Posted to General on

Mrs. Wendy Weiner listens as the judge reads out her sentence.

Wendy Weiner-Runge, a religious Jewish mother of four from Minnesota, was charged for deceiving the state of Iowa on tax forms while trying to film movies there - a first time, non-violent offense. She was sentenced to ten years in jail in a Polk County courtroom by Iowa Judge Douglas Staska.

Frum Mother of 4 Sentenced to 10 Years for ‘Defiance’

Mrs. Wendy Weiner listens as the judge reads out her sentence.

Wendy Weiner-Runge, a religious Jewish mother of four from Minnesota, was charged for deceiving the state of Iowa on tax forms while trying to film movies there – a first time, non-violent offense. She was sentenced to ten years in jail in a Polk County courtroom by Iowa Judge Douglas Staska.

The judge castigated her for not taking responsibility for her actions.

Many in the Jewish community have tried to point to similarities in the way the State of Iowa handled hers and Sholom M. Rubashkin’s cases.

The judge made it clear at the sentencing that although all other defendants were released on probation, Mrs. Weiner will have to sit years behind bars because of her behavior outside the courtroom – displaying a lack of remorse on her blog, and calling the case against her “anti-Semitic” and a “political conspiracy.”

From the Des Moines Register:

Wendy Weiner Runge tried to appear contrite Tuesday morning as she faced sentencing for fraud, telling a judge she was truly sorry for deceiving the state while trying to make movies in Iowa.

But outside the Polk County courtroom, the Minnesota filmmaker has been defiant about her culpability in Iowa’s long-running film tax-incentive debacle — a move that got the 46-year-old mother of four a 10-year sentence in Mitchellville women’s prison.

Judge Douglas Staskal criticized the head of Polynation Pictures before sentencing her for attacking prosecutors and judges in public statements she has made, while blaming her plight on antisemitism and “some sort of political conspiracy.”

He said the sentence was a difficult decision to make for a woman with no prior criminal history, but he could not ignore the “complete arrogant and defiant” way in which she had denied responsility for her crime.

“This is a case in my judgment that calls out for the court to send a message to you and others who would engage in this kind of behavior that it’s not accepted, that it’s criminal and it will not be tolerated,” Staskal said.

Staskal’s comments jolted the novice filmmaker, who had showed little emotion during much of her week-and-a-half-long trial in February. She wept quietly Tuesday in a corner of the second-floor courtroom before being ushered out by her attorney, Matthew Whitaker.

Whitaker said he had not decided whether to appeal, adding: “We are still weighing our options.”

Runge, an Omaha native, decided to accept a plea agreement proferred by prosecutors after both sides rested in her February trial. The first-degree fraudulent practices charge to which she pleaded guilty did not apply to “The Scientist,” a 2008 film that received $1.85 million in state tax credits.

Rather, she admitted she made false statements to procure tax credits for two uncompleted movies called “Forever” and “Run” before Iowa’s film program was suspended in late 2009.

But Runge hedged when she appeared before Staskal to accept that deal in court, saying she was “directed to do so by Tom Wheeler,” head of the Iowa Film Office at the time. And in her ongoing blog about the case against her, she has repeatedly denied doing anything criminal and professed to be a victim of malicious prosecution and misconduct by state officials.

Staskal scolded her for playing the victim Tuesday, saying “there was nothing muddying the water” in her case and said she was neither sincere nor genuine.

Runge’s plea was the third in connection with the scandal that engulfed the fledgling film incentive program a year and a half ago, leading to the firings or resignations of six state economic development managers. Two of her former partners who were more cooperative with prosecutors received much lighter sentences Tuesday before Staskal.

Matthias Saunders, a pivotal player in Polynation’s deals with the state, received an up to 10-year suspended sentence for first-degree theft and two years probation, meaning he will stay out of prison if he complies with the terms of his release.

Saunders, 39, who has been living in Georgia, ran a company called Maximux Production Services, and profited from services his company provided that prosecutors said were highly inflated or didn’t exist.

Chase Brandau, 26, also of Minnesota, received a deferred sentencing for second-degree theft. He will be able to wipe the felony from his record if he successfully completes to two years of probation. All three will have to pay restitution to the state, the amounts of which have not yet been determined.

Thomas H. Miller, who prosecuted the Polynation partners on behalf of the Attorney General’s Office, said lack of remorse is not typically an overriding factor in such sentencings, but Runge showed none.

“We feel the dispositions were entirely appropriate and that justice was done,” he said. “Those who pleaded early received appropriate leniency.”

Related Articles

31 Comments

  • Joey

    She has some nerve to play victim after slandering that judge on her now defunct blog

  • CHT

    Anti-semetism in its finest. “You are peaceful mother of four, we recognize it, but criticizing judges is so bad, here is full punishment of 10 years for you, peaceful mother of four. We are no anti-semits, no way, why all these criticism, you deserve full punishment for that”

    Go to H-l as soon as possible, I am so seek and tired of you. I can not bear you even a single moment.

  • still

    dont get it is she going to be sentenced 10 years in jail or is she free to go now?

  • still

    dont get it is she going to be sentenced 10 years in jail or is she free to go now?

  • ST

    1. People in the frum community need to respect the law

    2. When and if the do something wrong the must be admit they made a mistake and take responsibility for what they have done instead of making music videos

    3. This is very sad. A mother of 4. But if she knew what she was doing was no good – she should have thought about this before. The victims here are the children.

    4. I hate how the judge admits that the sentence is high and hard on a mother of 4 but then says because of what she said she will have to sit in jail for 10 years. You get jail time for that now? I didn’t know. It’s like when cops arrest you for “resisting arrest” or being disrespectful to them.

    5. Lets all learn to make a kiddush hashem in whatever we do – if not you might as well shave the beard and dump the skirt – You daven to G-d but don’t follow what he says? You keep Pesach with a million and one rules but dont treat others as you would treat yourself?

    Frum people: Behave.

    Court system: Keep people locked up for violent crimes – to keep society safe (most violent offenders don’t have families) People who commit white collar crimes are getting punished because the officially damaged someone in some way – if you cant put a dollar amount on it – and charge them double or triple or four times as much and throw a fee on top – then that would mean you don’t know what damage they really did. If someone stole $10,000 and they would have to pay back $30,000 and think it would hurt. The more damage they did the more it would hurt. I think that can deter people.

  • Mendy

    I can’t belive this. Seriously, in the frum community everyone is innocent. Take your head out of the sand, she commited a crime, she mocked the judge, she played the anti-semitisim card so she deserves this. I’m not saying I don’t feel bad for her but stop defending every frum criminal.

  • CN

    The Judge should have recused himself if the blog offended him on a personal level. It sounds like he lost all perspective, and no doubt he is an anti-Semite. Glad I live in NY.

  • frum mother

    I’m sorry that she’s frum but I must agree with the courts

  • hold on a minute

    i don’t get this! isn’t the judge supposed to base his judgement only on evidence presented in his court? and not the court of public opinion? just as a jury has to be sequestered during a trial in order to avoid any contamination, doesn’t the judge – acting in the place of a jury – have to base his decision only on what is presented in his courtroom?! can any legal persons out there explain this?
    also to those who have commented above, yes frum people have to respect the law, but that does not mean that they should be more severely punished than the non-frum population. she is a living in the u.s., and she is free to say anything she wants about her judge and case and legal system. when preparing a legal opinion, judges should be above being affected by personal recriminations and attacks.

  • disguested by ignorance

    People- no one is playing the “im frum therefore I am innocent card” here. Please do not comment if you do not know the facts of the case. Wendy, an inexperienced film maker was directed by the head of the film tax credit office to do as she did. The only charge she plead guilty to was switching titles on her movie. In other words her movie A was approved and she had not submitted al charges for movie B befor ethe deadline. The tax credit head told her it would be OK to scrap film A and use the credits for film b instead. Wendy was told- and I was present at the trial that she “should have realized that it wasn’t Ok and should have doublechecked with a lawyer”. Thus she had a hard time pleading guilty to “fraudulent practice” to begin with as she clearly had no intention to decieve or defraud anyone and in fact did not cost the tax payers any additional charges. If you recall the state dropped all other charges (in total dismissing 11 of 12 charges which they were actively pursuing her for). Why? If she was so guilty? Wendy and others felt very clearly that the court and state knew clearly the details of the above and still tried to portray her as a greedy defiant crook stealing “millions”.
    So no, SHe doesnt think she is innocent because she is religious. She knows that she is innocent because she is. And if indeed she did break the law by listening to the tax chief and not running her own investigation, it was clearly unintentional and not subject to such a stiff penalty

  • Ma Rabbi

    I cant believe that frum people would defend the momzer judge. He admitted that a first time non-violent offender should not receive such a harsh sentence. But he was doing so to“teach her a lesson.”
    Someone should teach the Judge a lesson to stick to the protocol. I hope that his outlandish remarks will be used to appeal this ridiculous sentence. I wish for this frum woman to be freed very soon and for the judge a Miysah Meshunah.

  • BS--D

    IS THE YIDDISHE OILEM BLIND?! 10 years and probation are two WAY DIFFERENT WORLDS! H’ should have all the greatest Rachomim on her.
    Lets sharpen our Avoideh for her Zechus.

  • wrong punishment

    they are destroying her, her family, and many others-
    this is not teh Torah way
    they need to start giving out punishments for non–violent offenders that will actually make the person pay back and learn a lesson

  • what happened to impartial justice?

    I agree with #12. How can they justify probation for some and 10 years for this woman? True, her arrogance is so stupid, but still….I guess they’ll appeal the sentence, right?

  • oy vay

    It seems like they grow lots of anti-semites in the Iowas Court Rooms!!!! It is scary to think…I hope the rest of The Heartland isn’t as anti-semetic as Iowa!

    THey should teach cultural sensitivity in these places

  • moi

    She was sentenced to an indeterminate sentence of 10 years, i.e., she can only be held in custody for a maximum of 10 years. How long she actually serves will be determined by the Dept of Prisons and the parole board.

  • peakman

    hello your headline is a lie

    she was sentenced because she was a tax cheat she got the maximum because of her arrogance

    I guess she did not learn a lesson from the SMR trial0

    wake up frum people nobody is giving a pass because you are frum.

    also when you and the frum community play the antisemitism card and act as if a goy has no right to judge a yid you are going to get hit and hit hard

    the secular courts are fed up with the frum world disgusting attitude that they are above the law

  • peakman

    to disguested by ignorance wrote

    I am sure you are correct everybody get arrested for tax fraud for changing a movie title

    only kool aid drinkers will belive your nonsense.

    Pretty good try to excuse another yid from their criminal actions

  • just to clarify

    You do not know the story. She is completely innocent, and this is another anti-Semetic story. First find out the details, before you say anything. Be careful what you say especially when you don’t know the details. Don’t be mekatreg, say she is zakai. I know the details and the whole thing was just a fraud against her, similar to the Rubashkin saga.

  • Justice

    She made a fool of herself and created a real chilul Hashem. She was caught red-handed because of an e-mail she sent asking for a phony receipt. She is not innocent; at best she was in way over her head. And what kind of films was she making?

    There is an old insurance fraudster from Brooklyn who did the same thing – made a total fool of himself in front of the judge, cried anti-Semitism etc – and he’s sitting over 10 years instead of a year. He has an excuse – he’s a survivor of the churban and who knows what he went through in the camps.

    This woman is off her rocker. She makes us all look bad. She is an example of why there is anti-Semitism and not an innocent victim.

  • Learn Yidden, Now!

    (the article says it’s not Iowa, it’s another state.)

    In the U.S. today any FINANCIAL crime is now considered MORE serious than violent crime.

    LEARN and UNDERSTAND. Drugs, theft, mugging..a few years.

    Fraud, tax evasion, money laundering, lying to the bank, lying on any government form that involves you receiving money…BIG NASTY CRIME with LONG JAIL TIME.

    Someone give to a tzedakah expecting some back in a check from the tzedakah…THAT’S MONEY LAUNDERING. BIG CRIME, long jail time.

    Carrying cash to Israel (more than $10,000) from the US and not reporting it, BIG CRIME, long jail time.

    Is it worth it??? Is it worth 10 years or 30 years? If you’re dealing with big money, get proper lawyers and accountants and follow the law and rules 100%.

  • horrified

    I did not know that in the US it is a crime for a person on trial to voice their opinion about their case out of the courtroom.
    I guess that is the case, especially in the mid-west,and certainly if you don’t share the same demographic as the judge and surrounding community.

  • Sad and Foolish

    This is no doubt a sad story…however, why would she be so Foolish as to rail about government misconduct out of the courtroom?!? She has kids!!!! Just suck it up and plead guilty! If I was the goyeshe judge I dont know I would do different. And bear in mind that he has made it clear that he will review the case again and may come to a reconsideration. Sad and foolish.

  • WHAT-S JUSTICE?

    ANY JEW ON THIS SITE THAT IS PASSING JUDGEMENT ON THIS WOMAN SHOULD REALIZE THAT THEY ARE ACTUALLY PASSING JUDGEMENT ON THEMSELVES IN G-D’S BOOKS! DID SHE DO SOMETHING WRONG? POSSIBLY. WAS SHE SILLY FOR SLANDERING THE EGOTISTICAL JUDGE? YES! WHILE I WOULDN’T SAY THE JUDGE IS BEING ANTI SEMITIC, HE US PUNISHING HER BECAUSE HIS EGO WAS TAMPERED WITH. SO ALL IT TELLS ME IS WELCOME TO GOOD OLD CORRUPT AMERICAN JUSTICE. THE FACT THAT SHE IS A MOTHER OF CHILDREN WITH NO PRIOR RECORD AT ALL SHOULD HAVE COUNTED FOR ALOT OF POINTS YET IT DOESN’T EVEN ENTER THE PICTURE AT ALL. THE ONLY THING THAT SEEMS TO BE OF MAJOR IMPORTANCE IN THIS CASE IS THE JUDGES HONOR. “HERE COMES THE JUDGE”……. DISGUSTING! DOESN’T SAY MUCH FOR THE AMERICAN JUSTICE SYSTEM. (EVERYONE KNOWS IT IS TOTALLY CORRUPT!)

  • Hysterical!!

    All the comments are so caught up, whos right, the court or the Frum lady? “NO SHES RIGHT!!” “she should’nt have played with the law!”, etc. Comment 29 is so “hey everyone, wats doing?” i actually had a smile when i read it!