Buy My Book Here

Fox News Ticker

Please check out my new books, "Bullied to Death: Chris Mackney's Kafkaesque Divorce and Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and the World's Last Custody Trial"

Thursday, February 28, 2019

Saturday, February 23, 2019

No Explanation from David Rucki and His Band of Judicial Misfits

                                                          (Judge Phillip Kanning)

Judges continue to make curious decisions with little or no explanation in the Rucki case.

Judge Phillip Kanning Mysteriously Disappears

The most recent update is that Judge Phillip Kanning is no longer assigned to the case.
This, on its own, is not news, but the circumstances leading up to and including his departure raise numerous red flags.

Kanning was assigned to the case even though he is a retired judge.
Sandra Grazzini-Rucki filed a motion to stop her license from being taken for back due child support in October 2018.

Kanning and the court sat on it until late January when a hearing was suddenly called for February 12, 2019.

But Kanning, though he was assigned, would not preside over the hearing, that’s because he was out of country on vacation.

Heidi Carstensen is the Court Administrator for the 1st Judicial District in Minnesota, where the David Rucki Vs. Sandra Grazzini-Rucki divorce has played out; she told me as much days before the hearing.

The hearing would instead be presided over by Judge Kathleen Gearin, also a retired judge.
Some time after the hearing, Kanning’s name was removed as the assigned judge, and a clerk at the 1st Judicial District confirmed he is no longer assigned but had no more information.

I also left a voicemail for Jean Baldwin, the Operations Manager for the 1st Judicial District Court, but she did not respond to my voicemail.

I sent separate emails to Baldwin and Carstensen, which were also left unreturned.

It’s not clear how or why his name was removed if he was out of the country.

Judge Kathleen Gearin Can’t be Bothered to Issue an Order

Meanwhile, the court hearing on February 12, 2019, turned into chaos.

Sandra Grazzini-Rucki filed several requests to have the hearing be postponed.

The judge never actually officially ruled on that request; worse yet, the court may have backdated a letter to cover it all up.

According to the court record, on February 07, 2019, there is an entry for “Request for Continuance needing approval.”
Ruck i Docket by on Scribd
But no order has been entered on this request.

Instead, the court sent a letter  Grazzini-Rucki dated February 8, 2019, but this date is dubious.
That’s because Grazzini-Rucki did not receive it until approximately a week after the hearing.

The letter is dubious in other ways; it wasn’t written by Gearin but by Baldwin on Gearin’s behalf.

The letter notes, “Per the instructions of Judge Kathleen Gearin, as she is involved in an unrelated hearing and unable to draft an order.”

Think about that, she is supposed to be retired; are they really saying the retired judge has such a busy schedule that she can’t “draft an order?”

I posed that question and others to Baldwin, Carstensen, and Gearin.

Also on this email were the four press people for the Minneosta Courts- Lissa Finne, Alyssa Roberson-Riems, Beau Berentsen, and Kyle Christopherson- and Jeff Shorba, the Court Administrator for the Minnesota Court System as a whole.

None responded to the email.

Baldwin’s letter continues, “Your request for a continuance has been denied but Judge Gearin is allowing you to appear via telephone.”

Because Grazzini-Rucki did not receive the letter until after the hearing she missed it.

The hearing appears to be a dud regardless. Lisa Elliott, David Rucki’s attorney, also needed to appear by phone and Judge Gearin would only say, “Taken under advisement,” also entered on February 12, 2019.

There is no update and it’s not clear what Gearin could do.

This case is being appealed with motions being filed in the appeals court simultaneously in which the parties are arguing the same issues.

Any decision by Gearin would be subjugated to the decision in the appeal’s court.

The appeal’s court is involved because rather than ruling on her motion right away, which is customary in district court, they waited months, with Grazzini-Rucki filing in appeal’s court subsequent to that.

Multi-Millionaire David Rucki Gets Benefits In Program for Low Income

Even more remarkably, I’ve recently discovered David Rucki receives aid under Minnesota Cares which is described as, “a health care program for Minnesotans with low incomes.” 

In his divorce, he received an estate which included 100% of a multi-million dollar business, four homes, and nine classic cars.

He is currently involved in at least two other civil actions trying to get money for pain and suffering related to his two oldest daughters running away and being hidden by Doug and Gina Dahlen from April 19, 2013 to November 2015.

He has received money as a result of Gina Dahlen and Doug Dahlen pleading guilty and Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and Dede Evavold being convicted.

Below is an aerial shot of one of his homes.

Here is a photo inside his long-time occupied home in Lakeville, Minnesota, an affluent suburb of Minneapolis.

I asked several people about this.

I asked members of the Dakota County Prosecutors office, Monica Jensen, the public affairs officer and James Backstrom the prosecutor, and neither responded.

I also asked Elliott, who also did not respond.

I asked members of the Minnesota Department of Human Services, which administers the program.
I asked Katie Bauer, the communication’s director for MDHS. I asked Shaneen Moore, the director of the Child Support Division in Children and Family Services for the Minnesota Department of Human Services. 

I also asked Julie Erickson, a supervisor of the Child Support Division  in Minnesota.  None of these folks responded either.

Rucki is simultaneously chasing after his ex-wife for back due child support.

In the last child support order, the judge, Jan Davidson, estimated that David Rucki makes $10,000 per month; she only estimated because she issued an order without forcing David Rucki to submit income documents. [

"The obligee (David Rucki) applied for public assistance and currently receives medical assistance." Davidson said in the order.

This would mean that he is simultaneously defrauding MDHS, while using the assistance to support his child support argument.

I also left a message with the MDHS media department.

I received a call back from Tammy, from the Minnesota Department of Human Services, who said she worked with Minnesota Care.

She could not help me, she said, due to privacy issues but said I could file a fraud complaint with the MDHS, which I did.

That David Rucki is committing fraud is self-evident- find more information here- whether or not anyone in MDHS will take it seriously is another matter. 

Tuesday, February 12, 2019

Federal Judge Imposes Million Dollar Fine in Futures Scheme – CFTC

The article is here. 

David Rucki The Multi-Millionaire Qualifying for State Aid

     (A look inside David Rucki's home; he somehow qualifies for state aid, photo courtesy of

Ruck Minnesota Care by on Scribd

David Rucki received Minnesota Care, "a health care program for Minnesotans with low incomes."

The site continues, " Enrollees get health care services through a health plan. You can choose your health plan from those serving MinnesotaCare enrollees in your county.

"MinnesotaCare is funded by a state tax on Minnesota hospitals and health care providers, Basic Health Program funding and enrollee premiums and cost sharing."

Even without providing any income documents, a recent court order estimated David Rucki's income at $10,000 per month.
With four homes and a multi-million dollar business, it is likely David Rucki makes much more.

In other words, the taxpayers of Minnesota are paying for this multi-millionaire who owns a home in Lakeville, Minnesota, one of four.

Here is another one of his homes.

Friday, February 8, 2019

Monday, February 4, 2019

The "Paper Divorce" from Hell

                                                      (Minneosta Judge David Knutson)

In what now looks like a remarkable and frankly bogus pronouncement, early on in the divorce process David Rucki claimed he didn't even think he was really getting divorced from his ex-wife Sandra "Sam" Grazzini-Rucki.

In an August 17, 2011, hearing, he said, "She (SGR) brought up this idea of a paper divorce or a divorce of convenience because of some issues we were dealing with, with her family in family court."

That little known divorce decree was signed on April 19, 2011; up to that point, the divorce was relatively painless. 

Later on in his August testimony, David Rucki explained what this issue is, "Her father, Al Grazzini, was an entrepreneurial guy, he had an estimated net worth of $300 million. The family has been fighting over the estate since the late 90s."

He went on to say he and his ex-wife weren't pulled in until 2006, but in 2008, he threatened to kill his in-law as part of a dispute in this same estate issue.

David Rucki made the now stunning statement- stunning because this so-called paper divorce (which only he has claimed) is now in its eighth year and has made national headlines- as an attempt to spin a police encounter in which he refused to leave the home after the April 2011 divorce was finalized.

According to two officers who testified, Joseph Danielson and Jeffrey Hanson, three police officers showed up at the Rucki home with a vacate order, as David Rucki was no longer allowed on the premises.

Both officers stated that it was a friend of Grazzini-Rucki's who called the police and they went up to the bedroom where David Rucki was before he left. Both officers said he was surprised that the officers arrived.

Here is how David Rucki described the same situation.

"I was pretty thrown back, so what I did was I – I was going to  leave the house. I called the kids in and that when I broke the news to the kids. I was upset. I broke the news to the kids that their mother had asked me to leave, and I went over to my friend, Tony Canny’s (ph) house who is a good friend of mine to talk this out,, to kind of work my way through it. I was there until 9:00, 9-ish, and then I came home. And when I walked in the door, that’s when I saw her and two of her girlfriends. They were drinking and I was pretty disgusted by that because of the fact of what had just happened earlier that night, I didn’t think that was appropriate behavior, and I was disgusted. And I turned and looked at them and I walked into the other room and I grabbed my son and told my son to come upstairs with me, Niko and I wanted to talk to him. And when he came upstairs, I asked him to go downstairs and tell his mother to ask her friends to go home because we had some things to deal with. And he walked down and about five, ten minutes later that’s when the police came and basically escorted out of the house." 
While he claimed to be taken aback, it's not clear why. The divorce decree he signed was only twelve pages, and he signed it with a notary present. SGR was given physical custody of their children and their marital home in the original divorce decree.

But when Allison Mann and Michael Brodkorb wrote a book, that yarn became much more sensational.

"Suddenly there was a knock on the bedroom door. As it opened, six police officers came in the room and surrounded David as he lay confused in his bed. Some of the officers had guns drawn, others had their hands on still-holstered weapons. “What are you guys doing?” he said as they stood above him. “You’re not supposed to be here,” an officer told him. “What are you talking about? I own this house, I built this house.” “Can we step outside?” the officer said. Again, David asked, “What are you talking about?” Next thing he knew he was being pulled from the bed, down the stairs, and out the front door. Outside in the  driveway an officer approached David. “You are divorced, you are not supposed to be here, what are you doing here?” David was shocked. “What?” His wife had told him just hours ago that she wanted a divorce—wanted one. “You’re divorced, right?” “No.” “You weren’t in court today?” the officer asked in an accusatory tone. “No. What are you talking about?” “I saw the papers in there, you got divorced today.” “I wasn’t in court today, I don’t know what you are talking about,” David said with a look that could only be described as dumbfounded. The officer insisted, “I read the papers, you are divorced.” 
Ms. Mann did not respond to an email for an explanation of how this story became so sensational in her book.

Mann, who doubles as the paralegal for David Rucki's attorney, previously called the police after finding another email "harassing". 

Furthermore, while David Rucki was stating that he thought they were only divorced on paper, this hearing was attended by the newly minted guardian ad litem. So, at the same time David Rucki was downplaying any issues in the divorce, the court felt the need to appoint a guardian ad litem who proceeded to say, "I would assume the therapist would meet with each parent and then with the children, for sure with the older ones individually. It's going to take a while to get everyone in individually and then usually what happens and then usually what happens next is they'd meet with one or more of the children and the father."

So, what started as a so-called paper divorce has by this point already transformed into a guardian ad litem, at least one therapist and as the record of this hearing shows, a reunification therapist.

"The parties are going to work with Moxie (a reunification therapy group)." Friedrich said at another point. 

Friedrich did not respond to an email for comment. 

All of this is even more remarkable since at this point, in August of 2011, the two parties had technically been divorced, with a divorce decree.

Here is part of Grazzini-Rucki's then attorney, Graves said, "I guess you know as far as custody is concerned, that's really contingent on you reopen the judgment and decree."

Graves was speaking to Judge David Knutson, who had then only recently been assigned to the divorce. 

This hearing was in part to determine if this divorce decree should be thrown out and the so-called paper divorce be restarted; Knutson did open it up shortly thereafter and this divorce continues without end in 2019. 

For someone who thought he was only getting divorced on paper, David Rucki seems to have mastered how to maneuver in a real divorce where he received 100% of the assets and sole custody of the children. 

Judge Knutson excluded a mountain of evidence of David Rucki's violent abuse when the custody case went to trial in September 2013.

He declined to explain when I emailed him, but he did allow for the appointment of a GAL, therapists, and even a reunification therapist, all before he technically even opened this divorce back up, a divorce where one party claimed they weren't even divorced but only divorced on paper. 

This is no academic point. The original divorce decree signed by Judge Timothy Wermeger made this point, "The parties were able to settle all issues arising out of the dissolution of the marriage including: child custody and support, spousal maintenance, disposition of real and personal property, and the payment of debts and attorney fees.”

David Rucki argued, after the fact, that he was defrauded by the divorce, claiming in this hearing that he thought he was signing a paper divorce. 

If, in fact, this claim- never made before or after as I can find- is itself fraudulent, then everything which happened after the divorce decree which became active on May 12, 2011, is itself fraudulent. 

That maybe why it is not only Ms. Mann and Knutson who declined to comment. 

I also sent emails to members of the Minnesota Judiciary public affairs office, Lissa Finne, Kyle Christopherson, Beau Berentson, and Alyssa Siems-Roberson, who also did not respond to the emails for comment. 

I also sent an email to Jeff Shorba, the Minnesota Court Administrator, who also declined to comment. 

Members of the press who have not explained this portion of the divorce process also have a lot to answer for and that is why it should surprise no one that Brandon Stahl also did not respond to an email for a comment on this hearing.

Emails to Sean Dooley and Beth Mullen, the two producers on the 20/20 broadcast of the show on this case, were also left unreturned. This revelation, like anything which painted David Rucki in a bad light, did not make it into the broadcast. 

I have also reached out to Laura Adelmann of the Sun Current, the local newspaper in Lakeville, Minnesota, where David Rucki lives, and her editor, Tad Johnson, and neither has responded. 

David Rucki represented himself and did not even attend the hearing in April 2011, which memorialized the divorce initially in front of Judge Wermeger.

On the 20/20 broadcast, Elliott called the divorce a "guerilla divorce"; what she failed to mention is that the divorce only became a guerilla as soon as she was hired by David Rucki, shortly after the first divorce decree, in May 2011, became official. 

Survey Finds Crypto Interest in American Advisors

The article is here.