Crime & Law
Michael Madigan Takes Stand in His Own Defense at Corruption Trial in Bombshell Move
Video: The WTTW News Spotlight Politics team discusses Michael Madigan’s testimony and more of the day’s top stories. (Produced by Emily Soto)
Michael Madigan, the nation’s longest serving legislative leader before his resignation as Illinois House speaker in 2021, has elected to testify in his own defense at his ongoing corruption trial.
The bombshell decision came Tuesday as the monthslong trial at Chicago’s Dirksen Federal Building is drawing to a close. In his first comments on the witness stand, Madigan denied trading his public office for private gain or demanding anything of value in exchange for a promise of official action.
“When people ask me for help, if possible, I tried to help them,” Madigan said.
Neither Madigan, nor his defense team, had given any prior indication the former speaker intended to take the witness stand.
But after testimony from former Illinois House Majority Leader Greg Harris wrapped up, Madigan attorney Dan Collins indicated to the court that his client was expected to be the next witness called.
“Mr. Madigan is prepared to waive his Fifth Amendment right to testify as to this trial,” Collins said.
But rather than launching directly into that testimony, government prosecutors and defense attorneys had to figure out whether Madigan’s decision would affect his ability to testify, or not testify, at a forfeiture trial that would be conducted immediately after any guilty verdicts are rendered against the former speaker.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Amarjeet Bhachu argued, while there’s no “no pinpoint clarity on this issue,” that prosecutors should be allowed to call Madigan at that forfeiture trial and his testimony should be allowed to be used in the event of a mistrial or subsequent retrial.
But U.S. District Court Judge John Blakey countered that a defendant should be allowed to assert their Fifth Amendment privileges in any future criminal case, regardless of his testimony in this trial.
Collins agreed, arguing that the Fifth Amendment right is “proceeding-specific.”
Madigan, who is charged alongside his longtime right-hand man Michael McClain, is alleged to have orchestrated multiple corruption schemes, wielding his political power to reward loyal allies and enrich himself.
He and McClain are each charged with racketeering, bribery and wire fraud. They have each pleaded not guilty.
On the witness stand, Madigan discussed his upbringing, presenting himself as a member of a blue-collar family, moving from elementary school to St. Ignatius for high school and then off to Notre Dame before returning to Chicago where he worked for the city under his father on a “dirt truck” where he picked up items too big to be collected by garbage trucks.
But Madigan said his father, who’d struggled with alcoholism, “dominated” their household.
“In that house, the word ‘nurturing’ didn’t exist,” Madigan said, saying his parents never embraced and never told him they loved him.
Eventually he moved into politics, saying he first sought to be a delegate to an Illinois Constitutional Convention in 1969 and was elected as state representative the following year — a position he continued holding until he resigned in 2021.
But because of that upbringing, Madigan said he became conflict-averse and instead focused on building consensus in order to keep all parties happy.
“My general approach would be if I could be helpful, I wanted to be helpful,” he testified.
Madigan became speaker in 1983 and held that position until Republicans took over the House in 1994. After 1996, the Democrats were back in power and Madigan was reelected as speaker.
When he returned to that position, he opted to maintain rules adopted by Republican Speaker Lee Daniels which greatly expanded the power of the position, giving the speaker say over what bills were called for votes in the House.
Madigan, who described himself as a “young 82” years old, appeared relaxed while testifying, often recounting several “very interesting” stories from his youth and early political career.
Opting to testify in one’s own defense is not typical and could prove to be a highly risky move, as it opens the door for prosecutors to cross-examine Madigan under oath. McClain has already elected not to testify in this case.
The most substantial of the alleged schemes involves ComEd. The two defendants are accused of arranging subcontractor jobs for several of the former speaker’s associates — including 13th Ward precinct captains Ray Nice and Ed Moody, and former Chicago Alds. Frank Olivo and Michael Zalewski — with the utility giant, which paid out more than $1 million to those individuals even as they did little or no work.
Those allegations involved his support for the “Smart Grid” bill passed in 2011.
Madigan testified that while on a promotional trip in Turkey in 2010, he met with ComEd exec Anne Pramaggiore, who told him the utility wanted to build an entirely new power grid, but would only be able to do so with a new formula rate put in place.
That “sounded like a pretty good idea,” Madigan testified, but he added that he “had this history with ComEd … we didn’t trust them.” That was because the utility company had previously relied on “camouflaged language” to avoid following through on its responsibility in a different piece of legislation years earlier.
He instructed his staff to engage in negotiations with ComEd, but to be wary of the specific language used. In doing so, Madigan’s legal team ensured there were sunset provisions included in the bill that would put a deadline on ComEd’s rate authority if they failed to follow through on their promises.
Madigan on Tuesday repeatedly denied that any job recommendations he made were ever tied to promises that he take official action in Springfield. He also distanced himself from the alleged no-work jobs, saying that he would simply pass off names and resumes to McClain, but that he didn’t know what happened beyond that.
Madigan said Olivo approached him seeking help to find work after he’d decided not to run for reelection as alderperson in 2011. Madigan testified that he gave Olivo’s resume to McClain, and that Olivo eventually got a contract working under Jay Doherty for ComEd.
According to Madigan, he knew nothing of the type of work Olivo was supposed to be doing and that when he learned Olivo had done “little to no work” for ComEd, he was “very angry.”
“I expected people associated with me to work all the time,” Madigan said. “He knew that and given that knowledge he should’ve worked. He should have done his job.”
Prosecutors alleged Nice, Moody and Zalewski received similar contracts and also did little or no work, which Madigan again said made him “angry.”
“He knew my work ethic and what I expected from people associated with me,” Madigan testified when asked about Nice. “He should’ve worked just like everyone else is supposed to work.”
Madigan denied demanding or even asking ComEd to hire his associates, and said he never believed their hiring was in any way part of an exchange for him to take official action on the utility company’s behalf.
Last year, Pramaggiore and John Hooker — two members of the so-called “ComEd Four” accused of conspiring to bribe Madigan — testified in their own defense. Pramaggiore, ComEd’s former CEO, distanced herself from the speaker, saying she didn’t consider herself a Madigan ally and telling jurors she regularly rejected job recommendations made to ComEd by Madigan through McClain.
Still, Pramaggiore, Hooker and their two co-defendants were each convicted.
Former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich also opted to testify at his own corruption trial back in 2011, where he, too, was ultimately convicted on several charges including wire fraud and attempted extortion.
Madigan’s daughter, former Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan, and other supporters were present in court Tuesday.
The trial of Madigan and McClain began back in October and testimony is expected to conclude later this month with jury deliberations tentatively scheduled for Jan. 27. The government rested its case in mid-December, and McClain’s defense rested its case after calling just one witness.
