Madigan attorneys say feds’ call for 12.5-year sentence is ‘draconian’; prosecutors say he’s worth $40 million in new court filings

Former Democratic House Speaker Michael Madigan’s attorneys have attacked prosecutors’ “draconian” recommendation that he serve 12½ years in prison in the ComEd scandal, likening the proposed term to a life sentence for an old man who is “not the villain of their constructed narrative.”

“The government seeks to condemn an 83-year-old man to die behind bars for crimes that enriched him not one penny,” Madigan’s attorneys told U.S. District Judge John Robert Blakey in a 28-page response filed late Friday.

In a filing of their own minutes later, however, prosecutors revealed for the first time that Madigan “amassed a personal fortune of more than $40 million” during his years in Springfield, built in large part through his successful law practice appealing property taxes for deep-pocketed developers.

“Madigan’s greed is even more appalling given his law firm’s success,” the prosecution filing stated. “He certainly did not need more legal business.”

The Madigan brief, which comes a week before his highly anticipated sentencing, said the U.S. attorney’s office “repeatedly ignores the truth in favor of offering arguments that lack evidentiary support entirely, rely on pure speculation, or — worse — are contradicted by the clear evidentiary record.”

Over and over, Madigan’s defense lawyers said, “the government knows better,” including the offering of a false comparison to previous corruption cases against former Gov. George Ryan and former Gov. Rod Blagojevich, who unlike Madigan were convicted of all charges.

“The government’s rhetoric ignores the jury’s verdict,” wrote attorneys Daniel Collins, Todd Pugh, Lari Dierks and Tom Breen. “By comparing this case to cases such as former Governors Ryan and Blagojevich, the government asks this court to sentence Mike as if he was convicted of all charges. He was not.”

In turn, prosecutors wrote that Madigan’s request for probation rather than time behind bars would be “extraordinary leniency” for a “former high-level elected official convicted of abusing his office for years through bribery, fraud and conspiracy.”

“Each of those crimes is the antithesis of what a public official should do on behalf of the citizens he serves,” Assistant U.S. Attorneys Sarah Streicker, Diane MacArthur and Julia Schwartz wrote in their own 16-page response, also filed late Friday.

The dueling briefs set up an age-old question in Illinois politics: If you’re convicted of corruption when you’re near the end of your life, should you get a break?

Madigan turned 83 in April. Once the most powerful politician in the state, he was convicted by a jury Feb. 12 on bribery conspiracy and other corruption charges alleging he used his public office to increase his power, line his own pockets and enrich a small circle of his most loyal associates.

The jury found him guilty on 10 of 23 counts, including one count of conspiracy related to a multipronged scheme to accept and solicit bribes from utility giant Commonwealth Edison. Jurors also convicted him on two counts of bribery and another related to payments funneled to Madigan associates for do-nothing ComEd subcontracts.

Madigan also was convicted on six out of seven counts — including wire fraud — regarding a plan to get former 25th Ward Ald. Daniel Solis, a key FBI mole who testified at length in the trial, appointed to a state board.

The 12½-year sentence request from the U.S. attorney’s office is the longest in a public corruption case since the government asked for 15 to 20 years behind bars for Blagojevich. The prosecution’s request for Madigan is also longer than their recent ask of 10 years for former 14th Ward Ald. Edward Burke, who ultimately received a two-year prison term and was fined $2 million.

If prosecutors got their recommended sentence, Madigan would be around 94 years old when eligible for release given that federal convicts must serve 85% of their sentence.

The dueling response briefs on Friday came a week after the defense previously filed more than 200 letters calling for leniency from family, friends, lobbyists, labor leaders, clergy and former public officials, ranging from the former speaker’s daughter, former Attorney General Lisa Madigan, and Democratic Senate President John Cullerton to Republican luminaries, including former Gov. Jim Edgar.

Prosecutors on Friday argued the generous outpouring of letters hailing Madigan’s trustworthiness also “have the unintended effect of bolstering the evidence of Madigan’s participation” in corruption. They maintained the former speaker repeatedly downplayed and distanced himself from remarks caught on secret recordings during his trial but then undercut his position by filing letter after letter saying he was a man of his word.

Also filing a videotaped appeal for leniency was Madigan’s wife, Shirley, who said she suffers from a variety of health concerns and that her husband is her primary caretaker.

Prosecutors, meanwhile, argued Madigan “largely ignores the jury’s verdict” and “deprecates the evidence.”

“Madigan’s arguments — that he did not receive any personal benefit, that the ComEd legislation benefited Illinois and that Madigan’s intent was solely to help people — essentially amount to a claim that he is ‘innocent’ of the crimes of which the jury convicted him,” they wrote.

They also maintained that Madigan recommended multiple letter writers to state-level positions, such as labor leaders James Connolly of the Chicago Laborers’ District Council and James Sweeney of the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 150. Both unions have been sizable contributors to Madigan’s campaigns, and both leaders have served on the state tollway board.

“These letters thus demonstrate the power Madigan wielded — and to this day wields — over individuals to whom he has doled out favors,” prosecutors wrote.

“It is important to consider loyalty in the context of general deterrence,” prosecutors wrote. “Loyalty to a public official, particularly one who bestows benefits, can be taken to an extreme.”

Prosecutors further contended that putting great weight on the numerous glowing letters when calculating a sentence would require a judge to consider that several witnesses lied on the witness stand as well as Madigan’s own comments caught on recordings, including when talking to Solis, the former 25th Ward alderman.

That should, prosecutors said, include Madigan recorded as telling Solis that he “shouldn’t be talking like that” rather than flatly telling him that he should not engage in what the alderman once referred to as a “quid pro quo.”

But Madigan’s legal team pointed out the “quid pro quo” recording was part of an episode in which Madigan was acquitted on all counts.

“In the face of this acquittal,” they wrote, “the government still attempts to revive its spin on Madigan’s words and asks the court to sentence Madigan based on acquitted conduct.”

The defense lawyers also took exception to the government’s “attempt to minimize the deeply moving stories from over 200 people.”

“Numerous letters share the story of a man that cared for others, often when no one else would, in ways that go far beyond mere constituent services,” they wrote.

Madigan’s team has recommended he serve five years’ probation with the first year on home confinement.

Even so, prosecutors argued that Madigan’s “failure to accept responsibility for his conduct — and to instead lie and blame others — mandates that leniency is inappropriate.”

On top of the request for a lengthy sentence for Madigan, prosecutors have recommended he pay a hefty $1.5 million fine.

jmeisner@chicagotribune.com

rlong@chicagotribune.com