see ee led in Fret Jul! Distt Court ‘282046 £20.26 PM ‘Dako Coury, aN May 23, 2016 EMAIL AND E-FILE Honorable Karen Asphaug First Judicial District Court Judge Dakota County 1560 West Highway 55 Hastings, MN 55033 RE: State of Minnesota v. Douglas Dahlen Court File No.: 19HA-CR-15-4229 State of Minnesota v. Gina Dahlen Court File No.: 19HA-CR-15-4230 Dear Judge Asphaug, Mr. White and | are writing this letter as a follow-up to the May 12, 2016 contested omnibus where the above-named defendant's challenged probable cause, the motion to dismiss for overbreadth of the free exercise clause, and the motion to compel records, Attached are the investigative reports from Mr, Warren Robinson and Ms. Laura LaManna, The Court is correct that the affirmative defense argument is left for the fact, finder when a factual dispute exists. However, “[gliven the facts disclosed by the record, is it fair and reasonable, [...] to require the defendants] to stand trial?” State v. Florence, 239 N.W.2d 892, 902 (Minn. 1976). In this case it would be unfair to require the Dahlens to stand trial based on these facts. This is a case where there is no factual dispute. The Dahlens allowed the two Rucki girls to stay at their ranch because the girls, as they have stated numerous times 41 (651) 315-3087 | KellDefense@gmail.com | KeliDefense.com P.O, Box 44295, Eden Prairie, MN 55344soHA.oR-18-4228, Fle in Fat cit Distt Cout ‘6242019 1:26'26 PM ‘Dakota County MN prior to arriving and after leaving the ranch, did not want to return home to their father out of extreme fear of abuse. (Please see the investigative reports of Warren Robinson and Laura LaManna.) Specifically, of relevance is Mr. Robinson's summary of his interview with the foster parents Jim and Patti, who housed the Rucki giris after they left the Dahlen residence, When reviewing the evidence in its entirety, the evidence is replete with information about how the girls were fearful of returning to their father, especially during their stay with the Dahlens. /d. The Dahlens, in their own statements to law enforcement and investigator Warren Robinson, confirmed that they allowed the girls to remain at their house because of the girls’ fear of returning to their father and the potential abuse they may suffer. The Dahlens also reaffirmed the girls’ statements that if they went back to their dad, they would run away. There was no intent to conceal. The Dahiens had preached to the girls about forgiveness. (See transcribed interview of Douglas Dahlen, page 4.) There is no evidence rebutting those facts. In fact, law enforcement confirmed the Dahlens had the Rucki giris’ best interests at heart. Id, at 17. No one is disagreeing with what the girls stated or believed, and why the Dahlen’s allowed the girls to stay. ‘There is no evidence establishing or alleging that the Dahlen’s were involved in a conspiracy with Ms. Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and/or Dede Evavold to keep those girls away from their father for any other reason other than the gis own personal safety. The State argues that the production of exonerating evidence at a probable cause hearing does not justify the dismissal of a criminal complaint, even ifit is based on a single law enforcement officer's opinion that the defendants were justified. Cf. State v. Gerard, 832 N.W.2d 314, 317 (Minn. Ct. App. 2013). Here however, we have an entire church community that are willing to come down from Herman, Minnesota to 4 (651) 316-3097 | KeilDefense@gmail.com | KellDefense.com P.O. Box 44295, Eden Prairie, MIN 55344soHA-OR 16-4229 Filed in Fret Jud! Distt Court ‘52072010 1:26:28 PUk Datta Caunty, MN confirm and testify the Dahlens allowed the Ruck girls to stay there based upon their reasonable belief that those girls would suffer physical, sexual, or substantial emotional abuse if they returned to their father. To extend the analogy further, from the State's proffered argument derived from State v. Gerard, the Dahlens did not kil the “cat,” but rather saved it, Aside from the fact that the girls were scared of returning to their father, there is no motive to rationalize why the Dahlens would have allowed the girls to stay at their residence other than what the Dahlens have consistently asserted. The Dahlens never received any remuneration or personal benefit for allowing those girls to stay. The Dahlens have no personal connection to Ms. Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, they are certainly not part of any underground network helping to conceal children from their parents, nor is there any other evidence showing why the Dahlens would allow the girls to stay, other than what is contained in Minn. Stat. § 609.26 subd. 2(1), (2). The only distant connection the Dahlens have with any of the co-defendants or anyone else involved in this matter is the relationship between Ms. Gina Dahlen and Ms. Dede Evavold. Ms. Dahlen and Ms. Evavold knew each other from their time working together in pharmaceutical sales, Ms. Evavold, knowing that the Dahiens founded a Christian- based ranch dedicated to helping abused children, recommended that Ms. Grazzini- Rucki take the girls there for temporary lodging pending the family law case. The girls firmly maintained that they would run away if they were required to return to their dad, both before they reached the Dahlen residence and after they were removed from the Dahlen residence. As of today, there is absolutely no evidence that the girls’ firmly held beliefs changed during or after their stay with the Dahlens. The only allegation is that the girls were “brainwashed” by their mother, as alluded to by the State and therefore the Dahlens’ belief in the Rucki girls abuse claims were misguided. 1 (651) 316-3097 | KellDefense@gmail.com | KeliDefense.com P.O, Box 44295, Eden Prairie, MN 55344ee ee Fl in First Juatiat Ditet Court ‘122016 126.26 Pad Dakota County, MI The alleged "brainwashing’ of the girls has no bearing on the Dahlens’ case. Itis irrelevant to their case unless the State can show that they were somehow involved in the brainwashing therefore eliminating their opportunity to assert the affirmative defense in Minn.Stat.609.26 subd. 2 (1) and (2). There is no evidence to support the conclusion that the Dahlens either participated in or facilitated brainwashing the gis to believe their father was abusive; they merely acted on the reasonable belief that the Rucki girls would suffer from abuse at his hands based upon the git's statements to them and the girls physical emotions and actions that they personally witnessed. The Dahlens motive for allowing the Rucki girls to stay was to provide a safe place for the girls based on their religious beliefs and the faith based principles of the White Horse Ranch. The Dahlens are all too familiar with what happens to run away and abused children. For the past five years the Dahlens have been involved in working with abused children; specifically children afflicted with physical abuse, sexual abuse and substantial emotional abuse. As such, they are very familiar with the signs of abuse and moreover, Mrs. Dahlen has completed numerous training seminars on dealing with abused children. In their own words to law enforcement, they had never seen gitls more frightened than when the Rucki girls came to their ranch. This is out of hundreds of children that have visited the White Horse Ranch. They firmly believed what the girls told them, a narrative that was underscored by how they acted. This fact is also confirmed by the girls after they were removed from the Dahlens' residence and placed into foster care, The Dahlens responded to the girls fears in the same way they do with other abused children that arrive at their ranch. Itis absurd to believe that the Dahlens would be, or are required to, investigate or inquire if a child has been brainwashed into believing they were abused. The State has alluded to the fact the Dahlens should have questioned the girls to see if these giris were brainwashed into believing their father is and would be abusive toward them. The 4 (651) 318-3097 | KellDefense@gmail.com | KellDefense.com P.0, Box 44295, Eden Prairie, MIN 5534419HALOR-15-4209 led in First Jul! Distit Court 57282016 1.25.26 PM ‘kota Coury, WN concept of mind control or brainwashing Is one that is arguably controversial to begin with, and in the view of scholars, is not accepted as scientific fact. So to suggest that the Dahlens should have, or were required to inquire about this, is entirely inaccurate. For example, it is hard to imagine that everyone who arrives at the Lewis House or another battered woman's shelter is asked: “have you been brainwashed into claiming you are being abused?” Not only is that illogical, but it undermines the assertions of the victims. This sets a dangerous precedent for anyone who attempts to help individuals claiming to be victims of any form of abuse; whether physical, sexual or emotional, ‘Another example of the logical deficiencies of this argument is, does the court ask every alleged domestic abuse victim if they are being brainwashed into making abuse allegations? No, the court does not. In fact, the court almost always will issue a domestic abuse no contact order for the protection of the alleged victim and will not lift it unless the court sees a reason why the alleged victim, whether a child or adult, will be safe, The same is true with the Dahlens except the girls were continually fearful of returning to their father the entire time they were at the ranch and even after. (See interviews by Mr. Robinson and Ms. LaManna.) If returned, the Rucki girls threatened to run away — triggering yet another fear of the Dahlens. Furthermore, the brainwashing argument seems a bit unrealistic and, ifit is to be believed that the brainwashing allegations are true, the Dahlens are just as much victims themselves of being deceived by Ms. Grazzini-Rucki and/or Ms. Evavold. The girls were brought to their place and were told it was only for a few days. A few days turned into a few months, and then almost two-and-a-half years. if brainwashing by Ms. Grazzini-Ruck’ is in fact true, the Dahlens were deceived and used for whatever purpose Ms. Grazzini-Rucki had. There was no intent to conceal. 4 (@51) 31-3097 | KellDefense@gmail.com | KellDefense.com P.O. Box 44296, Eden Prairie, MIN 55364seHACR5.4220 ‘Fed in Fest Jus Dist Court 61212016 1:25:26 Pi ‘Dakcta Coury, MN Finally, the idea of ‘proximity’ does not establish or show concealment on the part of the Dahlen's, There is no evidence or allegation that the Dahien’s had an overt or implicit agreement with anyone in their community or in the other locations where the girls visited (i.e., Fargo, Moorhead, etc.) to assist in the concealment of the girls. At any point, the Dahlens were well aware that anyone in the community could have reported that the giris were staying at the Dahlen ranch. To that end, it would not matter if the proximity of their residence was directly next door to Lakeville or any other city. The notion that the location or proximity establishes “concealment,” is pure speculation. There was no intent to conceal the Rucki girs These were not minor children who had no idea on how to or the means to leave the Dahlen residence. The State mentioned the idea that the Ruck girls were just “children.” However, these girls had access to and were capable of using phones, computers, vehicles, etc. In fact, the Dahlens prayed with the girls on forgiveness. The Dahlens would have driven those girls back to their father if they felt safe about returning. However, the girs did not. In conclusion, the Dahlens would respectfully ask this court to dismiss their case as there is no probable cause to believe they intended to conceal the Ruck’ girls from their father. There is also no factual dispute as to why the Dahiens allowed the girls to stay at their residence. They would be more than happy to tell their story at Ms. Grazini-Ruck’'s trial or Ms. Evavold's trial if their case was dismissed and they were granted full immunity from prosecution. Best Regards, Js! Travis M. Keil 1 (651) 316-3097 | KellDefense@gmail.com | KeliDefense com P.O, Box 44206, Eden Prairie, MN 55344sohACRA6-4226 Fld in Fret Jul Dist Count 7242018 1:26:26 PM ‘Dakota County, MN Travis M. Keil Enclosure cc: Ms. Kathy Keena, Assistant Dakota County Attorney Mr, Kyle White, Attomey for Gina Dahlen Mr. Douglas Dahien (email only) Mrs, Gina Dahlen (email only) 4 (681) 315-3097 | KellDefense@gmail.com | KeilDefense.com P.O, Box 44295, Eden Prairie, MN 55344