Prosecutors told jurors in the corruption trial of ex-Illinois House Speaker Michael J. Madigan they could choose from a vast swath of alleged crimes as they consider whether to convict the once-powerful politician of a racketeering conspiracy.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Diane MacArthur ended the feds’ initial closing argument at 11:30 a.m. Friday after explaining the so-called “umbrella” racketeering count that encompasses all of the alleged schemes prosecutors set out to prove in Madigan’s nearly four-month trial.
MacArthur told jurors that Madigan and his longtime ally, Michael McClain, operated “as an ongoing unit.”
“They talked constantly,” she said. “They met regularly. They supported each other. They performed their own roles. … One gave the orders, and one executed them.”
In all, the feds’ argument lasted about 10 hours over three days. Madigan’s defense attorneys were expected to begin their closing argument after a lunch break Friday.
To convict Madigan of a racketeering conspiracy, jurors will need to find that Madigan or McClain agreed that two so-called racketeering acts would be committed — not that they were actually carried out.
She said jurors could find that Madigan agreed to both acts, that each man agreed to one act, or that McClain agreed to both without Madigan agreeing to any.
MacArthur offered examples: The alleged bribery schemes involving ex-Ald. Danny Solis’ bid for a state board seat or to develop a parking lot in Chinatown, efforts by Madigan and McClain to install businessman Juan Ochoa on ComEd’s board of directors, and payments by ComEd and AT&T Illinois to Madigan allies that were allegedly meant to influence Madigan.
The prosecutor even told jurors that each payment to a Madigan ally from the utilities could amount to a racketeering act.
“There are many payments made to each individual subcontractor,” MacArthur said.
In fact, the lists of payments tied to the ComEd scheme take up roughly 20 pages of Madigan’s 117-page indictment.
MacArthur told jurors that Madigan and McClain abused their positions “to maintain Madigan’s power and acquire profit for his personal gain.”
“For Madigan and McClain, the corrupt way was the way it was,” MacArthur said. “The way it continued to be.”
And to make her point about the sense of entitlement at play, she aired a recording of McClain complaining to Madigan’s son about people who didn’t like being pressured to hire someone with political connections.
“That’s what happens when you’re in this game,” McClain said on the call. He told Madigan’s son that “it’d be easier if everybody would just obey, right?” And he said, “You never know, maybe someday you can ask for a favor … Hello? Dumb s—s.”
“Their use of utilities as benefit-fulfillment centers, and this sense of entitlement — they should get something from utilities because they required legislation — to fulfill their needs permeates this case,” MacArthur said.
Prosecutors say Madigan led a criminal enterprise made up of his public, political and private offices designed to enhance his political power and financial well-being, and to reward his associates.