Red Herring Alert

There's something fishy going on!

19 YEAR-OLD SUES FOR DEPRIVATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Minnesota Nineteen-Year-Old sues her Father, Hennepin and Carver Counties, along with Social Workers, Guardians at litem, and lawyers for an excess of $240 Million for Deprivation of Civil Rights

03/17/2017 Minneapolis, MN, US

Annelise Rice, a hockey player at UND and graduate of Minnetonka High School, filed a lawsuit on March 17, 2017, in Minnesota federal court seeking damages for deprivation of civil rights by tortuous intervention in a mother-child relationship and deprivation of rights under color of the law (Civil Action No. 17-cv-796 ADM/HB).

Annelise’s father, Brent Rice, branch manager of Merrill Lynch Wayzata, is a defendant on the lawsuit. Employees of Hennepin County (Michael Borowiak, Jolene Lukanen, Michael Garelick, Richard Witucki, Judith Hoy, Jean Peterson) and Carver County (Nicole Mercil, Bethany Koch, Sarah Kulesa, Brenda K. Dehmer, Carole Cole), and Brent Rice’s lawyer, Cory D. Gilmer, are also listed among the eighteen defendants. The defendants include court-appointed Guardians at litem, Social Workers, and lawyers who were involved in the custody evaluation and CHIPS (Child in Need of Protection or Services) proceedings for Annelise Rice. The proceedings began in Hennepin County and were moved to Carver County when the family moved.

Judges, lawyers, and social workers no longer have absolute immunity and can be held responsible for their actions that deprive Constitutional rights, even if they are acting in an official role.

This case is highly unusual due to the large amount of defendants involved. The defendants conspired to deny Annelise access to the courts and intentionally inflicted emotional distress on Annelise while she was still a minor. Defendants knowingly interfered with Annelise’s constitutional right to a relationship with her mother and four siblings, causing inordinate stress and difficulty.

Annelise asks the court for relief in an amount great enough to deter defendants and others in similar positions from engaging in this egregious misconduct in the future.There have been many cases of negligence by social services that have put young lives at risk. Social workers, Guardians at litem, lawyers, and judges need to be held accountable to prevent further neglect, abuse, and deaths of children in protective care. This lawsuit could potentially turn into a class action suit, because of the amount of families that have been mistreated in this way.

Contact:
Annelise Rice
More.moxie@me.com
612-991-1150


Read More About this Case:

Minnesota Appellate Court overturns mom’s conviction for ‘deprivation of parental rights’

Government Based Racketeering

Congressional Testimony: Dr. Sheila Mannix to Bill Windsor of Lawless America in Chicago, Illinois

Credit Copyright: http://www.lawlessamerica.com/

We’re Not Crazy. . .The Systems Are!

The degree of insanity in the courts is something that is indescribable unless you have witnessed it for yourself. Small is big, left is right, slow is fast, up is down and weak is strong.

A term  has even been coined for individuals that experience psychic injuries due to assaults by legal abuses, ethical violations, betrayals, and fraud in the court system. It’s called “legal abuse syndrome” and was identified by Dr.Karen Huffer, a marriage and family counselor who was also brutally defrauded in the courts.

In my case State of Minnesota vs Deirdre Elise Evavold- Case No. 19HA-CR-15-4227the court ordered that I complete a forensic psychological evaluation and cognitive skills assessment as I “showed no remorse or comprehension” for my actions. “The absence of remorse should never justify additional punishment because due process guarantees defendants the right to assert their innocence, and defendants cannot be expected to show remorse if they do not admit the crime.” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24618518 

The goal was always to get me to plead guilty or be found guilty when I’m not!

My sister also wrote a letter to the judge stating that I may have an undiagnosed mental health issue, hoping this would persuade the judge to apply leniency and a downward departure in sentencing. At that time, my family believed I could receive up to 12 years in prison due to the six felony convictions. In actuality, this was one alleged “crime” charged 6 different ways, which made someone with no prior criminal history, into a multiple offender in a single court case.                                                                     

Remember, it is an affirmative defense if a person charged under 609.26 DEPRIVING ANOTHER OF CUSTODIAL OR PARENTAL RIGHTS 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.

You can’t however, use the affirmative defense if you are deprived of your evidence and if the court prevents certain evidence from being presented at the trial of the case. As I’ve stated before, the overall goal is to break you down and get you to accept any injustice thrown at you. This was done through the use of perjured testimony,  illegal withholding and suppression of evidence to use in support of the affirmative defense, due process violations, witness tampering, abuse of discretion, judicial bias and malicious prosecution.

Anyhow, I completed my court ordered evaluation and unfortunately for those that wanted me to be diagnosed with a mental illness, I passed!

Am I being paranoid that the courts would want me to be diagnosed with a mental illness? I don’t think so . . . If the judge commits someone to treatment, it is typically for a six month period. The case is then reviewed with a hearing to determine whether the commitment should be extended. The exception to this is cases involving Mentally Ill and Dangerous Persons, Sexual Psychopathic Personalities, or Sexually Dangerous Persons. In those cases, there is not an end date to the commitment period; instead, periodic reviews are conducted by the court to determine whether the commitment continues to be necessary. http://www.mncourts.gov/Help-Topics/Civil-Commitments.aspx

The article below shows what happens when you speak out against court corruption.

Twin Cities lawyer suspended over mental health issues

Jill Clark faced discipline for accusing judges, others of misconduct. 
An outspoken and controversial Twin Cities attorney who repeatedly ran for a seat on the state’s high court has been suspended from practicing because of “serious mental health issues.”
According to an order filed Wednesday by the Minnesota Supreme Court, Jill Clark is unable to competently represent clients because of the unspecified mental illness experienced in 2012, which, according to the order, “raised substantial questions regarding Clark’s … ability to competently represent clients.”
The suspension puts a hold on disciplinary proceedings involving Clark. The Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility (OLPR), which is responsible for lawyer discipline, filed a petition against her last February alleging that she falsely accused judges of misconduct and filed paperwork that made it appear a judge signed an order that he actually had denied.
Clark repeatedly tried to move the disciplinary proceedings to federal court, and the matter was eventually heard by District Judge Gerald Seibel, who was appointed as a referee by the state Supreme Court. Clark was hospitalized shortly before a hearing could take place last June, and Seibel recommended that the Supreme Court place her on “disability inactive” status. She appeared before the state Supreme Court in October to argue against that recommendation. Seibel recommended “disability inactive” status for a second time.
OLPR Director Martin Cole said Clark indicated she would again challenge the recommendation, but had not done so before her suspension. It remains in effect until either disability or disciplinary proceedings are completed, Cole said.
The suspension means Clark cannot represent other clients, but can represent herself in further court proceedings. She did not immediately respond to an e-mail or phone message seeking comment Thursday.
In December, Clark filed a federal lawsuit against Hennepin County District Court, the Minnesota Supreme Court, the Minnesota Court of Appeals and more than a dozen other defendants. In a complaint more than 100 pages long, she alleged the OLPR complaint against her stemmed from discrimination, retaliation and several other constitutional violations because she spoke out against judges or planned to run against them in upcoming elections. The case has been transferred to a federal judge in Iowa for further proceedings.
Clark has written about the case on her blog, Jill Clark Speaks, in which she refers to herself as a judicial reformist. She has repeatedly run for Minnesota chief justice and placed third in a primary in August with more than 61,000 votes, or 20 percent of the ballots cast.
Clark, who has practiced law in the state since 1988, is controversial in some legal circles for zealously defending clients and has been accused of obstructing the legal process and causing trouble. She and Jill Waite earned notoriety for several cases, including their successful defense of two Iowa brothers accused of assaulting an off-duty Minneapolis cop and of a former state representative accused of spousal abuse.
Waite was suspended from practicing in 2010 for failing to file tax returns in a timely manner and for other reasons, but Clarke continued practicing. In 2011 she obtained a $60,000 jury verdict against a local blogger, but the award was overturned last year by the Minnesota Court of Appeals.

Abby Simons • 612-673-4921

http://www.startribune.com/twin-cities-lawyer-suspended-over-mental-health-issues/187367881/

THE REAL STORY SUMMED UP IN ONE PARAGRAPH

John Remington Graham                               

Jill Clark is one of the most gallant and capable lawyers in Minnesota. I think I can assess the quality of a lawyer, because I have been one 46 years, including service as a public defender, public prosecutor, and law professor. Jill is on “disability” status, because she has asked for judicial reform. That’s the real story in a nutshell. — John Remington Graham of the Minnesota Bar (#3664X)


  Same song, different verse. . .

(credit:Minnesota Judicial Branch/Michelle MacDonald For Supreme Court)

Attorney Michelle MacDonald also ran for the Minnesota Supreme Court in 2014 endorsed by the Republican Party but lost, getting 46.5 percent of the vote. MacDonald  ran again in 2016 however, Natalie Hudson won re-election. She was chosen by Gov. Dayton to take Justice Alan Page’s spot when he retired.

According to MinnPost, an incumbent hasn’t lost a re-election bid since the 1940s.

Michelle MacDonald also sued a judge on behalf of a client. Going up against a judge and the legal system has made MacDonald a target of the very system she is fighting against every day. Judge David Knutson has continually demonstrated misconduct and went to extreme measures to intimidate MacDonald at the trial of her client in 2013. During a recess on the second day of the trial, MacDonald was placed under arrest for the offense of Contempt of Court due to taking a photo when court was not in session.

In April of 2013, a Rosemount police officer arrested Michelle MacDonald on suspicion of driving while intoxicated and resisting arrest. Denying she’d been drinking, MacDonald refused a field sobriety test unless she was in the presence of a judge. Minnesota Statute 169.91

Michelle was labeled with a “DUI”, which had nothing to do with the forensic facts of what happened. Michelle’s case was a traffic stop, and more accurately an unlawful pullover by Alex Eckstein.  Michelle did not have any alcohol on the night she was stopped without probable cause.

  1. After dialogue with the officer about the reason for the stop, she was not asked to take a Breathalyzer or perform a field sobriety test.
  2. She asked to see a judge pursuant to Minnesota Statute 169.91 because it was obvious this officer was using questionable measures to fill his quota and was clearly abusing his power and authority. Any citizen can invoke this statute however, as can be seen from this incident, the system does not take kindly to exposing those who are not playing by the rules.
  3. Michelle was held and released from the Rosemount Police Station with NO CHARGES filed against her.
  4. On her own initiative, she went directly to a hospital for a drug and alcohol blood test to put to rest any questions about this incident. The tests came back zero alcohol and zero drugs. 
  5. Michelle filed an employee complaint against the Police Officer who unlawfully pulled her over.
  6. In response, she received a Citation in the mail with five criminal charges against her including charges for driving under the influence.
The Result: Jury convicts Michelle MacDonald of test refusal, resisting arrest

A Dakota County jury convicted Minnesota Supreme Court candidate Michelle MacDonald of refusing to submit to a breath test and obstructing the legal process in connection with an April 2013 traffic stop.

This should have been the headline in ALL media coverage of this insanity!   

MacDonald has stated that in order to demonize and discredit anyone that is exposing corruption, they either portray you as “Crazy, a Criminal or a Conspiracy Theorist.”

Michael Brodkorb, source: startribune.com

We also have Mr. Michael Brodkorb who became the main mouthpiece for spreading disinformation when MacDonald ran for Supreme Court. Brodkorb was and has been fixated on MacDonald and our criminal cases, covering them exclusively and not covering any other case or other news story. Brodkorb has lied by ommission and has refused to report facts and details of these cases. (Brodkorb and Judge Asphaug also made sure that the private letter my sister wrote to the judge was made public).                                        

In journalism the term hack writer is used to describe a writer who is deemed to operate as a mercenary or “pen for hire”, expressing their client’s opinions in articles. (I think it’s pretty obvious who Brodkorb’s clients are)!

Comments Brodkorb has made in some of his writings about me:

Evavold connected to Michelle MacDonald

Evavold previously served as Michelle MacDonald’s campaign manager for MacDonald’s campaign for the Minnesota Supreme Court in 2014.

Evavold is not an attorney, but is an activist, who also ran a blog focused on exposing what Evavold and her supporters believe are injustices and corruption in the judicial system


Last but not least, we have the 20/20 hatchet job on this case that originally aired in April 2016 and was rebroadcasted in March 2017. What do they have to gain in pushing this false narrative? Well, six enormous media conglomerates combine to produce about 90 percent of all the media that Americans consume. The mainstream media is the mouthpiece of the establishment and promotes the agenda of the establishment.

The big news networks have developed an almost incestuous relationship with the federal government in recent years.  But of course the same could be said of the relationship that the media has with the big corporations that own stock in their parent companies and that advertise on their networks.
This is one of the reasons why we very rarely ever see any hard hitting stories on the big networks anymore.  The flow of information through the corporate-dominated media is very tightly controlled, and there are a lot of gatekeepers that make sure that the “wrong stories” don’t get put out to the public.  7 THINGS ABOUT THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA THAT THEY DO NOT WANT YOU TO KNOW 

Family Courts are “government” and as such are supported by public funding. A multibillion dollar enterprise has been created by the family court divorce, domestic abuse and child abuse industries. Currently, non-profit and for profit advocacy groups nationwide and in the state of MN are obtaining court connected federal funding through Health and Human Services to infulence custody cases.

FEDERAL & STATE GOVERNMENTS DEFRAUDING MILLIONS IN CHILD SUPPORT SCAM ON MASSIVE PROPORTIONS !

Bottom Line

 

Censorship

Image courtesy of Stuart Miles at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Everyone has the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas without fear or interference. Well, ALMOST everyone.

Probation Conditions in State of Minnesota vs Deirdre Elise Evavold- Case No. 19HA-CR-15-4227

“You will not reference any of the XXXXXXXX-XXXXX family on any social media.”

I previously posted a press release on Darren Chaker, who reversed his conviction in federal court on First Amendment grounds. A Good Day For The First Amendment.

After corresponding with Mr. Chaker regarding my own First Amendment violations as well as numerous other violations in my case, I was enlightened further about our inherent rights.  See Below

“Rights might be inherent, but ideas need to be taught.” Maida Buckley, retired classroom teacher in Fairbanks, Alaska

Image courtesy of Pixabay

Focusing on the First Amendment issue,  I see a few flaws in Condition 2 preventing referencing to specific people in social media:  Case No. 19HA-CR-15-4227

What if you want to criticize the police/DA, the judicial process, etc but cannot even reference to your case since it makes reference to the names of the people you cannot make reference to? Suspicion that viewpoint discrimination is afoot is at its zenith when the speech restricted is speech critical of the government because criticism of government is at the very center of the constitutionally protected area of free discussion. Chaker v. Crogan, 428 F.3d 1215, 1217, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 23728, *1, 33 Media L. Rep. 2569 (9th Cir. Cal. 2005)​ Yes that is my first First Amendment case where I overruled the California Supreme Court. See also, https://www.scribd.com/document/3698825/Press-Release-CAL-SUPREME-COURT-Reversed-by-Chaker-v-Crogan

Additionally, you have a First Amendment right to re-distribute information contained in a public record.

     Preventing Blogging is Not a Governmental Interest.

For government to regulate speech, it must be “integral to criminal conduct.” United States v. Meredith, 685 F.3d 814, 819, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 13012, 7, 2012-2 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) P50,421, 110 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 5157 (9th Cir. Cal. 2012) Typically, restriction of speech concerns a gang member not associating with other gang member; a child pornographer being monitored or restricted from the internet, defendant not speaking to victims, etc. The only nontypical First Amendment challenge relates to a defendant speaking or writing about the unconstitutionality of tax laws and was reversed, but prohibiting advocating tax evasion was affirmed. Speech is presumptively protected by the First Amendment. The burden is on the government to show that a defendant’s website is within one of the narrow categories of unprotected speech. United States v. Carmichael, 326 F. Supp. 2d 1267, 1270, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13675, 1 (M.D. Ala. 2004) The Government would in its burden as it did not prove the speech at issue would be outside the scope of the First Amendment.

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))  

Protecting Reputation is Not a Government Interest.

If the Government were to say, ‘the families have been through enough and do not want to cause embarrassment or harm to there reputation’ – such would not be a proper Governmental interest. Specifically, protecting ones reputation is not a governmental function unless it violates criminal law.  United v. Alvarez, 617 F. 3d 1198. (Stolen Valor Act held unconstitutional) “At issue here is the First Amendment exception that allows the government to regulate speech that is integral to criminal conduct. . . .” Id. at 819-20. United States v. Osinger, 753 F.3d 939, 946, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 10377, 17-20, 2014 WL 2498131 (9th Cir. Cal. 2014)

Further, you have the right to attack people if you believe such behavior was unethical. See Wait v. Beck’s N. Am., Inc., 241 F. Supp. 2d 172, 183 (N.D.N.Y. 2003) (“[A s]tatement[] that someone has acted . . . unethically generally [is] constitutionally protected statements of opinion.”); Biro, 883 F. Supp. 2d at 463 (“[T]he use of the terms ‘shyster,’ ‘conman,’ and finding an ‘easy mark’ is the type of ‘rhetorical hyperbole’ and ‘imaginative expression’ that is typically understood as a statement of opinion.” (quoting Milkovich, 497 U.S. at 20)).

 Loss of Privacy Due to High Profile Case.

Also, due to all of the publicity in the case, it is likely the names you cannot blog about are deemed public figures. Public figures are entitled to less protection against defamation and invasion of privacy than are private figures with respect to the publication of false information about them. Carafano v. Metrosplash, Inc., 207 F. Supp. 2d 1055, 1059, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10614, 1, 30 Media L. Rep. 1577 (C.D. Cal. 2002)

         

Purpose of Probation is to Rehabilitate and Prevent Future Criminal Conduct, Blogging is Neither.

Consideration of three factors is required to determine whether a reasonable relationship exists: (1) the purposes sought to be served by probation; (2) the extent to which constitutional rights enjoyed by law-abiding citizens should be accorded to probationers; and (3) the legitimate needs of law enforcement. (Citation omitted.) United States v. Pierce, 561 F.2d 735, 739 (9th Cir. 1977). United States v. Lowe, 654 F.2d 562, 567, 1981 U.S. App. LEXIS 18287, 11 (9th Cir. Wash. 1981) See also, United States v. T.M., 330 F.3d 1235, 1240 (9th Cir. 2003) (“The conditions imposed run afoul of the supervised release statute because there is no reasonable relationship between them and either deterrence, public protection or rehabilitation.”)


“The Minnesota legislature delegated the authority to prosecute criminal matters to the county attorney, who was elected by the voters of that county.”

But, according to the Minnesota Attorney General’s website, the office does sometimes get involved in criminal matters:

The Dahlens have pled guilty in an associated case for their role xx xxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxx xxxxxx, while another defendant, Dede Evavold, was found guilty as well. Inexplicably, Judge Karen Asphaug presided over all four cases.

A message left with the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office concerning the current legal situation was left unreturned. An email to Laura Flanders was also left unreturned and an email left with the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office was also left unreturned. The current Minnesota Attorney General is Democrat Lori Swanson, and she has held that position since 2007.


Excerpts from The “Justice” blog authored by an anonymous group of concerned citizens.
The Attorney General’s Office has been receiving documentation concerning the XXXXXXXXXXXXXX case for over 5 years and has refused to investigate or take any action in the face of serious allegations, and evidence, showing corruption in local government and law enforcement. However, when opposing President Trump’s immigrant order, Lori Swanson said “It does not pass constitutional muster, is inconsistent with our history as a nation, and undermines our national security.” The same can be said for Dakota County; yet instead of taking a public stance on a very real concern that affects not only the XXXXXXXXXXXXXX family but the entire state of Minnesota, and possibly tens of thousands of families victimized by an out of control court system, Swanson remains silent. Now is a time for leadership, not silence.

Another article written by Michael Volpe on indicates that other MN citizens have encountered the same type of cover-up by the MN Attorney General’s Office.
Excerpts Below:
The tact does not surprise John Hentges, another parent battling court officials on behalf of his children and suffering from disingenuous actions by the court, who told CDN that rather than representing the people of Minnesota the office covers up and represents the corrupt public officials.

“I reported the corruption to her (Lori Swanson, Minnesota Attorney General) and to the governor and to the Minnesota Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.” Hentges.

Hentges said he spent time in jail for failure to pay child support for a bill which had already been paid in another state and his trials in the Minnesota Justice System opened his eyes.

“I found several other things they were doing in the criminal justice system.” Hentges said. “I firmly believe that nearly every single case in the 1st Judicial District is fixed in one way or another.”

 

Veterans Investigating Pedophile Rings


VETERANS FOR CHILD RESCUE

 
Our VIPR Team

 (Veterans Investigating Pedophile Rings) come from the highest levels of Military Special Operations, Federal Law Enforcement, International Counter-Poaching Operations, The Intelligence Community, The Diplomatic Community and Film & Television. Together, we can work with federal and local law enforcement to help arrest these predators and liberate the child victims. We’ll share the shocking events through an unflinching television docu-series, which tears the lid of this cesspool for all to see!

crssyc

Censored Campaign: Exposing Pedophile Rings in Docu-Series by Spec Ops Vets

Source-> https://www.youcaring.com/ourteam-785399
Author-> Craig Sawyer
Date-> 30 Mar 2017

{UPDATE: YouCaring has already taken down this campaign, within the hour}

via Craig Sawyer and Veterans For Child Rescue, a new non-profit org:

“Over 750 Pedophiles have been arrested, just since January! These predators are in every aspect of our society and inflict unthinkable suffering upon little children – the soul of our nation.

Until now, pedophiles have enjoyed a counter-productive level of privacy from the media. That puts more children at risk.

“The best anti-septic for corruption is sunlight!”
Let’s all UNITE to shine some light on this horrible aspect of our society to create a non-permissive environment for any further harm to our children!

OurVIPR Team(Veterans Investigating Pedophile Rings) come from the highest levels of Military Special Operations, Federal Law Enforcement, International Counter-Poaching Operations, The Intelligence Community, The Diplomatic Community and Film & Television. Together, we can work with federal and local law enforcement to help arrest these predators and liberate the child victims. We’ll share the shocking events through an unflinching television docu-series, which tears the lid of this cesspool for all to see!

More on my background leading up to this mission here: www.tacticalinsider.com/bio

We’re starting up an official 501c3 (non-profit) “Veterans For Child Rescue” org (V4CR) to handle the funding for our work. While we labor to get that org paperwork finalized over the next few months, this will be our funding page to get our operations started.

We NEED YOUR HELP funding our mission to get the ugly truth past the “gatekeepers” of the news media and make maximum impact to save these kids!

Updates will be posted as they develop.

Thanks for your support! 🙂

~Craig Sawyer
VIPR Team Leader
Founder: Veterans For Child Rescue
www.vets4childrescue.org

OUR CHILDREN BREAKING FREE”
What it’s ultimately all about.

 

Stearns Co. Has Some Splainin To Do!

FOX

Dan Rassier files defamation lawsuit against investigators for Wetterling case 

– Dan Rassier is suing the Stearns County investigators, including the sheriff, who once named him a person of interest in the Jacob Wetterling case.

According to the lawsuit filed Wednesday morning, Rassier and his mom, Rita, are seeking more than $2 million in damages, claiming the law enforcement agencies botched the investigation into Jacob’s disappearance.

“The thing you have to understand is people in Stearns County, we didn’t do any research, but people really thought he was guilty,” Mike Padden, Rassier’s attorney, told Fox 9. People really believed it. That’s the problem when law enforcement runs amok like that.”

Eleven-year-old Jacob was kidnapped at the end of Rassier’s driveway on October 22, 1989. During the initial investigation, Rassier told authorities he saw two cars drive onto the farm property the day of the abduction.

But in the years that followed, Rassier went from being a key witness to the focus of investigators.

In 2004, Stearns County Sheriff John Sanner and the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension zeroed in on Rassier. He was formally named a person of interest in the Wetterling case in 2010 after investigators executed a search warrant was executed on his farm and took his personal property and some of his land.

The court documents describe a malicious, reckless and fraudulent effort on the part of the three investigators named in the lawsuit to obtain the search warrant. Rassier and his lawyers claim the investigators did not disclose certain details to the judge regarding the case because it would have kept them from getting the warrant.

The personal property that was taken in the search was not returned to Rassier until last November, two months after Heinrich admitted to the kidnapping and killing Jacob, the lawsuit says. The topsoil that was taken by investigators has still not been returned.

Rassier was finally cleared after Heinrich confessed to the crime last September. His claims in the lawsuit include defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress and unlawful entry, search and destruction of his home and property on the part of law enforcement.

In addition to Stearns County Sheriff John Sanner, Rassier also named Pam Jensen who worked for Sanner as well as the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension’s Ken McDonald as co-conspirators against him.

Click to read more and view the video: http://www.fox9.com/news/244683777-story


2 Men Suing Stearns County In Separate Cases

November 21, 2016 6:37 PM

MINNEAPOLIS (WCCO) — Two Minnesota men will file civil rights lawsuits against the sheriff’s office that led the investigation into Jacob Wetterling’s kidnapping. They claim the failings of investigators ruined their reputations, after accusing both of them of murders they did not commit.

Dan Rassier was the first publicly named person of interest in Jacob’s case. He wasn’t cleared until Danny Heinrich’s courtroom confession. Ryan Larson was arrested for the killing of a Cold Spring police officer. Another man who killed himself was later named as the killer in that case.

Continue Reading: http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2016/11/21/stearns-county-lawsuits/


Stearns County Sheriff John Sanner Photo: Stearns County Sheriff’s Office 

Stearns County Sheriff John Sanner plans to retire next month

Career was shadowed by search for Jacob Wetterling.

Continue Reading: http://www.startribune.com/stearns-county-sheriff-john-sanner-plans-to-retire-next-month/416768503/

 


Stearns sheriff must clear innocent man

With the recent developments regarding Jacob Wetterling’s disappearance, many have been able to obtain much-needed closure from a crime haunted our region for over two decades.

Now that the healing can begin, one aspect has gotten lost among the shuffle; the systemic misconduct that has taken place within the Stearns County Sheriff’s Department. The manner in which the initial search, and eventual investigation was executed not only allowed Jacob’s killer to remain free for more than two decades, but also destroyed the reputation of an innocent man.

Throughout Sheriff John Sanner’s time, his investigation attempted to create a new theory for Jacob’s abduction and murder, one that is based entirely around one innocent man — Dan Rassier.

 The unsealing of the warrants, which formed the basis for the excavation of the family farm in 2010, detailed misrepresentations and false statements. They even went as far as to falsely portray Dan as being investigated by Interpol. I would invite everyone to listen to the recently released American Public Media’s eight-part podcast “In The Dark,” which details this further.

Despite finding no evidence linking Rassier to the crime, the sheriff continues to refuse to clear his name. It has been six years since that very public search of the Rassier family farm. Not a single item has been returned to the family, nor was Dan ever officially cleared from the case — leaving him forever connected to a crime he didn’t commit.

To top this off, we all had the pleasure of watching Sheriff Sanner stand tall during that news conference following the killer’s confession, praising himself and his department while ignoring that it was blogger Joy Baker’s hard work that ultimately shifted the investigation back in the right direction.

So, job well done Mr. Sanner, but our leadership of the department needs to be re-examined.

IT’S HALF-PAST GET OUT!

What is a GAL? A Guardian ad Litem is an advocate for a child whose welfare is a matter of concern for the court. In legal terms, it means “guardian of the lawsuit.”


IN ESSENCE, STATES ARE INCENTIVIZED BY FEDERAL GRANT MONEY  TO CREATE SITUATIONS THAT DON’T EXIST TO GENERATE THESE FUNDS.  
   Everyone wants a piece of the federal funding pie, so you have federal, state and local government agencies, non-profit and faith-based organizations, private foundations and corporations all working together to support the efforts of these programs. We don’t need government to intervene in families and then have adults and children abused by the very system that is designed to protect them. The majority of the time, parents are in the best position to represent the interests of their children
Read more about grant funding: Healthy Marriage-Responsible Fatherhood & Faith-Based Grants…We Know What the Game Is!

Proposal: If the deficit is not funded, services to children need to be reduced by 8%. There are several considerations to be aware of in discussing which children no longer receive guardian ad litem services. Because of the Federal mandate for abused and neglected children in juvenile court, both congressional and legislative agreement would be required to remove this mandate.  Additionally, the guardian ad litem is independent from the child welfare system and often may be the only person who is assigned to the child from the beginning of the case through permanency. Eliminating mandatory guardian ad litem appointments in dissolution/custody cases would be particularly troublesome in pro se cases where the parties are proceeding without legal counsel and would greatly complicate the work of the court. (Um, I don’t think so!)

2016-17 Biennial Budget (Click to View)


Children at Risk: Foster Children’s Rights Ignored

Getting off a school bus, heading home for an afternoon snack and sitting down for homework.

McKenna Ahrenholz doesn’t complain about an average afternoon.

She has much more important ways to use her small voice in an effort to make a lot of noise.

“As early as I can remember I was in the system,” she wrote in a letter to lawmakers explaining her life while she was caught in Minnesota’s flawed child protection system. “I have been punched, starved and neglected.”

They’re big words to come from such a small person. At just 12 years old, McKenna is fighting for the thousands of foster kids across the state who don’t have a voice.

Because, in Minnesota, they’re not always given one.

“No one would listen that we wanted to stay at grandpa and grandma’s,” the letter continued. “The people who make the laws like yourselves need to hear us children who are the ones going through such a crazy life.”

McKenna and her four siblings have a lengthy history with child protection in counties all across the state.

Click to read more and view the video.http://kstp.com/news/children-at-risk-foster-childrens-rights-ignored-child-protection-mckenna-ahrenholz-childrens-law-center/4303701/


State Lawmakers Move Forward on Bill Aimed at Giving Foster Children a Voice 

March 09, 2017 06:53 PM

State lawmakers moved forward Thursday on a bill they hope will give abused and neglected foster children a voice.

The proposal stems in part from a 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS investigation that found examples of juvenile victims forced to fend for themselves, despite state law saying they’re entitled to a lawyer.

The piece featured 12-year-old McKenna Ahrenholz, who testified Thursday in front of the Minnesota House Civil Law and Data Practices Policy Committee.

Click to read more and view the video: http://kstp.com/news/minnesota-house-bill-ron-kresha-state-legislature-aims-to-give-voice-to-foster-children/4421376/

 

After 20+ Years Minnesota Guardian ad Litem Board STILL Working to Improve Complaint Process

Minnesota, Jan. 2017:  The Board that manages Minnesota’s GAL program has absolutely failed to address serious issues that have put children’s live at risk, caused children to be placed in the custody of unsafe parents and then be re-abused, and contributed to families being torn apart and children, estranged from parents…as documented in complaints raised by parents. 

Families have been coming forward for 20+ years to raise complaints about individual Guardian ad Litems in regards to unprofessional conduct, and conduct that violates their mandated duties.

Many concerns have been raised about the use of guardians ad litem. Most complaints have centered on guardian actions in family court cases, primarily in contested divorce actions. Complaints have focused on guardian bias, lack of oversight and accountability, inadequate training, and inappropriate communication between guardians and judges. Parents have also complained that there is no place to seek relief if they have a problem with a guardian.” GAL Executive Summary (95-03) February 28, 1995

Continue Reading: https://acalltoactionblog.wordpress.com/2017/01/20/mn-gal-board-complaint-process/


Click on links below to view e-mails sent to the Attorney General, Board on Judicial Standards, Minnesota Office of the Legislative Auditor; MN House Reps, the State GAL, Sheriff, Congressman Tom Emmer and others.

GAL Jean Hariman FIRED

Atty. General

%d bloggers like this: