Secrecy a sign of charges to come?
Indictments against Runcie, Myrick could point to other developments
The secrecy surrounding this week’s arrests of Broward Schools Superintendent Robert Runcie and school district General Counsel Barbara Myrick could be a sign that more criminal charges are on the way, according to legal experts.
Keeping the details of the allegations against Runcie and Myrick under wraps could prevent other targets from learning they are under investigation, former prosecutors say, but it deprives the public of knowing exactly what some of their top leaders are accused of, and experts say it could be unfair to the accused.
Runcie, 59, and Myrick, 72, were arrested Wednesday and indictments were unsealed. The superintendent is accused of lying to the statewide grand jury while Myrick,
the district’s top in-house lawyer, is accused of spilling secrets about the statewide grand jury that has been investigating Broward Schools since 2019.
What did Runcie lie about in his testimony March 31 and April 1? No one is saying publicly. How did Myrick violate the secrecy of the grand jury process? Again, no one is saying.
Grand jury proceedings are highly secretive. Jurors hear only from prosecutors. Defense lawyers are not allowed in the room, and witnesses are not cross-examined. The jury’s decisions determine only whether someone is charged, not convicted.
Disclosing what happens in the grand jury room, as Myrick is accused of, is a crime. The Florida Attorney General’s Office relied on that law to withhold comment about the alleged offenses attributed to Runcie and Myrick.
It’s an unusual stance, especially once the indictment is unsealed and the defendants arrested. When former technology chief Tony Hunter was arrested in January, charged with bid rigging and bribery, the underlying accusation was disclosed the same day. Prosecutors said he directed a $17 million technology contract to a friend. Hunter has pleaded not guilty.
In most cases, the unsealing of indictments ends the secrecy of a behindthe-scenes investigation. But when the indictments against Runcie and Myrick were unsealed Wednesday, there were still more questions than answers.
“That is very strange,” said Nova Southeastern University law professor Bob Jarvis. “I can’t recall seeing a case where we didn’t know the underlying act that formed the basis of the criminal charge. It’s unfair to Runcie that he doesn’t know what’s going on. I can’t explain that.”
Former prosecutors say that when indictments are sealed or other information is withheld, there’s usually a strategic reason for it.
“My best guess is, it means there’s more out there,” said former prosecutor Gregg Rossman. “Whether it means more charges or more defendants, I don’t know.” Others agreed. “That could very well be what we have here,” said Brian Cavanagh, who was once Rossman’s supervisor in the homicide unit of the Broward State Attorney’s Office. “Eventually it’s all going to come out by court order, because they have to prepare their case. The defendant has a due process right to know the specifics of the allegations against him.”
Jurors get picked for grand juries the same way they get picked for a trial jury. They answer a summons, get called into a courtroom and are asked about their biases and availability to serve. A total of 18 jurors are picked, and 15 have to be present to conduct business or to indict, according to the Florida Supreme Court website.
Unlike trial juries, grand juries generally meet fewer days a week over a longer period of time and handle multiple cases. The grand jury that filed these indictments began meeting in 2019 to review school safety in the wake of the shooting, but it has expanded its scope to include corruption and mismanagement in school district operations.
Its members came from circuit courts in MiamiDade, Palm Beach and Broward counties.
Fort Lauderdale lawyer Elias R. Hilal, who practices civil and criminal defense law but is not connected to the case, said lawyers for Runcie and Myrick won’t be able to wait too long before getting more specific information.
“They need to be on notice of what they are alleged to have done wrong if they’re going to properly defend themselves,” he said. “But it’s also true that they probably have some idea what’s behind these charges.”
Runcie’s lawyer, Michael Dutko, said he filed a motion late Thursday afternoon demanding the specifics. A copy of the motion was not available. Myrick’s lawyer, David Bogenschutz, did not.
Bogenschutz said he’s in no particular rush to find out everything the state has on his client.
“They’re not responsible to give us one word of discovery until we demand it,” he said. But a discovery demand comes with an obligation for the defense to turn over evidence it intends to use in the case, he said, and that’s not something he wants to do at this early stage.