Despite lingering four months without a conclusion, the preliminary hearing for criminally charged Epic Charter Schools co-founders Ben Harris and David Chaney will be delayed even further after their attorneys asked an Oklahoma County District Court judge to recuse herself from the case this week.
The two defendants’ request for the judge to recuse has delayed a hearing on their co-defendant’s request for one of their attorneys to recuse. Oklahoma County District Judge Susan Stallings was scheduled this morning to hear former Epic executive Josh Brock’s request for Chaney’s attorney, Gary Wood, to recuse from the case, but Harris’ attorney, Joe White, asked Stallings to recuse Wednesday.
Brock, the controversial charter schools’ former chief financial officer, was charged along with Harris and Chaney in June 2022. But Brock waived his preliminary hearing and agreed to testify against his former employers, who are accused of carrying out what is alleged to be the largest embezzlement scheme in state history.
The case has seen a multitude of delays and a number of twists and turns since it was filed by then-Oklahoma County District Attorney David Prater more than two years ago, such that none of the three defendants has actually entered pleas on the 15 charges, which run the gamut from embezzlement to conspiracy to money laundering.
The case finally seemed to gain forward momentum in March when the defendants, their lawyers and Attorney General Gentner Drummond’s prosecutors found themselves in Special District Judge Jason Glidewell’s courtroom for a week-long preliminary hearing. (Drummond took control of the case from Prater’s successor in early 2023.)
The hearing played like a a trial in miniature, with all of the characters and drama of a John Grisham legal thriller. Prosecutors called eight witnesses to build their case against Harris and Chaney, who founded Epic Charter Schools in 2011 and also co-owned Epic Youth Services, a private management company into which hundreds of millions of dollars in public school funding were diverted in the name of the “Learning Fund.”
On the fifth day of the March hearing, Brock testified that he had agreed to a plea deal with prosecutors that would net him a suspended sentence in exchange for his cooperation against Harris and Chaney. Assistant Attorney General Jimmy Harmon took most of the day to question Brock, such that Brock had not been cross-examined by Wood or White as Friday afternoon arrived.
Following a scheduling discussion, Glidewell set the preliminary hearing to resume for two more days in May.
But when the hearing was set to resume six weeks later, it was cancelled after a brief meeting of the lawyers in Glidewell’s chambers wherein Brock’s attorney, Irven Box, made a motion to recuse Wood over a purported conflict of interest.
Brock alleged Wood had acted as his attorney while he worked for Epic, meaning the act of Wood cross-examining him would constitute a conflict of interest. Wood, for his part, argued otherwise.
“I never represented Brock,” Wood said at the time.
Glidwell set the requested recusal of Wood for a hearing Thursday. In the weeks leading up to the hearing, prosecutors attempted to carry out a number of subpoenas to make the case that Wood knew confidential information related to his alleged representation of Brock.
But prosecutors said Wood’s law firm, Riggs Abney, has resisted a subpoena requesting record production, which led to a short hearing Monday where Stallings ordered the firm to comply with the subpoena and turn over any records it might have related to its alleged representation of Brock.
On Wednesday, however, when White said the lawyers met for Riggs Abney to turn over the records, White announced his intention to file a motion seeking Stallings’ recusal from the case.
“They were prepared to address the issue (related to Wood), but before that issue presented itself, I raised the issue of requesting a Rule 15 in-camera request,” White said Thursday.
Stallings confirmed Thursday morning that a recusal motion had been raised against her in camera, meaning not in open court. She said she denied that motion, so White now must file a motion in open court. White said he intends to do that sometime next week.
Both Stallings and White declined to say what reasons the defense has for seeking her dismissal, however, Prater’s presence on the prosecution’s witness list regarding the Wood recusal has irritated White. Stallings previously served as an assistant district attorney under Prater, and a pair of prominent former Prater assistants are now prosecuting the case for Drummond’s office.
“I don’t like Mr. Prater coming in and testifying in front of Judge Stallings who used to work for him,” White said. “I mean, how is that fair?”
White’s impending motion means all other proceedings in the case will be stayed until the judicial recusal request is concluded. After that, the parties would need take up the matter of Wood’s recusal before the preliminary hearing can resume.
Phil Bacharach, Drummond’s director of communications, said Thursday that Riggs Abney had still not turned over any records regarding Wood’s alleged representation of Brock, but he declined to discuss the pending criminal case, which was investigated for years prior to charges being filed.
“We have no statement on the recusal/repeated delays,” Bacharach said.
(Correction:Â This article was updated at 9:09 a.m. on Tuesday, Aug. 15, 2024 to correct the spelling of Irven Box’s name. NonDoc regrets the error.)
