Madigan juror recounts deliberation process following verdict: ‘It was kind of emotional’

CHICAGO (WGN) — Jurors in the landmark federal corruption trial of former House Speaker Michael Madigan provided insight Wednesday into how they reached their decision.

After 11 days of deliberations, a jury of eight women and four men convicted the longtime politician, charged in multimillion-dollar racketeering and bribery schemes, of 10 counts and acquitted him of seven. They could not decide on six counts.

Juror No. 50, a 32-year-old woman who wished only to be identified as Danielle, sat down with WGN News to reflect on four months of the trial and 11 days of deliberations with her fellow jurors, some of whom she says are now lifelong friends.

“It was kind of emotional,” she said. “You are making the decision for somebody’s life for the rest of their life. It’s kind of a heavy burden to be put on our shoulders but we just went in there and had to do what we had to do.”

Danielle said jurors broke down the evidence piece by piece, using highlighters, notes, and other tools. But they couldn’t agree, which crystallized on Tuesday, Feb. 11.

“We pretty much had all the verdicts in order, but there were two that were holding their ground. They were still on the fence, or other jurors were questioning them as to why they were on the fence, so we thought it be best to break for the day,” she said.

MADIGAN VERDICT: Former Illinois House Speaker found guilty on several counts; jury deadlocked on others

When no one had changed their minds Wednesday morning, jurors sent a note to the judge that read: “It is our belief this impasse will not be overcome.”

While jurors ultimately found Madigan guilty of several counts, the group could not decide on all charges against Madigan’s co-defendant, Michael McClain.

“We just didn’t really find a great amount of evidence to convict him on most charges, and that was another thing we did not all agree on, so we just left it at that,” Danielle said.

Another juror, Malik, spoke about jury deliberations with WGN News cameras outside the courthouse.

“It just took us a little moment to get on the same page with the perspective of the language in the instructions. That was it. And whether or not the evidence was ever presented and whether it was there or not,” he said.

Danielle says the state presented a thorough case, noting that one piece of evidence out of hundreds stood out.

“There was a wiretap where Madigan was referencing the subcontractors making out like bandits that kind of gave the impression to us as a jury that he knew what was going on,” Danielle said.

She says she appreciated hearing from Madigan himself on the stand.

“It seems like he was a down-to-earth character who cared greatly about the people he was around, and several of the witnesses said how much he had done for them,” Danielle said. “So you see both sides to each story.”

Danielle has missed work since October but told WGN news she is eager to return on Friday after a well-deserved day off on Thursday.