Harassment Hypocrisy

Excerpts from Michael Brodkorb’s Motion to Dismiss the Harassment Restraining Order  Case No. 18-009299-FD Section 22

B. Violation of the First Amendment

Mr. Brodkorb’s non-threatening statements relating to the Petitioner and the Minnesota case that he posted on twitter.com and his website, missinginminnesota.com, are protected by his First
Amendment right to free speech, not only as a professional author and journalist, but also as an individual.

Mr. Brodkorb never threatened or directed his statements directly at the Petitioner  and merely posted updates regarding her case citing and sharing from other media outlets that disclosed similar information, sourced from public record.

“a temporary injunction directed to speech is a classic example of prior restraint on speech triggering First Amendment concerns.” Vrasic v. Leibel, 106 So.3d, 485 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013); See Moore v. City Dry Cleaners & Laundry, 41 So.2d 865, 873 (Fla.1949) (recognizing First Amendment concerns triggered by temporary injunction); Murphy, 176 So.2d

Upholding a temporary injunction against Mr. Brodkorb would constitute an unlawful prior restraint on protected speech. “[P]rior restraints on speech and publication are the most serious and the least tolerable infringement on First Amendment rights.” Neb. Press Ass’n v. Stuart, 427 U.S. 539, 559, 96 S.Ct. 2791, 49 L.Ed.2d 683 (1976). And, protection against prior restraints on speech extends to both false statements and to those from which a commercial gain is derived. See Va. State Bd. of Pharmacy v. Va. Citizens Consumer Council, Inc., 425 U.S. 748, 761, 96 S.Ct. 1817, 48 L.Ed.2d 346 (1976).

Granting the Petitioner the relief she is seeking to prohibit the statements she attaches to her Petition and prohibit Mr. Brodkorb from ever speaking about her or the Minnesota Case would be a violation of Mr. Brodkorb’s First Amendment right to free speech and an impermissible prior restraint on speech and publication which has been held to be the “least tolerable infringement on First Amendment rights.” Id. As the Supreme Court of the United States so eloquently stated in 1975, “[A] free society prefers to punish the few who abuse rights of speech after they break the law than to throttle them and all others beforehand.” Se. Promotions, Ltd. v. Conrad, 420 U.S. 546, 559, 95 S.Ct. 1239, 43 L.Ed.2d 448 (1975).

Finally, to uphold an injunction that is supported solely by allegedly defamatory statements
would be a shameful and unconstitutional violation of his right to free speech. The law and the
law and the Constitution requires that this Court dissolve the Temporary Ex Parte Injuction and
fully restore Mr. Brodkorb’s right to free speech.                                        

This looks likes the same arguments I have made in the courts for my false SLAPP Suits/Harassment Restraining Orders.

The following written objections were provided to the District Court by my attorney for my May 16, 2018 motion hearing to vacate the temporary restraining order filed against me on July 31st, 2017 by the “victims” in my false criminal case. This is the case that Michael Brodkorb has falsely written about since 2016. With a doggedness that verges on obsession, the site covers just one story — the case of Sandra Grazzini whose children went missing for 944 days until they were found on a northern Minnesota ranch.” Michelle MacDonald’s defamation suit may lack factual basis By: Kevin Featherly August 24, 2018  https://minnlawyer.com/2018/08/24/michelle-macdonald-defamation-suit-may-lack-factual-basis/

PETITIONERS OFFER NO EVIDENCE OF HARASSMENT – There is no allegation or evidence of direct contact by Respondent. Instead, the focus of this action is a number of blog posts written by Respondent that are either about Petitioners or at least mention Petitioner in some way.

The blog posts by themselves cannot meet this definition, and to the extent the Court believes this definition can be expanded to included blog posts, then the statute must necessarily run afoul of the First Amendment

THE BLOG POSTS ARE NOT HARASSMENT AS DEFINED UNDER LAW

THE ORDER IS AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL PRIOR RESTRAINT – Because there are no findings of unprotected speech making up the conduct of Respondent and because the Order prohibits a large category of protected speech, the Order is an unconstitutional prior restraint.

THE MINNESOTA HRO STATUTE, IF APPLIED TO SITUATIONS LIKE THIS WOULD VIOLATE THE FIRST AMENDMENT    

On July 27, 2018,  I received a Memorandum and Order from Judge Kanning stating “Respondent, through her attorney raises constitutional issues relating to the First Amendment and Prior restraint. The Court has considered these and finds no merit to these.”

Clearly Judge Kanning was unable to keep his disdain for me to himself and wrote in the order, “In the 34+ years the undersigned has served as a District or Senior Judge, never have I seen a case that represents harassment most evil.”   More on this case: Because I Said So

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

Judge Michael Baxter (Dakota County), granted the SLAPP Suit/Harassment Restraining Order filed by Michael and Sarah Brodkorb against me after the hearing held on October 29th, 2018.  Read transcripts of the hearing. Evavold 2018-10-29 

In the memorandum, Baxter writes, While the evidence here is a close call, there is a reasonable basis to find that Respondent was involved in the chain of events that led to the repeated harassment of Ms. Sarah Brodkorb and her minor children.

Who needs facts and evidence?  We no longer need to analyze information without prejudice, we just go with beliefs. Never mind the fact that HRO’s are also now being misused by declaring that speech itself is harassing.

Knowingly presenting false evidence to the court with the intent of doing harm to someone else is acceptable. Read LIES BY OMISSION to understand this case further.

Not only did Michael Brodkorb falsely report a crime and perjure himself, he is now attempting to fee shift for process serving to witnesses he subpoenaed for our hearings to contest the false orders. In some cases, the ‘losing’ side may be required to pay fees if they initiated a meritless lawsuit. The same doesn’t appear to hold true if a meritless lawsuit was filed against the defendant. Oh well, I still have my integrity and Brodkorb is still a knuckle dragging thug!

See request for costs below:↓

 

On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 10:16 AM Williams, Briana <Briana.Williams@courts.state.mn.us> wrote:

Mr. Hansen,

The Court received your notice and application for costs and disbursements in the above referenced matter. Judge Baxter would like you to submit documentation supporting the claimed cost of service in this case in the amount of $747.16. Could you please provide the Court with the appropriate documentation?

Thank you,

Briana Williams
Judicial Law Clerk to the Honorable M. Michael Baxter
Dakota County District Court, Hastings, Minn

_________________________________________________

From: Nathan Hansen [mailto:nathan.hansen@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2018 10:21 AM
To: Williams, Briana <Briana.Williams@courts.state.mn.us>
Cc: dedeevavold@hotmail.com
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: 19AV-CV-18-2157

Here are the invoices.  The cost was high because Carrie Beaudette worked hard to avoid service of process, according to my process servers.

Also, it is my understanding a judgment has to be entered before costs are taxed.  I have submitted such a proposed document.

Nathan Hansen
651-704-9600

CLICK ON DOCUMENTS TO ZOOM↓

Update: Just received this in the mail today 

§549.02 COSTS.  SERIOUSLY???

Subdivision 1.District court.

In actions commenced in the district court, costs shall be allowed as follows:To plaintiff: (1) Upon a judgment in the plaintiff’s favor of $100 or more in an action for the recovery of money only, $200. (2) In all other actions, including an action by a public employee for wrongfully denied or withheld employment benefits or rights, except as otherwise specially provided, $200.

To defendant: Upon discontinuance or dismissal or when judgment is rendered in the defendant’s favor on the merits, $200.

To the prevailing party: $5.50 for the cost of filing a satisfaction of the judgment.


Read Objections to the extortion:   Objections to Costs

Phony Phenomena

Michelle Obama is releasing her book “Becoming” on November 13th, 2018.

USA TODAY says it’s a much anticipated memoir and that Obama’s national book tour is “one hot ticket’.

Watch Owen Shroyer’s assessment of the book, book sales and book tour in the video below:

We are also being lied about by a group of phonies in the book written by hack Michael Brodkorb and his assistant hack Allison Mann.

I’m illegally gagged from saying the names of the family involved in this case due to invasion of privacy, yet a book that omits major facts is written with the father’s paralegal and with a hack that has a documented history of perjury. Like Michelle Obama’s book, this book too will come back to bite them.

I think it’s fairly obvious that Dakota County wants to control the narrative in this case. The only reason we were falsely convicted is that our evidence was illegally withheld and suppressed in our criminal trials. Dakota County and the appellate courts have refused to acknowledge this fact and continue to spin the narrative in their favor. They also have the advantage of the complicit mainstream media to publicize and promote this work of fiction.

Read the article below about how to create a false “best-selling” book.

Behind the Scam: What Does It Take to Be a ‘Best-Selling Author’? $3 and 5 Minutes.

Go to the profile of Brent Underwood
Brent Underwood Follow: Partner @ Brass Check | Founder @ HK Austin http://brasscheck.net/ | https://hkaustin.com/

I would like to tell you about the biggest lie in book publishing. It appears in the biographies and social media profiles of almost every working “author” today. It’s the word “best seller.”

This isn’t about how The New York Times list is biased (though it is). This isn’t about how authors buy their way onto various national best-seller lists by buying their own books in bulk (though they do). No, this is about the far more insidious title of “Amazon Bestseller” — and how it’s complete and utter nonsense.

Here’s what happened in the book industry over the last few years: As Amazon has become the big dog in the book world, the “Amazon Bestseller” status has come to be synonymous with being an actual bestseller. This is not true, and I can prove it.

.  .  .

A while ago, I put up a fake book on Amazon. I took a photo of my foot, uploaded to Amazon, and in a matter of hours, had achieved “№1 Best Seller” status, complete with the orange banner and everything.

How many copies did I need to sell to be able to call up my mother and celebrate my newfound authorial achievements? Three. Yes, a total of three copies to become a best-selling author. And I bought two of those copies myself!

Continue Reading: https://medium.com/the-mission/behind-the-scam-what-does-it-take-to-be-a-best-selling-author-3-and-5-minutes-ec05cee1749a

MacDonald Defamation Suit Against Brodkorb

Judge takes MacDonald, Brodkorb motions under advisement

A Ramsey County judge early Thursday heard arguments in Supreme Court candidate Michelle MacDonald’s defamation suit against blogger and former GOP party operative Michael Brodkorb.

Ramsey County District Court Judge Richard H. Kyle, Jr., heard competing motions in a one-hour hearing before taking the matter under advisement.

MacDonald’s motion seeks a default judgment in her favor. Brodkorb and his co-defendant, Allison Mann, are seeking summary judgment to dismiss the case.

Continue Reading: https://minnlawyer.com/2018/11/02/judge-takes-macdonald-brodkorb-motions-under-advisement/


RELATED

Dirt-Digging Journalism
Defamation by Implication 
Weaponized Information
Michael Brodkorb Sued for Fake News 
Supreme Court Candidate Michelle MacDonald

OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE

To: mike.slavik@co.dakota.mn.us, kathleen.gaylord@co.dakota.mn.us, thomas.egan@co.dakota.mn.us, joe.atkins@co.dakota.mn.us, liz.workman@co.dakota.mn.us, maryliz.holberg@co.dakota.mn.us, chris.gerlach@co.dakota.mn.us, jim.backstrom@aol.com, tim.leslie@gmail.com,Todd.Podgorski@comcast.net, aputz@minnpost.com, awallmeyer@minnpost.com, tad.johnson@ecm-inc.com,

Dakota County Commissioner Kathleen Gaylord

Subject: Demand for Administrative Investigation into Dakota County Attorney James Backstrom’s Obstruction of Justice & Data Breach in High-Profile Sandra Grazzini & Dede Evavold case

Kathleen A. Gaylord (chair) (651) 450-7775  

I am demanding an administrative investigation into the illegal withholding of data from me, Deirdre Elise Evavold. Data that could have been used to prevent my malicious prosecution in high-profile Case No. 19HA-CR-15-4227 State of Minnesota vs Deirdre Elise Evavold. Your corrupt Dakota Co. Attorneys James Backstrom, Philip Prokopowicz & Kathryn Keena conspired with Lakeville Chief of Police Jeff Long to illegally withhold the13.03 subdiv 3(e) electronic data – 13.82 Subd. 7. Criminal investigative data for Lakeville PD ICR: 13001278 data from me and my co-defendants. My co-defendant Sandra Grazzini (19HA-CR-15-2669) only received a twelfth of the evidence that I received for my kangaroo court trial. I have reason to suspect that Backstrom, Prokopowicz & Keena are going to prevent me from obtaining my evidence so I can’t obtain a new trial. 

I am also demanding an administrative investigation into what I suspect is Dakota Co. Attorneys James Backstrom’s, Philip Prokopowicz’s & Kathryn Keena’s illegal release of my 13.82 Subd. 7. Confidential criminal investigative data to MinnPost hack Michael Brodkorb @mbrodkorb of Missing in Minnesota @missinginmn, attorney Lisa Elliott @lmelliott18 and Elliot’s paralegal Allison Mann @AllisonMannMN. Magically and mysteriously DSC_0073.JPG ended up on the Underwatch Twitter account @underwatchEd and the Underwatch website http://underwatch.wordpress.com/. Can you guess who are all followers of Underwatch? If you guessed MinnPost hack Michael Brodkorb @mbrodkorb of Missing in Minnesota @missinginmn, attorney Lisa Elliott @lmelliott18 and Elliot’s paralegal Allison Mann @AllisonMannMN, then you are right, aren’t you? I’ve attached proof that MinnPost hack Brodkorb, Missing in Minnesota, Elliott, and Mann are all followers of Underwatch. I’ve also attached an email which proves that your corrupt Mayor Matt Little knew about the data breach and did nothing about it. I’ve also attached a response from Stearns County which is saying that they are not going to release the data they were illegally withholding from me. You’ll notice it is approximately the same time frame. I have reason to suspect that the City of Lakeville personnel will willfully refuse to comply with my data requests in order to sabotage my attempt to get a new trial. I am also demanding a signed document acknowledging that there was a breach of security and subsequently my confidential data was released to the public pursuant to 13.055 DISCLOSURE OF BREACH IN SECURITY; NOTIFICATION AND INVESTIGATION REPORT REQUIRED. https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/13.05. I’m not holding my breath on any signed document form you acknowledging the data breach, am I?

https://redherringalert.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/020217_100416_underwatched_wordpress_100416_twitter_icr13001278_dsc_0073jpg2.pdf
https://redherringalert.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/people-following-underwatch-underwatched-twitter062517b.pdf
https://redherringalert.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/matt-little-mayor-underwatch100418_1052am.pdf
https://redherringalert.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/redacted-scso-15060803.pdf

Dede Evavold 320-293-6233

A. Co-Defendant Deirdre Evavold received 12 times the evidence as Appellant. Signed July 10, 2017 by Sandra Grazzini Page 10. Appellants’ Reply Brief, Addendum. Case Number: A16-1997 Short Title: State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Sandra Grazzini Appellant. [Note: Sandra had not one but two licensed attorneys on her criminal case. Evavold represented herself.] scribd.com/document/354000486/Reply-Grazzini

Missing Evidence: – Lakeville Officer Kelli Coughlin’s preliminary audio recorded statements from  – Preliminary audio statement of , Tammy Love, Rick Hakanson, Loralie Musolf, Kelli Coughlin, Jim Dronen, and Matthew Palmer – Deputy US Marshal, (Corresponding audio and video with a report.) – Stearns County Evidence (Surveillance of Residence by ) (Private, criminal investigative data for Christina Fox) – Blueray disc containing MN Bureau of Criminal Apprehension reports – Child Protective Services Documents November 2015. Appellant’s Brief. Case #: A17-200 State of Minnesota Court of Appeal. State of Minnesota v. Deirdre Evavold. scribd.com/document/352906584/Dakota-Co-Brief-Evavold-1

The objective of our rules of discovery is to encourage the exchange of relevant information by the parties prior to trial  and to discourage and prevent unjust surprise and prejudice at trial, especially where the testimony of expert witnesses is concerned. See Shymanski v. Nash, 312 Minn. 304, 307, 251 N.W.2d 854, 856 (Minn.1977). As we have stated, “trial by ambush” fell out of favor in the courts of this state over 50 years ago. See American Standard Ins. Co. v. Le, 551 N.W.2d 923, 925 n. 3 (Minn.1996). Supreme Court of Minnesota. Stuart E. GALE and Sandra W. Gale, petitioners, Stringer, J. and Lancaster, J. Relators, v. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, Respondent. No. C5-99-1349. Decided: May 11, 2000. https://caselaw.findlaw.com/mn-supreme-court/1275639.html How Courts Work Steps in a Trial Discovery To begin preparing for trial, both sides engage in discovery. This is the formal process of exchanging information between the parties about the witnesses and evidence they’ll present at trial. Discovery enables the parties to know before the trial begins what evidence may be presented. It’s designed to prevent “trial by ambush,” where one side doesn’t learn of the other side’s evidence or witnesses until the trial, when there’s no time to obtain answering evidence. American Bar Association – Division For Public Education https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/resources/law_related_education_network/how_courts_work/discovery.html

Front row (from left to right): Liz Workman, Kathleen A. Gaylord (chair), Mary Liz Holberg. Back row: Mike Slavik, Thomas A. Egan. Chris Gerlach, Joe Atkins.

Dakota County  County Commissioner District 1  Candidate Name Party Website File Date  Mike Slavik Nonpartisan www.mikeslavik.com  5/22/2018 County Commissioner District 2  Candidate Name Party Website File Date  Kathleen A. Gaylord Nonpartisan kathleengaylord.com  5/22/2018  Todd Podgorski Nonpartisan www.ToddPodgorski.com  5/23/2018 County Commissioner District 6  Candidate Name Party Website File Date  Mary Liz Holberg Nonpartisan   5/22/2018 Name Political Party Mike Slavik Nonpartisan Residence Address Campaign Address 1050 SOUTHVIEW DR HASTINGS, MN 55033 Candidate Website Phone Number www.mikeslavik.com (651) 3983372   View Voluntary Disclosure Email  mikeslavik@comcast.net  Candidate Information Filing Date 5/22/2018   Name Political Party Kathleen A. Gaylord Nonpartisan   Residence Address Campaign Address 2301 ANTHONY SOUTH ST PAUL, MN 55075    Candidate Website Phone Number kathleengaylord.com (651) 4507775   View Voluntary Disclosure Email  kathleengaylord@hotmail.com  Candidate Information Filing Date 5/23/2018   Name Political Party Todd Podgorski Nonpartisan   Residence Address Campaign Address 651 15TH AVE NO SOUTH ST PAUL, MN 55075    Candidate Website Phone Number www.ToddPodgorski.com (651) 3060052   View Voluntary Disclosure Email  Todd.Podgorski@comcast.net  Candidate Information Filing Date 5/22/2018   Name Political Party Mary Liz Holberg Nonpartisan   Residence Address Campaign Address 12195 UPPER 167TH ST W LAKEVILLE, MN 55044    Candidate Website Phone Number  (952) 4358723   View Voluntary Disclosure Email  holberg@charter.net County Sheriff  Candidate Name Party Website File Date  Tim Leslie Nonpartisan timleslieforsheriff.com5/22/2018  County Attorney  Candidate Name Party Website File Date  James C. Backstrom Nonpartisan   5/22/2018 Candidate Information Filing Date 5/22/2018   Name Political Party Tim Leslie Nonpartisan   Residence Address Campaign Address NOT REQUIRED  PO BOX 18278, 3 SIGNAL HILLS CENTER WEST ST PAUL, MN 55118   Candidate Website Phone Number timleslieforsheriff.com (000) 0000000   View Voluntary Disclosure Email  tim.leslie@gmail.com  Candidate Information Filing Date 5/22/2018   Name Political Party James C. Backstrom Nonpartisan   Residence Address Campaign Address NOT REQUIRED  860 BLUE GENTIAN RD STE 290 EAGAN, MN 55121   Candidate Website Phone Number  (651) 4701736   View Voluntary Disclosure Email  jim.backstrom@aol.com https://candidates.sos.state.mn.us/CandidateFilingSearch.aspx

Final 33-602.205 Inmate Telephone Use 11580556 Effective: 06/14/2012 https://www.flrules.org/Gateway/View_notice.asp?id=11580556 33-602.205 Inmate Telephone Use. (1) This rule sets forth the minimum telephone privileges that shall be granted to inmates housed in institutions or facilities other than community correctional centers, or inmates housed on death row. All inmate calls, with the exception of those calls placed to attorneys pursuant to paragraph (3)(a), and to foreign consulates pursuant to paragraph (4)(a) shall be subject to monitoring and recording. Due to the high level of security needs on death row, the only telephone privileges available to death row inmates are those set forth in paragraph (3)(a), private calls to attorneys; paragraph (4)(a), private calls to foreign consulates; and subsection (5), calls made in the event of family crisis.

James Backstrom, Dakota County Attorney (651) 4701736 & Tim Leslie, Dakota County Sheriff (651) 438-4709:
Chapter 13 data request – Please email/file share me the following readily available, free, electronic, public data in its original searchable pdf format pursuant to 13.03 Subd 3(e):

  1. See attached signed informed consent form. Make sure that you include the illegally withheld unredacted Osceola County Florida Jail  video visit video of Sandra Grazzini 5146__20151029_143913.mp4 and 5147__20151021_114909.mp4. I also want the unredacted confidential attorney/client audio recordings between attorney Michelle MacDonald and Sandra Grazzini that you also illegally withheld from me. I’ve attached MacDonald’s complaint filed with Chief Judicial Officer Terrence Conkel. The complaint includes MacDonald’s certificate of representation which you ignored to illegally obtain the attorney/client audio recordings between attorney Michelle MacDonald and Sandra Grazzini, right? See attached. 13001278 Florida Jail Calls. I also want the preliminary audio statements of Tammy Love, , , , Deirdre Evavold, Gina & Douglas Dahlen that you are still illegally withholding from me. Make sure to include the Osecola County Florida preliminary audio statement of Sandra Grazzini. That’s the audio statement that will outline how you duped the U.S. Marshals into arresting Sandra on trumped up charges, isn’t it? In case you try to play dumb, I’ve attached Osceola documents which debunk your “clerical error” propaganda, haven’t I? See attached. Osceloa_Kidnap_Minor Oh, I almost forgot! I want the preliminary audio statements from Christina Fox that you, Stearns County Attorney Janelle Kendall and Stearn County Sheriff John Sanner conspired to illegally withhold from me. See previous link.

Judge Karen Asphaug

2. Transcripts for Case No. 19HA-CR-15-2669 State of Minnesota vs Sandra Grazzini  ALL HEARINGS IN FRONT OF ASPHAUG  11/16/2015 Transcript Index # 26  09/26/2016 Transcript Index # 154  10/05/2016 Transcript Index # 161  03/20/2017 Transcript Index # 216 03/20/2017 Transcript Index # 217 03/20/2017 Transcript Index # 218 03/20/2017 Transcript Index # 219 03/20/2017 Transcript Index # 220 03/20/2017 Transcript Index # 221 03/20/2017 Transcript Index # 222 03/20/2017 Transcript Index # 223 03/20/2017 Transcript Index # 224 03/20/2017 Transcript Index # 225 03/20/2017 Transcript Index # 226 03/20/2017 Transcript Index # 227 03/20/2017 Transcript Index # 228 03/20/2017 Transcript Index # 229 03/20/2017 Transcript Index # 230 03/20/2017 Transcript Index # 231 03/20/2017 Transcript Index # 232 03/20/2017 Transcript Index # 233 03/20/2017 Transcript Index # 234 03/20/2017 Transcript Index # 235 03/20/2017 Transcript Index # 236. 13.03 ACCESS TO GOVERNMENT DATA Subd. 12. Pleadings. Pleadings, as defined by court rule, served by or on a government entity, are public data to the same extent that the data would be public if filed with the court. https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/13.03

  1. Transcripts for Case No. 19HA-CR-15-4229 State of Minnesota vs DOUGLAS CRAIG DAHLEN 12/19/2016 Transcript Index # 47, 12/23/2016 Transcript Index # 50; Case No. 19HA-CR-15-4230 State of Minnesota vs GINA SCHMIT DAHLEN 12/19/2016 Transcript Index # 50, 12/27/2016 Transcript Index # 53. 13.03 ACCESS TO GOVERNMENT DATA Subd. 12. Pleadings. Pleadings, as defined by court rule, served by or on a government entity, are public data to the same extent that the data would be public if filed with the court. https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/13.03

Sandra Grazzini

 

  1. Bills submitted by Dakota County Attorney’s office to indigent Sandra Grazzini for readily available, free, electronic data in high-profile 19HA-CR-15-2669. [ https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/611.271 611.271 COPIES OF DOCUMENTS; FEES.  The court administrators of courts, the prosecuting attorneys of counties and municipalities, and the law enforcement agencies of the state and its political subdivisions shall furnish, upon the request of the district public defender, the state public defender, or an attorney working for a public defense corporation under section 611.216, copies of any documents in their possession at no charge to the public defender, including the following: police reports, photographs, copies of existing grand jury transcripts, audiotapes, videotapes, audio or video files on CD Rom or DVD Rom disc, copies of existing transcripts of audiotapes, videotapes, or audio or video files on CD Rom or DVD Rom disc and, in child protection cases, reports prepared by local welfare agencies. When files are provided on CD Rom or DVD Rom disc, the provider shall, upon the request of the public defender, include the software needed to open, view, or play the disc. Nothing in this section shall compel production of documents that are not discoverable under the rules of court, court order, or chapter 13.]

Dede Evavold 320-293-6233

THE COURT: And at our initial hearing, former counsel expressed he desire to address the issue of probable cause, whether there’s sufficient probable cause to support the charges in the complaint – I assume no amended complaint – although I have not received the motion, a formal motion to dismiss for lack of probable cause. Do you intend to litigate this issue of probable cause, Mr. Grigsby?

GRIGSBY: I do, you Honor. The only issue that I am able to discern from what I have, and that’s simply two complaints, is the issue of probable cause. There’s apparently a large amount of discovery that I haven’t seen. I don’t know if it has been disclosed. Apparently they want a large fee for it. My understanding is that Ms. Grazzini has been given in forma pauperis, so then we could eventually present that to the court. 11-24-15 Hearing Case No.19HA-CR-15-2669 State of Minnesota vs. Sandra Grazzini, Page 1,2 of 7.

____________________________________________________

Douglas Dahlen’s Attorney Travis Keil

THE COURT: Have you – are you satisfied that you have received the discovery from –
KEIL: No.
THE COURT: – the State?
MR KEIL: It is my understanding that one of the kids provided a statement to law enforcement. It’s been on Twitter; it’s been in the press. We have not received a copy of that statement.
KEENA: Your Honor, if I may just comment to that? I just received it late last week, and it’s actually on sitting on my secretary’s desk to disclose to Mr. Keil, and she’s gone today. So they will be receiving it this week. Jury Trial Volume I, State of Minnesota vs. Sandra Grazzini. Court File No. 19HA-CR- 15-2669. July 18, 2016 at the Dakota County Judicial Center, Hastings, Minnesota. Page 6.

_____________________________________________________

Dede Evavold

THE COURT: Ms. Evavold, you are representing yourself.
EVAVOLD: Yes.
THE COURT: The State filed a motion to compel testimony of Ms. Dahlen, Mr. Dahlen and Ms. Evavold pursuant to Minnesota Statute 609.09, Subdivision 1. A joint response was filed on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Dahlen. I have not received a response from Ms. Evavold. Have you responded in writing to this motion, Ms. Evavold.
EVAVOLD: I have responded to the District Court Administrator again on Friday about not receiving my evidence, so —
THE COURT: Did you file a response to the motion to compel?
MS.EVAVOLD: No, not with the court
THE COURT: Okay. Is the State ready to proceed? Jury Trial Volume I, State of Minnesota vs. Sandra Grazzini. Court File No. 19HA-CR- 15-2669. July 18, 2016 at the Dakota County Judicial Center, Hastings, Minnesota. Page 3.

______________________________________________________

Osceola County Uniform Charging Affidavit Case No. 15l09456; Filing Agency: Osceola Co Sheriff’s Office; Master Name#: 1011676; Case#: 15l09456; DOB: 9/30/1965; Arrest Location: 5000 Avenue of Stars – Area 26; Violation Location: 5000 Avenue of Stars – Area 26; Date/Time Arrested Arresting Officer 10/18/2015 3:48 Gonzales, Eman; Charge Offense Charges F.S.: 3F, Fugitive Wrnt – OutofState Ext 941.13 Kidnapping. Warrant#: 19HACR1526691; Court Case # 13001278. Osceloa_Kidnap_Minor

Osceola County Jail Classification: Primary Assessment; 10/19/2015; 08:52:57; Booking Number: 293281; Name Number: 1011676 Sandra Grazzini; Assessment Date: Monday, 10/19/2015 08:51 AM; Who: McNees, P; Risk Class: HMD; Final Score: 12. Risk Assessment Questions: Question: What is the current charge? Answer: Assaultive Felony Notes: Current charge Fugitive (Dakota, MN) Kidnap Minor Question: Assessment Summary Answer: Enter Pertinent Information in the Note Field Notes: Classified HMD/ Current charge fugitive (Dakota, MN) Kidnap Minor / No Past Aslt Felony / Hold for Dakota, MN / No IDP’s // PM 5170

Dakota County Minnesota Government Data Practices Contacts Responsible Authority – County Attorney James C. Backstrom Judicial Center 1560 Highway 55 Hastings, MN 55033-2343 Responsible Authority – County Sheriff Tim Leslie Law Enforcement Center 1580 Highway 55 Hastings, MN 55033-2343 Dakota County Data Subject Requests https://www.co.dakota.mn.us/Government/DataPractices/Documents/DataSubjectRequests.pdf

Recently uncovered phone conversations between Michelle MacDonald and Sandra Grazzini recorded shortly after Grazzini was arrested in Florida in October 2015, confirm MacDonald was aware her client was involved in the disappearance of her daughters – . MacDonald’s statements to Grazzini, made while she was in an Osceola County Jail awaiting extradition to Minnesota, directly contradict MacDonald’s public statements about what she claimed both she and her client knew about the disappearance of the sisters. Jail recordings confirm MacDonald knew Grazzini took her children October 1, 2018 http://missinginminnesota.com/jail-recordings-confirm-macdonald-knew-grazzini-took-her-children/

Tad Johnson, Sun This Week – Managing Editor/Dakota County/Letters to the Editor Phone: 952-846-2033 & Andrew Putz, Editor – MinnPost Phone: 612-455-6950 & Andrew Wallmeyer, Publisher – MinnPost Phone: 612-455-6950:

How would you like to interview me? I have all sorts of dirt on Dakota Co. Attorneys James Backstrom, Philip Prokopowicz & Kathryn Keen and MinnPost hack Michael Brodkorb, haven’t I?

Dede Evavold 320-293-6233

_______________________________________________________

On April 12, 2018 I received a notice from Twitter’s legal team which explained they would not provide IP address information as Minnesota administrative subpoena’s did not comply with California criminal proceedings (Cal. Penal Code § 1334) . They also would not recognize the Minnesota statute related to non-disclosure and would alert the user to any legal requests from law enforcement. Twitter legal team advised that with a search warrant and Federal non-disclosure order (18 U.S.C. § 2705(b)) they would provide IP address information and not alert the user of the legal process request. At this time Sergeant Wayne and I determined the most reasonable course of action based upon the nature of this case would be to create an informal request to Twitter for the defamatory posts to be removed.  Dakota Investigations (MN0190000) Page 2 of 3 Report Generated by: -() Creation: Brian Eells 2018-04-23 15:21:07 SUPPLEMENT Case Number: 18900089 Title: Criminal Defamation Dakota Investigations

Judge David Knutson

On May 17, 2018 I met with Judge Knutson to speak with him about this investigation. I provided him information about Twitter’s public portal which allows a private citizen to request content be removed if they feel it is defamatory or threatening in nature. I suggested that if he made a request as a private citizen it may hold more weight with Twitter as requests from law enforcement have been unsuccessful. This investigation will be closed as inactive. SUPPLEMENT Case Number: 18900089 Title: Criminal Defamation Dakota Investigation

PARTIES INVOLVED PERSON 1 Role(s): Victim Last: Knutson First: David Middle: Race: Height: Date of Birth: Refused / Unavailable Weight: Sex: Male PERSON 1 Role(s): Victim Last: Knutson First: David Middle: Race: Height: Date of Birth: Refused / Unavailable Weight: Sex: Male Residence: 1560 Highway 55; Hastings, MN 55033 Residence Type: GOVERNMENT/PUBLIC BUILDING Residence Description: Court House OFFENSE INFORMATION Type Charge Level Description Statute 609.765.2 Gross Misdemeanor Criminal Defamation-Acts RELATED REPORTS Agency Case Number Type Description Dakota Investigations 17900122 Incident-Reference Related investigation  “@johnsonmedia2”  involving Twitter user  Dakota Investigations (MN0190000) Page 2 of 2 Report Generated by: -() Creation: Brian Eells 2018-06-01 07:17:28 This investigation will be closed as inactive. laj424 PARTIES INVOLVED PERSON 1 Role(s): Victim Last: Knutson First: David Middle: Race: Height: Date of Birth: Refused / Unavailable Weight: Sex: Male Residence: 1560 Highway 55; Hastings, MN 55033 Residence Type: GOVERNMENT/PUBLIC BUILDING Residence Description: Court House OFFENSE INFORMATION Type Charge Level Description Statute 609.765.2 Gross Misdemeanor Criminal Defamation-Acts RELATED REPORTS Agency Case Number Type Description Dakota Investigations 17900122 Incident-Reference Related investigation  “@johnsonmedia2”  involving Twitter user  Dakota Investigations (MN0190000) Page 2 of 2 Report Generated by: -() Creation: Brian Eells 2018-06-01 07:17:28

Q: You note on page 2 of your petition that respondent, meaning Ms. Ristau, pursued and photographed victims with intent to distribute the photograph. Do you have certain knowledge that Ms. Ristau actually pursued your wife?

Michael Brodkorb

A: Yes. She wasn’t with — she wasn’t accompanying my wife and my children at Famous Footwear.
Q: Did you witness her pursue your wife?
A: I did not.
Q. Did you know Ms. — are you claiming to know Ms. Ristau intent, you know what she’s thinking?
A: I can’t speak to — I can’t –HANSEN: Object as to foundation. She’s asking him to read somebody’s mind. I think if there is —

THE COURT: She’s — overruled. She’s asking about what appeared in the petition. I think she has a right to ask those questions.

Well, based on what’s in the petition, it’s obvious that Ms. Ristau pursued my wife for a period of time.

Attorney Rebecca Moore

BY MS. MOORE: Q. But it’s not obvious based on the facts. Did you witness Ms. Ristau pursue your wife?
A: No.
Q. And you are not presuming to tell the Court that you know what Ms. Ristau’s intent was when she took the photo?
A: I can offer my opinion, but I can’t state what her —
Q: Okay. All right.
A: I can’t state what Ms. Ristau’s intent was. Direct Examination of Michael Brodkorb by Ms. Rebecca Moore. Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP) Suit Sarah Beth Brodkorb, Michael Brodkorb, and o/b/o Minor Children (AB, EB, BB), Petitioners, vs. Diane Kathleen Ristau, Respondent. File No. 19AV-CV-18-2159. Transcript of hearing on September 26, 2018.

SEEK TRUTH AND REPORT IT Ethical journalism should be accurate and fair. Journalists should be honest and courageous in gathering, reporting and interpreting information. Journalists should: Avoid undercover or other surreptitious methods of gathering information unless traditional, open methods will not yield information vital to the public. Be vigilant and courageous about holding those with power accountable. Give voice to the voiceless. BE ACCOUNTABLE AND TRANSPARENT Ethical journalism means taking responsibility for one’s work and explaining one’s decisions to the public. Journalists should: Explain ethical choices and processes to audiences. Encourage a civil dialogue with the public about journalistic practices, coverage and news content. Respond quickly to questions about accuracy, clarity and fairness. Acknowledge mistakes and correct them promptly and prominently. Explain corrections and clarifications carefully and clearly. Expose unethical conduct in journalism, including within their organizations. Abide by the same high standards they expect of others. Society of Professional Journalists https://www.spj.org/pdf/spj-code-of-ethics.pdf  

DRAMA, DRAMA, DRAMA


From: Nathan Hansen [mailto:nathan.hansen@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2018 10:21 AM
To: Williams, Briana <Briana.Williams@courts.state.mn.us>
Cc: dedeevavold@hotmail.com
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Fwd: Michael Brodkorb shared “19AVCV182159Transcript09262018.pdf” with you

Re:  Brodkorb v. Evavold

Brodkorb v. Ristau transcript attached.

Nathan Hansen
651-704-9600


On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 11:37 AM Williams, Briana <Briana.Williams@courts.state.mn.us> wrote:

Mr. Hansen,

There was no attachment to the email and the link contained within the email came up as “page not found”

Please try to resend the transcript.

Thank you,

Briana Williams
Judicial Law Clerk to the Honorable M. Michael Baxter
Dakota County District Court, Hastings, Minn


On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 11:45 AM Nathan Hansen <nathan.hansen@gmail.com> wrote:

Will do.


From: Nathan Hansen <nathan.hansen@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2018 12:15 PM
To: Briana.Williams@courts.state.mn.us
Cc: dedeevavold@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Fwd: Michael Brodkorb shared “19AVCV182159Transcript09262018.pdf” with you

NH19AVCV182159Transcript09262018.pdf

Here you go.

Thanks,

Nathan Hansen
651-704-9600


 

Maybe Mikey-Cindy Bradykorb should get his facts straight before he commits perjury again.

 

 

 

BATTLING WITH THE BRODKORBS

Michael and Sarah Brodkorb

My malicious SLAPP Suit hearing was held on October 29th, 2018 in Apple Valley with Judge Michael Baxter presiding. Michael and Sarah Brodkorb filed the false police report against myself, Diane Ristau and Carrie Beaudette on 8-30-18 and claimed that a photo of Sarah Brodkorb was taken while shopping and distributed with intent to harass.

Carrie Beaudette was subpoenaed to testify by the Brodkorb’s attorney Nathan Hansen, but Beaudette asserted her constitutional right against self-incrimination and plead the fifth.

Michael Brodkorb is now whining, pissing and moaning that I was belligerent, unruly, argumentative and unprofessional during the court hearing.

I’m sure he felt that way when confronted with the truth about their perjury and lies of omission as well as the detective’s admission that he destroyed evidence.

Judge Baxter will issue a decision within the next two weeks and I will post the transcripts from the hearing when they become available.

Below is my request for sanctions against the Brodkorbs and Attorney Nathan Hansen.

Read in its entirety: Sanctions103018

Below is the dismissal of the SLAPP Suit filed against me on September 21st, 2017 for blog posts.

Dismissal of Ticket

RELATED: 

ONE DOWN…FOUR TO GO

LAWLESS DAKOTA COUNTY COURTS

https://redherringalert.files.wordpress.com/2018/10/continuance1026181.pdf

https://redherringalert.files.wordpress.com/2018/10/beaudette-letter-fax-verification.pdf

Nathan Hansen Letter to Presiding Judge 

Attorney Rebecca Moore and Judge Michael Baxter: Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP) Suit Sarah Beth Brodkorb, Michael Brodkorb, and o/b/o Minor Children (AB, EB, BB), Petitioners, vs. Diane Kathleen Ristau, Respondent. File No. 19AV-CV-18-2159. Transcript of hearing on September 26, 2018.

MS. MOORE: Your Honor, I’d actually bring a motion, if the Court would entertain it. I’d move at this point after the petitioners’ case in chief is done to vacate the harassment order as it stands.

Petitioner had the burden today to prove to you that Ms. Ristau engaged in harassing conduct. All they’ve been able to establish at minimum is that she took a photo and that that photo ended up on Twitter but not through Ms. Ristau. They have to prove that there is some sort of harassing — multiple, repeated incidents of harassing conduct. They’ve been unable to do that today. Even before I call any witnesses, petitioner hasn’t met its burden to prove that Ms. Ristau personally engaged in harassing conduct.

You heard the detective offer his testimony that there is no information from Twitter connecting Ms. Ristau to this account. You’ve heard that they don’t have any information, direct, factual evidence, connecting Ms. Ristau to this Jane Johnson media account. It’s also arguable whether or not these tweets even constitute harassing conduct. As Your Honor knows, harassing conduct has to be more than inappropriate and argumentative statements.

These pictures, there are two that perhaps directly tag Mr. Brodkorb with his handle @brodkorb. Again, they simply have failed to establish that Ms. Ristau has any connection to this Twitter account that posted them. At best, she took a photo of people in a public place, no expectation of privacy in a public place, Your Honor. Where there’s no expectation of privacy, there can’t be a wrongful invasion.

THE COURT: Okay. Here’s — here’s what I do know at this point. I know that I consider the posting of the photos that have been admitted as Exhibits 1, 2, and 3 to be harassing behavior. I also consider the fact that they’re posted on the site that can be retweeted are multiple instances of harassment. I know — or at least the evidence at this point, no further evidence, would suggest that the beginning of this harassing act occurred with the taking of the photo at the shoe store and then evidently went through Beaudette and Evavold. And at least at this point, if I — if I look at this as a conspiracy to harass, the evidence would suggest that a substantial step in that was taking the photo and passing it on to Beaudette.

You know, I do think that there is evidence that could be offered that could overwhelm that or — or indicate to me that that’s not the chain. But I think they’ve gone far enough with the standard being in a harassment hearing more likely true than not true; that they’ve met the prima facie case at this point.

I really wish that who has been before us today was either Ms. Evavold or whoever posted that verbiage on those photographs, because that’s what raised it to the level that I find difficult to comprehend in this kind of thing. So that’s my reasoning.

It doesn’t look like I’m going to get a fair hearing by an impartial judge but then again, why would I expect anything different in this continual collusion and harassment by Dakota County.

Stay tuned for the outcome of tomorrow’s hearing….