logo
Madigan jurors give insight into deliberations that led to ‘historic' conviction

Madigan jurors give insight into deliberations that led to ‘historic' conviction

Yahoo14-02-2025

CHICAGO (WGN) – Former Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, a leader in Illinois politics for more than 50 years, walked out of federal court on Wednesday a convicted felon after being found guilty on corruption charges.
After 11 days of deliberations, the jury in the trial of Madigan, 82, and longtime political confidant Michael McClain, 77, reached a split verdict.
Madigan was convicted on 10 of 23 counts, including bribery, bribery conspiracy, and wire fraud. He was found not guilty on seven counts, and a jury was deadlocked on the remaining six counts, faced by both Madigan and McClain, which were declared a mistrial by agreement.
Prosecutors have not said whether they intend to retry Madigan or McClain on the six deadlocked counts.
Former Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan found guilty on 10 counts; jury deadlocked on others
Acting U.S. Attorney Morris Pasqual called it a 'historic conviction,' ranking high among the public corruption cases tried in federal court in Chicago.
The jury of eight women and four men heard over 150 secret recordings, testimony from close to 60 witnesses, and arguments laid out by the government and defense teams for both men. In their deliberations, they were led by the 46-year-old foreman, a South Side native and longtime resident of the Beverly neighborhood, Tim Nessner.
Nessner, an insurance underwriter, father, and husband, who describes himself as a 'proud Chicagoan,' said the jury was extremely diligent in its deliberations as it combed through a 'mountain of evidence.' They went on a count-by-count basis and allowed the over 100 pages of instructions to guide them in their decision-making process.
'It got to a point where we had debated it over and over again. We broke for the day on Tuesday, and we came back with fresh eyes on Wednesday. I reminded everyone of the presumption of innocence and the guilt beyond reasonable doubt,' Nessner said. 'We went around the room again. It was clear to everyone that the two dissenting votes would not be swayed, and for that reason we knew we were at an impasse, and it had to end at that point.'
Nessner said there were two holdouts on the final count in the indictment, a conspiracy charge involving an alleged no-work contract arranged through AT&T Illinois for a Madigan ally in exchange for support on key legislation, and one holdout on five other charges, including the overarching racketeering conspiracy charge.
Prosecutors had argued Madigan ran his political operation like a criminal enterprise. Jurors were unable to come to an agreement on that count, with 11 voting in favor of acquittal.
'That first count is actually the one we saved for last because we knew it would be all-encompassing, and we knew that we would be discovering evidence all along as we deliberated each count,' Nessner said.
Jurors who spoke with WGN said it was not lost on them the responsibility that came with serving, including the fact that they held someone's future in their hands.
'We didn't allow it to come into play when determining a verdict, but it was something that was at the very forefront of our minds,' Nessner said. 'We understood the gravity of what we were doing.'
Juror No. 36, who wished only to be identified as Natalie, echoed a similar sentiment.
'When I found out that I was actually picked, I was very nervous, I didn't know what to expect. All I thought was, 'I can't believe I have to help make a decision that could alter someone's life,'' Natalie said.
As the group got into the routine of reporting to court, listening to evidence and testimony, and taking vigorous notes, Natalie said those thoughts began to dissipate.
'Somebody knows something': Elgin Police Department launches podcast aimed at solving cold cases
The 23-year-old first-born American citizen, first-generation student, and college graduate said she was surprised she was selected to serve given where she lives. For close to four days each week, Natalie took the train about an hour and a half each way from her home near the Illinois-Wisconsin border.
Natalie said, some days, the amount of evidence was enough to make her head feel like it was going to explode. She jokes that she had the most notebooks of all jurors and ended with about 10 filled from front to back when all said and done.
'I didn't know what information I would need to help during deliberations, so I just wrote everything down,' Natalie said.
When it came down to deliberations, she said 'time was absent' in the room where jurors spent close to 60 hours combing through evidence and talking out the case. They were focused on making sure they understood the laws and applying those to the facts to help them reach their verdict.
'It was very emotional. I remember when we first came to agreement for our first guilty verdict there was silence in the room, and it just felt so unreal – so real,' Natalie said. 'It really just gave us a reality check. We're like, 'woah, this isn't just going over what we have heard for the last few months, but this is real life now.' It was a really sobering moment.'
Natalie said it all came into an even clearer perspective when they returned to the courtroom on Wednesday afternoon as Madigan, McClain, and their families awaited their fate.
'I know that we did what we did for a reason. We followed the judge's instructions and the law to the best of our abilities. Although it came to an ugly outcome, it's just the way that it turned out. There wasn't anything we could do to change the situation. I know a lot of jurors felt similar,' Natalie said.
Judge Blakey praised the jury for being one of the best he has experienced in his years on the bench.
Madigan juror recounts deliberation process following verdict: 'It was kind of emotional'
Jurors echoed their gratitude for the judge, the prosecutors and defense teams in being thorough in what they provided, and for each other – many whom they now consider lifelong friends.
Madigan, who was known for operating off-the-books, steering clear of the press, and rarely having a cellphone, sent shockwaves with his choice to testify in his own defense. His co-defendant declined to take the stand.
Juror No. 50, a 32-year-old woman who wished only to be identified as Danielle, said she appreciated hearing from Madigan on the stand.
'It seems like he was a down-to-earth character who cared greatly about the people he was around, and several of the witnesses said how much he had done for them,' Danielle said. 'So, you see both sides to each story.'
Nessner also had some thoughts about the ex-Speaker's testimony.
'To the degree that Mr. Madigan tried to separate himself from his co-defendant led a couple of the jurors to believe that he may have been lying about some other things that he testified about on the stand. For me, I think it was a little bit of both,' Nessner said. 'I don't think there was an absolute lynchpin in his testimony that said it was absolutely damming, there was nothing in there that said he was absolutely innocent, so him actually taking the stand did not have a massive effect on any persuasion of mine.'
Madigan could face prison time on the counts he was convicted on, though his age will likely be a factor in sentencing decisions, experts said.
TikTok returns to Apple, Google app stores amid Trump ban delay
'It's the most significant public corruption case in my lifetime, just because of its breadth. I mean this guy ran the state for 40 years and had been down in Springfield for 50,' said Pat Brady. 'He was the last of the power bosses in the country and he ran this state with an iron fist, and it turns out he ran corruptly like a lot of us had been saying for a long time.'
Brady, the former chairman of the Illinois Republican Party and a former federal prosecutor, said given the broad scope of the indictment, he is not surprised there were some split verdicts. He calls what Madigan was convicted on 'significant' and praised the jury for their diligent work.
'He'll report to the parole office and have his presentencing investigation done. There will be motions. I imagine it will be a pretty vigorous sentencing hearing, then he'll be sentenced, and then the big question for me is, if he's sentenced does he get a bond pending appeal,' said Brady.
According to court records, the government must file its motion for forfeiture by March 14. A hearing on post-trial motions, including the forfeiture bench trial, is set for May 5.
In a filing last month, prosecutors indicated they would seek approximately $3.24 million in forfeiture if Madigan were convicted. It is not clear whether that number could change given the counts Madigan was found guilty on.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Ex-Illinois Speaker Mike Madigan's attorneys ask for no prison time for bribery conviction
Ex-Illinois Speaker Mike Madigan's attorneys ask for no prison time for bribery conviction

Yahoo

time11 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Ex-Illinois Speaker Mike Madigan's attorneys ask for no prison time for bribery conviction

The Brief Lawyers for ex-Illinois House Speaker Mike Madigan are asking that he not be sent to prison for his bribery conviction. Federal prosecutors recommended a prison sentence of more than 12 years and a $15 million fine. Earlier this year, a jury found Madigan guilty on 10 of 23 counts, including bribery and wire fraud. CHICAGO - Attorneys for former Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan are asking that he not be given a prison sentence after he was convicted of bribery and conspiracy earlier this year. What we know Federal prosecutors have already called for sentencing Madigan to more than 12 years in prison, which his lawyers called "draconian," in a new court filing. Madigan's attorneys argued it would essentially be a life sentence for the 83-year-old. Instead, they're asking that Madigan be sentenced to five years' probation, including one year of home detention, community service, and a "reasonable" fine. Prosecutors said they're also seeking a $15 million fine from Madigan. "Madigan was in a special position of trust and responsibility to the public. Yet he deprived all residents of Illinois of honest government and eroded the public's trust," prosecutors wrote in their memo." Earlier this year, a jury found Madigan guilty on 10 of 23 counts, including bribery and wire fraud. The former speaker, arguably the most powerful politician in Illinois at one point, was accused of using his role leading the state House and heading the state Democratic Party to enrich himself and his allies by securing jobs, contracts, and other financial benefits. What's next Madigan's sentencing is scheduled for this Friday.

AT&T says conducting investigation into claims leaked data is for sale
AT&T says conducting investigation into claims leaked data is for sale

Business Insider

time17 hours ago

  • Business Insider

AT&T says conducting investigation into claims leaked data is for sale

After Hackread reported that the previous leaked data of 88M AT& T customers now includes both date of birth and Social Security numbers, an AT&T spokesperson said in a statement: 'It is not uncommon for cybercriminals to re-package previously disclosed data for financial gain. We just learned about claims that AT&T data is being made available for sale on dark web forums, and we are conducting a full investigation.' Confident Investing Starts Here:

Where Is Barack Obama?
Where Is Barack Obama?

Atlantic

timea day ago

  • Atlantic

Where Is Barack Obama?

Last month, while Donald Trump was in the Middle East being gifted a $400 million luxury jet from Qatar, Barack Obama headed off on his own foreign excursion: a trip to Norway, in a much smaller and more tasteful jet, to visit the summer estate of his old friend King Harald V. Together, they would savor the genteel glories of Bygdøyveien in May. They chewed over global affairs and the freshest local salmon, which had been smoked on the premises and seasoned with herbs from the royal garden. Trump has begun his second term with a continuous spree of democracy-shaking, economy-quaking, norm-obliterating action. And Obama, true to form, has remained carefully above it all. He picks his spots, which seldom involve Trump. In March, he celebrated the anniversary of the Affordable Care Act and posted his annual NCAA basketball brackets. In April, he sent out an Easter message and mourned the death of the pope. In May, he welcomed His Holiness Pope Leo XIV ('a fellow Chicagoan') and sent prayers to Joe Biden following his prostate-cancer diagnosis. No matter how brazen Trump becomes, the most effective communicator in the Democratic Party continues to opt for minimal communication. His 'audacity of hope' presidency has given way to the fierce lethargy of semi-retirement. Obama occasionally dips into politics with brief and unmemorable statements, or sporadic fundraising emails (subject: 'Barack Obama wants to meet you. Yes you.'). He praised his law-school alma mater, Harvard, for 'rejecting an unlawful and ham-handed attempt' by the White House 'to stifle academic freedom.' He criticized a Republican bill that would threaten health care for millions. He touted a liberal judge who was running for a crucial seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court. When called upon, he can still deliver a top-notch campaign spiel, donor pitch, convention speech, or eulogy. Beyond that, Obama pops in with summer and year-end book, music, and film recommendations. He recently highlighted a few articles about AI and retweeted a promotional spot for Air Force Elite: Thunderbirds, a new Netflix documentary from his and Michelle's production company. (Michelle also has a fashion book coming out later this year: 'a celebration of confidence, identity, and authenticity,' she calls it.) Apparently, Barack is a devoted listener of The Ringer 's Bill Simmons Podcast, or so he told Jimmy Kimmel over dinner. In normal times, no one would deny Obama these diversions. He performed the world's most stressful job for eight years, served his country, made his history, and deserved to kick back and do the usual ex-president things: start a foundation, build a library, make unspeakable amounts of money. But the inevitable Trump-era counterpoint is that these are not normal times. And Obama's detachment feels jarringly incongruous with the desperation of his longtime admirers—even more so given Trump's assaults on what Obama achieved in office. It would be one thing if Obama had disappeared after leaving the White House, maybe taking up painting like George W. Bush. The problem is that Obama still very much has a public profile—one that screams comfort and nonchalance at a time when so many other Americans are terrified. 'There are many grandmas and Rachel Maddow viewers who have been more vocal in this moment than Barack Obama has,' Adam Green, a co-founder of the Progressive Change Institute, told me. 'It is heartbreaking,' he added, 'to see him sacrificing that megaphone when nobody else quite has it.' People who have worked with Obama since he left office say that he is extremely judicious about when he weighs in. 'We try to preserve his voice so that when he does speak, it has impact,' Eric Schultz, a close adviser to Obama in his post-presidency, told me. 'There is a dilution factor that we're very aware of.' 'The thing you don't want to do is, you don't want to regularize him,' former Attorney General Eric Holder, a close Obama friend and collaborator, told me. When I asked Holder what he meant by 'regularize,' he explained that there was a danger of turning Obama into just another hack commentator—' Tuesdays With Barack, or something like that,' Holder said. Like many of Obama's confidants, Holder bristles at suggestions that the former president has somehow deserted the Trump opposition. 'Should he do more? Everybody can have their opinions,' Holder said. 'The one thing that always kind of pisses me off is when people say he's not out there, or that he's not doing things, that he's just retired and we never hear from him. If you fucking look, folks, you would see that he's out there.' From the April 2016 issue: The Obama doctrine Obama's aides also say that he is loath to overshadow the next generation of Democratic leaders. They emphasize that he spends a great deal of time speaking privately with candidates and officials who seek his advice. But unfortunately for Democrats, they have not found their next fresh generational sensation since Obama was elected 17 years ago (Joe Biden obviously doesn't count). Until a new leader emerges, Obama could certainly take on a more vocal role without 'regularizing' himself in the lowlands of Trump-era politics. Obama remains the most popular Democrat alive at a time of historic unpopularity for his party. Unlike Biden, he appears not to have lost a step, or three. Unlike with Bill Clinton, his voice remains strong and his baggage minimal. Unlike both Biden and Clinton, he is relatively young and has a large constituency of Americans who still want to hear from him, including Black Americans, young voters, and other longtime Democratic blocs that gravitated toward Trump in November. 'Should Obama get out and do more? Yes, please,' Tracy Sefl, a Democratic media consultant in Chicago, told me. 'Help us,' she added. 'We're sinking over here.' Obama's conspicuous scarcity while Trump inflicts such damage isn't just a bad look. It's a dereliction of the message that he built his career on. When Obama first ran for president in 2008, his former life as a community organizer was central to his message. His campaign was not merely for him, but for civic action itself—the idea of Americans being invested in their own change. Throughout his time in the White House, he emphasized that 'citizen' was his most important title. After he left office in 2017, Obama said that he would work to inspire and develop the next cohort of leaders, which is essentially the mission of his foundation. It would seem a contradiction for him to say that he's devoting much of his post-presidency to promoting civic engagement when he himself seems so disengaged. To some degree, patience with Obama began wearing thin when he was still in office. His approval ratings sagged partway through his second term (before rebounding at the end). The rollout of the Affordable Care Act in 2013 was a fiasco, and the midterm elections of 2014 were a massacre. Obama looked powerless as Republicans in Congress ensured that he would pass no major legislation in his second term and blocked his nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court. 'Obama, out,' the president said in the denouement of his last comedy routine at the White House Correspondents' Dinner, in 2016. In Obama lore, this mic-drop moment would instantly become famous—and prophetic. After Trump's first victory, Obama tried to reassure supporters that this was merely a setback. 'I don't believe in apocalyptic—until the apocalypse comes,' he said in an interview with The New Yorker. Insofar as Obama talked about how he imagined his post-presidency, he was inclined to disengage from day-to-day politics. At a press conference in November 2016, Obama said that he planned to 'take Michelle on vacation, get some rest, spend time with my girls, and do some writing, do some thinking.' He promised to give Trump the chance to do his job 'without somebody popping off in every instance.' But in that same press conference, he also allowed that if something arose that raised 'core questions about our values and our ideals, and if I think that it's necessary or helpful for me to defend those ideals, then I'll examine it when it comes.' That happened almost immediately. A few days after vowing in his inaugural address to end the 'American carnage' that he was inheriting, Trump signed an executive order banning foreign nationals from seven predominantly Muslim countries from entering the United States for 90 days. The so-called Muslim travel ban would quickly be blocked by the courts, but not before sowing chaos at U.S. points of entry. Obama put out a brief statement through a spokesperson ('the president fundamentally disagrees with the notion of discriminating against individuals because of their faith or religion'), and went on vacation. Trump's early onslaught made clear that Obama's ex-presidency would prove far more complicated than previous ones. And Obama's taste for glamorous settings and famous company—Richard Branson, David Geffen, George Clooney—made for a grating contrast with the turmoil back home. 'Just tone it down with the kitesurfing pictures,' John Oliver, the host of HBO's Last Week Tonight, said of Obama in an interview with Seth Meyers less than a month after the president left office. 'America is on fire,' Oliver added. 'I know that people accused him of being out of touch with the American people during his presidency. I'm not sure he's ever been more out of touch than he is now.' Oliver's spasm foreshadowed a rolling annoyance that continued as Trump's presidency wore on: that Obama was squandering his power and influence. 'Oh, Obama is still tweeting good tweets. That's very nice of him,' the anti-Trump writer Drew Magary wrote in a Medium column titled 'Where the Hell Is Barack Obama?' in the early days of the coronavirus pandemic. 'I'm sick of Obama staying above the fray while that fray is swallowing us whole.' Obama did insert himself in the 2024 election, reportedly taking an aggressive behind-the-scenes role last summer in trying to nudge Biden out of the race. He delivered a showstopper speech at the Democratic National Convention and campaigned several times for Kamala Harris in the fall. But among longtime Obama admirers I've spoken with, frustration with the former president has built since Trump returned to office. While campaigning for Harris last year, Obama framed the stakes of the election in terms of a looming catastrophe. 'These aren't ordinary times, and these are not ordinary elections,' he said at a campaign stop in Pittsburgh. Yet now that the impact is unfolding in the most pernicious ways, Obama seems to be resuming his ordinary chill and same old bits. Green, of the Progressive Change Institute, told me that when Obama put out his March Madness picks this year, he texted Schultz, the Obama adviser. 'Have I missed him speaking up in other places recently?' Green asked him. 'He did not respond to that.' ​​(Schultz confirmed to me that he ignored the message but vowed to be 'more responsive to Adam Green's texts in the future.') Being a former president is inherently tricky: The role is ill-defined, and peripheral by definition. Part of the trickiness is how an ex-president can remain relevant, if he wants to. This is especially so given the current president. 'I don't know that anybody is relevant in the Trump era,' Mark Updegrove, a presidential historian and head of the LBJ Foundation, told me. Updegrove, who wrote a book called Second Acts: Presidential Lives and Legacies After the White House, said that Trump has succeeded in creating a reality in which every president who came before is suspect. 'All the standard rules of being an ex-president are no longer applicable,' he said. Still, Obama never presented himself as a 'standard rules' leader. This was the idea that his political rise was predicated on—that change required bold, against-the-grain thinking and uncomfortable action. Clearly, Obama still views himself this way, or at least still wants to be perceived this way. (A few years ago, he hosted a podcast with Bruce Springsteen called Renegades.) From the July 1973 issue: The last days of the president Stepping into the current political melee would not be an easy or comfortable role for Obama. He represents a figure of the past, which seems more and more like the ancient past as the Trump era crushes on. He is a notably long-view guy, who has spent a great deal of time composing a meticulous account of his own narrative. 'We're part of a long-running story,' Obama said in 2014. 'We just try to get our paragraph right.' Or thousands of paragraphs, in his case: The first installment of Obama's presidential memoir, A Promised Land, covered 768 pages and 29 hours of audio. No release date has been set for the second volume. But this might be one of those times for Obama to take a break from the long arc of the moral universe and tend to the immediate crisis. Several Democrats I've spoken with said they wish that Obama would stop worrying so much about the 'dilution factor.' While Democrats struggle to find their next phenom, Obama could be their interim boss. He could engage regularly, pointing out Trump's latest abuses. He did so earlier this spring, during an onstage conversation at Hamilton College. He was thoughtful, funny, and sounded genuinely aghast, even angry. He could do these public dialogues much more often, and even make them thematic. Focus on Trump's serial violations of the Constitution one week (recall that Obama once taught constitutional law), the latest instance of Trump's naked corruption the next. Blast out the most scathing lines on social media. Yes, it might trigger Trump, and create more attention than Obama evidently wants. But Trump has shown that ubiquity can be a superpower, just as Biden showed that obscurity can be ruinous. People would notice. Democrats love nothing more than to hold up Obama as their monument to Republican bad faith. Can you imagine if Obama did this? some Democrat will inevitably say whenever Trump does something tacky, cruel, or blatantly unethical (usually before breakfast). Obama could lean into this hypocrisy—tape recurring five-minute video clips highlighting Trump's latest scurrilous act and title the series 'Can You Imagine If I Did This?' Or another idea—an admittedly far-fetched one. Trump has decreed that a massive military parade be held through the streets of Washington on June 14. This will ostensibly celebrate the Army's 250th anniversary, but it also happens to fall on Trump's 79th birthday. The parade will cost an estimated $45 million, including $16 million in damage to the streets. (Can you imagine if Obama did this?) The spectacle cries out for counterprogramming. Obama could hold his own event, in Washington or somewhere nearby. It would get tons of attention and drive Trump crazy, especially if it draws a bigger crowd. Better yet, make it a parade, or 'citizen's march,' something that builds momentum as it goes, the former president and community organizer leading on foot. This would be the renegade move. Few things would fire up Democrats like a head-to-head matchup between Trump and Obama. If nothing else, it would be fun to contemplate while Democrats keep casting about for their long-delayed future. 'The party needs new rising stars, and they need the room to figure out how to meet this moment, just like Obama figured out how to meet the moment 20 years ago,' Jon Favreau, a co-host of Pod Save America and former director of speechwriting for the 44th president, told me. 'Unless, of course, Trump tries to run for a third term, in which case I'll be begging Obama to come out of retirement.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store