A federal jury will hear closing arguments Tuesday in the case of ex-AT&T Illinois boss Paul La Schiazza, who is accused of secretly funneling payments to an ally of then-House Speaker Michael Madigan in an effort to win the powerful Democrat’s support of key legislation in Springfield.
The final presentations to the jury come as both sides rested their cases Monday after testimony from some 14 witnesses over four days.
La Schiazza, 66, was charged in an indictment returned by a federal grand jury in October 2022 with conspiracy, federal program bribery and using a facility in interstate commerce to promote unlawful activity.
The most serious counts carry up to 20 years in prison if convicted. He has pleaded not guilty and has been free on bond while his case is pending.
According to prosecutors, La Schiazza schemed to pay retiring state Rep. Eddie Acevedo a total of $22,500 over nine months for doing little or no work for AT&T, even though he ostensibly was supposed to produce a report on the Latino caucuses in Springfield and Chicago’s City Hall.
The arrangement, which was pushed by longtime Madigan confidant Michael McClain, came as AT&T was looking to pass a bill ending mandated landline service, which stood to save the company millions of dollars, according to trial testimony.
La Schiazza’s lawyers contend that Acevedo’s hiring was nothing more than the typical relationship building that is necessary in politics, especially when a company is trying to get lawmakers to consider its agenda. They also told the jury there was no evidence that La Schiazza thought what he was doing was improper — an element that prosecutors have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.
The trial, which proceeded far quicker than the original three-week estimate, has offered a sneak peek at evidence that will be presented at Madigan’s own racketeering trial, which kicks off in three weeks.
Among the key witnesses in the weeklong trial was Tom Cullen, a lobbyist and former top aide to Madigan who was the alleged go-between for the illicit payments to Acevedo.
Another was Stephen Selcke, who was given immunity by prosecutors in 2022, compelling him to testify against his friend, La Schiazza, but also shielding him from any criminal prosecution as long as he tells the truth.
Both Cullen and Selcke testified that Acevedo, whose penchant for drinking and sometimes belligerent behavior was well-known in Springfield, was far from an ideal hire for AT&T, but the deal went forward anyways at McClain’s urging to appease the speaker at a critical time for the company.
Cullen testified Friday that as leader of the Democratic Party of Illinois, Madigan “had complete control” over a vast network of staffers and resources, while his role as speaker also gave him “complete control over the House of Representatives.”
That’s why La Schiazza and his team at AT&T Illinois knew that without Madigan’s support for legislation to end mandated landline service, which stood to save the company millions of dollars, it would likely go nowhere, Cullen told the jury.
“It was terribly important because the speaker controls the flow of legislation in the House and the speaker was influential on whether a bill could pass or fail,” Cullen testified.
On Monday, the jury was shown a flurry of internal AT&T emails that came after La Schiazza received a request from Madigan’s son, Andrew Madigan, asking for a charitable contribution just days after the passage of the landline bill, which was known by the acronym COLR.
In his donation request, Andrew Madigan made clear that “our good friend Mike McClain” had suggested he reach out to AT&T.
“Here we go … this will be endless,” La Schiazza wrote to colleague Bob Barry, a leader on AT&T’s government relations team, about the request from Andrew Madigan. Barry, responded, “I suspect the ‘thank you’ opportunities will be plentiful.”
“Yep … we are on the friends and family plan now,” La Schiazza replied.
“We are,” Barry responded. “And there is a sensitivity in that office about us going away now that we got COLR.”
“That is something to keep in mind in rest (of) 17 and in 18 regarding budget and profile with the Speakers office,” Barry wrote.
La Schiazza responded by noting they still had other pending legislation that would require the speaker’s assistance.
“I will emphasize that to leadership. … Especially if we expect to pass a small cell bill,” La Schiazza wrote.
AT&T wound up donating $2,500 to Andrew Madigan’s charity, according to evidence presented in court Monday.
Prosecutors allege the exchange showed La Schiazza’s state of mind in the weeks after Madigan helped shepherd AT&T’s COLR relief bill through the General Assembly.
Andrew Madigan is not accused of wrongdoing.
Shortly after presenting the emails, prosecutors rested their case. After a short sidebar with the judge, the defense also rested its case without putting on evidence. La Schiazza declined to testify in his own defense after being informed about his rights in a sidebar.
U.S. District Judge Robert Gettleman told the jury to return at 9:30 a.m. Tuesday for closing arguments.
Earlier Monday, La Schiazza’s attorney, Tinos Diamantatos, had a chance to cross-examine Tom Cullen, a lobbyist and former aide to Speaker Madigan who allegedly acted as the go-between for the payments from AT&T to Acevedo.
Cullen, who was granted a “non-target” letter from the government, testified on direct examination Friday that he was just trying to be a “team player” when he agreed in 2017 to take on Acevedo as an off-the-books consultant as a favor for AT&T, one of his top clients.
But Cullen told the jury Acevedo was not very pleased with AT&T’s $2,500-a-month offer, even though the job called for little or no work. In fact, Cullen said, after a meeting about the proposal, Acevedo called him and blew his stack.
“He basically said, ‘What the F is goin’ on here? I’m worth more money,’” Cullen testified, adding that his recollection was that Acevedo demanded double what was being offered.
When the prosecutor asked Cullen to use Acevedo’s exact words, Cullen quoted Acevedo as saying, “F— AT&T, they can kiss my ass.’”
Cullen told the jury he never would have hired Acevedo if AT&T hadn’t asked him, citing the Chicago Democrat’s inexperience and penchant for carousing after legislative sessions.
“I didn’t think that he was a serious lobbyist,” Cullen said. “He was brand new, potentially liked to go out and party and drink a lot, so he just wasn’t somebody I wanted to hire.”
On cross, Diamantatos pointed out repeatedly that there were no emails between Cullen and La Schiazza about the alleged scheme to hire Acevedo, and that Cullen had no direct knowledge that Madigan had requested AT&T hire him.
Cullen testified he knew La Schiazza only casually through the years.
“Would it surprise you to know that between 2015 through 2019, there were zero calls between yourself and my client, Mr. Paul La Schiazza?” Diamantatos asked.
“No,” Cullen responded.
jmeisner@chicagotribune.com
