Leading Federal Criminal Defense Lawyer Michael Leonard comments on Madigan decision to testify and predicts not guilty jury verdict. One of the most difficult choices facing a defendant and his/her counsel prior to, and during trial, is the decision of whether the defendant should take the stand at trial and testify. Of course, a defendant has no obligation to testify, and the jury is told repeatedly by the Court, including during jury selection, during the trial, and in the jury instructions, that a defendant has an absolute right not to testify and that the jury is not to give the decision not to testify any weight – or even discuss it. That arises from the fact that the Government has the burden of proving the defendant guilty; in other words, the defendant does not have to disprove the Government’s case or establish his/her innocence.
Despite all that, jurors often clearly want to hear from the defendant. They want to be able to hear the defendant talk; assess the defendant’s credibility; and hear the defendant’s explanation. However, many defendants have prior criminal convictions that might be able to be admitted and brought to the attention of the jury, but only if they take the stand and testify. Sometimes, that alone tips the balance in favor of making the decision not to have the defendant testify. In addition, other defendants may simply lack the ability to effectively communicate, or lack the discipline (despite practice and instruction) to stick to only answering the question asked. Moreover, many defendants do not have a suitable explanation to rebut or explain away the allegations. Furthermore, by putting the defendant on the stand, that doubt that the jurors may have harbored with regard to the defendant’s guilt may be erased – against the defendant. That and numerous other considerations that are individualistic to a particular case, may make the decision to call or not to call the defendant to testify an easy one, or a quite difficult one.
Yesterday, in his on-going federal criminal trial in Chicago, former Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan took the stand. Although some have termed it a risky move, I believe it was an excellent decision. Unlike many other defendants, Mr. Madigan has no criminal history baggage. Moreover, he is an effective and engaging communicator who will be able to make connections and resonate with the jury. Perhaps more importantly, it provides him with the opportunity to take, head on, the allegations – and to deny them and put them in context. The jury has already heard dozens of tapes and other testimony which have characterized his actions in unsavory and illegal terms. Testifying will provide him with the opportunity to address, and put in context, all of those allegations – which would have otherwise gone unrebutted and unexplained, apart from the arguments of counsel. As a result, I still continue to believe that the jury will return a verdict of not guilty on all Counts against Mr. Madigan. At best for the Government, the jury will be hung, and unable to reach a verdict on some of the Counts.
Michael Leonard
Leonard Trial Lawyers
January 8, 2025