Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: This is gonna be one for the lawyers
Posted in:
* Sun-Times…
The judge overseeing the case against a former AT&T Illinois executive accused of bribing ex-state House Speaker Michael J. Madigan declined Tuesday to schedule another trial, saying he first wants to hear arguments on a motion for acquittal.
U.S. District Judge Robert Gettleman got back together with lawyers in the case of ex-AT&T Illinois President Paul La Schiazza five days after a jury failed to reach a verdict in the case. The panel heard from more than a dozen witnesses over four days earlier this month.
Defense attorney Tinos Diamantatos told the judge Tuesday he planned to file the motion for acquittal as soon as Friday, while prosecutors planned to ask for another trial date. But Gettleman said they’d be getting ahead of themselves by scheduling a new trial.
Rather, Gettleman said he planned to take a “serious look” at La Schiazza’s motion. He set oral arguments for Nov. 14.
…Adding… The Tribune…
Meanwhile, the oral arguments in La Schiazza’s case will land in the middle of Madigan’s own trial on racketeering charges, which kicks off in two weeks and could pose similar problems for prosecutors, particularly on several counts where they now have to prove there was an agreement with Madigan ahead of time to exchange something of value for an official act.
Gettleman alluded to the Madigan trial during Tuesday’s hearing, noting that it has “similar issues” to the one’s they were dealing with.
“Maybe we get some guidance from the (7th Circuit U.S.) Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court, who knows,” the judge said. “We certainly could use it.”
If there is a retrial, Gettleman said it would probably not happen until spring or summer of 2025, due to his schedule.
posted by Isabel Miller
Tuesday, Sep 24, 24 @ 11:29 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: This is gonna be one for the lawyers
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
The attorney is going to argue that the US Attorney failed to offer up any direct evidence of a quid pro quo.
McClain says Madigan says it would be great if you hired my friend the lobbyist.
Acevedo gets a consulting gig for which he did no work.
The kicker is Selke saying that they did not hire Acevedo as a lobbyist because it would make the GOP mad. It’s an open admission that both sides influence who AT&T (let’s be honest, everyone) hires as a lobbyist.
Prosecution witness testifies hiring of Acevedo had no impact on the bill passage.
Can the judge look at the evidence and make the determination that insufficient evidence was presented?
Comment by Juvenal Tuesday, Sep 24, 24 @ 11:51 am
Can the judge look at the evidence and make the determination that insufficient evidence was presented?
100% yes. Even if the Jury had found him guilty, the judge would be able to set aside the verdict if the judge was not convinced that the government had met its burden.
Comment by Paddyrollingstone Tuesday, Sep 24, 24 @ 12:26 pm
If the burden of proof is not met?…JNOV.
Gotta prove this for that…unambiguously.
Comment by Dotnonymous x Tuesday, Sep 24, 24 @ 1:18 pm
Looks like Judge already has “guidance” from U.S. Supreme Court…the AT&T effort was not a bribe. Perhaps he awaits the USA get get “guided”?
Comment by Annonin' Tuesday, Sep 24, 24 @ 3:19 pm
IMO, its going to be very difficult for there was ever a quid pro quo. MJM was too smart for that.
Comment by low level Tuesday, Sep 24, 24 @ 3:33 pm
“MJM was too smart for that.” So Mike Madigan still has some admirers here? The Springpatch social media/twittersphere has been full of thinly veiled admiration of Madigan for years. “The powerful and mysterious Speaker of the House. What is he really thinking, enquiring minds want to know…” Gag.
Gettleman’s telegraphed moves reminds me of the “mob illness” courtroom shtick where local bosses would come into the federal courthouse with a cane. At least back then before Greylord, we knew there was a serious possibility that cases were being fixed. Now I just think that the U.S. Attorney’s office is weak.
Comment by Payback Tuesday, Sep 24, 24 @ 6:16 pm