Category Archives: Criminal Complaint

Blagojevich asks Judge Zagel to nullify conviction, Lying to FBI

Blagojevich asks Judge Zagel to nullify conviction, Lying to FBI

From the Chicago Tribune September 14, 2010.

“Former Gov. Rod Blagojevich wants a judge to nullify the only conviction the jury returned in the Illinois Democrat’s mostly deadlocked corruption trial.

In a motion filed in federal court in Chicago late Monday, defense lawyers call on trial Judge James Zagel to override the jury’s decision and acquit Blagojevich of lying to the FBI. The attorneys say another option is for Zagel to set the conviction aside and try Blagojevich again on that charge.”

Read more:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-il-blagojevichtrial,0,2697557.story

JoAnn Chiakulas Blagojevich juror speaks out, Prosecution case weak, Emphasis on selling Obama senate seat

JoAnn Chiakulas Blagojevich juror speaks out, Prosecution case weak

Although I do not totally agree with Blagojevich juror JoAnn Chiakulas, she does make a point about the case that the prosecution didn’t make against ex governor Rod Blagojevich. JoAnn Chiakulas has finally spoken out about her decisions. From the Chicago Tribune August 27, 2010.

“Battling stomach pains and fatigue, JoAnn Chiakulas would take the train into the city each morning knowing that her resolve was disappointing some people and infuriating others.

But the 67-year-old grandmother said she also knew that as a juror in Rod Blagojevich’s corruption trial, she had a responsibility to follow her conscience and the law. She said she did not believe he or his brother committed a crime with their actions to fill Barack Obama’s Senate seat, so she would not find them guilty despite what other jurors, prosecutors and, perhaps, the general public wanted.

If it was going to be 11-1, so be it.
“I could never live with myself if I went along with the rest of the jury,” Chiakulas told the Tribune in her first media interview since the trial ended. “I didn’t believe it was the correct vote for me.”

The jury deliberated on the sweeping corruption charges for 14 days and, in the end, convicted Rod Blagojevich of one count of lying to the FBI. The panel was split on the 23 other counts, prompting the judge to declare a mistrial and the government to promise a retrial.”

“Chiakulas and two other jurors broke their silence in an interview Wednesday night and offered their account of the deliberations and the trial’s aftermath. Also attending was longtime Chicago Tribune contributor Ruth Fuller, a family friend who helped arrange the meeting.

Chiakulas said she found Blagojevich’s recorded statements on the Senate vacancy to be so scattered and disorganized that his actions did not reach the level of a criminal conspiracy.

One day he chattered about being the Indian ambassador, for example, then in the next conversation he discussed another plan. In the space of a few weeks, he talked about appointing, among others, Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan, Oprah Winfrey or himself.

She said she never saw him formulate a clear plan to sell the seat. But in voting him not guilty, she stressed she did not find him innocent.

“I thought he was narcissistic,” she said. “I thought he was all over the place. I thought he was just rambling.”

It also concerned Chiakulas that some key witnesses who testified against Blagojevich had cut deals with prosecutors before testifying, she said.

“Some people in (the jury room) only saw black and white,” Chiakulas said. “I think I saw, in the transcripts and in the testimony, shades of gray. To me, that means reasonable doubt.””

“Still, the holdout label upsets Chiakulas and some other jurors because, they say, it wrongly suggests she was a Blagojevich apologist. To the contrary, she readily acknowledged the governor’s faults during deliberations and made it clear that she didn’t condone his behavior or leadership, Moore said.

“She admitted he talks too much, he sounds like an idiot sometimes,” Moore said. “She said, ‘But we’re not here to determine whether he talks like an idiot sometimes. That’s not what he’s on trial for.'””

“While Chiakulas shunned the media spotlight in the days after the verdict, the loquacious Blagojevich appeared on national television to thank her for her resolve and proclaim that she has reaffirmed his faith in God.

When asked about his comments, Chiakulas frowned and slightly shook her head.

“I didn’t do it for him,” she said.”

Read more:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-blagojevich-jury-20100827,0,7458628,full.story

Blagojevich retrial hearing, August 26, 2010, Judge James Zagel, Citizen Wells open thread

Blagojevich retrial hearing, August 26, 2010, Judge James Zagel

The retrial hearing for Rod Blagojevich takes place today, Thursday, August 26, 2010.

From the Chicago Tribune.

“The retrial of Rod Blagojevich could look decidedly different from the first go-around if the bombastic father-and-son team of Sam Adam and Sam Adam Jr. drop off the case, as the former governor’s lead lawyers have hinted since last week.

Both Adams have suggested they want out of a repeat performance, with the younger one telling attorneys in the case that it’s time for him and his father to move on, according to sources.

Sheldon Sorosky, another Blagojevich lawyer who could remain on a reduced two-member defense team, said Wednesday he believes the younger Adam, whom he described as a “legal Michelangelo,” may struggle to find the energy to tackle the mammoth task again.

Adam’s closing argument was marked by loud and passionate pleas, a flurry of government objections and even an apology for sweating on a juror.

Some answers could become apparent Thursday as U.S. District Judge James Zagel holds the first public status hearing since the trial ended last week, with the jury convicting Blagojevich of lying to the FBI about his knowledge of political fundraising but deadlocking on all the other 23 counts.”

“”The primary purpose (for the hearing) is to set a new trial date,” Sorosky said. “Then, as in any retrial situation, the second purpose — which this time may eclipse the first — is the lawyer situation.”

In a private conference last week with attorneys in the case, Zagel said he expects the former governor to be allowed just two lawyers for the retrial.

Blagojevich, who had seven attorneys for the first trial, has tapped out his $2.7 million campaign fund, which under Zagel’s supervision was used to pay his legal fees. Rules under the Criminal Justice Act allow a defendant whose defense is paid for with taxpayer funds to have no more than two lawyers.”

Read more:

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/08/blagojevich-hearing-could-answer-question-over-lawyers.html

Blagojevich trial January 2011?, Judge James Zagel, Public defenders, Citizen Wells open thread, August 24, 2010

Blagojevich trial January 2011?, Judge James Zagel, Public defenders

From the Chicago Tribune August 23, 2010.

“At a private meeting last week with lawyers in the case, U.S. District Judge James Zagel said he was eyeing January for a second trial and suggested he would appoint two attorneys for Blagojevich at taxpayer expense, according to sources familiar with the matter.

Blagojevich’s legal team of seven lawyers was paid from his campaign funds for the first trial, but taxpayers will have to foot the bill for the retrial because the $2.7 million in campaign money ran out.

No date for a retrial has been picked, and the matter remains fluid, those with knowledge of the meeting said. The attorneys are scheduled to meet for a public status hearing in front of Zagel on Thursday.”

Read more:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/blagojevich/ct-met-blagojevich-retrial-0824-20100823,0,7833059.story

Blagojevich retrial, Rezko and Levine must be witnesses, Leonard Cavise, DePaul University law professor, Evidentiary Proffer

Blagojevich retrial, Rezko and Levine must be witnesses, Leonard Cavise, DePaul University law professor, Evidentiary Proffer

It was clear to experts and novices alike that Tony Rezko and/or Stuart Levine had to be called as witnesses in the Rod Blagojevich trial. Tony Rezko’s name was mentioned approx. 288 times in the Evidentiary Proffer. When Judge James Zagel stated that Rezko was a bad witness, our collective jaws dropped. Stuart Levine, the key witness in the Rezko trial was not only enmeshed in corruption, he was a long time drug user.

From Citizen Wells July 29, 2010

“If I were a Blago juror …”

“If I were a juror, I’d wonder why we never heard from so many of the allegedly bad guys — Tony Rezko, Stuart Levine — mentioned by the prosecution.”
“As noted in part 5 of this series, Tony Rezko’s name was mentioned approximately 288 times in the Evidentiary Proffer. The above numbers reveal that of the evidence presented in the Proffer, 38 pages are loaded with names and corruption activities tied to Blagojevich from 2002 to mid 2008. And yet neither Tony Rezko or Stuart Levine were called as witnesses. And just as predicted and warned about here, the focus of the trial was the selling of Obama’s senate seat.”

Read more

An expert on law has commented on Rezko and Levine being called as witnesses. Leonard Cavise is a DePaul University law professor. From the DePaul website.

“Biography

Professor Cavise has a long background in litigation , both criminal and civil, including substantial pro bono litigation. In addition, he has worked in international human rights for many years, including lectures and training sessions in El Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico, Venzuela, Italy, France and other locations throughout the world. Several projects were designed to train Latin American human rights lawyers in the art of trial advocacy. In 1999, he founded the Chiapas Human Rights Practicum and has taken law students to work in human rights offices in Chiapas every year since then. He was the Director of DePaul’s Lawyering Skills Program from 1983 until 1990.”

http://www.law.depaul.edu/faculty_staff/faculty_information.asp?id=10

From the Chicago tribune, Cavise’s comments.

“A day later, all that was clear was that Blagojevich would have another day in court. What was less certain was what changes could be made to the prosecution case next time around, who would represent the governor at his retrial and how that defense would be paid for.

Experts differed on what the government might do as it makes another attempt at proving Blagojevich tried to leverage the powers of his office — including the appointment of a U.S. senator to fill the seat once held by President Barack Obama — to enrich himself and his campaign fund.
Some predicted that prosecutors would just slightly adjust their case or possibly leave it the same, while others suggested the next go-round could be much more drawn out.

Former federal prosecutor Dean Polales said he thinks the pr
osecution’s case will only be tweaked, especially since jurors reported an 11-1 split in favor of conviction on many of the major counts in the indictment.
“You’ve got an outlier juror,” Polales said. “That’s hard (for the defense) to duplicate in a future trial.”

But Leonard Cavise, a DePaul University professor, suggested the government will need to do more at the retrial, possibly leading to a longer presentation of evidence. He said he believes the government may try to avoid another deadlocked jury by using fundraiser Antoin “Tony” Rezko and political fixer Stuart Levine as witnesses.

Both men have agreed to cooperate, but prosecutors chose not to call them this summer in part because of the baggage both bring.
“If the prosecution insists on going forward, I have two words for them: Rezko and Levine,” Cavise said. “They know where all the bodies are buried.””

Read more:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/blagojevich/ct-met-blagojevich-retrial-20100818,0,2911219.story

Blagojevich jury holdout, Jo Ann Chiakulas, End justifies the means, Hand of God?, Citizen Wells open thread, August 19, 2010

Blagojevich jury holdout,  Jo Ann Chiakulas, End justifies the means

From ACE OF SPADES HQ.

“Here’s what Fox local news in Chicago reports:
Jurors who have been interviewed so far will not identify the juror, other than to say the juror was a female.
FOX Chicago News reported that speculation is centering on juror Jo Ann Chiakulas of Willowbrook, after a second-hand acquaintance said that she has been saying for weeks that she would find Blagojevich not guilty.

Chiakulas is a retired director from the Illinois Department of Public Health.

Contacted Tuesday night, she told FOX Chicago News she would call on Wednesday if she wished to talk about the case.

On one count at least, Chiakulas voted with her fellow jurors, agreeing to convict Blagojevich of lying to federal agents.

Note that that is not yet confirmed. It is now confirmed by CBS local news Chicago.

They actually could have reported more — because pre-trial, they had this to say about a female “retired public health director” on the jury panel:
Juror # 106, a black female believed to be in her 60s, is a retired state public health director who has ties to the Chicago Urban League. She has handed out campaign literature for a relative who ran for public office. She listens to National Public Radio and liberal talk radio shows.

Media accounts mention the campaign literature, but they don’t mention NPR and liberal talk radio. Why?

We know they read this description — why do they end their repetition of it at that point?

The media is quick to stereotype conservative-tilting Americans and attribute to them bad motives.

Think they’ll do the same here?

What were her motives for so egregiously ignoring the law to set a guilty man free that her fellow jurors had to confront her with her own oath to render a true verdict?

Ties to the Chicago Urban League?
The Chicago Urban League supports and advocates for economic, educational and social progress for African Americans through our agenda focused exclusively on economic empowerment as the key driver for social change.
The Chicago Urban League provides African Americans with the tools, the programs and the experiences to help them reach their full economic potential. We are committed to growing Chicago’s African-American workforce and business community with well-informed pursuit of the following four strategies….
So she’s sort of hooked up with… community organizers?”

Read more:

http://minx.cc/?post=304818

This information surprises none of us. For the far left, the guiding principle seems to be the end justifies the means.

This woman is no worse than the judges, election officials and others who have ignored the US Constitution to justify the end.

And furthermore, this may be a blessing in disguise. For starters, this has highlighted the weak case of the prosecution and the failure to present a smoking gun, aka, Tony Rezko. This also brings more attention to the case and thus Obama and his fellow thugs and cronies. The prosecution may actually have to step up to the plate and present evidence. And who knows, perhaps Patrick Fitzgerald will unhitch his wagon from a falling star. And of course, it presents another platform for me and others to reveal the truth about Blagojevich and Obama. 

Perhaps the hand of God touches this.

Blagojevich retrial, Protecting Obama, Patrick Fitzgerald conspirator?, Fitzgerald and Justice Dept delayed arrest of Blagojevich

Blagojevich retrial, Protecting Obama, Patrick Fitzgerald conspirator?, Fitzgerald and Justice Dept delayed arrest of Blagojevich

Patrick Fitzgerald has zero credibility with me. However, with rats jumping ship left and right, will Fitzgerald throw Obama under the bus?

From the Chicago Tribune.
“Moments after a rare setback, a chastened U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald was acting nothing like the swaggering prosecutor who just 20 months earlier proclaimed he had arrested a sitting governor to stop a political crime spree.

He would not take questions from reporters about his office’s failure to convict former Gov. Rod Blagojevich on 23 counts against him, winning a guilty verdict only on a single count of lying to the FBI,  among the least serious of the charges he faced.

Instead, Fitzgerald vowed to retry the case, then quickly ending his news conference.

“So, for all practical purposes, we are in the mode of being close to jury selection for a retrial,” he said.”

Read more:

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/08/defense-jubilant-prosecutors-look-to-retrial.html

From the Chicago Tribune.

“The counts on which the jury could not agree framed the heart of the government claims that Blagojevich schemed to profit from his post from his earliest days in office and in the 2008 attempted to auction off the U.S. Senate seat vacated by President Barack Obama.”

“Lawyers in the case are to be back in court Aug. 26, possibly to pick a retrial date. Prosecutors are expected to push for the case to be back before a jury this fall, while the defense is likely to drag its heels and promised to appeal the single count the former governor was convicted on.
While gaining a conviction of the former governor on one count, the result of the trial was a far cry from the sweeping convictions in public corruption cases that Fitzgerald and his prosecutors have grown accustomed to. In his nine years at the helm of the prosecutor’s office here, Fitzgerald has secured guilty verdicts for an array of public officials, ranging from aldermen to the patronage chief for Mayor Richard Daley to Blagojevich’s predecessor as governor, Republican George Ryan.
The government case against Blagojevich was a vivid example of how slowly the wheels of justice can grind in public corruption cases. Blagojevich was arrested just weeks after he allegedly began plotting to sell Obama’s Senate seat, but federal agents had been probing wrongdoing in the governor’s administration since at least 2004 — his second year in office — and questioned Blagojevich for the first time in 2005 during his first term.”

Read more:

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/08/blagojevich-convicted-on-1-of-24-counts.html

Thanks to the Tribune for pointing out that Blagojevich was under scrutiny at least by 2004.

Now for the rest of the story.

From Citizen Wells July 15, 2010
“The question is, why did Patrick Fitzgerald and the US Justice Department wait until December 2008 to arrest Rod Blagojevich?”

“The US Justice Department had plenty of evidence indicting Rod Blagojevich by 2006. Why did the US Justice Department wait until December 2008, after the election, to arrest Blagojevich?”

“From in or about 2002 to the present, in Cook County”

“Since approximately 2003, the government has been investigating allegations of illegal activity occurring in State of Illinois government as part of the administration of Governor ROD BLAGOJEVICH.”

“Timeline is revealing

Patrick Fitzgerald was aware of Blagojevich’s corruption in 2003

“Pamela Meyer Davis had been trying to win approval from a state health planning board for an expansion of Edward Hospital, the facility she runs in a Chicago suburb, but she realized that the only way to prevail was to retain a politically connected construction company and a specific investment house.

Instead of succumbing to those demands, she went to the FBI and U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald in late 2003 and agreed to secretly record conversations about the project.””

Patrick Fitzgerald and US Justice Dept. delayed Blagojevich arrest

Blagojevich jurors speak out, No smoking gun presented, Rezko for example, Citizen Wells open thread, August 18, 2010

Blagojevich jurors speak out, No smoking gun presented, Rezko for example

From the Chicago Tribune August 18, 2010.

“”They were very strong personalities,” foreman James Matsumoto said of the jurors. “They were all independent thinkers.”

He said he would have convicted Blagojevich on all counts, saying that the case slowly built, “layer upon layer.”

“You just say, ‘God, what was he doing?’ You find out here they were selling seats on boards and commissions. That to me was shocking,” Matsumoto said.

But in the end, he said, the “lack of a smoking gun” was too much of a hurdle for jurors to reach more than the one unanimous decision.

“We deliberated logically and with respect for each other’s opinions,” Matsumoto said. Still, he added, “it was very frustrating.”

Erik Sarnello, 21, of Itasca, said a female juror who was the lone holdout on convicting Blagojevich of attempting to sell the Senate seat “wanted clear-cut evidence, and not everything was clear-cut.”

Sarnello, a sophomore at College of DuPage studying criminal justice, said the main problem with the prosecution’s case was that it was all over the place.

“It confused people,” he said. “They didn’t follow a timeline. They jumped around.”

The foreman said jurors came close to convictions on a number of the 24 counts — as close as 11-1 — but remained far apart on others.”

Read more:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/blagojevich/ct-met-blagojevich-verdict-jury-20100818,0,1234825.story

Obviously, Tony Rezko is the biggest smoking gun.

Blagojevich trial verdict anticlimatic, Blagojevich fix in years ago, Citizen Wells open thread, August 1, 2010

Blagojevich trial verdict anticlimatic, Blagojevich fix in years ago

The Blagojevich trial jury has requested transcripts from the trial. Judge Zagel may provide some of them. However, no matter how this farce plays out, regardless of the outcome, it will be anticlimatic. The fix was in years ago. Some kind of deal was struck between Blagojevich, Rezko and Obama. The US Justice Department is corrupt and just as in the dismissal of the case against the New Black Panther Party, openly displays a racial bias. We also have evidence of this in the total disregard for the Constitution by federal judges when they have been confronted by overwhelming evidence against Obama’s eligibility. Will the US Supreme Court rise to the occasion to check the miscarriage of justice? Will another whistleblower come forward? 

If anyone questioned corruption in the US Justice Dept. in the past, with the dismissal of the New Black Panther Party case and the flagrant manipulation of evidence combined with delays and timing in the Blagojevich trial, all doubts must be erased.

Blagojevich trial jury verdict, Tony Rezko, Stuart Levine, If I were a juror, Thanks Mary Schmich

Blagojevich trial jury verdict, Tony Rezko, Stuart Levine, If I were a juror

I ran across this article written by Mary Schmich of the Chicago Tribune.

“If I were a Blago juror …”

“If I were a juror, I’d wonder why we never heard from so many of the allegedly bad guys — Tony Rezko, Stuart Levine — mentioned by the prosecution.”

Read more:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ct-met-schmich-0728-20100728,0,2697214.column

Thanks to Mary Schmich. This should be front page news.

From part 6 in the series here on the Blagojevich trial, protecting Obama and US Justice Department corruption.

“Beginning with

“THE GOVERNMENT’S PROFFER REGARDING THE EXISTENCE OF A CONSPIRACY”

Pages 15 to 52  reveal Blagojevich’s involvement in corruption beginning in 2002 and going into the summer of 2008. Here are some of the names mentioned in this section:

Tony Rezko

Stuart Levine

Patti Blagojevich

John Harris

Christopher Kelly

Alonzo Monk

Joseph Cari

William Cellini

Robert Weinstein

Ali Ata

Joseph Aramanda

Daniel Mahru

Fortune Massuda

Imad Almanaseer

Michel Malek

Jacob Kiferbaum

Out of this 91 page document, 38 pages are loaded with names and events tied to Rod Blagojevich from 2002 to the summer of 2008. Beginning on page 52 and to page 90 are references to Blagojevich shady dealings primarily from the summer of 2008 on.”

As noted in part 5 of this series, Tony Rezko’s name was mentioned approximately 288 times in the Evidentiary Proffer. The above numbers reveal that of the evidence presented in the Proffer, 38 pages are loaded with names and corruption activities tied to Blagojevich from 2002 to mid 2008. And yet neither Tony Rezko or Stuart Levine were called as witnesses. And just as predicted and warned about here, the focus of the trial was the selling of Obama’s senate seat.”

Read more

If I were a juror, I would be shocked at the prosecution’s case, their shortening of the trial and their failure to call many key witnesses.