Madigan trial: Defense files motion as jurors return for 9th day of deliberations

CHICAGO - Jurors in the federal corruption trial of former Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan and longtime political associate Michael McClain returned Monday for their ninth day of deliberations, but still have not returned a verdict.

Since receiving the case on Jan. 29, the eight-woman, four-man jury has now deliberated for roughly 55 hours and counting.

What we know:

On Friday, jurors submitted a note asking for clarification on their instructions as they worked through nearly two dozen felony counts against the man who was once the state's most powerful politician.

In addition to requesting two more binders of audio transcripts, jurors also wanted guidance on whether "bona fide salary" is considered something of value. Attorneys for both sides debated whether the jurors should determine that for themselves before Judge Edmond Chang decided it was a fair question.

Chang, who was substituting for the case's assigned judge, Judge John Robert Blakey, offered clarification, telling jurors that salary and wages that come from a normal course of business do not qualify as a thing of value. But if they're obtained by means of bribery, that should not be considered a normal course of business.

Chang reminded the jury that it's ultimately up to them to determine the facts of the case.

"Look, it's a complicated case," said Ron Safer from Riley Safer Holmes & Cancila LLP. "The jury is trying to draw the line between what is legitimate conduct and what is bribery. It is clear that the jury is struggling, as lawyers struggle with what is the line between legitimate conduct and bribery? They are wrestling with that. It's very difficult, and I wouldn't be surprised if there are some people who just say, look, we're not finding that that's bribery."

Defense Files Motion on Monday

What they're saying:

Early Monday, attorneys for Madigan and McClain filed a motion requesting that the court provide jurors with further clarification on their question, emphasizing that the burden of proof lies with the government, not the defense.

"For purposes of evaluating a 'thing of value', 'valuable thing', or 'something of value', the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant knew the salary at issue was not bona fide or wages paid in the usual course of business," the motion read.

Federal prosecutors responded to the defense’s motion on Monday afternoon, writing that it would be "improper" to provide the jury with additional elements or instructions.

They argued in their written response:

"The crafting of the instructions in this case was not the product of some off-the-cuff one-hour instruction conference; on the contrary, the submissions on the jury instructions were an exhaustive months-long affair."

The backstory:

The jury in this landmark case was seated in mid-October. Jurors have been meticulously sifting through evidence presented during the nearly four-month-long trial.

They’ve heard testimony from more than 60 witnesses and listened to dozens of wiretap recordings in court.

They have also been provided with a laptop to access key files as they work through the 23 counts against Madigan and six counts against McClain. Their jury instructions, alone, amount to more than 100 pages.

What's next:

The jury deliberated until 4:30 p.m. on Monday and will return to the courthouse at 9 a.m. Tuesday to continue discussing the case.  

If convicted, Madigan, 82, and McClain, 77, could face significant prison time, though their ages may play a role in sentencing considerations.