The 12 primary jurors include a nurse who enjoys Marvel movies, a woman who works for Aramark and another woman who has worked in catering, including for an event tied to the recent Democratic National Convention.
It took seven days and dozens of interviews, but 12 jurors have finally been chosen to decide whether Michael J. Madigan, the longest-serving statehouse speaker in the country, is guilty of a nearly decadelong racketeering conspiracy.
The 12th member of the 8-women, 4-men panel was chosen Thursday.
There’s more work to do before opening statements can begin in Madigan’s trial, though. U.S. District Judge John Blakey is still searching, along with prosecutors and defense attorneys, for alternate jurors.
Madigan’s trial is expected to push into the holiday season, and it wouldn’t be unusual for some of the people chosen for the jury to drop out before deliberations begin.
For now, the 12 primary jurors include a nurse who enjoys Marvel movies, a woman who works for Aramark and another woman who has worked in catering, including for an event tied to the recent Democratic National Convention.
Why the Madigan trial matters
Michael J. Madigan was the longest-serving state House speaker in the United States. That position made him the leader of the Illinois House of Representatives for nearly four decades, where he shepherded legislation that affected everyday life in Illinois. He also served for more than 20 years as the head of the Democratic Party of Illinois. Ultimately, he rose to become one of the most dominant politicians in Illinois since the late Chicago Mayor Richard J. Daley.
- What to expect in the trial
- Who was caught up in the investigation
- Who is Judge John Blakey?
- The documents behind the case
There is also a painter who lives in the 19th Ward, but who hopes to move to Ireland in the next five years; a woman who works at a Goodwill donation center; and a woman whose favorite TV shows include “The Office” and “Game of Thrones.”
The 12th juror picked works at a local hospital and said his brother works for a Swedish company in Macedonia. He recalled that Madigan was a “longtime leader” but couldn’t recall what position Madigan held. He said his position on Madigan was “neutral.”
Madigan is accused of leading a criminal enterprise designed to enhance his political power and enrich his allies and associates. His longtime friend and confidant, Michael McClain, is accused of acting as Madigan’s agent, passing along his instructions and shielding him from liability.
Both men have sat through hours of jury selection so far. It’s been light-hearted at times. A little drama ensued. But mostly it’s been dry and tedious. It’s also gone much slower than expected, putting the trial a full week behind schedule.
Madigan has been seen stifling several yawns.
A particularly colorful moment came last week, during an exchange between a woman who was eventually chosen for the jury and Madigan attorney Tom Breen. The juror at one point interrupted Breen to tell him he looked like the actor Eric Roberts.
That juror also told Breen about her longtime best friend, “Becky.” She said Becky surmised that the juror had likely been summoned for Madigan’s trial.
“She said, ‘If you get on the jury, vote guilty,’” the juror told the courtroom.
She went on to describe Becky as a “Trumper” who hates all Democrats “except me, maybe.”
“Watch what you eat with her,” Breen warned.
Breen’s exchange with the juror also led to one of the earliest dust-ups between prosecutors and defense attorneys in the trial. When the juror left the courtroom, Assistant U.S. Attorney Amarjeet Bhachu accused Breen of attempting an “inoculation” of the jury pool by using his questions to suggest there will be no repercussions if Madigan is acquitted.
“Sometimes it takes guts to tell the United States government, ‘You blew it,’” Breen countered.
Blakey told Bhachu he should object to any attempts at jury nullification — seeking a verdict that’s contrary to the law. But the judge said he hadn’t seen it yet.
Another point of strategy might have been revealed when McClain’s lawyers challenged a potential juror who recalled the guilty verdicts in last year’s ComEd bribery trial. The juror did not seem to recall that McClain was among those convicted.
McClain’s lawyers found it problematic. But Madigan’s lawyers chose not to join them in challenging the juror.
McClain’s team predicted this summer that Madigan’s will effectively throw McClain under the bus during the trial, possibly even asking jurors to choose between the two of them. In fact, Madigan’s lawyers have also made a point of asking jury candidates whether they understand that each defendant deserves “separate consideration.”