Star Tribune

Wendy Weiner-Runge

A Minnesota filmmaker sentenced to 10 years in prison for her role in the Iowa Film Office scandal was denied an appeal of her sentence Wednesday by the Iowa Court of Appeals.

Iowa Court Affirms 10-Year-Sentence for Frum Woman

Star Tribune

Wendy Weiner-Runge

A Minnesota filmmaker sentenced to 10 years in prison for her role in the Iowa Film Office scandal was denied an appeal of her sentence Wednesday by the Iowa Court of Appeals.

Wendy Weiner-Runge claims the district court judge improperly considered comments she made in an Internet blog during her trial that were critical of prosecutors and the judge. She also alleges the charges were the result of anti-Semitism.

Runge’s appeal says Judge Douglas Staskal violated her rights to free speech when he considered the blog comments. In some of the posts, Runge accused prosecutors of engaging in political games and criticized Staskal saying her lawyer found the judge unprofessional.

The blog posts were given to Staskal, and he referred to them at Runge’s sentencing hearing.

He said the posts suggest “you have not taken responsibility for what you did, and what you did was a felony.”

Staskal called Runge “arrogant and defiant” and sentenced her to 10 years in prison.

Runge, 47, said in her appeal brief that a guilty plea inherently accepts responsibility and demonstrates remorse. The appeals court, however, found that Staskal properly considered Runge’s blog statements and did not violate her free-speech rights.

The justices said the judge concluded prison time would send a message that Runge’s behavior won’t be tolerated.

“The judge chose to sentence her on these clearly articulated reasons and grounds, which we find are not clearly untenable or unreasonable,” the appeals court said.

Prosecutors accused Runge, a co-owner of Minneapolis-based Polynation Pictures, of inflating expenses on applications for film tax credits offered by the state. The company received $1.8 million in incentives for a film.

Runge pleaded guilty to fraudulent practices, and several other charges were dropped.

Two of her partners pleaded guilty and were sentenced to probation.

Runge’s attorney, Matt Whitaker of Des Moines, did not immediately return a call seeking comment.

25 Comments

  • Duvid Markowitz

    Tell us exactly what she said! Maybe she needs 10 years. If a Jew got 2 years for murder you would still say they are anti semites.

  • How sad!

    The article forgot to mention that her appeal was slated for Simchas Torah and the judge refused to change the date, saying that it will go on with or without her there. The prosecutor also asked her just by the way how her friend Sholom Rubashkin was doing.

  • idiot

    tbis lady is an idiot… dont mess with the law! she stole money from the state and the. calls it anti semitism.. Rubashkins case is anti semititsm.. but it gets cheaponed by people lkke this. enjoh the next 10 years.

  • Baruch Neminovich, babsprink@msn.com

    Sounds like a miniature scenario of Rubashkin, but still, all in all, 10 year sentence for cooking the books for a mere 1.5 million is truly silly. 10 years my God is for rape, murder, very serious physical stuff. I am very sorry, the judge and the whole Iowa judicial system stinks to high hell, they can take their 10 year sentence and shove it up where the sun don’t shine. Shoot.

  • serel maness

    as l understand she didn’t do anything wrong,yup,it’ anti semititem all right,the lowa state wants scapegoats

  • to # 3

    hashem should have mercy on u but to write such a thing on a fellow jew a frum mother when u dnt even u know the full story and even if u knew the full story it doesnt excuse in any way or form these words may hashem give u some typr of brain to realise how wrong and hurtful ur words are but untill then keep ur low filthy hurful comments to yourself

  • Insidious Jew Hatred in Iowa Courts

    It appears that there is some very deep-seated wish to “get at” (or get back at) frum Yidden among the powers that be in the court system in Iowa.

    Apparently any infraction will be punished to the absolutely fullest extent possible.

    I am not saying that a Jew should not be punished when in the wrong. But the punishment should fit the crime, and when there are comparable convictions, the sentences should also be comparable.

    And the right to appeal should not be abridged.

    Something is thoroughly rotten in the state of Iowa.

  • Don-t jump to conclusions

    If you read the details of the case you will see that it is not as black and white as you think it is. The real question is why her partners got off with probation and she got ten years. That’s justice in Iowa these days.

  • abc

    and by the way it was the same exact prosecuter as sholom mordechai rubashkin had its irelevent what happend she was set up the same exact way as rubashkin was she stood no chancer’l

  • 10 years for a blog

    It states that her partners received probation but she gets 10 years because of a blog??????????

  • mmb

    Someone who kills another person doesn’t even get 10 years in many cases, so why does this, non violent incident, warrant 10 years.

    • Thoughtful

      We all need to realize that here in USA money is worshipped and a money crime is therefore punished more than many violent crimes. I don’t think anyone can give any opinion about what she deserves or doesn’t, since we are not intimately involved in the case to know all the details. The media rarely reports things accurately. Our job is to repent and to pray for all jews that
      G-D should protect them and should bring us the redemption speedily. Amen.

  • Tragic

    ppl this is a tragedy and if u knew anything about that part of the country u would understand that the anti semitism charge is not as outlandish as it seems

  • COMMENTS #1 AND #3 ARE DISTORTED

    AND WHAT IS FAR WORSE IS THE FACT THAT THESE PEOPLE ACTUALLY BELIEVE THAT THEIR WAY OF THINKING IS PERFECTLY JUST AND HUMANE AND THAT THEY ARE REPLETE WITH RIGHTEOUS INTEGRITY.

    IN ADDITION, THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED EVEN IF THERE IS A NEED TO PUBLICIZE THE CASE.

  • Mendell

    #3 is half right. This case is not anti-semitism, but neither is the Rubashkin affair. In both cases they stole big time. They were both caught red-handed; and then both played the holiness card. It does not matter if you have a beard or sheitel. You steal, you get caught, you sit in the can. And when you get arrogant toward the system instead of simply admitting and regreting then your sentence gets doubled. They were BOTH idiots.

  • CHLEAKS.COM

    A Lesson Learned

    This is why you don’t create web-sites or write comments against a Judge and/or prosecutor while you are facing prosecution. This is why you don’t call the prosecution or the Judge presiding over your case and antisemitic all the while your on trial.

    This tactic didn’t work for S.M. Rubashkin and Mrs. Wendy Weiner. In fact, using this “tactic” was damaging.

    Once you are victorious, then you are free to do what you want.

  • reg joe

    Our trust in carrying out financial dealings honoestly is the bedrock of our world of works of commerce.every corrupt act cuts away from our ability to faithfully engage one another in business. As such the government treats it very severely.

  • Big TIMEfor financial CRIME

    10 years is certainly excessive, and anti-semitism cannot be ruled out. But, they also like to set an “example,” kind of like a scapegoat, in order to scare and deter anyone else from such activity. Unlike a generation ago, a financial crime can result in a longer jail sentence than, let’s say, murder or rape.

    A few years ago a NJ mayor, a couple of big shot politicians and a couple dozen Rabbis were arrested on corruption charges. There was a meeting (about 2000 attended) in Vizhnitz Hall, where the Spinka Rebbe, and famed white-collar attorneys, Ben Brafman and Jack Laufer, spoke. The Spinka Rebbe said,“I made a mistake,” and called on the mosdos to implement a “compliance program.” “Just as you don’t pasken without consulting a Rav, likewise, don’t assume anything questionable is okay without an attorney or accountant.” Ben Brafman said,“they have no patience for loopholes.”

    The attorneys related the reason for harsh penalties for financial wrongdoing. The government used to be in a kind of “cat and mouse” game with the mob and drugs. The way they would keep on top of them was by monitoring their financial activities, esp. through the banks. But loopholes and light penalties enabled them to take advantage and keep ahead of the Feds. So, they tightened the noose by closing the loopholes and toughening the penalties. But the outlaws still found a way to beat the system. This scenario played out to the extent that now, yes indeed, you can get more time in jail for a financial crime than for murder or rape; a generation ago, just like a slap on the wrist. The only thing still going for a financial misdeed is that you go to a white-collar prison, whereas a murderer/rapist goes to that kind of prison.

  • serel maness

    it so happens that shalom.m rubashkin was framed by people who wanted them out of business and l’m sure that wendy was also,hope for imm geula

  • Wisen Up

    The sentence is the perfect amount of time. Because people have learned nothing. As we speak, there are Yidden opening “moisdos” whose real purpose will be to commit money laundering, tax evasion or other financial crimes.

  • What happened?!

    What has happened to us Lubavitchers?! Comment numbers 3, and more I am hoping are written by people in their drunk stage of life. To call a fellow Jew an idiot is BEYOND exception. I cannot believe my eyes!! If you were the one who was tide up with the government and law, would YOU want people calling you an idiot? Exactly, stop judging!! And stop with the disgusting language! Enough already!

  • fed up

    # 22 you are also in the drunk stage of life if you think that Lubavichers are “better” or “holier” than other jews and they don’t make mistakes, wake up

  • Framed or informed on?

    To 19:

    Do you mean to say that Rubashkin did nothing illegal? It could very well be that he had enemies who wanted to do him in. But was he “framed,” or more like, informed on?