Excerpt:“The audit request received support from the state’s powerful Service Employees International Union (SEIU California), the California Partnership to End Domestic Violence (CPEDV) and the Sacramento Chapter of the NAACP, along with more than a dozen court reform and child protection organizations. A number of audit supporters have been working to expose widespread corruption in the family court system that many say has created an epidemic of judicial trafficking of abused children away from their protective parents and into abusive homes during divorces and separations.“
These groups continually ignore the money matters and help cover up, ignore, and derail the very important discussions on grants use and corporation fraud.
The Center for Judicial Excellence promotes the narrative that “the system is broken.”
Read more about the “Broken Courts Crowd” from familycourtmatters.wordpress.com below:
In 2002, California NOW put out a report declaring that the family courts were “Crippled, Incompetent and Corrupt.”
Which is it? Because, that’s a good question and depending on the answer, a different response is called for. I have cited both references below, and blogged both of them before.
Our Courts are Corrupt v. Our Courts are Broken?
Instead, the different sides, Balkanized, put out their own materials, and own conferences. Generally speaking the “our Courts are Broken” conferences are run by some of the would-be fixers, and this viewpoint has much more financial backing!
But — the question CAN be answered, and has. However, the answer is psychologically disturbing and very unpleasant, and to verify it, most people would have to take out some private time to read the record. And that’s not what most people’s minds are tuned to these days.
Mine only is because I don’t like losing complete contact with my kids overnight, and thereby losing my ability to self-support, or a period of time in which to rebuild what was destroyed in the last boxing round, which court events when combined with family events, are. I also didn’t like my children losing their right to child support when it was in serious arrears, or their contact with an ethical working mother. The existence of the family law system parallel to a criminal law system is logical dilemma.
Is there a formula for when the identical behavior is considered criminal versus a family dispute, or is it a coin toss? Does it depend on local politics, the money in one’s family, luck, or is there a strategic plan (as yet unexposed) which the public and the peopel running through the courts don’t know?
If no one cares to give me a reasonable explanation why these things are so in my state (other states) and this country — if this is business as usual, then either it has to change or I will seek a safer place to live out what remains of my life, if one exists Period. So, I look things up until things that fit with the facts and the record make themselves known, but I am always interested in validating or invalidating statements; are they reasonable or unreasonable, or ridiculous. If they are borderline ridiculous (the root word for “ridiculous” is Latin for “to laugh.”), then who is promoting these ridiculous viewpoints, and where’s the profit in them?
Now, the profit is not that hard to track — it’s objective. It takes work to track, but it can be found (even the LACK of incorporation, nonprofit 990 tax returns, etc. can be “found,” i.e., when the group says it’s a nonprofit, and the IRS says it’s not, and hasn’t been — that’s a found fact….)
RE: “Our Broken Courts” —
Amazingly, even families (often mothers) who have been more than just “broken” by the allegedly broken courts — they are “broke” financially, devastated emotionally, and some are homeless, others have been killed, and many have no real contact with their own children. others may have contact, but are paying heavily (that’s paying a lot financially) to do so — they have been put in supervised visitation themselves! yet, they continue to endorse, listen to, and socially etc. support others who are promoting the “broken” viewpoint.
But, they have taken up the phrase themselves, along with phrases calling themselves losers (“Mothers of Lost Children” being a phrase that calls for the emotion of desolation, but moreover, it associates “mothers” with the word “Losers.” A better word would be “stolen” children….) Other emotional adjectives, even if true, engrain the trauma into the group name: “Battered Mothers’ Custody Conference,” focuses on the language of battering. Etc.
I pulled this segment out of the middle of the last post, which was about the quality of the TAGGS database, and believe this topic is more than timely right now. I also (obviously) expanded it.
The answer is surprising and informative. By getting to it, I believe anyone will be better equipped as a citizen here, children or no children. But, you must make up your mind where you stand sooner or later. I am asking those that are NOT part of the expansive business empire of the courts to make that “sooner.” Thanks for reading this post!
August 01, 2016 Sandra Grazzini-Rucki story/The Fix. Podcasts: Archived programs
From Michael Volpe:
The jury started deliberations in the Sandra Grazzini-Rucki case at 1:00 pm today. No verdict reached. Will resume deliberations on Thursday, July 28th at 9:00 am.
At the beginning of this trial, a sign was posted on the courtroom door that stated:
In order to ensure a fair trial, the Court hereby issues the following ORDER:
1. All electronics devices must be powered off, or subject to confiscation for the length of the trial.
2. No audio or video recording of any form.
3. No person may wear clothing or accessories that are designed to influence the jury.
4. Any person who diisplays facial expressions or utters verbal outbursts that may influence the jury or witnesses will be removed from the courtroom.
5. Any person who violates this order will be removed from the courtroom and may be found in contempt of court and subject to the penalties therefor.
Signed by Judge Aspaugh
Okay, let’s recap some of the fairness that Dakota County has demonstrated in 19HA-CR-15-2669 State of Minnesota vs Sandra Grazzini-Rucki.
- Illegal withholding of evidence.
- Wrongful arrest and imprisonment by US Marshals based on fabricated charges by Lakeville PD. Charges: Assaultive Felony – Fugitive- Kidnap Minor
- Excessive Bail: ONE MILLION DOLLARS–Reason? Determination that Grazzini-Rucki presented a significant flight risk. Prosecutor Phil Prokopowicz acknowledged that the bail amount was large, given the charges, but argued that it took nine weeks for federal authorities to find Grazzini-Rucki. Unwarranted: Was the Arrest Warrant Against Sandra Grazzini-Rucki Improperly Handled?
- Unfair chance to present a defense: All criminal charges against David Rucki were ruled inadmissable by Judge Karen Aspaugh at the beginning of the trial. David Rucki-Judge Knutson-Criminal Defense Matters. Today, Dakota County Assistant Attorney Kathryn Keena objected 4 times throughout the closing arguments of the defense. When questioned regarding reason, she stated “never mind.” Numerous other disruptive behaviors noted during the closing arguments: Keena ripping paper, Dakota County Attorney James Backstrom shifting loudly in his seat (why is he even there?) and David Rucki leaving and returning to the courtroom. Sounds to me like they’re a little nervous, so maybe the jury isn’t rigged after all?!
- Collusion – where two persons enter into a deceitful agreement,usually secret, to defraud and/or gain an unfair advantage over a third party. David Rucki, Dakota Co. and media haven’t even pretended to maintain a discreet appearance in front of the public.
It should also be noted that David Rucki was shaking hands with Dakota County Attorney James Backstrom in the court hallway today.
- Witness Tampering AIDING AND ABETTING IN THE OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE
Charge Stacking: The practice of charge stacking is a simple and terribly effective method for prosecutors looking to win cases. The technique entails finding as many possible criminal counts to “stack” against the defendant in order to strengthen the core case of the prosecution.This strategy is made wide open to prosecutors, because the main deterrent against stacking charges is the law of double jeopardy. Charge Stacking: Gambling with People’s Lives
It’s always been the State’s position that the girls didn’t run away.” Kathryn Keena Assistant Dakota County Attorney (Stated at the May 12th Contested Omnibus Hearing ~ State of MN vs. Doug and Gina Dahlen).
Don’t change that dial. We’ll have more tomorrow!
SCHLOCK /SHläk/ noun North American informal
Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family –and “Conciliation” — Courts’ Operations, Practices, and History
In 2011, Judge David Knutson ordered the Rucki children into reunification therapy and supervised visits with father, David Rucki. This happened while a harassment order was still in place against Rucki, barring him from contact with the neighbors, their children and the children enrolled in the daycare they operated.
This emerging information raises questions on the Grazzini-Rucki case in regards to allegations of domestic abuse and the allegedly violent behavior of David Rucki. If David Rucki is not safe around other children – why would he be safe around his own children?
Background: In September 2009 a neighbor filed for and received a harassment restraining order (HRO) against David Rucki due to his violent and threatening behavior; some of this menacing behavior occurred in front of small children. The harassment order included that David can not have any contact with the neighbor’s own children, and can not have contact with children in a local daycare (run by the neighbor).
According to the HRO David Rucki terrorized the family in the following ways:
Made Threats: “He said he would unleash holy hell if we ever turned him in again”. “He also did a threat later in the street. He’s mad we called animal control over his dogs.”
Exhibited Frightening Behavior: Loud, Cursing, Coming in Close proximity to their house and mailbox.
Called the Victim(s) Abusive Names: Called my wife a “bitch” and my son a “son of a bitch” and called us “assholes”. Cursing at us while daycare kids present.
(The HRO is not being published to protect the identity of the victims)
While the HRO was in place, David violated the order. Judge Karen Asphaug dismissed the charges; Asphaug is now the criminal judge presiding over the cases regarding the missing Rucki sisters. The neighbors were so frightened that they placed security cameras around their home.
The HRO remained in place for 2 years – the only reason the neighbors did not renew the HRO was because Sandra Grazzini-Rucki had a protective order in place that prohibited David from coming near the cul-de-sac, where the neighbors also lived, so they felt that restraining order would also protect their family. (Sandra’s protective order was later dismissed by Judge Knutson).
Rucki has made statements to the press that he does not have an anger problem and has never abused his children. Rucki admits that sometimes he just gets “frustrated”.
Michael Volpe has also published police reports filed against Rucki detailing other incidents where he exhibited threatening and violent behavior on his blog: David Rucki’s Greatest Hits (The Provocateur)
Court documents also indicate that Rucki was ordered in anger management classes on 3 separate occasions, and during the divorce was ordered into domestic abuse counseling.
In November 2013, Judge Knutson granted Rucki full custody of the children – at the time, the two eldest girls were missing, and both had made various allegations of abuse against their father, and disclosed abuse to the court-appointed therapist. Judge Knutson said the abuse allegations were not credible, and accused mother Sandra Grazzini-Rucki of brainwashing and parental alienation.
At the time of the court order giving Rucki sole custody, he was still on probation for a domestic violence charge with a violation of an order for protection. Judge Asphaug presided over the pre-trial on this case. David was discharged from probation on October 17, 2014 (Case No. 19AV-CR-11-14682).
Does parental alienation alone produce multiple police reports concerning violent behavior, multiple witness reports and HROs in regards to violent and threatening behavior? Or is this just an abuse excuse? Stay tuned to Red Herring Alert as we keep you updated on the latest developments in the Grazzini-Rucki case!