Lawyers for former House Speaker Michael Madigan need the jury in his corruption trial to see proof that then-Ald. Daniel Solis allegedly cheated on taxes whereas working undercover with the federal authorities.
Before starting a jury briefing convention Monday, Madigan’s legal professionals revealed that they wish to name Solis’ longtime accountant, in addition to a former IRS worker, to testify concerning the then-alderman’s tax returns, which in line with the protection have failed to say tons of of 1000’s of {dollars}. within the funds Solis acquired from his sister.
Madigan’s authorized group started engaged on the case on Dec. 19, earlier than an extended vacation break, however the identities of future witnesses had not been absolutely mentioned in public information.
Solis, the previous head of the influential zoning board, grew to become a mole for the FBI in June 2016 and made a collection of undercover audio and video recordings of Madigan that kind the spine of the prosecution’s case.
“What we’re displaying is that he was committing a criminal offense whereas cooperating,” Madigan’s legal professional Daniel Collins advised U.S. District Judge John Robert Blakey. The proof would additionally present that Solis had ulterior motives to curry favor with the federal government.
Prosecutors objected to a few of the proof offered, saying that any bias by Solis was “absolutely explored” in cross-examination final month, and that together with the proof would danger creating an irrelevant sideshow about tax regulation.
“There’s no want so as to add this further layer” for the jury,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Diane MacArthur mentioned Monday. She mentioned that assuming “there was a criminal offense right here relating to the tax returns” is “stuffed with issues”.
Collins, nonetheless, mentioned the jury didn’t want to search out any guilt to conclude that Solis had been compromised as a witness.
“I’m not going to ask the jury, ‘Hey, discover Danny Solis responsible of this crime,’” Collins mentioned. “Frankly, the federal government wants to research this data and decide whether or not a criminal offense was dedicated and whether or not he will likely be charged.”
During cross-examination of Solis in November, Collins questioned the previous alderman about his connections to the Vendor Assistance Program, a enterprise began by his pal Brian Hynes and Solis’ sister, longtime Democratic operative Patti Solis Doyle. The program made tens of millions by buying unpaid payments from the state after which amassing late charges.
As compensation for connecting her with Hynes, Solis’ sister paid the alderman greater than half 1,000,000 {dollars} over a interval of about seven years, a lot of which was by no means reported on Solis’ tax returns, she revealed Collins in his interrogation.
Additionally, Solis’ sister was recorded by the FBI telling her brother to “evaluation” the monetary paperwork in his tax return and to say the $230,000 she paid him in 2016 as a capital acquire on a earlier funding, which it wasn’t true.
Solis testified that he usually does not perceive how taxes work and acted on his sister’s suggestions.
“Did you notice your sister beneficial tax fraud?” Collins requested.
“No,” Solis mentioned.
It was additionally revealed Monday that the protection plans to name Madigan’s former regulation companion, Vincent “Bud” Getzendanner, to testify about long-standing moral controls used to keep away from any potential conflicts of curiosity involving Madigan’s public positions.
Getzendanner, who was seen and heard on most of the undercover recordings Solis made to pitch the corporate’s companies to builders, can be anticipated to testify concerning the firm’s historical past and the way it has helped purchasers navigate the sophisticated means of evaluating Chicago property taxes.
Prosecutors mentioned they object to having Getzendanner testify about what their firm would do in conditions apart from these at concern within the trial.
Blakey mentioned he’ll rule on the query of witnesses earlier than they take the stand.
Madigan, 82, a Southwest Side Democrat, and his longtime confidante, Michael McClain, 77, of Quincy, are charged in a 23-count indictment that alleges the vaunted state and political operations of Madigan have been run as a prison enterprise to build up and enhance his energy and enrich himself and his associates.
In addition to pressuring builders to rent the relator’s regulation agency, the indictment accuses Madigan and McClain of conspiring to have utility giants Commonwealth Edison and AT&T Illinois place the relator’s associates on contracts requiring little or no work in return of Madigan’s help on key laws in Springfield. .
ComEd additionally allegedly outsourced authorized work to a Madigan ally, granted his request to put a political affiliate on the state-regulated firm’s board of administrators, and distributed summer time internship packages to school college students residing in his Southwest Side legislative district, in line with the fees.
Both Madigan and McClain have denied any wrongdoing.
The trial, which started on October 8, is predicted to achieve its ultimate stage as early as subsequent week. While jury instruction conferences are usually boring, they took on better significance in Madigan’s case after a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in June raised the bar for what prosecutors should show when coping with the federal statute on corruption contained in Madigan’s indictment.
In its resolution within the corruption case of former Portage, Indiana, Mayor James Snyder, the High Court dominated that “suggestions” – or presents given as thanks for actions already taken by a public official – should not criminalized below of the federal statute, and that prosecutors should reveal the existence of an settlement prematurely.
A jury seemed to be wrestling with that very query earlier than deadlocking in September within the trial of former AT&T Illinois chief Paul La Schiazza, accused of bribing Madigan in an alleged scheme that can be a part of Madigan’s case.
Earlier this month, La Schiazza’s legal professionals misplaced an try to dismiss the fees, and the case is now up for a brand new trial in June.
Blakey, in the meantime, refused to dismiss any corruption fees towards Madigan, saying the indictment overcomes the hurdle posed within the Snyder case by alleging that Madigan carried out official acts in alternate for varied issues of worth, together with ComEd jobs for i his associates.
However, the High Court ruling is certain to affect the language the jury receives within the authorized directions, which can set out what prosecutors must show on the 5 counts of corruption included within the indictment.
Blakey had hoped that earlier than the trial concluded, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the seventh Circuit would obtain new jury directions addressing the Snyder ruling.
But the choose advised the events earlier this month that the brand new mannequin directions wouldn’t be prepared in time.
jmeisner@chicagotribune.com
mcrepeau@chicagotribune.com
Originally printed:
