Jurors hint at impasse in bribery trial of Illinois state Sen. Emil Jones III
CHICAGO — Jurors on Wednesday told the judge overseeing the federal corruption trial of state Sen. Emil Jones III that they may be approaching a deadlock in their deliberations.
In a note late in its second full day of talks, the panel wrote to U.S. Judge Andrea Wood that it may not be able to agree on two counts, those alleging bribery and lying to the FBI, respectively.
'It doesn't look like the jury can reach a unanimous agreement on counts one and three. Is there any assistance that can be provided,' the jury note read. In a separate note, the jury observed that count one states Jones agreed to accept a bribe and money for an associate and asked if it needs to find both of those things to be true along with other criteria to convict.
The jury is expected to resume its work Thursday morning after further instructions from the judge.
Jones allegedly agreed to help a red-light camera executive with legislation in Springfield in exchange for $5,000 and a part-time job for his former intern.
The trial, now in its third week, featured testimony from the prolific FBI mole Omar Maani, a co-founder of SafeSpeed LLC who admitted to using steak dinners, cigars and cash payments to get his way on red-light camera legislation with politicians. Jones, federal prosecutors allege, was one of those officials— caught on wires laughing over Waygu filets and telling Maani he would 'protect' the company from a Republican opponent in the Illinois House of Representatives.
Jones, 46, is charged with bribery, use of an interstate facility to solicit bribery and lying to federal agents. The most serious charge carries up to 10 years in prison, while the others have a five-year maximum term. He is the first sitting member of the Illinois General Assembly to stand trial in almost a decade.
Jones' lawyers have argued that the senator, who continues to represent the far South Side and south suburban 14th District, was 'in the way' of an expansive net of other legislators on the take. They contend that Jones met with Maani at the behest of admittedly corrupt state Sen. Martin Sandoval to try and get a stubborn bill out of committee and that he was in fact trying to distance himself from Maani.
Jurors began deliberating late in the day Monday, following nine days of testimony and arguments. On their first full day of deliberations, they sent several notes to Judge Wood inquiring, among other things, whether they should consider the crime of bribery to have been committed the moment an official agrees to a deal or whether that official's later actions should influence their decision.
Shortly before jurors were left Tuesday, Wood instructed them that 'the crime of bribery as charged in Count 1 has been committed at the time the defendant solicits, agrees to accept or accepts the thing of value, so long as all the other elements of the crime are satisfied at that point in time.'
Several members of Jones' family have been present for most of the trial, including Former Senate President Emil Jones Jr., who handed off his seat to the younger Jones in 2009.
Jones testified on direct examination that he 'always wanted to be a state senator' and held a series of jobs with the state before deciding to run in 2008. Prosecutors sought to poke holes in Jones' narrative of his career on cross-examination, pointing out that the elder Jones orchestrated his son's taking his seat in the Senate.
The jury also heard testimony that Jones had provided information about numerous individuals to the FBI and identified photographs of people he dealt with, including 'an executive at an organization' that hired one of Jones' relatives after he'd helped get them funding. Jones was asked to wear a wire for an investigation into Roseland Community Hospital but ultimately did not end up cooperating, he testified.
He has maintained that he decided to fight the charges 'because I knew I didn't do nothing wrong and I had nothing to hide.'
Wood asked lawyers for Jones and the government to reconvene at 8:45 a.m. Thursday to agree on an answer for the jurors' question about whether Jones needed to accept one or both things of value to be found guilty of bribery.
____
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump announces $1,000 government-funded accounts for American babies
Donald Trump unveiled a federal program Monday providing $1,000 government-funded investment accounts for American babies, getting backing from top business leaders who said they plan to contribute billions more to an initiative tied to 'the big beautiful bill'. At a White House roundtable with over a dozen CEOs, including from Uber, Goldman Sachs and Dell Technologies, Trump relayed the details of 'Trump accounts' – tax-deferred investment accounts tracking stock market performance for children born between 2025 and 2029. 'For every US citizen born after December 31, 2024, before January 1, 2029, the federal government will make a one-time contribution of $1,000 into a tax-deferred account that will track the overall stock market,' Trump said. The accounts will be controlled by guardians and allow additional private contributions up to $5,000 annually. Trump called it 'a pro-family initiative that will help millions of Americans harness the strength of our economy to lift up the next generation'. Related: Trump's 'big, beautiful' bill is built on falsehoods about low-income families | Brigid Schulte and Haley Swenson CEOs from major companies including Michael Dell, Dara Khosrowshahi of Uber, David Solomon of Goldman Sachs, and Vladimir Tenev of Robinhood committed billions for employees' children's accounts. Trump praised the executives as 'really the greatest business minds we have today' who are 'committed to contributing millions of dollars to the Trump account'. Mike Johnson, the House speaker, also at the roundtable, championed the program, saying: 'It's a bold, transformative policy that gives every eligible American child a financial head start from day one. Republicans are proud to be the party we always have been. It supports life and families, prosperity and opportunity.' The program passed the House as part of a massive budget bill but faces stiffer Senate Republican resistance over the broader package. The accounts cannot be implemented as a standalone program and depend entirely on passage of what Trump calls the 'one big, beautiful bill' that is 'among the most important pieces of legislation in our country's history', claiming it's 'fully funded through targeted reforms' including welfare changes and a proposed remittance tax. However, the congressional budget office last week found the bill would also add $2.4tn to the national debt over the next decade while cutting Medicaid and food assistance programs. The CBO analysis showed the bill, which passed the House by a single vote and no Democratic support, would leave 10.9 million more Americans without healthcare by 2034. The treasury-funded accounts, previously called 'Maga accounts' resemble existing 529 college plans but with lower contribution limits – leading some financial advisers to say the Trump accounts may not offer the best investment incentives. The move is also not without precedent: the United Kingdom operated a similar Child Trust Fund with government seed funding from 2002-2011 before discontinuing the program, while Singapore runs the Baby Bonus Scheme that includes government-matched savings accounts for children. Trump was optimistic about returns, saying beneficiaries would 'really be getting a big jump on life, especially if we get a little bit lucky with some of the numbers and the economies into the future'. Johnson warned that failure to pass the legislation would result in 'the largest tax increase in American history' and pushed for swift congressional action on what he called 'pro-growth legislation' that would 'help every single American'. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Axios
31 minutes ago
- Axios
Colorado Gov. Polis wields power despite lame-duck status
Gov. Jared Polis is a lame duck — but he still holds a veto pen. Why it matters: The term-limited Democrat loomed large in the now-completed legislative term, evidenced by his record 11 vetoes, and his influence sets the stage for his final session in 2026. State of play: A deepening rift between Polis and his fellow Democrats emerged as a major theme from this year's session on issues ranging from artificial intelligence to labor issues. Polis signed 476 of 487 bills into law by last Friday, the deadline — 88% of the new laws included at least one Republican sponsor. He signed business-friendly legislation and rejected measures tightening regulations on technology companies, calling them "what's right for Colorado." Yes, but: The numbers mask the outward tension from the 2025 term that split Democrats. Polis managed to use his veto threat to scuttle numerous other bills to keep them off his desk. He vetoed three bipartisan measures and one to limit ambulance costs that passed with unanimous support. What they're saying:"This isn't the first year where we've had conflict. I think maybe the difference is how visible it might be," House Speaker Julie McCluskie said at a recent event hosted by the Colorado Sun. What we're watching: Asked if he feels like a lame duck, Polis demurred.
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
What Sen. Josh Hawley Wants from the One Big Beautiful Bill (for Medicaid)
Some would call it another perfect call. And as soon as Sen. Josh Hawley hung up the phone, the Missouri Republican rushed to social media to report on the "great talk" he just had and the promise President Trump made about the One Big Beautiful Bill, the cornerstone of his second term domestic policy agenda: "NO MEDICAID BENEFIT CUTS." Trump has said as much publicly, but the message still reassured the senator as Republicans on Capitol Hill search for savings to make up for federal revenue lost to tax cuts. Quickly emerging as the most vocal GOP opponent to Medicaid cuts, Hawley has warned his business-friendly colleagues that their mega bill amounts to a referendum: They can be either the party of the working class or the corporate C-suite. The president put it more bluntly. "People who cut Medicaid and Medicare lose elections," Trump told Hawley according to the senator. "My advice," he said in an interview with RealClearPolitics, "listen to the guy who won the popular vote." Asked about the conversation, White House spokesman Kush Desai repeated Trumps long stated policy preference. "The President has been clear-no cuts to Medicare, Social Security, or Medicaid," Desai said in a statement to RCP, adding that the bill "addresses waste, fraud, and abuse in government spending." Normally this would be the final word. Trump has remade the party in his image, and he gets his way more often than not. But the battle over Medicaid reform comes when the federal debt exceeds $36 trillion, and after Moodys downgraded the U.S. sovereign debt rating, and as interest payments to service that debt exceed federal spending on national defense. According to Congressional Budget Office estimates, Medicaid, the largest health U.S. insurance program, will cost nearly a trillion dollars annually within the decade. Hence the mocking all-caps rebuttal from Rep. Chip Roy. The Texas Republican wrote that he had his own "great talk," not with the president, but his children, who said, "STOP BORROWING MONEY TO PROP UP WASTEFUL SPENDING & TO SUBSIDIZE THE ABLE-BODIED OVER THE VULNERABLE." Replied Utah Sen. Mike Lee, one of the few remaining GOP fiscal hawks, "Your kids arent wrong." Such is the split that defines the modern GOP, as the old fiscal conservatives battle the new-right populists for control of the movement. The dry text of the tax bill doesnt make compelling reading. The intricacies of the legislation, and then all the outside analysis attempting to explain those details, can certainly be confusing. But the result of the fight, the direction the GOP takes, will be telling. "Were about to learn whether or not Republicans want to be a majority party," Hawley insisted. While the White House insists the mega bill "is the most essential piece of legislation currently under consideration in the entire Western World," the proposed spending cuts to Medicaid are starting to overshadow the new border security and tax cuts they were designed to pay for. Republicans now have the most consequential fight over health care since Obamacare repeal on their hands. And just like 2017, the margins are again slim; Majority Leader John Thune can afford to lose only two votes. But the party has changed considerably since then. With Trump at the helm during the last election, Republicans increased their voting share with every major demographic. The "multiethnic, multiracial, working class" coalition that former Florida Sen. Marco Rubio once envisioned seems within the GOPs grasp. Screwing it up by "considering" cuts to the social safety net, Hawley said, wouldnt only be "insane." He warns his party that it is "suicidal." This befuddles the likes of Speaker Mike Johnson, who defended the cuts in an interview with NBCs "Meet the Press" earlier this month by arguing that "4.8 million people will not lose their Medicaid unless they choose to do so." It isnt a cut, the speaker argues, so much as a structural reform to root out waste, fraud, and abuse. The House bill that Johnson shepherded requires able-bodied adults without dependents to work, study, or volunteer for at least 80 hours per month to keep their coverage. It also includes new eligibility requirements which Republicans say are meant to keep illegal immigrants off Medicaid. Another big reform, the bill would freeze so-called provider taxes, a practice employed by 49 states that the New York Times describes as a "Medicaid loophole" which allows individual states to use taxes to inflate their spending, thus increasing their federal reimbursement. The populist isnt opposed to everything House Republicans passed over to the Senate. Work requirements - Hawley said he supports them "wholeheartedly." And making illegal immigrants ineligible for benefits, he added, "Im absolutely for that 100%." The provider tax, however, he finds "problematic" and worries it could lead to the closure of rural Missouri hospitals. Congress has not yet reached the beginning of the end of the sausage-making (a fact that makes pinning lawmakers down difficult). The House version of the bill can and will change. Rather than picking apart that text, Hawley said he is focused on influencing the Senate bill and ensuring that "it is in line with the commitments that the president has consistently articulated." The general Hawley redline: "What I don't want to see, and what Im not going to vote for, is anything that will result in benefit cuts to folks who are otherwise eligible, and for working people, in my state." Even with slim majorities, Republicans have a free hand to pass the bill using budget reconciliation, a parliamentary process that requires 51 votes rather than the normal 60-vote supermajority. All the same, they are tied up in knots by a new more populist coalition. Warned Steve Bannon, an early architect of Trumpism, "MAGAs on Medicaid because theres not great jobs in this country." A familiar fracas has ensued. "The current budget is a rare, maybe once in a generation, chance for a significant Medicaid policy victory," opined the Wall Street Journal editorial board earlier this year. But to the horror of that business-friendly paper, Hawley and his Medicaid redline threatened to tie up the GOP. Wasnt this the same senator who as Missouri attorney general once joined a 2018 lawsuit to repeal the Affordable Care Act and its Medicaid expansion, they asked, dubbing the evolution "the Josh Hawley Medicaid Switcheroo." "This is not about Obamacare," Hawley replied when asked about that criticism. "This is about protecting working people and Medicaid." More than a million Missouri citizens rely on the program for insurance, and despite strong opposition from Republicans particularly in rural areas, the state voted through a ballot measure to amend the Constitution and expand Medicaid. "I represent the state of Missouri. I dont represent Wall Street," Hawley said referencing that recent history, "and I certainly dont represent the Wall Street Journal editorial board." He then added, "I'm sure that those who are in the business of making money by strip mining this country would love to gut Medicaid." Conservatives have long hoped to trim the social safety net. Some want steeper reductions. All in all though, there is a feeling in more orthodox corners of the GOP, like the conservative National Review, that the House bill represents a good compromise. In a recent editorial, that magazine opined that the cuts were more akin to "a modest series of tweaks" which will "not do much to alter its spending trajectory." According to the Congressional Budget Office, the House reforms will reduce Medicaid spending by about $723 billion over the next decade and reduce total enrollees in the program by 7.6 million. Hawley isnt deaf to those debt arguments. If Republicans really want to save money on healthcare, though, he said that his party ought to look to the president. More specifically, the senator pointed to Trumps proposed policies to cap the cost of prescription drugs and to close the so-called carried interest loophole. Those he says, "would save a bunch of money." Of course, as Hawley well knows, those proposals would kick up their own firestorms on the right. But his point remains: There are other avenues. "If people are serious about wanting to actually save money, theres all kinds of ways to do it," Hawley said. "But my point is, lets not tell working people that we just cant help them. 'Sorry! Were going to have to take away your benefits because theres a corporate guy out here who wants his thing to be permanent!" That is the old GOP way of doing things, and in his estimation, it leads to political obscurity. "If were not interested in being a majority party, then we'll keep doing the things that the partys done for decades," Hawley concluded, "And you know, well bow to corporate interests and let them write the bill." His suggestion, the one giving Republican brass fits right now, is instead to "just go back and listen to what Donald Trump said on the trail over the last year." Philip Wegmann is White House correspondent for RealClearPolitics.
