‘He could have been a star witness’: Closing arguments begin as Tim Mapes perjury trial reaches final chapter

CHICAGO — Tim Mapes “could have been a star witness” in the widening federal corruption investigation into his boss, longtime Democratic House Speaker Michael Madigan, but he chose instead to lie to a federal grand jury to protect is friends, a prosecutor said Wednesday in closing arguments in Mapes’ perjury trial.

Mapes, 68, of Springfield, is charged with perjury and attempted obstruction of justice, accused in an indictment of lying in answers to seven questions during his appearance before the grand jury investigating Madigan and his vaunted political operation.

He faces up to 20 years in prison on the obstruction count, while the perjury charges carry up to five years behind bars.

In her closing argument, Assistant U.S. Attorney Julia Schwartz told the jury Mapes, who had served as Madigan’s chief of staff for more than 25 years, was “a man on the inside, a man who was behind the curtain” of Madigan’s often-secretive political organization, and could have given the grand jury key insight when he testified on March 31, 2021.

“If the defendant had been honest, he would have been a star witness,” Schwartz said. “But he did everything he could to obstruct the process…to minimize his participation, to act as if he was clueless.”

Some of the questions posed by the prosecutor in the grand jury were “Springfield 101, Madigan 101,” Schwartz said.

But Mapes acted as if there was a “third rail” when it came to answering questions about Madigan and his longtime confidant, Michael McClain, who was at the center of the government’s ongoing probe.

“These three men were tight, extremely tight. Who better to give the grand jury insight into what was going on than this defendant?” Schwartz said, pointing at Mapes at the defense table.

She said Mapes’ lies were intentional and repeated and on broad topics, and that he was evasive even when asked simple things like the extent of the relationship he had with McClain.

McClain, Schwartz said, was Madigan’s trusted right-hand man, who had unique access to the speaker and would camp out in his office suite at the Capitol. McClain and Mapes were also good friends, she says, and Mapes lied about it.

“Protecting those two men was a key motivation,” she said.

Schwartz played a snippet of the grand jury testimony where Mapes said McClain was “one of my fr- ...sorry strike that,” then basically recited McClain’s work history that anyone could have looked up on Google. She said he caught himself before he touched the third rail.

She also played a portion of the grand jury testimony where Mapes was asked whether McClain was acting as an “agent” for Madigan.

“Do you know Mr. McClain to have acted as a messenger for Madigan in any capacity?” he was asked.

“I’m not aware of any,” Mapes answered.

During her argument, Schwartz displayed a diagram showing a power triangle, with Madigan’s photo at the top.

“Mike Madigan, the boss.... He wielded immense power in the General Assembly and in the Democratic Party of Illinois.” And Tim Mapes? “Nobody got in to see the wizard without going through that man,” she said, referring to a sign that Mapes kept in his office.

Prosecutors have said they will present up to two hours of initial arguments and about 45 minutes in rebuttal.

Mapes’ attorney, Andrew Porter, has not given an estimate for the defense argument but told U.S. District Judge John Kness “I have a lot to say.”

Given that, it’s likely the jury of six men and six women would not start deliberating until late in the day — or perhaps not until Thursday.

Mapes, who in addition to Madigan’s chief of staff also served stints as executive director of the state Democratic Party and the clerk of the House, has denied making any false statements.

His attorneys have argued that he did his “level best” to provide truthful answers. They also accused prosecutors of asking open-ended questions and failing to provide Mapes with any corroborating materials that might refresh his recollection of years-old conversations.

Shortly before the defense rested Tuesday, Mapes confirmed outside the presence of the jury that he wished to waive his right to testify in his own defense — a move that seemed all but certain given the inherent pitfalls of taking the witness stand.

The faults of human memory and Mapes’ state of mind after he was forced to resign in 2018 were the focus of Mapes’ defense, as his lawyers pushed the argument that he was truthful in the grand jury but just couldn’t remember answers to the questions he was asked due to the stress-filled, intimidating nature of the grand jury setting in March 2021.

Meanwhile, prosecutors over eight days of testimony presented more than a dozen witnesses and dozens of wiretapped phone conversations, emails and other documents in an effort to prove that Mapes was lying when he said he was unaware that McClain was doing sensitive “assignments” for the speaker even after McClain’s retirement from lobbying in 2016.

The prosecution’s case also included the audio of Mapes’ entire grand jury testimony, offering a rare glimpse into a secretive process and illuminating how big-time political corruption investigations play out behind the scenes.

Mapes’ trial is the latest among a series of blockbuster cases to arise out of the political corruption probe into Madigan.

Earlier this year, the “ComEd Four” trial ended with the convictions of McClain and three others on bribery conspiracy charges alleging they schemed to funnel payments from the utility to Madigan associates in exchange for the speaker’s assistance with legislation in Springfield.

Madigan and McClain are set to go on trial in April on separate racketeering charges alleging Madigan used official duties to maintain his power and enrich his cronies.

Both have denied the allegations.

____