This page lists the major wrongdoers involved with the case. Names are only used for the public officials and entities.
Named Public Officials/Entities
John Choi - Ramsey County Attorney and Richard Dusterhoft - Criminal Division Director, Ramsey County Attorney's Office.
After sending evidence of fraud, namely fraud upon the court, by my ex-wife's lawyer I was told, in writing, by Choi and Dusterhoft:
- Lawyers can only commit fraud when they are under oath.
- The term "fraud upon the court" does not exist in Minnesota statues.
- When I asked they open up an investigation of the legal industry in the county, they told me the Ramsey county attorney's office can only investigate individuals and corporations.
In reply I stated:
- Nowhere in Minnesota law does it state lawyers are immune from fraud laws unless they are under oath. To state otherwise is flagrantly false.
- A simple google search for "fraud upon the court Minnesota" will direct you to the Minnesota statute which proves that the term "fraud upon the court" does indeed exist in current Minnesota statutes. Indeed, it is considered so serious it has no statute of limitations.
- Mr. Choi is on record, multiple times, stating his office is investigating the "sex trafficking industry" so the statement that the Ramsey County Attorney's office can only investigate individuals and corporation was either false or Mr. Choi was being untruthful to the public.
Despite multiple letters to both Mr. Choi and Mr. Dusterhoft, they failed to explain their statements. Their responses were evasive, belligerent and unprofessional.
Choi and Dusterhoft actively and knowingly attempted to cover up crimes committed by a fellow attorney. Covering up a crime is a crime. The proper term is obstruction of justice.
Judge William Leary III - Ramsey County
Judge Leary, who was the main judge during the divorce, ignored all evidence agaisnt my ex-wife's attorney. He didn't even mention it.
Judge Leary angrily told me that not having a lawyer would hurt me. He was unconcerned that my previous lawyers attempted to get me to commit perjury. This is especially distributing because our legal system is supposed be based on facts and the law. Judge Leary's statement is a near admission that you have to grease the wheels to "win" in court.
Throughout the proceedings Judge Leary was abrasive, unprofessional and demeaning to everyone except my ex-wife's lawyer, who he freely admitted knowing personally.
Judge Mark Ireland - Ramsey County
Judge Ireland was the final judge in the case. Unlike Judge Leary, Judge Ireland was well mannered during the hearings. However, when presented with he evidence of fraud by my ex-wife's attorney, stated, without questioning the facts, that they did not reach the level of intent. Given the seriousness of the fraud and overwhelming evidence it was purposeful and directed, this seems like a blatant attempt in covering up justice. Like Judge Leary, he ruled that I was to pay even more money. The reality is that he ordered the victim of a crime to pay even more money to the perpetrator of a crime. That is not justice, that is corruption plain and simple.
Dave Pinto - Minnesota State Representative and Ramsey County Attorney's Office lawyer.
I wrote Pinto, who not only works in the Ramsey County Attorney's Office but is also my state representative, regarding the correspondence I had with John Choi and Richard Dusterhoft. Nearly a year later he replied that I should talk to law enforcement. I replied back stating that I had already contacted the FBI, as they are charged with investigating local corruption, but had not heard back from them. I asked if he could help facilitate a meeting with them. Pinto failed to reply.
Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board (LPRB)
Soon after my ex-wife's lawyer committed the fraud detailed in the evidence section, I filed a complaint with the LRRB as it was a clear violation of the Lawyers Rules of Professional Conduct. An investigator, who worked as a real estate lawyer, was assigned. Soon after the investigator was replaced by someone who worked as a divorce mediator. The investigator determined that no action was warranted without ever addressing any of the complaints at all. An appeal was likewise dismissed. I do not think there is any question that the investigation was a white-wash.
I later learned that the LPRB very rarely disciplines lawyers. In the few cases where they do take action it is almost always after the lawyer has been criminally charged.
Although the LPRB is supposed to discipline lawyers for violations of the rules of professional conduct, the reality is that they far more often function to shield lawyers from the consequences of violations of the rules. Never, in their entire history have they disciplined a lawyer for lying in family court.
I am not naming these people either because doing so be of little consequence or due to the risk of them suing me. Despite truth being an absolute defense for defamation, my experience with the court give me no faith that justice would prevail.
- My ex-wife - Committed numerous unethical and criminal actions including perjury and fraud. However, nearly all of her crimes lack hard evidence as she could simply claim she felt that way at the time. Perhaps the one exception is when she directly contradicted her sworn written testimony when under oath on the witness stand at a hearing but no doubt she could claim mental confusion for something like that.
- My ex-wife's first lawyer - Clearly committed fraud upon the court (the evidence could not be better) as well as numerous other unethical and criminal actions. She is equivalent of a Watergate burglar in that others mainly got into trouble trying to cover up her crimes.
- My lawyers - One wrote a completely fictitious affidavit he wanted me to sign and was amazed I would not do so. They were far more interested in getting me to spend ever more money in legal costs than actually representing me effectively and justly.
- The mediator - Stated that my ex-wife was insisting we use a parental consultant. A very expensive parental consultant who was recommended by the mediator. I found out later the mediator was telling my ex-wife that I was the one who was insisting on the parental consultant. Neither of us wanted to use a parental consultant. It is difficult not to believe the mediator was simply committing fraud to fleece us out of money.
- My ex-wife's second lawyer - I cannot say he violated any laws but he did regularly ignore my letters to him and either backdated or held letters after they were written before mailing in order to make sure I did not have time to review them before the hearing. Told one falsehood in court but that may have been due to incompetence rather than willful lying.