A federal jury began its fourth day of deliberations Thursday after signaling a potential impasse on two of the charges in the corruption trial of state Sen. Emil Jones III.
Late in the day on Wednesday, the jury sent a note to U.S. District Judge Andrea Wood signaling that they were unable to agree on counts of bribery and lying to the FBI. After consulting with lawyers in the case, Wood told the panel Thursday that a deadlock would be premature at this point in their talks, and to continue deliberating.
The jury also indicated that they would take Friday off from deliberations or leave early due to scheduling conflicts, if they do not conclude their work by then.
The panel is faced with determining whether the South Side Democrat is guilty of bribery, use of an interstate facility to solicit bribery and lying to federal agents regarding his dealings with a red-light camera company executive over the summer of 2019.
Prosecutors allege he promised the camera company’s executive and undercover FBI operative, Omar Maani, assistance with a bill in Springfield in exchange for a $5,000 campaign donation and a part-time job for his former intern.
The jury in its Wednesday note observed that count one states Jones agreed to accept a bribe and money for an associate, and inquired about whether they had to find both of those things to be true along with other criteria to convict him.
“It doesn’t look like the jury can reach a unanimous agreement on counts one and three. Is there any assistance that can be provided,” the note read. They did not elaborate about what could be at the root of their apparent disagreement.
Previously, the jury has sent notes asking about whether they should consider the crime of bribery to have been committed the moment an official agrees to a deal or whether that official’s later actions should influence their decision.
Wood on Thursday said she thought “three days of deliberation for a trial of this length… is probably a reasonable point in time to inquire whether they were still making progress in their deliberations.” It was not immediately clear when she might ask the jury for more information on their progress.
If the jury deadlocks or is unable to make a complete finding, it would not be the first recent example of such a result in a public corruption case in the Dirksen U.S. Courthouse. Former Illinois House Speaker Michael J. Madigan was not convicted of a racketeering conspiracy charge, among other counts, after a marathon trial earlier this year. Before that, a federal judge declared a mistrial after a jury deadlocked 11-1 on charges alleging former AT&T Illinois boss Paul La Schiazza bribed Madigan.
Jones’ trial, now well into its third week, doesn’t have the blockbuster status of other recent trials with roots in the Illinois General Assembly like Madigan’s or La Schiazza. But Jones is the first sitting state legislator to go before a jury in nearly a decade, and the first sitting politician to be tried in federal court since former Ald. Patrick Daley Thompson was convicted of tax fraud in 2021.
Jones’ attorneys have argued that Jones was snared while trying to get a stubborn bill through the committee process and have focused on the fact Maani never made a payment to Jones.
Prosecutors, however, have pointed out that Jones was noncommittal for years about legislation that was friendly to red-light cameras and changed his tune about a proposed study after a series of steak dinners and a pledge from Maani to find a job for Jones’ old intern, Christopher Katz.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Tiffany Ardam described Jones as “jumping in” to strike an agreement with Maani and contended that he “knew full well” that he was involved in something corrupt: “That is why the defendant lied to the FBI when they came knocking at his door.”
Jones, testifying in his own defense, said his taped responses of “yeah, yeah,” and “I got you, I got you” were actually his attempts to blow Maani off, whom he said reminded him of a “used car salesman.”
If the jury convicts him, Jones would be forced to resign under Illinois law and would almost certainly forfeit any future pension. The most serious charge carries up to 10 years in prison. Others would bring a five-year maximum term.