* First, some background from the Sun-Times, published last December…
Former AT&T Illinois President Paul La Schiazza will face trial again June 3 after his first trial ended in September with a hung jury, a federal judge said Thursday.
U.S. District Judge Robert Gettleman had previously delayed rescheduling La Schiazza’s trial, saying he first wanted to hear arguments on whether to acquit La Schiazza. But Gettleman shot down the former utility executive’s long-shot bid for an acquittal last week.
That means La Schiazza still faces charges that he bribed Madigan in 2017 by paying $22,500 to former state Rep. Edward “Eddie” Acevedo after Acevedo left the Illinois General Assembly.
* Today’s update from Tribune reporter Jason Meisner…
One of the issues was that the man La Schiazza is accused of bribing, former House Speaker Michael Madigan, is scheduled to be sentenced June 13, which would have been in the middle of La Schiazza’s trial.
AUSA Tim Chapman tells Judge Gettleman a delay until the fall would have them “more time to consider our position, especially with our new U.S. attorney (Andrew Boutros) coming on board…He’s basically drinking from a firehose right now in the first few weeks since his arrival.”
Gettleman says he’s still considering the jury instructions.
“I think we’ve seen juries hang lately — including ours– because these instructions are terribly confusing. …I don’t want another hung jury. And I don’t think anybody does. I want these to be as plain as possible”
The judge is moving La Schiazza’s trial to January 2026.
Thoughts?
- Donnie Elgin - Thursday, May 1, 25 @ 11:18 am:
= because these instructions are terribly confusing=
I trust the Judge here. Get better instructions next time. It is also good to remember that the case was pretty solid and La Schiazza avoided a conviction by one vote.
A federal judge declared a mistrial Thursday after a jury apparently deadlocked 11-1 on charges alleging former AT&T Illinois boss Paul La Schiazza bribed House Speaker Michael Madigan.
The panel was overwhelmingly leaning toward a conviction, one juror told the Tribune.
https://digitaledition.chicagotribune.com/tribune/article_popover.aspx?guid=410a8718-92ef-4528-8f25-ef0f127981ee
- Amalia - Thursday, May 1, 25 @ 11:41 am:
confusing jury notes. drinking from a fire hose taking over an office of less than 300 attorneys. what kind of confusion has gone on in the Northern District? they have long had a reputation of NOT going after cases like, say, the Northern District of Indiana, where AUSAs pretty much work like County prosecutors. high minded but not in the weeds gets you trial mess ups.
- low level - Thursday, May 1, 25 @ 11:53 am:
I agree the jury instructions are confusing but the entire exercise is ridiculous at this point. Just drop the charges. Everyone has moved on. Focus on violent criminals, not whether Idiot Eddie Acevedo got a contract.
- Sue - Thursday, May 1, 25 @ 12:09 pm:
Hmmm- who do you think ultimately approves the jury instructions? The Judge criticizing the so called confusing instructions is the one responsible for any said confusion
- clec dcn - Thursday, May 1, 25 @ 12:26 pm:
I say forget the whole thing no retrial. He is not a danger to society. Move on save money.
- low level - Thursday, May 1, 25 @ 12:29 pm:
==I say forget the whole thing no retrial. He is not a danger to society. Move on save money.==
1000000% yes.
- walker - Thursday, May 1, 25 @ 12:31 pm:
Jury instructions are confusing because the application of the law as argued by the State is confusing, as are their preferred interpretations key terms like “conspiracy”, “wire fraud”, and “bribery”. Judges have made it more confusing over time, by often adding to this evolution.
- *ducks* - Thursday, May 1, 25 @ 12:38 pm:
That’s some dog-the=feds–homework redirected posterior covering from the judge. Jury instructions are reflective of the laws. and when the feds contort the laws to fit the fact pattern, they reap what they sow.
- Frumpy White Guy - Thursday, May 1, 25 @ 1:26 pm:
Retrial is the right thing to do. La Schiazza escaped justice by one Juror. It will be interesting to see if State Rep Bob Rita reemerges as a witness.
- Jeb - Thursday, May 1, 25 @ 1:50 pm:
This whole thing is a mess. I suspect Chapman was all but telling us they plan on dropping the charges as they want guidance from Trump’s DOJ, and the new guy really has no business weighing in. Drop the charges. You shouldn’t put this man’s life on hold for almost five years. Ridiculous.
- ElTacoBandito - Thursday, May 1, 25 @ 2:06 pm:
==Focus on violent criminals, not whether Idiot Eddie Acevedo got a contract.==
Seriously? Sure we’ll let bribery, financial fraud, digital theft slide for now.
- Rich Miller - Thursday, May 1, 25 @ 2:09 pm:
===Sure we’ll let bribery, financial fraud, digital theft slide for now. ===
In the case of Sen. Jones, the person offering up the unsolicited bribe was instructed to do so by the federal government.
- Jeb - Thursday, May 1, 25 @ 2:32 pm:
–Hmmm- who do you think ultimately approves the jury instructions? The Judge criticizing the so called confusing instructions is the one responsible for any said confusion–
Well said. Maybe the 83-year-old judge should retire.
- Friendly Bob Adams - Thursday, May 1, 25 @ 4:34 pm:
Let it go and move on. I realize that the feds wanted to make the Madigan/ComEd cases the crimes of the century, but no point in going on into 2026. There have to be more important criminal activities to go after.