Jury Selection Remains Slow Going in Ex-House Speaker Michael Madigan’s Landmark Corruption Trial

Matt Masterson | October 16, 2024, 1:17 pm

(WTTW News)

The pace of jury selection in ex-House Speaker Michael Madigan’s landmark corruption trial has remained sluggish as the questioning process enters its second week.

Eleven jurors were picked through the first three days of the selection process last week, but so far no new members have been chosen through two days of questioning this week.

Thanks to our sponsors:

Only one additional person is needed to finalize the 12-person jury that will hear the case against Madigan and his longtime confidant Michael McClain — who stand accused of racketeering, bribery and wire fraud — but prosecutors and defense attorneys must then pick six additional alternates.

The selection process has lumbered along to this point due to the extensive pool of prospective jurors and the thorough questioning they’ve faced. Judge John Blakey has repeatedly said he won’t rush attorneys, but has noted the trial schedule would be affected if the process continues at this pace.

Attorneys on the case had initially expected a full jury would be seated by the end of last week and that opening statements would be held Tuesday. Instead, it’s now likely openings won't be held until next week.

During questioning this week, the perception of corruption throughout Chicago politics has been brought up by multiple potential jurors.

One person, a retired attorney, said Tuesday his views of Madigan fall “more on the negative side” adding that “politics can be a messy business.” He also said he’s aware of general allegations of corruption made against Chicago politicians.

“Politics can be a dirty business,” he said. “They don’t always cross a line, sometimes they might, and that’s where I think it would be interesting, to see what goes on behind the curtain.”

When asked if he understood that the allegations in this case related to corruption, he replied “Oh absolutely.” The man also said Chicago has a “stain” on its politics, noting that he often hears about city alderpeople getting in trouble with the law.

Another possible juror, a man who works in asset management and has connections to Baltimore and Chicago, discussed on Tuesday his sense that both cities had been marred by corrupt politicians.

On Wednesday, a potential juror from Bloomingdale said her knowledge of Madigan largely comes from negative campaign flyers from past elections, but noted that she doesn’t put much stock in that information.

“In a campaign you’re always going to be getting ‘anti’ literature and you have to take it with a grain of salt,” she said. “There’s two sides to a coin.”

The woman — who said she’d previously heard of this case and believed there “must have been some basis” for the charges — also said she “cringed” when she received her jury summons and hoped the lengthy trial estimate was a “worst case scenario.”

"The worst case may very well occur,” Madigan attorney Tom Breen told her.

Each of those potential jurors were ultimately excused.

Also questioned Wednesday was a woman who works as a bank compliance officer in Morton Grove and has previously served on two juries. In one case, she served as the foreperson in a criminal trial held in Cook County, but said nothing about that experience would affect her ability to hear this case fairly.

During that case, she said the judge described a defense argument made at trial as “white noise.” Madigan attorney Todd Pugh argued that previously receiving such an instruction very well could create an unconscious bias in her mind against the defense in this case.

Blakey noted that jurors in this trial must follow his own instructions, not those from any previous case, but he ultimately excused the woman over those potential issues.

The woman — who told the court she gets her news largely from WTTW and “Chicago Tonight” — said she was vaguely aware of the allegations in this case, but said she isn’t interested in politics and had no strong feelings for or against Madigan.

The former House speaker is alleged to have orchestrated multiple corruption schemes, wielding his substantial political power to reward loyal allies and enrich himself.

Among the allegations included in Madigan’s 23-count indictment are claims he arranged contract jobs for his associates — who did little actual work — with Commonwealth Edison and AT&T Illinois, and in exchange he offered political backing on Springfield legislation that was favorable to those companies.

Both Madigan and McClain have denied any wrongdoing. McClain was previously convicted along with three other ComEd officials for conspiring to bribe Madigan, but those defendants have not yet been sentenced and have sought to have those verdicts tossed out.

Madigan and McClain, who have been seated at separate tables throughout jury selection, have rarely acknowledged each other inside the courtroom during the first days of the trial. But on Wednesday morning, McClain patted Madigan on the shoulder as he passed by the former speaker before jury questioning resumed.