HON or POS? Is Dakota County MN suspending the Rule of Law in the Sandra Grazzini-Rucki matter?

 

SandraGrazziniRuckiCloseup07252016This writer’s followers on Twitter and other Social Media are familiar with his intention of uniting rank and file Americans under one common Perspective of Reality. A Perspective of reality far truer than the false Perspective of Reality promoted through the divisive propaganda of the Main Stream Media and the two faux major political parties. With this article, this writer intends to build upon creating that truer, common Perspective of Reality so WE THE PEOPLE can unite against our government and hold our government officials accountable for their departures from the Rule of Law (aka Abuse of Power and/or Abuse of Discretion) and betrayals of the best interests of WE THE PEOPLE.

Yesterday morning this writer went to the continuing trial of Sandra Grazzini Rucki in Dakota County MN on various criminal charges relating to allegedly wrongfully depriving her ex husband, David Rucki, of parental rights, etc. Sandra Grazzini-Rucki’s well-founded and well-recognized affirmative defense is that she was acting to protect her children from what she reasonably believed was danger from their father.  Sandra Grazzini-Rucki numerous times went to the appropriate channels to seek the safety of her children, and resorted to helping the girls escape their allegedly abusive father only when the police, the courts and Child Protective Services (CPS) failed her.

This writer does not really know Sandra Grazzini-Rucki from Adam. This writer first became aware of her abuse at the hands of the Dakota County MN Courts and our Government in 2014, through his involvement with the Judicial TAR (Transparency, Accountability and Reform) Movement. Judicial TAR is a group of citizens who have sought a hearing before the Minnesota Legislature dedicated to receiving evidence and testimony of Systemic Corruption in the Minnesota Courts every year from 2005, and every year our requests for said hearing have been denied.  From this, WE THE PEOPLE of Judicial TAR believe it is reasonable for all American citizens to conclude that Minnesota Government and Courts, at a minimum have something to hide, and more likely are complicit in the Systemic Corruption of the Minnesota Courts. [Systemic Corruption means that the aspects of government that are supposed to prevent & punish corruption instead are complicit in and cover it up] In 2009, WE THE PEOPLE of Judicial TAR came to believe it would be unlikely we would ever have our request for said hearing granted. With victims of the Abuse of Power of the Courts and their advocates  getting frustrated, becoming disheartened, moving away and dying, WE THE PEOPLE of Judicial TAR held an Ad Hoc hearing on the Systemic Corruption in the Minnesota Courts to preserve our Petitions for Redress for Posterity:

03MAR2009 Ad Hoc MN hearing: Corruption in Judiciary 1/2
http://bit.ly/2009AdHoc1of2

03MAR2009 Ad Hoc MN hearing: Corruption in Judiciary 2/2
http://bit.ly/2009AdHoc2of2

 From this writer’s experience with the Judicial TAR Movement, this writer has learned nuances of the legal profession that most Americans are unaware of.  Add to this, this writer’s own experience in his personal civil litigation and 1 bogus criminal charge (eventually dismissed for lack of Probable Cause), and this writer asserts that he is uniquely qualified to understand how our Courts fix the outcomes of Court cases and educate his fellow rank and file citizens of the true nature of their government and courts.

This writer has written previously on the Sandra Grazzini-Rucki Matter in Dakota County Minnesota, but your government has seen fit to scrub those articles from the internet. (Main Stream Media (MSM) has seen fit to not publish this writer’s previous articles on the Sandra Grazzini-Rucki matter.) In total, almost 200 of this writer’s blogs and several hundred of his posts and articles have been scrubbed from the Internet.  One gets the sense that our government and courts don’t want rank and file Americans to have the information about their corruption, machinations and duplicity that this writer exposes. Yet, rather than try to recreate and reassert all the facts from those censored articles, this writer is going to focus on the mechanics of various allegations of how the Dakota County MN Courts are trying to fix the outcome of the Sandra Grazzini-Rucki litigation from a succinct, common sense legal perspective. (Fellow Minnesotan, Tim Kinley has a much better knowledge of the all the particular facts in the related previous matters under Judge David Knutson and underlying facts and minutia of the Dakota County MN Court departures from the Rule the Rule (aka Abuse of Power and/or Abuse of Discretion) under Judge Karen Asphaug which have led to this trial of Sandra Grazzini-Rucki – His Youtube Channel http://bit.ly/SpeechlessMN) This article is written more from a macro-overview and general mechanics perspective.

This writer wanted to attend this trial yesterday because it was alleged that there were/are departures from the Rule of Law (aka Abuse of Power and/or Abuse of Discretion) occurring intended to fix the outcome of the case, and he wanted to confirm their accuracy. At the same time, recent events provide an opportunity for this writer to build upon the American Public’s current familiarity with the departures from the Rule of Law. Specifically, this writer refers to the FBI’s Comey’s and DOJ’s Lynch’s failure to charge Hillary Clinton over her various State Department Email related crimes despite facts in evidence which required Hillary Clinton to be charged (http://usat.ly/29wwvnV; http://cnn.it/29JlQDO) For those not familiar with the concept of the “Rule of Law”;

It is the concept and requirement embodied in our founding documents that there only be one set of laws for all American citizens and that it be enforced equally on all
citizens without regard to status, wealth or government position.

Additionally, this writer will also build upon recent revelations by Wikileaks (and Edward Snowden) which have revealed to all Americans the lengths to which our government will go to conspire against WE THE PEOPLE’s free will and the Democratic Process. In this instance, this writer is specifically referring to a hack of the Democratic National Committee’s (DNC) computer servers. Subsequently, the disclosed emails and documents from the DNC servers revealed that the level of Systemic Corruption extends not just to suspension of the Rule of Law but also to violations and machinations of the Democratic Process. (http://bit.ly/2afaGro)

In the present matter of the Sandra Grazzini-Rucki trial, it has been alleged:

  • The jury was tainted with a Newspaper containing an article placed in the jury holding room prior to jury selection;
  • The Court engaged in jury rigging in that it placed so many biased and/or unqualified potential jurors in the jury pool that the Defense could not eliminate them all with its limited number of “free boots” and Judge Karen Asphaug failed to remove at least two jurors for cause who eventually were empaneled on the jury;
  • The Court did/is engaging in fact shaping.

Now, as a member of the press, this writer went to the trial yesterday with the specific purpose of ascertaining if any of these allegations were true. This writer was denied the opportunity to make said inquiries.

WARNING – DEPARTURE FROM ACCEPTED DECORUM FOLLOWS

This writer asserts the recent revelations of the magnitude of our government’s departures from the Rule of Law and Democratic Process warrant departures from accepted decorum. In some way, this writer feels he must signal to his fellow citizens that recent events require special attention. This writer will use these departures from decorum to signal to our fellow citizens that they can no longer remain calm and just go along with their normal daily routines; Rather our Government has departed so far from Constitutional and Natural Law, that the time has come for every American to question their blind loyalty to our government and actively work to restore our government’s accountability to WE THE PEOPLE. You have been fore-warned…

At the noon lunch break, as Prosecutor Kathryn M. Keena walked by where this writer was seated in the Courtroom gallery, this writer took the opportunity to shake her hand and introduce himself as a member of the Press and a member of the Judicial TAR Movement. Ms. Kathryn M. Keena continued toward the door as this writer began to ask her questions about the allegations. With the rudeness and arrogance of those Progressives who think they are better than all the rest of us (http://bit.ly/1mvmoB3), Ms. Kathryn M. Keena continued into a conference room without even the professional courtesy of saying she did not want to hear what this writer had to say nor answering any of this writer’s questions. As Prosecutor Kathryn M. Keena entered the conference room, this writer turned to leave the foyer of the courtroom but was blocked by the egress of others from the court room and patiently waited his opportunity to exit the door. While this writer was standing their facing the exit door waiting for an opportunity to leave, the lying POS Prosecutor Kathryn M. Keena made a FALSE REPORT to a Bailiff that I tried to follow her into the conference room. Lying POS Prosecutor Kathryn M. Keena ordered the Bailiff to have me removed. This writer protested that POS Prosecutor Kathryn M. Keena was lying, and that the Bailiff himself and others had this writer standing near them patiently waiting to leave the foyer. Others advised me to give up my protest and this writer left the foyer and the building.  Once again, Dakota County MN Courts had succeeded in preventing this writer from verifying the truth of their corruption and publishing it for the world to see.

EXPLAINING THE THREE ELEMENTS OF DEPARTURE FROM THE RULE OF LAW
ALLEGEDLY USED TO ATTEMPT TO FIX THE OUTCOME OF THE
SANDRA GRAZZIN-RUCKI MATTER

JudgeDrunkonJudicialImmunityNow, lets revisit the various acts of departure from the Rule of Law (aka Abuse of Power and/or Abuse of Discretion) that have been alleged, in a simple, non-legal gibberish way so the average American can understand it. (See also http://bit.ly/SimulatedLitigationDefined and Proposed Election 2012 caucus resolutions for judicial reform(updated) Part 2of2; Resolution 17 http://bit.ly/2012JudicialTARResolutions2of2)

The alleged Court rules require that a Judge not do anything that might give the appearance of impropriety. Further, there is a requirement in the rules that says the “Finder of Fact” (Judge or Jury) allegedly can only consider facts and evidence on the OFFICIAL COURT RECORD. (When this writer says alleged, it mean that, in the writer’s opinion, the Courts so frequently ignore them one must question if they actually are adhered to or not.

DEPARTURE FROM THE RULE OF LAW
ARTICLE IN THE PROSPECTIVE JURY WAITING ROOM

In regard to the matter of the newspaper article about Sandra Grazzini-Rucki being in the jury waiting room before jury selection, shouldn’t there be a member of the staff assigned to ensuring that jury tainting evidence is not permitted in the jury waiting area.  Of course there is, but in this writer’s experience and knowledge, such methods of tainting juries are common in the courts.  To wit, every American has a right to a trial before an IMPARTIAL jury of their peers. To the point, if you were the one on trial how would you feel about a derogatory article about you being made available to potential jurors in the potential jury waiting room, potential jurors admitting they have read it and Judge Karen Asphaug ruling, “Ain’t no big deal”? In your opinion, if you are the Defendant, does Judge Karen Asphaug’s failure to redress this matter in a satisfactory manner give rise to an “appearance of impropriety”? (Untouchables – Switch Jury scene https://youtu.be/5Mbdi_NXweQ)

DEPARTURE FROM THE RULE OF LAW
ALLEGED JURY RIGGING

Next, we move to the departure from the Rule of Law (aka Abuse of Power and/or Abuse of Discretion) in alleged jury rigging.  In jury selection, the judge is supposed to disqualify jurors for a variety of reasons such as they are a friend or relative of one of the parties, that they are already familiar with the case, or they state have already made up their minds as to guilt or innocence, etc. This writer wanted to ask if any of these allegations regarding the Sandra Grazzini-Rucki matter were true. POS Prosecutor Kathryn M. Keena use the arrogant Progressive tactic (http://bit.ly/1mvmoB3) of having reporters not submissive to the Courts, booted. Therefore, it is necessary to say it is alleged  Judge Karen Asphaug failed to remove a person who said they read the article, knew about the case, felt that Sandra Grazzinni-Rucki was guilty and would be surprised if she was not found guilty.  Another allegation is that a potential juror admitted he had recently attended a party of a relative of David Rucki and was familiar with the case. Judge Karen Asphaug failed to disqualify either prospective juror, in the later case Judge Karen Asphaug said the potential juror’s assurances that they could remain impartial were sufficient to prevent her from disqualifying them. If you are the Defendant, “How impartial do you think these two jurors are going to be?” This is your life on the line here, should you be afforded every appearance of neutrality and fairness?

Now, in addition to the judge disqualifying jurors for cause, the Defense and Prosecution are allowed a small number of “free boots” of any juror for any reason.  It is alleged that Dakota County MN Court machinated the jury pool in the Sandra Grazzini-Rucki case so the Prosecution could get biased jurors on to the final jury panel.  It is alleged that the afore-mentioned two particular jurors should have been disqualified by the judge, but were not. It is alleged that so many biased/unqualified jurors had been machinated into the jury pool (stacked) by Dakota County MN Courts,  that the Defense would not have enough free boots, to get rid of them all. It is alleged that by the time these two particular prospective jurors turn in the jury selection process came up, the Defense had already expended all of its “free boots”.  In an allegedly random process, and with thousands of citizens living in Dakota County MN, what are the chances that 6 or more of about a 25 person jury pool would be biased against the Defense. Now, if you are the Defendant, do you think this was by chance or by deliberate machination of the process by the Dakota County Courts? ]Make sure you factor in your new understanding of your government’s lack of honor and integrity manifests itself in Government’s willingness to manipulate outcomes with recent revelations of its departure from the Rule of Law in the Hillary Clinton State Department Email matter and its willingness to engage in machinations to violate the Democratic Process reveal in the DNC Leaks (http://bit.ly/2afaGro)]

DEPARTURE FROM THE RULE OF LAW
ALLEGED FACT/EVIDENCE SHAPING

And lastly, there is the allegation in the Sandra Grazzini-Rucki matter that the Court is Fact/Evidence shaping the Sandra Grazzini-Rucki case.  As was mentioned earlier, the only facts and evidence the Finder of Fact (in this case the jury) is supposed to use in making its finding is the facts and evidence on the OFFICIAL COURT RECORD. Over time our courts have enacted a series of rules and precedents whereby they can include or exclude facts from the OFFICIAL COURT RECORD (let or keep the jury from seeing/hearing). In effect, judges can determine (fix) the outcome of any trial (or any other court proceeding) by only allowing on the OFFICIAL COURT RECORD those facts and evidence which support the desired outcome.

In this writer’s long experience with the Judicial TAR Movement, he has became aware of the practice in multiple cases of Judges “telegraphing” to the lawyers on both sides and other court personnel how the Judge would like to rule.  The lawyer fraternity (even the lawyer you paid) and other witness like Guardians Ad Litem and CPS, oblige the judge by only placing on the OFFICIAL COURT RECORD facts and evidence that will allow the Finder of Fact (Judge or Jury) to rule in the manner the judge has previously “telegraphed” to them. (Remember these judges and lawyers all go to the same continuing education courses, golf courses, country clubs and other social and professional events and speak their own “Legal-ease version of English – wink, wink; nudge, nudge; meaningful glance)

In the Sandra Grazzini-Rucki Matter, there is an allegation that Judge Karen Asphaug has purposely and wrongfully excluded and attempted to exclude facts and evidence from the OFFICIAL COURT RECORD which demonstrate Sandra Grazzini-Rucki reasonably feared for the health and safety of her children from their father David Rucki.

The question to you, if you are the Defendant, if Judge Karen Asphaug in fact acted in this matter, did she act in a way that gives an appearance of impropriety in the trial of Sandra Grazzini-Rucki? Did you get a fair trial? And, even if you have the money and emotional fortitude to appeal and win on appeal, is not the additional money and time spent amount to unjust punishment? (Progressive Conditioning http://wp.me/p4KIHq-27)

One single event/fact has cemented this writer’s belief in Sandra Grazzini-Rucki’s representation that she feared for the lives and safety of her children. It has been alleged that at some point in all of this David Rucki gathered the family around a kitchen table. Sandra Grazzini-Rucki alleges that David Rucki threatened to kill all of them and then himself. In the opposing version David Rucki only threatened to kill himself in front of the entire family gathered around the kitchen table. In this writer’s humble opinion, regardless of which version is true, this event also cemented the Parental Alienation of David Rucki’s children towards himself. That some version occurred is a matter of relevant fact. You can hear David Rucki in his own words try to spin the event to his best advantage in this newscast. (https://youtu.be/qVaXS_neu2E at 4m 45s to 5m); http://bit.ly/2aeUHWr 4m 50s to 5m 3s) David Rucki’s admission of some version of this event is what cements in this writer’s mind that Sandra Grazzini-Rucki reasonably believed her children were in danger, and when the legal authorities failed to act in accordance with the Rule of Law, Sandra Grazzini-Rucki was forced to assert her own UNALIENABLE NATURAL RIGHT TO SELF-DEFENSE and act to protect her children from her reasonably perceived threat from their father.

It is important to remember went to the Courthouse yesterday and tried to make inquiries and ask these questions so he could assert them as facts rather than allegations. But POS Prosecutor Kathryn M. Keena resorted to Progressive tactics to keep rank and file Americans ignorant of the systemic corruption of the Dakota County MN Courts.

What you also don’t know, are the allegations that Judge David Knutson made decisions in prior litigation related to the Rucki Divorce that also depart from the Rule of Law(aka Abuse of Power and/or Abuse of Discretion).  (In this writer’s humble opinion; think bribe, other consideration or Teddy Kennedy and Chappaquiddick dynamics) As Judge David Knutson is on the Discipline Review Board, its tough to pursue the truth through that avenue.  As the Minnesota Board of Judicial Standards is a legal black-hole and essentially a Public Relations firm for Minnesota Judges, no relief is available there either. And, as the Minnesota Legislature for 10+ years has refused to the Judicial TAR Movement a hearing dedicated to receiving evidence and testimony of systemic corruption in the Minnesota Courts, no relief will be force coming there. Still, someone should ask Judge David Knutson to explain his departures from the Rule of Law(aka Abuse of Power and/or Abuse of Discretion) in the Sandra Grazzini-Rucki matter, and this writer even suggests Judge David Knutson should submit to a polygraph to “avoid the appearance of impropriety”. [Here again, and especially, Tim Kinley has a much better grasp and understanding of the minutia and specifics of the departures from the Rule of Law allegedly committed by Judge David Knutson than does this writer. See his YouTube Channel “Speechless” (http://bit.ly/SpeechlessMN)]

This writer has an additional special qualification in this case of asserting the likely truthfulness of the allegations of departures from the Rule of Law(aka Abuse of Power and/or Abuse of Discretion)  in the Sandra Grazzini-Rucki matter.  Judge Karen Asphaug was one of the Judges in the only criminal matter this writer has ever been charged with (besides minor traffic tickets – No DWIs).  In that matter, this writer was in another Dakota County Courtroom in 2014 investigating allegations that Dakota County MN Law Enforcement was complicit in the local Drug Trade.  A woman complained that her X-husband was getting special treatment from Dakota County Law Enforcement and the Courts because he was the main supplier of these illegal drugs. The matter was eventually dismissed for LACK OF PROBABLE CAUSE(meaning it was BS). But along the way, I told Judge Karen Asphaug as I stood before her, “The charge and being forced to defend one’s self is the intended punishment” Our Government brings bogus charges against people to achieve its agenda because it knows the trauma, time and expense is punishment enough to scare people off or cow them into submission. Behind closed doors our government officials often laugh and think its funny to terrorize citizens. (Progressive Conditioning http://wp.me/p4KIHq-27)

Before the case against this writer was dismissed for being bogus, Judge Karen Asphaug ruled from the bench that the case should be heard by a Judge from a different jurisdiction as it involved Bailiff’s who work closely with Judges. This writer alleges that later Judge Karen Asphaug was instructed by former US MN AG and current MN Supreme Court POS Justice David “The Bag Man” Lillehaug (aka Killehaug) to cooperate in fixing the criminal case against this writer for political reasons and in furtherance of an ongoing criminal conspiracy against this writer.  Dakota County lined up 4 Bailiff’s/Sheriff’s Deputies to perjure themselves against this writer by saying he disrupted the Court and was guilty of “Disorderly Conduct”(while they believed no video existed). For months, the POS Prosecutor Dan Fluegel insisted all exculpatory video tape was destroyed. Only when this writer produced written correspondence from the Dakota County Sheriff’s Department confirming this writer demanded the video tape be retained within days of the incident, did some of the exculpatory video tape appear and the 4 Bailiff’s/Sheriff’s Deputies willing to perjure themselves slink away(Yet not fired or punished).  Only this writer’s appeal to the Minnesota Appellate Court along with a copy of the Court transcript forced Judge Karen Asphaug to make sure a Judge from another jurisdiction was administratively assigned to this writer’s case. You can read more about that here: Don Mashak Notice of Claims to Dakota County MN 10_09_2015 (http://bit.ly/2aeZfgy) You can also learn how a Sheriff’s Deputy can “Blow someone’s face off and the Union will have him back on the job the next day”.  So arrogant and above the law is Dakota County MN, that even though they are required by law to perform an investigation and provide a copy of the findings when a Notice of Claims is filed, they simply refused to comply. And apparently no government agency exists to force them to comply.

[With the topics we have covered in this article in mind, let us take a moment for this writer to acknowledge he sympathizes with the underlying causes of action pursued by “Black Lives Matter” (BLM). Though this writer does not agree with their methods, this writer has reached out to the “Black Lives Matter” Movement, offered them advice and asked them to join the Judicial TAR Movement. (http://bit.ly/29Ae8fH)]

So now, you understand why when Dakota County MN Courts and Judge Karen Asphaug are accused of departing from the Rule of Law(aka Abuse of Power and/or Abuse of Discretion), this writer has special qualifications for assessing the validity of those allegations. Really, Judge Karen Asphaug, you are going to put a woman in jail for being forced to protect her children when the police and legal system failed her? Really Judge Karen Asphaug, you don’t think your oath of office requires you to do something regarding Judge David Knutson requiring Sandra Grazzini-Rucki’s Lawyer to defend her client handcuffed to a wheel chair without notes or client her client present? When will you act to “avoid the appearance of impropriety”? Judge Karen Asphaug, there are so many other, “Really?” type posits, but in the end Judge Karen Asphaug, Is this what you really want to be known as?

Its up to you, Judge Karen Asphaug; HON or POS?

It is apparent from my one interaction with POS Prosecutor Kathryn M. Keena, she is in the habit of flippantly lying and ignoring her oath of office and should never be known as HON.

In closing, as I believe that WE THE PEOPLE are in fact the equals of the arrogant Progressive POS’s [despite Progressive Educated Elite assertions to the contrary (http://bit.ly/1mvmoB3)], I believe WE THE PEOPLE have the right to judge them for their failure to answer our questions and provide documents we request. And, I further assert WE THE  PEOPLE have a right to view these refusals in the manner prescribed by the US Supreme Court.

The Finder of Fact (You and I) may presume that the failure of a person (POS Prosecutor Kathryn M. Keena/Judge Karen Asphaug/Judge David Knutson) to answer questions and/or produce documents may be interpreted as an indication that their truthful responses would have been detrimental to their legal position.

POS Prosecutor Kathryn M. Keena refused to answer my questions and lied, to prevent the Press from exercising its First Amendment Right of Freedom of the Press. This writer never got a chance to query Judge Karen Asphaug. Others have tried to query Judge David Knutson, unsuccessfully.

This writer gives POS Prosecutor Kathryn M. Keena and Judge Karen Asphaug until 6pm CDT 28 JULY 2016 to respond to these allegations or summarily, WE THE PEOPLE may judge them to be accurate and true, in accordance with the rules the US Supreme Court that apply to anyone of WE THE PEOPLE when we appear before them.

Judge Karen Asphaug is aware of my contact information from her previous court related departure from the Rule of Law (aka Abuse of Power and/or Abuse of Discretion).

My fellow Americans, this writer hopes this article helps you all in forming a truer Perspective of Reality that permits us, as equals, to unite together and make our Government once again accountable to WE THE PEOPLE. Millennials and GenX’rs, as I have promised you elsewhere, you now have a better handle on the true nature of our Government and Courts. Keep fighting the good fight!

“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good [people] do nothing”

~ Edmund Burke

Government and Courts; Please take note, WE THE PEOPLE shall include lack of proper redress of our concerns in this matter, and our future Third Declaration of Causes (http://bit.ly/NewDOCRev1), in determining if and when it is appropriate for WE THE PEOPLE to withdraw our CONSENT TO BE GOVERNED.

This article was written by Don Mashak alone without seeking advice, direction or permission of anyone else. I alone am responsible for the content and publication of this article.

Those were my thoughts.

Thank you for your time.

In Liberty,

Don Mashak
The Cynical Patriot

 

 

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s