.

In comparison, abusive ex-husband, David Rucki, has been given exclusive ownership of not one but 4 separate homes, that they owned jointly during the marriage by order of Judge Knutson. In addition, Rucki has been given 100% of property inside all four homes – including every item of Sandra’s personal belongings down to from her family mementos down to her socks. Sandra’s name is listed on a mortgage of a home that she cannot step foot in even though she is so desperately in need of shelter. The Farmington home is beautifully remodeled with 4 bedrooms, 2 baths, cherry cabinets in the kitchen and adjacent to a city park. It is the perfect home for a family, but the happy laughter of children will remain forever silent in these empty rooms.

If that is not outrageous enough, while Sandra is living on the street, homeless, Rucki uses the pole barn in the back of the home as a luxury suite for his collection of classic cars. The cars even have a home, and are protected from the elements, while ex-wife Sandra is living on the streets. Rucki owns a total of 9 fully restored classic cars, with a specially designed lift to stack the cars so they will fit in the luxury suit. The rest of the luxury suite is Rucki’s own version of the playboy mansion and includes a fully stocked bar with the most expensive taste in liquor, includes a bedroom, kitchen and bathroom. The taxpayers are footing the bill for Rucki’s life of luxury since he is living off public assistance PLUS he writes off the entire Farmington property as a business expense on his taxes.

Public Domain: wall.alphacoders.com

While Sandra is living on the streets, Rucki is even able to provide his collection of cigars with a home. Rucki pays for 3 separate, exclusive memberships to house his collection of expensive cigars in a humidor, with personal use of a temperature controlled wall vault. Each vault is beautifully decorated with Rucki’s name engraved in gold (every welfare recipient should have their own humidor inside a cigar lounge!).

Clearly, Rucki doesn’t need to be on welfare, he is just scamming the system. Each cigar Rucki smokes, he burns up cash while he demands nearly $1,000 a month in child support from ex-wife Sandra. Sandra  is not only  homeless but the State of Minnesota has denied food support and general assistance to her, leaving her utterly destitute. Sandra should not even have to ask for welfare, nor should be homeless, had Rucki complied with the divorce on it’s original, mutually agreed upon terms, she would be living very well today, and financially stable, raising the five children she loves.

Judge David Knutson

If that is not bad enough, Sandra has also been court ordered by Judge Knutson to pay the millionaire’s credit card debt — and she has ZERO income. David Rucki is also using the Farmington address, and using Sandra’s name to charge up thousands of dollars of debt on credit cards, one example is this publicly listed notice from September 25, 2014: Capital Finance LLC v Rucki

According to the complaint, on May 1, 2004, Rucki opened a charge account with U.S. Bank, with $31,417 owed at the time of this notice posted in the newspaper. According to the complaint Rucki was “unjustly enriched” and refusing to pay back the amount owed.

David Rucki 3rd Party Complaint Against Sandra Grazzini-Rucki

So what is Rucki’s defense for going on a shopping spree and ringing up $31k in debt? Blame the debt on destitute, homeless ex-wife Sandra! In fact, Rucki actually cites a court order from Judge Knutson stating he has the right to shift ALL of his personal debt, that he acquired after the divorce, onto ex-wife Sandra. The summons here, filed by attorney Lisa Elliott (who charges $310 to “poor” Rucki living on public assistance) does not include the name or contact information for Sandra’s attorney in the notice. Which means Elliott is manipulating the legal process so that Sandra will not be able to respond, and Rucki will receive a favorable settlement by default.

While David Rucki lives like a king in any one of the 4 fully furnished, beautifully decorated house of his choosing, he is purposefully driving ex-wife Sandra further into debt each day, and attempting to murder her by making it impossible for her to survive… Sandra is living on the street, somewhere.

Public Domain: wallpapercave.com

Judge Knutson should also be held responsible because he willingly took part in Rucki’s scam, that destroyed a family and is costing the taxpayers in the State of Minnesota millions the longer the Grazzini-Rucki case, and Rucki’s “paper divorce” continues. David Rucki “Paper Divorce” Scam

It’s Not Right On Ireland Place

David Rucki is claiming that Dede Evavold is harassing him by posting pictures of his home on Ireland Place, that property is was also previously listed for sale on a realty site and posted online… and has remained online, in public view, for many years. Evavold is not responsible for actions that happened before her criminal trial, Rucki consented to put pictures of his home into the public domain, where they sit today.

The Ireland Place property owned by Rucki has been subject of a mortgage fraud complaint, that Dakota County and the State of Minnesota refuses to investigate.

Rucki put the Ireland Place home in foreclosure 7 times in one year and then bought the home at a rock bottom prices, far below market value.

Read the complaint at this link: mortgagefrauda

Another Day in Lawless Lakeville: Fraud & Financial Abuse Allegations Surround David Rucki

Just like the property in Farmington, the Ireland Place property was fully remodeled, listed for sale and then delisted and put back into Rucki’s ownership as part his “paper divorce” scam.

The (former) realty listing describes the luxurious home on Ireland Place: “Pack the bags and bring the family this fantastic 1 owner, 2 story awaits you. Cul-de-sac, walk to schools, Lake  and more. Lots of updates, stainless, carpets, paint, gorgeous hickory floors. Quality throughout. McDonald Built!

Read More: Ireland Place on Zillow

The photos on Zillow are from a prior real estate listing for Ireland Place, MLS #4464616.

Note the family photo on the wall of the Rucki children, by court order of Judge Knutson that was also confiscated and turned over to Rucki. Sandra was not allowed to take even one picture of her children with her when she was removed from her home by order of Judge Knutson in Septmeber 2012. Then Rucki systemically removed every picture of Sandra from the house, every reminder, and through de-programming and reunification therapy has worked to remove Sandra’s memory from the minds of the children who have begged for their mother since the day she was forcefully, and unjustly removed from their lives. All of this done with the consent, and approval, of Judge Knutson who has been enriched by Rucki’s “paper divorce” scam.

Will Rucki File an HRO Against Elizabeth Vargas and 20/20 Next?

Let’s not forget that David Rucki appeared on a nationally televised show, 20/20 with Elizabeth Vargas on two separate occasions where he allowed his house to be filmed inside and out, and allowed filming of the minor children during a private family Christmas. The episode also featured family photos, including those of the minor children, and video footage that Rucki provided to 20/20. 20/20 also included the full legal names of the minor children.

Pictures of Rucki’s home and children were blasted across the country, and went viral, with his consent and now he is claiming his privacy is invaded and he feels harassed??

Rucki also requested the filming of the Grazzini-Rucki criminal case. Again, no concerns for privacy then, and the names of minor children were also made public.

And we are to believe Dede Evavold is to blame? Or to throw out the 1st Amendment to make blogging an illegal activity?

The HRO Rucki filed against Evavold is clearly fraudulent and constitutes legal abuse, if not a malicious lawsuit.

Advertisements

The Sandra Grazzini-Rucki Case as You’ve Never Heard Before… Hidden Truth Radio

F.A.C.E.U.S. Robin Lulu Marci Friedman Michael Volpe… and surprise guest Sandra Grazzini-Rucki

Listen Here: The Grazzini-Rucki Story As You’ve Never Heard it Beforeichael-volpe-conservator-or-liberal-news

39533844-radio-wallpapers

Public Domain: http://bsnscb.com

More information on the Grazzini-Rucki case:

1) The definitive dossier documenting David Rucki’s violence: 99 pages of police reports, orders for protection, letters, affidavits, and more…

2) The propaganda of 20/20

3) The court created horror of the five Rucki children

4) Dakota County disallows nearly all Sandra Grazzini-Rucki’s evidence and only then is she convicted

5) Dakota County slaps destitute Sandra Grazzini-Rucki with $975 per month in child support, $14,000 plus bill

Family Crisis Main Reason Children Run Away – Studies Validate Arguments Raised in Grazzini-Rucki Defense (Repost)

Family crisis is the main reason kids runaway- escaping to the streets to avoid chaos, abuse in their homes… (2015 report, National Runaway Safeline)

Studies reveal that family crisis is the main reason why many kids run away from home.  47% of runaway / homeless youth indicated that conflict between them and their parent or guardian was a major problem. (Westat, Inc. 1997: National Runaway Safeline: Statistics ) 

 Further, a majority of runaways are victims of child abuse. According to another study, “80% of runaway and homeless girls reported having been sexually or physically abused. (Molnar, et al, 1998: National Runaway Safeline: Statistics)

Findings validate claims raised by the 4 defendants in the Grazzini-Rucki criminal trial, who raised the affirmative defense stating their actions to help two troubled teen sisters was not criminal, but rather an effort to keep them safe. The Rucki sisters, S.R. and G.R., ran away after learning of a court order that they felt would endanger their lives, on two separate occasions in September 2012 and again in April 2013. Both sisters have asserted, on numerous occasions, that they feared their father and ran away to escape his violence.Rucki social service records

 

Background:

* Four of the Rucki children attempted to run away after their mother, Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, was forcibly removed from the home by an unjust family court order, on Sept 7, 2012.

*At the time of the “emergency” court order that September, Judge David L. Knutson acknowledged the sisters had raised allegations of sexual abuse but chose to ignore safety concerns. Judge Knuston determined a mother attempting to protect the children from harm was more of a danger to the children than actual abuse.

* The Rucki children were then placed into the custody of a paternal aunt, Tammy Jo Love, whom they feared. Love had previously lost custody of her own children due to drug problems. The court never conducted a study to determine her fitness to care for children, nor was any motion filed to petition for custody.

* Love went to the elementary school of the youngest children (ages 8 and 10 years old) to inform them of the order, and then left the traumatized children to take the bus home, alone. The two youngest children immediately ran away. The children were found an hour later, having walked over 2 miles alongside a busy road.

* The police report says one of the children asked to see her mom – but was refused due to the court order. The report also said both children indicated that if they go back home, they are “just going to run away,” and said they did not feel safe with Love. After the incident, the children were placed in the care of another relative. http://sunthisweek.com/2015/11/18/son-mom-of-missing-girls-told-kids-to-run-in-2012/

*Just seven months later, this after Judge Knutson personally spoke to the Rucki children and ignored their cries for help, he again court ordered the children into Love’s custody on April 19, 2013.

*This time, the two oldest girls S.R. and G.R. succeeded in running away, and remained in hiding for the next two years. When given opportunities to return home, the terrified teens refused, citing fear of their father.

* The youngest children did not run away because the court recognized the risk, and detained them at school to prevent escape. The court then forced the youngest children into reunification therapy with Rucki even though the GAL noted that they expressed fear, and avoided physical contact with him.

*That the Rucki children currently remain in the custody of David Rucki is no indication of their well-being or safety, especially considering how the family court system has colluded in the abuse of these children and greatly contributed to their suffering.

Among the tragic stories of 1.6-2.8 million American youth who runaway every year, are the 5 Rucki children whose cries for help have been lost in a purposeful cover up orchestrated by Judge David L. Knutson, former family court judge in Dakota County, and assisted by corrupt officials working at every level of government in the State of Minnesota.

Judge David L Knutson

When children do not feel safe, and have witnessed domestic violence or been victims to abuse, they are at a much higher risk of running away. Especially when those charged with protecting them, social services and family court, fail to do so.

The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention reports that 21% of runaway youth have a history of physical or sexual abuse, or were afraid abuse would continue if they returned to their home. (Source: Safe Place: Running Away)

Shrieking winds sweep across the prairie, beating against the the luxurious Rucki house, situated at the end of a quiet cul-de-sac in a rural suburb. In the dying light of a sun that never seems to shine over this corner of hell, the door remains firmly shut, the blinds drawn …the house remains unusually quiet and shuttered tight, with no sign of life inside.

Carefully choreographed footage from ABC 20/20 shot over Christmas with David Rucki and children offers a rare glimpse inside… it is an awkward scene with blurred faces and forced cheer.

It is painfully obvious that mother, Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, is absent from the festivities. Sandra has been forcibly removed from the lives of her children by abusive ex-husband, David Rucki, and by an unjust court order that prohibits her from having any contact with her children for the rest of their lives. Once a stay at home mother, and primary caregiver, Sandra is now alienated from her children and has not had any contact with them in over 5 years. Sandra spent Christmas grieving for her children. She clings to the precious memories .. and is haunted by thoughts of who they are today.

Elizabeth Vargas and ABC 20/20 portray David Rucki as a whimpering father who says he is victimized by an angry ex-wife who brainwashed the children to wage abuse allegations against him. The truth is more sinister.. it takes just a click of a mouse to reveal what 20/20 failed to report as much of the documentation has been made publicly available on the internet. Did 20/20 manipulate the Rucki story to hide abuse? (Michael Volpe, CDN)

A long history of police reports documents Rucki’s explosive anger, and propensity towards violence. druckipolicereports

The violence continued after David and Sandra divorced, with stalking, threats, and eruptions of Rucki’s rage – that often spilled onto the streets of this otherwise quiet neighborhood.

After the divorce was finalized, Sandra says Rucki terrorized the family, and in one incident, threatened to kill all of them. Soon after that threat, one of the children received a voice mail with the sound of six bullets being fired in quick succession – one bullet for Sandra and each of the children. recorded voice mail messages

The Rucki children bravely came forward to report abuse to many officials who should have protected them but failed to do so – the court appointed Guardian ad Litem, police, therapists, the family doctor, social workers, the family court judge and others.

The court appointed psychologist Gilbertson wrote a letter from Feb. 6, 2013 that stated, “There are two prevailing emotional themes that these children speak to: One is fear of being in the presence of their father given what they allege to he being an angry and violent person. A second theme is the anger they have over his alleged mistreatment and a corollary of this, a belief that their father is morally flawed, i.e. womanizer, drinks too much, and is hiding money.

Dr. James Gilbertson, PhD

Yet time and time again the Rucki children were not protected but rather, sent back into the abuse; and their mother, and only protector, Sandra, was forcibly removed from their lives.

Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, and three other co-defendants were criminally charged and convicted for their role for assisting S.R. and G.R. after they ran away in April 2013. This, despite the fact that in Minnesota it is an affirmative defense (subd. 2) to take action to protect a child from imminent emotional or physical harm. Sandra continues to fight for justice, and to clear her name. She is actively appealing her conviction.

Co-defendant, Dede Evavold is actively appealing her case, and has argued (Evavold Appeal 2017) that she was wrongfully charged and convicted of parental deprivation because (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...”

 

 

For More Info:

Birthday Blow Up: David Rucki Chased Terrified Teens Down Street

Rucki Child Speaks Out – Social Media Post Offers Glimpse From Months Leading Up to Disappearance of Sisters

Sandra Grazzini-Rucki convicted of hiding daughters (Michael Volpe, CDN)

 

 

 

 

Source Family Crisis Main Reason Children Run Away – Studies Validate Arguments Raised in Grazzini-Rucki Defense

 

 

 

20/20 Continued Coverage of Grazzini-Rucki Case

20.20

As we suspected, 20/20 left the door open to follow up on the Grazzini-Rucki trial scheduled for July 18th, 2016. Let’s see if they make a better attempt at getting some truth out there this time. Doubtful, but previous backlash may make them more accountable to their viewers.

 

20-20


Did 20/20 manipulate the Rucki story to hide abuse?  by Michael VolpeApr 14, 2016

“20/20” ran a program entitled “Footprints in the Snow” about the disappearance in April 2013 of Samantha and Gianna Rucki; Did they tell the whole story.

Read more at http://www.commdiginews.com/entertainment/did-2020-manipulate-the-rucki-story-to-hide-abuse-61696/#48fPjM4DO8migHFI.99


Michelle Lowney MacDonald Shimota
Michelle Lowney MacDonald Shimota The police told 20/20 there were no police reports??? The police lied. 20/20 wilfully refused to acknowledge numerous police reports they were provided. 20/20 pretended to be looking for police reports. These numerous reports document that Sam Grazzini-Rucki regularly complained, feared that the police would not act on her complaints, and feared retaliation for even filing. 20/20 was cherry picking for pictures of physical abuse…https://redherringalert.files.wordpress.com/…/doc031816…
Thea Ciancanelli
Thea CiancanelliIt makes me so sad that the corruption of the judges and the police was not shown. This only shares the dad’s side of the story. There is so much more to the mother loosing her children. They had no reason to take them from her, yet the dad got them…See More
Bonnie Roy
Bonnie Roy Investigators need to dig into the boxes of motions by attorneys involved. Look at money stolen..why was testimony with children judge hidden?who took care of children prior to divorce? Look at the financial ruin of mother … Tax statements…judge orSee More
Keo Sengsavang
Keo Sengsavang Here are somethings I wonder about: If the girls were programmed by their mother, why did they not call or return home to their father as they were freed to come and go as they please and have not been around their mother for 2 years? If the mother wasSee More

Terry HartsfordTerry Hartsford Letter to ABC To be Reposted Boycotting ABC                                                                         Dear President Dungey, See More                                                                                                                    Like · Reply · 1 · April 11 at 9:29am · Edited

1 Reply
Terry Hartsford
Terry Hartsford As reading through all the comments and replies it appears Jen Love ( David Ruckis niece) and Andres Garcia appear to have the most negative comments towards this mother. Perhaps these two could benefit from Anger/Frustration classes themselves.

Andres Garcia                                                                                                                                                                            Andres Garcia That mom is a joke! Im soo glad she is facing felony charges. She ruined the relationship between the father and his daughters.

64 Replies

Molly McIntyre
Molly McIntyre How dare you 20/20 be So naive! You are hurting abused children now and the futures. Hope you can live with yourselves, selling out abused children for a shows headline. I speak from experience.

124 Replies

Suzanne Cyr
Suzanne Cyr 20/20 failed protective mothers and verbally, emotionally and psychologically abused children. Twenty twenty should read Donna Basio’s book, Nothing but My Voice. Family court is failing our families. Disappointed at how poorly 20/20 researched DV, DV by Proxy and maternal deprivation, trauma bonding and Stockholm Syndrome

8 Replies

Angila Hartzheim
Angila Hartzheim Why didn’t the local news station that interviewed the girls apprehend them? I am totally confused. The story should have stopped there. Ridiculous.

11 Replies

Viviana Jones-Caicedo
Viviana Jones-Caicedo This hits so close to home. Why would a child be against a good, loving parent? Think about it! Judges abuse their power everyday and take children from safe homes to give them to sociopath parents, putting children and good parents in desperate situatSee More

93 Replies

Jennifer John
Jennifer John Thank you for bringing the corruption of family court to everyone’s attention. I’m a victim of a corrupted system in Maryland.

6 Replies

Nancy B Sura
Nancy B Sura I watched. I disliked! The stress that the children have gone through is tremendous. When adults fight over their children no one wins….20/20 did not win with this story.
Glenda Pugh Williams
Glenda Pugh Williams It didn’t bother David Rucki to leave his wife penniless, homeless, childless, no car after she gave birth to 5 children for his selfish self. 20/20 should be ashamed of themselves.
Linda Hanley
Linda Hanley 20 20 should have delved into parental alienation and the deeper issues. I kept saying – what is point of this story ???

1 Reply

Alexandra Beckman
Alexandra Beckman Thank you 20/20 for bringing parental alienation to the public eye. Most people dont even know of the word, until after it hits them….And it is too late. frown emoticon
3 Replies
Courtney Lynn Blasiol
Courtney Lynn Blasiol 20/20 lied. THEY PROMISED to show the truth about family court from the protective mom’s perspective and they didn’t. They just did more harm.

19 Replies

Bethany Ann
Bethany Ann 20/20, why didn’t you uncover the fact that David is a MASON and has ties with the illuminati?! Ever think that’s what happened to the police reports?!
17 Replies
Jeremy Stenerson
Jeremy Stenerson Did ANY of you people watch ANY of this. The ex-wife BRAIN WASHED her children into thinking their father was evil. Perhaps 20/20 should have mentioned the dangers of having a psycho ex-wife as well as domestic violence.

9 Replies

Lisa Bilow
Lisa Bilow Really people…if she felt her children were in danger, how come only hide two of the kids and not all 5?? I was an abuse child…and there is scares physically and emotionally…she hadnt proved any of it…i watched her face and sorry she was lyingSee More

4 Replies

Jeanne Oster-Lederman
Jeanne Oster-Lederman I was married to a man like this for 13 yrs, with him for 17. The last time he kicked me was the last day I lived with him. The man in this story reminds me exactly of him…acting very meek & mild. The judge in this case is very, very WRONG.
3 Replies
Mariah Rae Vasquez
Mariah Rae Vasquez Shame on the interviewer for how she conducted herself. She seemed so RUDE and biased against the mother. I was very disappointed in her ability to interview approiately this time.
5 Replies
Karen Ewart

Timmy WunderlichTimmy Wunderlich Sounds set up with the mother and caretakers who had the girls. My first thought, why didn’t call police right away or within days?

Sharon Blair
Sharon Blair ABC 20/20– Many Grandparents are alienated from their natural grandchildren. Please contact me about covering this. Founder of The Jennifer Act http://thejenniferact.com/…/grandparent-visitation…/

Elizabeth Vargas

3 Replies
Jim Cavins
Jim Cavins I have appealed to 20/20 several time regarding Parental Alienation in Fresno Calif Courts. I and many others would welcome 20/20 to investigate Parental Alienation for Title IVc funds or VAWA . The offer still stands…
Jeanne Oster-Lederman
Jeanne Oster-Lederman Why does Elizabeth Vargas so obviously believe the father & demonize the mother. Watch the home videos again. You can see the Father’s rage just below the surface. Professionals call it Passive Aggressive. Elizabeth, as a journalist you need to remain neutral.
6 Replies
Diane Zimmerman Very disappointed in the show ! They missed the bigger story ! The corruption of judge Knutson in the courtroom having attorney handcuffed to a wheelchair ! You missed the mark this time 20/20 !
Cathy Norton
Cathy Norton Watching 20/20 was an eye opener for a lot of people. I know a lot of people were upset with this show, but I believe that they pointed out with this show how things really are in the real world of divorce and custody. This stuff happens everyday. 20/20 did not take sides in this, but reported the facts. I think both parents were at fault for letting there kids go through this crap.
Nancy James Policastro
Nancy James Policastro My heart goes out to the children. I know how it feels, I was there. I feel the decision to run was the girls, but once they got away from their father, they called their mother for help. She would do anything to protect them.
5 Replies
Keo Sengsavang
Keo Sengsavang So disappointed in ABC 20/20’s spin on this report, NOT surprised, but very disappointed. It would appear that 20/20’s legal team strongly believes in “Professional Courtesy” and declined to investigate the real issues within the case. Why else would tSee More

1 Reply

Melodee Miller
Melodee Miller I watched this program and then 90 minutes later it was rehashed on Nightline. Is that the best you can do for programming. Must have been a slow news day to have repeat the story.
Amy Pain
Amy Pain Oh…btw 20/20…those video clips you said you “found”…but all of us that submitted them, know you requested them… get your facts straight!

1 Reply

Veronica Hatton
Veronica Hatton The American Bar Association even acknowledges that abusers win custody of children 70 percent of the time. My son and I’s case has documented domestic violence, child abuse medical documentation, audio recordings, etc. My abuser currently has custody See More

3 Replies

EliseEvelyn Keledjian
EliseEvelyn Keledjian I’m watching now but that term ” Real life gone girl?” Is always being used! That wasn’t anything like this situation. ..plus this is real and not a so so very predictable movie. .Just got that off my chest lol but I love 20/20 Elizabeth your fantastiSee More
Theresa Yuan
Theresa Yuan @elizabethvargas #elizabethvargas visitleadershipcouncil.org, watch garland waller’s documentary, view her#ignoranceisthis videos, talk to Lundy Bancroft and Wendy Murphy, visit a family court court room of a mom alleging DV or child abuse and read tSee More
Welcome. . . The Leadership Council is a nonprofit independent scientific organization composed of…
LEADERSHIPCOUNCIL.ORG

2 Replies

Syndi Sajarab
Syndi Sajarab 20/20 sad to see you questioned and judged good people trying to help children who believed they were in danger. There isn’t many people now that would offer their home to children with out getting something in return, or even sexually abusing them becSee More
Samantha Jones
Samantha Jones Elizabeth Vargas you have NO IDEA how corrupt the family court system is!!!!!! People with enough money, PAY for results and outcomes!!! It’s Completely corrupt!!!!!!!!!!! This story you did is completely one sided. Abuse is for real and it is a sick world how someone can turn the entire thing around. I pray for JUSTICE!!!!!
7 Replies
Sharon M Ruddy
Sharon M Ruddy Damon was great! A wonderful young man! He was the light of the show. I’m in this nightmare for many years and I am truly disappointed that they did not use a typical protective mom case that involved sexual abuse and unmistaken evidence. I believe thiSee More
Josh Jackson
 Josh Jackson I own a Mental Wellness Clinic and I can’t count how many times I’ve seen when the custodial parent fighting for their children loses some of their parental rights for expressing there concerns. I’ve seen attorney’s for parents in shock and awe at whSee More
1 Reply
Elizabeth Eubanks-Brown
Elizabeth Eubanks-Brown So I would also like to know why the news crew that met up with the girls and talk to them and had them on tv with out telling the police? They where reported miss right? So if here’s a murderer on the loose and the news finds them first they can interview them and not call police??????
3 Replies
East Side
East Side I think that they should look into the mother and father relationship with their kids and leave the people they were with for 2 years alone ! The people they were with for 2 years were just trying to help the kids out by giving them a place to stay instead of having them out on the street. The real case here is the mother and father.
2 Replies
Todd Dombrock
Todd Dombrock That mother in ur story has problems and is crazy and needs help badly she is also lying big time. The mother should go back to jail same with ppl that helped her and the girls. I live in county where this took place too. I hope 2020 does a follow up on this story this summer sometime
Mardi Miller-Plastow
Mardi Miller-Plastow Watched the Rucki story. I’m can only comment on my own experience with an abusive marriage. It was many years ago but remember it all. My husband reminded me of the husband in this story. These men can charm, manipulate and lie. As l watched the See More
Diana Ansley
Diana Ansley I agree 20/20 has failed the abused. I have seen abusive parents have NOTHING to do with their children behind closed doors but act like the best dad in the world at soccer and football games. If you could hear the screaming I hear when on the phoneSee More

1 Reply

Mary Lachapelle Mary Lachapelle Watching from Edmonton, Alberta, love my 20/20.
Becky Weers
Becky Weers I live not far from Herman, Mn. Sad story all around for everyone involved. My fear is for the huge scars the children will have the rest of their lives.
Kari Schwerr
Kari Schwerr Watching from Blaine, MN. I want to know where the court stands with the family who let the girls stay with them for 2.5 years. Are they still awaiting trial and verdict…?
Rosa Guadagnano-Dratsch
Rosa Guadagnano-Dratsch You did an excellent job sticking to the point, Damon. If it were not for you, the show would have been a waste. Thank you

 

Jude Hunter
Jude Hunter Elizabeth Vargas is despicable misrepresenting and editing snippets of Damon’s interview. Disney owns ABC 20/20, they continue their misogynistic Company policies, [in their movies] killing off mothers-and on 20/20 disparaging good fit mothers-and elevating abusive dads to [heroes].

 

Pesky Details in the Grazzini-Rucki Case

Twitter
 

Michael Volpe Discusses the Grazzini-Rucki Case on The Long Version

Apr. 20, 2016  Weighing In.

Start at 22:47

 

Well Warriors, I just had the first “Weigh In Wednesday” today sponsored by the Doctor’s Diet Clinic.  I have dropped 3.8 pounds the first week and I am taking all-natural supplements and not the controlled substance, appetite suppressant, though the program permits the latter, which is why there is a physician on staff.    My mother, who is doing the program with me, in the same amount of time has lost 3.5 pounds and she too is thrilled.  Proportionately, she has done even better than I, as 3.5 pounds comprises much more of her total body weight than 3.8 pounds comprises of mine, I assure you.  “Weighing In” has a literal component, as I have above detailed, but is has a hypothetical component too.  

On the Version, Michael Volpe, author of the book Bullied to Death: Chris Mackney Kafkaesque Divorce, a regular contributor, and daily listener weighed-in on how the ABC News show, 20/20, treated Michelle McDonald.  Michelle MacDonald represented Sandra Grazzini-Rucki in a custody matter against her ex-husband David Rucki regarding two children, Samantha and Gianna Rucki who ran away from home during the bitter custody dispute and were gone for some two years.  The subtitle of the piece run on 20/20 was Footprints in the Snow.  On the Version detailing the story from the perspective of Michelle MacDonald, Michelle was taken into custody for violating the Court’s rule against taking a photograph during the proceeding.  She was hand-cuffed to a wheel chair and forced to defend a client whom court personnel had sent home, telling Ms. Rucki and her witnesses Court had adjourned for the day.  Michelle lost the custody case, but, after all, she was confined to a chair and forced to proceed with her client and witnesses dispersed to the four corners of the area.  I guess if winning that way is satisfying to David Rucki, then…Congratulations.

On what Michael and I focused, however, was the curious decision of 20/20 and its host Elizabeth Vargas to require that Sandra Rucki provide police recorded, written proof of David Rucki’s abusing her during their marriage.  What Vargas did was ask a very limited question meant to confine the answer to constraints Vargas knew would net the answer on which she was counting.  All Vargas had to do was consult the public record to find out that Ms. Rucki never complained to the police, in a manner which was memorialized in writing at least, of being abused by David Rucki during the parties’ marriage.  While there was ample documentation setting forth a litany of incidents of abuse, none of them fit into the box 20/20 fashioned in that they weren’t reported to the police during the parties’ marriage and memorialized in writing by the police via “report.”  

I suppose what Elizabeth Vargas is saying is that all wives subjected to abuse at the hands of the husbands report the incident to the police and that the incident is further reduced to writing in official report.  I suppose in all instances the police confer charges.  I suppose further that event of abuse never really occurred if, let’s say, a wife be unwilling to report being abused to authorities for some silly reason like the husband is either the primary wage-earner or, at least, a substantial contributor to the household wages and the children and she would like to continue eating.  Do motorists only speed if issued a citation?  Is the fact the motorist has never been cited establish he has never disobeyed any rules of the road?

What Elizabeth Vargas did was a technique I commonly employed when I practiced law and one I would have undertaken had David Rucki employed me to defend him.  The difference is, in those days, it would have been my function to advocate my client’s position.  It is both sad and misguided that Elizabeth Vargas, as a member of the national media, thought this was her function too.  What Ms. Vargas did in asking such a limited question is scope is frighteningly similar to an old sleazy, lawyer trick. “Mr. Johnson, are you still beating your wife?”  There is no way for the witness to answer the question.  If he is no longer beating his wife he concedes he once did and if he answers yes he is confessing.  Members of our esteemed National News Media, of the ilk of Elizabeth Vargas, enjoy a much finer reputation than almost all lawyers.  Wouldn’t it be just resplendent if they comported thusly?    

Vargas knew exactly what she was doing in confining her question to a narrow set of circumstances which would net a response which best furthered her angle.  She arrived at the interview pre-armed with the opinion Sandra Rucki was alienating the Rucki children against their father and the Judge had properly conducted the hearing in which Michelle MacDonald was forced to participate from restraint and confinement.  She worked the problem in advance of her investigation and didn’t set about to expose the truth but to confirm the answer to which she had long arrived.  Mark Twain once said “[t]here are laws to protect the freedom of the press’s speech, but none that are worth anything to protect the people from the press.”  I am afraid Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and her intrepid lawyer, Michelle MacDonald, were in need of protection from Elizabeth Vargas and 20/20 unwittingly.  I am afraid Joseph Pulitzer was correct when he warned, “A cynical, mercenary, demagogic press will produce in time a people as base as itself.”  Take it for what it is worth, because…

THAT’S THE LONG VERSION!

P.S. The Long Version both credits and appreciates Michael Volpe and CDN (Communities Digital News) for contributions to this blog from the story, Did 20/20 manipulate the Rucki story to hide abuse?

Allow me first to say that if you haven’t heard Today’s Version go, tout suite, and hear the Podcast under the same title as this Blog.  We covered for the second day in a row the 20/20 interview of Attorney Michelle MacDonald.  What ensued was fantastic radio and completely unplanned and unscripted.  That’s what makes it fun and I hope it was as fun to hear as it was in which to participate.  It does cast a light on a topic I daily contemplated in my former profession as a trial lawyer and that is the most persuasive way to argue a point.

Desmond Tutu, a famous Anglican Catholic Archbishop emeritus of Cape Town, South Africa, instructed “[d]on’t raise your voice, improve your argument.”  I found this to be true throughout my career.  More simply put by Ben Goldacre in Bad Science  “[y]ou cannot reason people out of a position that they did not reason themselves into.”  Yelling creates discourse and resentment but not thoughtful discussion. I have personally always found true intelligence is often marked by one’s ability to change a position if one or the other side makes a compelling and reasoned argument.  My mind has been changed about a great number of things in my lifetime and any conviction of mine is subject to be altered if sufficiently persuaded when appropriate.  

Probably one of the first things one should do in an argument is find where there is common ground and take that as the ground from which to base your thesis.  Today it became obvious to me that, regarding the story 20/20 aired about the Rucki dispute, neither Cliff nor Michael Volpe (I tend to agree with Volpe on this), were going to agree about whether the ABC News story had covered the story accurately and fairly.  In the interest of full disclosure both Michael Volpe and I have personal relationships and even business ties to Michelle MacDonald which results in her having credibility with us.  I personally have found no reason to not put faith in what she has ever before represented to me.  Cliff appears suspicious of Michelle MacDonald and what she professes; so, right there, a critical divide exists which appears to impede agreement.  Blaise Pascal in his work, De l’art de persuader, which amounts to the title of this piece but in French, says “People almost invariably arrive at their beliefs not on the basis of proof but on the basis of what they find attractive.”  For both personal and business reasons Michael Volpe and I find it attractive to believe what our friend and Publisher tells us.  Cliff finds being skeptical of Michelle’s representations and crediting the ABC News reporter’s integrity and honesty more attractive.  I am not willing to credit the ABC News Reporter because of her profession and for whom she works anymore than Michelle should be likewise credited.  I know Michelle to be honest and have enormous integrity, that’s enough for Michael Volpe and me.

Here’s what I do know.  Ms. Rucki is in custody for violating an Order of the Court.  This Order emanated from a proceeding in which her attorney was arrested for an offense which didn’t warrant arrest and forced to conduct the trial restrained to a wheel chair, hand-cuffed, with the hand-cuffs attached to a belt around her waist tethered to the wheel chair.  The party represented by the constrained attorney was sent home by Court personnel, together with her witnesses, after being told the Court had adjourned for the day, which was untrue.  With Ms. Rucki absent and unable to either defend or be heard in a meaningful way, the Court awarded custody to David Rucki.  If Ms. Rucki then absconded with the children in defeat of that Order, as alleged by the charging instrument; then that Order’s coming to exist in violation of the Federal Constitution is both relevant and should have been part of the 20/20 story.  ABC News omitted this from the story it took to air on its very popular news show.  Between Michael Volpe, Cliff Ritter and me, though we agreed on almost nothing else, we all agreed on the contents of this paragraph.  This becomes, then, the common ground from where an argument can be won.

So here it is!  ABC News reported on Ms. Rucki’s being jailed for interfering with an Order which came into being in violation of her Federally protected Constitution Rights.  They made Sandra Rucki look like a wanton criminal in the offing.  However, Orders entered in complete defeat of a litigant’s Constitutionally protected rights either are or should be considered void ab initio; which means the custody order would have been treated as invalid from the outset or from the beginning.  With respect to 20/20 and ABC News that isn’t just relevant, it’s the crux of the whole dispute.  It not being included in the coverage for the viewer to at least frame the issue as to whether this was an Order which should have been ignored, owing to how it came into being, is slanted, one-sided, and partial reporting unworthy of a multiple Peabody Award winning broadcast.  In my mind, it discredits the story’s complete integrity.  Take it for what it is worth, because

THAT’S THE LONG VERSION!

____________________________________________________________


This is about money laundering through our tax dollars!

FATHERHOOD.GOV

Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) as a “custody switching tactic.”  Kids can definitely be turned against a parent and demonstrate alienating behaviors but PAS to switch custody is a scheme in which mothers are primarily pathologized and blamed for interfering with their children’s attachment to their fathers. The scheme is funded by fathers’ rights extremist groups who in turn are funded by federal grants.

There are many terrific and honest  father`s rights groups across the U.S. that promote fairness and equality between mothers and fathers working towards the best interest of the children.  Unfortunately, there are also wide spread corrupt fathers’ rights groups that pocket federal grant funds while allowing severe trauma to children.

Fathers Rights – is the term used for the federal funding used in the fraud and corruption. Fathers Manifesto Groups discovered a malicious way to take advantage of the billions handed to State Agencies and abuse and control their ex-girlfriend/spouse.

Hatred of Women a Common Theme – A number of leaders of fathers’ custody advocacy groups are clearly misogynistic and use their Internet sites to exhort men to take action against ex-wives, using hate-filled language. They are described as displaying virulent misogyny, spreading false anti-woman propaganda and applauding and even encouraging acts of domestic terrorism and extreme violence against women and children, up to and including murder.

  • 95% of sexual molestation of girls and 90% of sexual molestation of boys are by
  • 70% of abusive fathers are the winners in custody fights.
  • ”The Parental Alienation Syndrome theory” is used almost exclusively against women.
  • Statements by Dr. Richard Gardner “…pedophilia is an accepted practice by billions of people”  “…our society’s response to it is ‘excessively moralistic and punitive.”  “…there is a certain amount of pedophilia in all of us.”  “a mother’s hysterics [to child molestation]…will contribute to the child’s feeling that a heinous crime has been committed.”
  • The “true” victims according to PAS: Fathers are “victims of mothers’ viciousness and vindictiveness.” Judges are “manipulated by mothers.”
  • Sub-conclusion: 94-98.5% of sexual abuse allegations made by either children or their mothers are true
  • In this largest national study to examine intentionally false allegations, CIS-98 found Deliberate false allegations mostly by fathers

Fathers Rights and THEIR Corrupt Judicial Cronies

A short history of how judges set up a secret system to rig cases for men The Liz Library

Fathers’ Rights activists have made themselves well known.  While they have been successful as promoting themselves as underdogs fighting for equal parenting in a society and legal system which is rigged for women, a closer look at their history, their leaders, their literature and web sites shows a very different story.  Not only are they directly affiliated with a secretive group of judges who handle much of their case litigation, but they are also affiliated with published incest promoters – Gardner, Underwager and Farrell.

Many of them, especially their leaders,  are very bad-dads who are out to beat the system and destroy the mother of their children because her legal rights and the child’s natural bond with their own mother, threaten his need to have the advantage, and especially to evade financial obligations and abuse charges.  While their public chatter is about being disenfranchised by a system which places little to no value on the father-child relationship, their private activities and discussion show that they have been very successful in changing state custody laws in their to their advantage, and changing custody and support orders in their own cases to their advantage.  Many of these purported underdogs have sole custody and receive child support.  The sociopathy of this movement has had a very profound affect not only at its victims, but also on government policy and programs which is tilting toward an official policy of rejecting family violence and abuse complaints as vengeful acts by “bitter” ex-spouse, and eliminating post-divorce financial obligations for women.

AFCC: Association of Family and Conciliation Courts   The AFCC has many state chapters which conduct conferences, seminars and workshops on their “latest” practices for handling divorce, custody and related family & children litigation.  Most of the identified AFCC professional members routinely practice anti-woman, pro-abuser father PAS tactics against mothers who complain of child abuse by the father.  Most have a documented history of rubber-stamping every mother as an mentally unstable alienator who is the cause of all the problem and unfit to be around her children.  Of course, they know the truth of what they are really doing – is to trump up reasons to make the mother look bad so they can justify recommending sole custody a father accused of domestic violence, child abuse or support delinquencies.

Fathers’ Custody Advocacy Groups’ Main Strategies

The Push for Joint Custody: The fathers’ custody activists claim that both legal and physical joint custody is in the best interest of the child. But it is no coincidence that joint custody drastically reduces the father’s child support payments and other financial obligations (health insurance, day care, etc.).

Efforts to make joint custody presumptive by state statute are ongoing around the country for this very reason. In reality, after joint custody is agreed to or ordered by the court, many mothers often have the child or children most of the time, while the reduced child support payment from the father negatively impacts the mother’s ability to support the child or children.

Additionally, in many families where the parents are married, time spent with and provision of daily care of the children are not evenly shared by the two parents while they are together. There is no reason to impose a presumption of joint legal and physical custody on families when they have not previously chosen this arrangement for themselves.The Use of an Accusation of “Parental Alienation Syndrome” (PAS) as an Offense or Defense in Court: Fathers are urged by some fathers’ custody activists to say the mother is alienating the child from the father and harming the child’s mental health. The fathers hire mental health professionals or others not well qualified who will testify (frequently for a substantial fee) that the mothers are alienating the children. In many cases, the fathers are abusive to the mothers and/or the children, or are using the children to harass or control the mother – leading the children to not want to visit the father. The accusation is most often used to deflect charges of abuse made by the protective mother.

More on Fathers Rights local groups:   While they try to appear as independent people united at the grass roots to fight individual injustices – they are in reality cogs in a highly organization national scheme to recruit male litigants into the AFCC-CRC organized litigation racket.  The men are used to keep the case litigation as active as possible so each court hearing can be billed to federal HHS-ACF program funds.

We all need to have the basic understanding of the federal funding as it really is the heart of the entire system. It’s important to analyze the situation in the courts and come to some conclusions about cause and effect — not just that the effects are really devastating.

The best interests of the child is one safe, secure home, no shifts like cattle mid-week or bi-weekly or seasonally, unless all wish them to go. The best father, once divorced, paves the way to his family’s door with good behavior, with kindness, and generosity. Not the good behavior, kindness and generosity mandated by a court—for that is meaningless.

List of various resources on family law issues. See http://www.thelizlibrary.org/

____________________________________________________________

20/20 Suppression of Truth

SEMANTIGANS

Did 20/20 manipulate the Rucki story to hide abuse?

Did 20/20 manipulate the Rucki story to hide abuse?

by Michael VolpeApr 14, 2016

“20/20” ran a program entitled “Footprints in the Snow” about the disappearance in April 2013 of Samantha and Gianna Rucki; Did they tell the whole story.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/39/Gfp-minnesota-glacial-lakes-state-park-footprints-in-the-snow.jpg

WASHINGTON, April 14, 2016 – A recent ABC “20/20” report on a bitter custody battle that led to the disappearance of two Lakeville, Minnesota girls for more than two years may have ignored critical facts.

On April 8, 2016, “20/20” ran a program entitled “Footprints in the Snow” about the disappearance in April 2013 of Samantha and Gianna Rucki, who ran away from home during a bitter custody dispute, leaving nothing but footprints in the snow.

The show hinged on claims by the parents. The mother, Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, said she was abused by her ex-husband, David Rucki. David Rucki, on the other hand, said she made up the allegations and brainwashed their children into believing her, which he called parental alienation.

In the critical scene of the program, Elizabeth Vargas, the show’s host, asked Sandra to provide proof of abuse during their marriage saying: “I’m asking for any of the documentation you assured us existed and we can find none of it.”

Sandra’s attorney, Michelle MacDonald, went back to her office, where producers rummaged through several thousand papers and then proclaimed, “In more than 20 boxes we didn’t find a single piece of paper or photo to provide that any physical abuse existed.”

But this appears to twist what MacDonald provided them.

According to a 42-page document provided by MacDonald to “20/20,” there was a litany of evidence of abuse including an affidavit, criminal charges and convictions, and numerous incident reports made by Sandra.

Continue Reading: http://www.commdiginews.com/entertainment/did-2020-manipulate-the-rucki-story-to-hide-abuse-61696/