Madigan judge says ex-Rep. Eddie Acevedo must testify at trial, rejects competency concerns

The judge presiding over former Illinois House Speaker Michael J. Madigan’s corruption trial ruled Wednesday that ex-state Rep. Edward “Eddie” Acevedo must testify if called by the feds — but defense attorneys warned that prosecutors summon him “at their own peril.”

U.S. District Judge John Blakey ordered Acevedo to testify despite concerns about Acevedo’s mental health. Prosecutors say they will likely call Acevedo, 61, to the stand Monday. He won’t undergo a video deposition that had been considered to safeguard his testimony.

Still, Assistant U.S. Attorney Amarjeet Bhachu warned that Acevedo earlier made comments in front of a grand jury about Madigan that weren’t prompted by a prosecutor. A similar outburst at trial could be problematic and even lead to a mistrial motion.

Troublesome testimony could be edited out of a video deposition, and Blakey raised the idea earlier this week. But lawyers on both sides of the case ultimately chose not to pursue it. Madigan attorney Todd Pugh warned that prosecutors call Acevedo “at their own peril.”

“We will timely object as matters come,” Pugh said.

The warning didn’t seem to deter prosecutors a bit.

Acevedo, a former assistant House majority leader who served a six-month prison sentence for tax evasion in 2022, plays a role in two alleged schemes at issue in Madigan’s trial. Jurors heard extensive testimony about one of them later Wednesday.

Madigan and Acevedo are both Democrats from Chicago’s Southwest Side. Madigan resigned in 2021 and is now on trial for a racketeering conspiracy. Michael McClain, his longtime ally, is also on trial and accused of acting as Madigan's agent.

Blakey and the lawyers met privately with Acevedo in the judge’s chambers on Tuesday. Then, the judge heard further arguments from the lawyers Wednesday morning. But it turned into a dizzying back-and-forth that Bhachu said even left his head “spinning.”

Defense attorneys explained that their earlier meeting with Acevedo did not leave them fearing an outburst from the former lawmaker. But Madigan attorney Dan Collins told the judge that Acevedo “lacks any type of recollection on the facts at issue.”

“This is going to be an absolute mishmash on the facts,” Collins said of Acevedo’s testimony.

Gabrielle Sansonetti, Acevedo’s attorney, told the judge that anything Acevedo says will be compromised because he’s been diagnosed with dementia.

“Everybody has an interest in this proceeding and how it goes,” Sansonetti said. “I have an interest in Mr. Acevedo. That’s my interest. And not putting somebody on the stand to just humiliate them. For what reason?”

Ultimately, Blakey called Acevedo up to a podium in front of his bench. Acevedo, using a walker, listened as the judge told him there’s a difference between "credibility" and “competency.”

“If you give truthful answers to questions in this proceeding, they cannot be used against you directly or indirectly," Blakey told Acevedo, reiterating an immunity ruling Blakey issued last week.

The judge added, “You will have to testify.”

When he asked if Acevedo understood, Acevedo said, “Yes sir.”

Despite the drama over Acevedo’s testimony, prosecutors continued to make their case to the jury, with an apparent goal of resting next week. The feds walked jurors through a series of emails and text messages showing how AT&T lobbyists maneuvered in an ultimately successful bid to get a prized piece of legislation passed in Springfield — and quickly connected with McClain to make it happen.

As the company aimed to change a state law requiring AT&T Illinois to provide landline service statewide, its president Paul La Schiazza reminded his team of lobbyists in February 2017 that “no bill can get through the legislature and to the Governor without the tacit approval of the all-powerful House Speaker Michael Madigan.”

Jurors saw further emails from La Schiazza reporting that Madigan had assigned their bill as a “special project” to McClain, who in a separate email asked lobbyist Robert Barry if there was “even a small contract for Eddie Acevedo?”

The AT&T team then arranged for Acevedo to be paid through the firm of Tom Cullen, a longtime Madigan staffer-turned-lobbyist who was also contracted with the telecom giant.

Acevedo previously served as a key ally of Madigan's as chair of the statehouse Latino Caucus, Cullen said.

He and the AT&T lobbyists met in the Capitol to offer Acevedo a $2,500-per-month contract for what amounted to “busy work,” Cullen testified, but an angry Acevedo rebuffed them, complaining that he was “worth more money and AT&T was being cheap.”

“He said, ‘f— AT&T. They can kiss my ass,’” Cullen told the court.

Acevedo later called back and took the deal, Cullen said.

Cullen also walked jurors through a set of payments to another Madigan loyalist, ex-aide Kevin Quinn, who was forced out of the speaker’s 13th Ward organization over sexual harassment allegations, although jurors have only been told it was “misconduct.”

Prosecutors played a recorded phone call of McClain asking Cullen to join “a bunch of us” in paying $1,000 per month to Quinn to “keep him afloat.”

Cullen eagerly agreed, saying “it’s not even a question.”

Asked in court if he had any actual need to hire Quinn, Cullen said “not really.”

So why commit to monthly contracts totaling $6,000 for Quinn?

“I was loyal to the operation,” Cullen said. “I was loyal to Mike McClain.”