Runcie lawyer: Perjury charge is too vague
An indictment accusing Broward Schools Superintendent Robert Runcie of perjury is too vague to be valid, his lawyer said in court Wednesday, and a judge suggested that could be a strong argument.
But Circuit Judge Martin Fein didn’t say whether this concern is enough to dismiss the entire case, as Runcie’s lawyers have requested. He said he will issue a written ruling but didn’t provide a time frame for when that may happen.
Runcie was indicted April 21 on one count of perjury regarding his testimony to the grand jury. But the indictment doesn’t say specifically what the grand jury believes Runcie lied about.
After his lawyers asked for more information, prosecutors released a “statement of particulars” with more details five days later. They said Runcie contacted grand jury witnesses to prepare
for his testimony and then lied about it under oath when asked.
Although Runcie was charged with only one count of perjury, prosecutors said Runcie lied repeatedly during two days of testimony.
But Runcie attorney Jeremy Kroll argued that the state has to provide this detail in the indictment in order for Runcie to mount an adequate defense.
While Kroll said the case should be dismissed, that doesn’t mean Runcie would “go scot-free.” The case could be referred to the Broward State Attorney’s Office, Kroll said. Or the grand jury, which is no longer in session, could be reconvened, he said.
Weir said he did have concerns about the lack of specifics in the indictment, although he didn’t say what he thinks the remedy should be.
“When I read the indictment, I can’t determine whether the allegation was there was one false statement made or 25 false statements made. I have no idea,” Fein said.
The judge also seemed concerned when Assistant Statewide Prosecutor Richard Mantei said the document with the allegations could be amended with additional false statements.
“Now they prepare their entire defense, and then the Friday before we start jury selection on Monday, you can amend this statement?” Weir asked. “The amount of false statements can change at your discretion.”
Mantei said the court has the ability to say no to that. He argued that specific details are not required in the indictment, particularly when it comes from a grand jury, which is secretive by law. Still, he said prosecutors provided the details when asked.
“I’m still waiting to hear how without knowing chapter and verse, page and line, they have no ability to prepare a defense,” Maintei told the judge. “They’ve known all along it’s a perjury case.”
Runcie attended the court hearing, conducted via Zoom, but did not speak. He agreed to resign as superintendent after his indictment. His last day is scheduled for Aug. 10, although a yet-to-benamed interim superintendent may take over before then.