Rod Blagojevich: As he contemplates jury's message, the bluster is gone
In the two years and seven months between Rod Blagojevich鈥檚 arrest on his front lawn in Chicago and Monday鈥檚 jury verdict convicting him of 17 counts of wire fraud, extortion, and bribery, the former Illinois governor was alternately an amiable populist stumping for public empathy or a fierce political warrior, launching verbal missiles at perceived enemies.
But Tuesday morning, confronted with the possibility of facing his twilight years in federal prison, Mr. Blagojevich was unusually somber.
鈥淎 lot of what life is, is how you deal with adversities 鈥� it鈥檚 a true test of who you are and it鈥檚 an example to your children on how you deal with the tough times,鈥� he told reporters outside his Chicago home. 鈥淭hrough that adversity and hardship can come good things.鈥�
His reflective approach will be put to the test Aug. 1, the day US District Judge James Zagel starts sentencing arguments, giving Blagojevich a chance to seek mercy and reduce his prison term.
Almost every count carries a prison term of 20 years and $250,000 in fines, although most experts agree it is unlikely the maximum will be enforced. It also is likely some terms will be served concurrently. In his first trial, Blagojevich was also found guilty of lying to the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Whatever the details of the sentencing, Blagojevich faces a lifetime of figuring out whether his testimony in his second trial, which ran for seven days and allowed the former governor to tap his expert campaign skills, helped or hindered the jury鈥檚 decision.
Speaking to the media after the trial, some jurors agreed that they found Blagojevich genuinely likable. But, they said, they sensed that his string of comic asides and long-winded explanations were part of a strategy to show he was nothing more than an aloof talker who had no intention of carrying out the schemes he is heard discussing on FBI wiretap recordings.
鈥淚 did really feel that his testimony at times was really manipulative, which I didn鈥檛 appreciate. I wanted to hear the facts. I didn鈥檛 want to have my emotions played,鈥� said Karin Wilson.
Ms. Wilson also said the jury, consisting of 11 women and one man, could not help but consider how their decision would affect Blagojevich鈥檚 two children. The conversation, however, was inevitably followed by a sense that their responsibility was limited to the charges, and that Blagojevich was ultimately responsible for how his actions affected his family.
鈥淲e live in a world of right and wrong. When you make good decisions, good things happen to you. And when you make bad decisions, not-so-good things happen to you,鈥� she said.
Blagojevich鈥檚 testimony persuaded the jury to save him from three counts related to an alleged scheme to shake down a construction company for bribes. For those, the jury deadlocked on two and found him not guilty of a third.
However, the jury was certain of his guilt regarding the 13 charges related to the sale of President Obama鈥檚 former US Senate seat. Wilson said those charges were 鈥渢he easiest鈥� on which to reach guilty verdicts.
鈥淚t wasn鈥檛 just one attempt. It was attempt after attempt after attempt that was made,鈥� she said.
Unlike the first trial where the jury was described as contentious and often argumentative, deliberating for three weeks until deadlocking on all but one count, the jurors in the second trial were noteworthy for their calm and unanimity. Experts agree that much of the credit should go to federal prosecutors, who simplified their case by dropping counts and creating a strategy that emphasized that Blagojevich鈥檚 words constituted wrongdoing, even if they didn鈥檛 result in successful personal gain.
For instance, in her three-hour closing argument, US assistant attorney Carrie Hamilton used a PowerPoint presentation to succinctly summarize each count to show how Blagojevich operated with the sole purpose of bettering himself. 鈥淭he defendant intended to defraud. It was not a mistake or accident,鈥� Ms. Hamilton said.
The strategy was key to earning the convictions, which, taken collectively, are 鈥渁 pretty brutal statement from the jury,鈥� says Shari Seidman Diamond, a law professor at Northwestern University in Chicago.
鈥淭he verdict is not confined to one thing nor is it a kitchen sink kind of verdict where everything is thrown at [Blagojevich],鈥� Ms. Diamond says. 鈥淭hey picked and chose."
