The high-profile racketeering bribery trial of former Democratic Illinois Home Speaker Michael Madigan and his co-defendant, Michael McClain, has been probably the most highly-anticipated trial in years.
Madigan is the longest-serving speaker of any legislative chamber within the nation, having led the Illinois Home of Representatives as its speaker from 1983 to 2021, apart from a two-year window within the Nineties when Republicans managed the chamber. For years, McClain was one of many best-known lobbyists below the Capitol dome, with a prolonged listing of shoppers that included Commonwealth Edison, the ability supplier for Chicago residents that additionally has been on the heart of the federal investigation into Madigan. McClain was additionally a longtime confidante of Madigan’s, having served collectively as legislators in the course of the Nineteen Seventies.
They’re now on trial in federal courtroom in Chicago, going through fees of racketeering conspiracy, bribery and different counts. Prosecutors are searching for to show that ComEd bribed Madigan with no-work jobs and contracts for the ex-speaker’s allies in trade for assist ushering by means of their priorities within the legislature. One other prong of the case facilities on allegations Madigan and McClain allegedly helped shake down builders — with enterprise pending earlier than the Metropolis Council and Illinois legislature — for profitable tax work for Madigan’s regulation agency. The previous speaker and McClain say they’ve executed nothing incorrect.
First, some catching up:
- If you wish to know extra about who Michael Madigan is, learn this in-depth profile.
- For a take a look at the opposite gamers concerned, learn this abstract from the Chicago Solar-Occasions’ Jon Seidel, a federal courts reporter who has been following the twists and turns of those allegations for a few years. He’s overlaying this trial with veteran WBEZ politics reporter Dave McKinney and the Solar-Occasions’ Matthew Hendrickson.
- To listen to McKinney’s preview of the case towards Madigan, pay attention right here.
Here’s a timeline of how the trial has unfolded to this point:
Week 1: Oct. 8–17
The trial, initially estimated to be 10 weeks, began off fairly slowly. It took prosecutors and protection attorneys seven work days to decide on the jurors, a panel of eight girls, 4 males and 6 alternates. The federal choose on this case, U.S. District Decide John Blakey, let attorneys query the jurors and signaled early on that attorneys’ estimates for the size of the trial appeared off.
Week 2: Oct. 21–24
In opening statements Oct. 21, Asst. U.S. Legal professional Sarah Streicker accused Madigan and his co-defendant, Michael McClain, of “corruption on the highest ranges of state authorities.” Streicker and powerhouse protection lawyer Tom Breen laid out their respective circumstances for 3 hours, with McClain lawyer John Mitchell following up the following day. Breen instructed jurors that Streicker was “counting on unhealthy info” and “unreliable sources” and that the case was constructed round ”guesswork and hypothesis.”
Madigan is accused of 5 completely different schemes. In two of them, he’s accused of searching for and accepting bribes from ComEd and AT&T Illinois whereas the utilities had been searching for favorable motion from Madigan. HoweverBreen insisted to jurors that Madigan was “utterly unaware of what persons are saying behind his again.” In doing so, he gently shifted blame towards McClain, Madigan’s longtime good friend.
To start to unspool the case towards Madigan, the prosecution referred to as a number of former legislators as witnesses this week, to attempt to lay out how Madigan’s affect made or broke laws. These witnesses included former state legislators Scott Drury and Lou Lang, the latter of whom testified that McClain instructed him hewanted to step downamid sexual harassment allegations, and he assumed that was at Madigan’s behest.
The week included jurorslistening to one seemingly banal dialog, performed to indicate the tight connection between Madigan and McClain, by which the previous speaker goes over a soup order together with his spouse, utilizing McClain’s cellular telephone. Madigan famously didn’t carry his personal cellular phone or use e-mail, testimony revealed.
Week 3: Oct. 28–31
A part of the federal government’s case is how Madigan and McClain allegedly rewarded loyalists to the political operation — that included allegedly securing no-work jobs, but it surely additionally meant supporting them financially and behind the scenes when these loyalists had been accused of misdeeds.
Jurors heard from a senior advisor to Madigan, Will Cousineau, who testified that Madigan and McClain would repeatedly meet alone in Cousineau’s workplace. Jurors additionally heard a secretly recordedtelephone dialog between Cousineau and McClain, by which McClain floated the concept of elevating cash for a Madigan ally who had misplaced his job over explosive sexual harassment allegations.
Week 4: Nov. 4–7
The federal government’s case depends on the testimony and secretly recorded tapes of various individuals who as soon as labored in Madigan’s interior circle. However federal brokers didn’t solely faucet telephones. Additionally they had Fidel Marquez, ComEd’s prime lobbyist, secretly put on a wire towards McClain and others in an try to get a greater deal for himself for his position within the scandal. One secret recording Marquez made had McClain describing the roles at ComEd as “an quaint patronage system.” In one other, McClain instructed Marquez to not put something in writing as a result of, “all that may do is harm ya.” That exact dialog unfolded over pizza inside a favourite Springfield Italian restaurant frequented by Madigan and different political insiders.
Prosecutors this week additionally revealed that Madigan’s son, Andrew Madigan, allegedly labored with McClain to attempt to get a job for a good friend at utility big Folks’s Fuel. Jurorsheard tape of McClain and Andrew Madiganjoking in regards to the utility firm’s reluctance to do the favor, with McClain saying he wished they’d simply “obey.”
Week 5: Nov. 11–14
On this week, an lawyer for McClain pushed Marquez on whether or not he thought he was exchanging jobs at ComEd for motion by Madigan. Marquez reiterated that he needed the speaker to look favorably upon ComEd. Protection attorneys additionally identified that Marquez had lied about his prison background when he bought a gun and that he tried to hide cash from his spouse throughout their divorce.
Week 6: Nov. 18–21
Prosecutors continued to hammer the “no-work” subcontracts Madigan and McClain allegedly organized at ComEd throughout this week. They referred to as to the stand Ed Moody, certainly one of Madigan’s prime political operatives, to testify about how he made $354,000 between 2012 and 2018 as a ComEd subcontractor regardless of doing little to no work for the ability firm. He mentioned Madigan instructed him, “That is how I reward my good troopers.”
The jury additionally heardhow Madigan needed McClain to push ComEd to put Juan Ochoa on the corporate’s board of administrators. Recordings performed in courtroom confirmed that Madigan, whose district was quickly changing into extra Hispanic, regarded Ochoa’s appointment as a political favor to then-Democratic U.S. Rep. Luis Gutierrez, a number one Latino voice within the state’s congressional delegation.
Week 7: Nov. 25–27
The most extremely anticipated witnesses of the trial took the stand: Former Chicago Ald. Danny Solis, additionally chairman of the town council’s Zoning Committee, was a key mole for the prosecution.
Solis secretly recorded a number of conversations he had with Madigan centered on utilizing his affect on the Metropolis Council to get builders to rent the then-speaker’s agency for property tax attraction work. When Solis would discuss his efforts to steer builders to Madigan’s agency, Madigan mentioned, “Thanks.”
However Solis’s testimony got here with lots of baggage. He acknowledged a litany of misdeeds: from accepting favors from builders even once they had enterprise in entrance of the council, to accepting Viagra and massages that “turned sexual” that had been organized for by a political operative.
Specializing in when Solis was in workplace, federal investigators outlined his sexual forays at therapeutic massage parlors and shaking down builders for marketing campaign contributions. Solis acknowledged his misdeeds to jurors, whereas additionally testifying how he steered builders to Madigan to curry political favor with the Southwest Aspect Democrat.
Week 8: Dec. 2–5
Below cross-examination by Madigan lawyer Dan Collins, Solis acknowledged partaking with prostitutes, together with throughout a 2015 journey to Puerto Rico with different elected officers. Solis testified he stayed on the house of a state contractor for free of charge and repeatedly denied that the contractor supplied the prostitutes. As an alternative, Solis instructed Collins “we took up a group” to pay the intercourse employees.
Collins additionally confronted Solis with years price of tax data that confirmed the previous alderman receiving $617,000 in funds from an organization owned by his sister, Patti Solis Doyle, the 2008 marketing campaign supervisor for presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. That cash appeared to hyperlink again to the state contractor in Puerto Rico, who with Solis Doyle co-founded an organization that paid state distributors with overdue state billings and pocketed tons of of hundreds of thousands of {dollars} in late-payment curiosity penalties. Most of these funds weren’t declared as earnings on Solis’ tax kinds, Collins revealed.
Solis left the stand after 21 complete hours of testimony over six days.
Prosecutors then centered consideration on Michael Madigan’s son, Andrew Madigan. Prosecutors mentioned Andrew Madigan obtained $43,000 from a deal that they are saying was linked to his father’s alleged corruption. Andrew Madigan has not been charged.
Week 9: Dec. Sep 11
Prosecutors referred to as Tom Cullen, a longtime Madigan staffer who labored with AT&T, who testified that the corporate supplied $2,500 a month to former Illinois State Rep. Edward Acevedo for what amounted to “busy work.”
With out the jury within the room, prosecutors instructed the choose they meant to name Acevedo as a witness. However protection attorneys objected to Acevedo’s competency as a result of the 61-year-old has a type of dementia. The choose in the end dominated that Acevedo ought to take the stand.
Additionally this week, prosecutors referred to as U.S. Rep. Nikki Budzinski, D-Illinois, who testified that whereas she was an aide to Gov. JB Pritzker, the governor gave critical consideration to job suggestions from Michael Madigan. However, she mentioned, Pritzker didn’t act on them to learn or enrich Madigan. The query got here up in reference to Solis’ alleged try to get on a state board with the assistance of Madigan. Budzinski was not accused of being concerned in that scheme or any wrongdoing.
Week 10: Dec. 16-20
Prosecutors rested their case this week. Of their remaining days, they completed presenting their proof towards Madigan and McClain by honing in on the scheme associated to Acevedo.
On the witness stand, prosecutors pressed Acevedo about not doing any work for the $140,000 he obtained from ComEd and AT&T. After Acevedo testified that he did do some work, the prosecutor offered the previous lawmaker together with his personal grand jury testimony that apparently differed from his declare. Acevedo mentioned he was having hassle studying it as a result of he left his glasses at house, prompting the choose to sharply threaten Acevedo with contempt if he didn’t deliver his glasses the following day. He got here to courtroom with glasses the following day.
As soon as Acevedo had completed his testimony, prosecutors then referred to as an AT&T contract lobbyist who testified that Acevedo by no means handed alongside something to him about firm laws.
