Ryan 'staying strong'

Former Gov. George Ryan's conviction on corruption charges was upheld Tuesday but the once-powerful Republican got a reprieve from having to report to prison -- for now.

A federal appellate court late Tuesday allowed Ryan and his co-defendant, Larry Warner, to remain free for at least two more weeks as it weighs a further appeal from the former governor.

Tuesday began with a three-judge panel from the 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals turning down Ryan's and Warner's request for a new trial by a 2-1 decision.

Yes, a juror did bring improper outside information into deliberations at Ryan's trial and "there is no doubt this should not have happened," the two-judge majority wrote. The judges also acknowledged that the sudden removal of an outspoken juror after eight days of deliberations was irregular.

"The trial may not have been picture-perfect," the two judges wrote in the majority opinion.

Dissenting Judge Michael Kanne called that "a whopping understatement by any measure." The jury deliberations were "dysfunctional" and U.S. District Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer was "irresolute," he wrote, concluding that Ryan and Warner did not get a fair trial.

"The obvious -- but onerous -- way to address this situation was a mistrial," he wrote.

Former Gov. James Thompson, one of Ryan's lawyers, held out hope Kanne's "powerful dissent" might spark a rehearing of the case before all nine of the appellate court's active members.

"This case -- in terms of the management of the jury and the substitution of jurors after eight days of deliberation -- is unprecedented," Thompson said. "No court anywhere has ever deprived a defendant of his life and liberty under these circumstances."

Initially, it looked as if Ryan might have to report to prison by Friday morning. But his fortune changed by 5 p.m. when the three judges agreed he could remain free until the full court takes up the matter.

Ryan could eventually take his case to the U.S. Supreme Court, but experts hold out little hope. "He's not going to win there -- this was his best shot," said DePaul University law Professor Len Cavise.

Some jurors in the case praised the upholding of Ryan's conviction last year for using his office to shower rewards on friends and family.

"What I want to know is: How many judges will it take for Ryan and his team to find out that nothing was wrong?" Juror Jim Cwick asked. "Judge Pallmeyer ruled we didn't do anything wrong. Now you've got the appeals court saying nothing was wrong. I think it's time he start serving his sentence."

But juror Evelyn Ezell, whose ouster from deliberations was a focal point of Ryan's appeal, called the ruling unfair. "The bottom line was that George was railroaded for pardoning blacks and other minorities," she said, referring to Ryan's historic decision to clear Illinois' Death Row. "There is no way that you can say that jury was not flawed."

Lead prosecutor Patrick Collins, now in private practice, said the majority opinion was right: "I think what this opinion states is, while it was not a perfect trial, Judge Pallmeyer gave George Ryan a fair trial.

"I'm not here doing cartwheels," Collins added. "On a human level I feel bad for Mr. Ryan and Mr. Warner. I don't wish them ill."

Northwestern University law Professor Al Alschuler said Kanne was right. "At the end of his opinion Kanne said, 'I have no doubt that had this case been a six-day trial, rather than a six-month trial, a mistrial would have been swiftly declared,'" Alschuler said. "I think it's a shame that judges allow these long kitchen-sink trials and then find themselves in a position where it's almost unthinkable to incur the costs of starting over."

Contributing: Norman Parish, Dave McKinney

DIANE WOOD
57, a former University of Chicago law professor appointed by President Bill Clinton in 1995, wrote the majority opinion upholding Ryan's conviction. Daniel Manion, 65, a former Indiana state senator and deputy attorney general appointed by President Reagan in 1986, joined the opinion.
"Ryan's work on issues of importance to the public, such as the death penalty -- important and admirable though it may have been in many people's eyes -- does nothing to show that Ryan was not at the same time accepting financial benefits in exchange for other specific, official actions."
"The high-profile nature of these proceedings gave rise to some unusual problems with the jury, but we are satisfied that the court handled them acceptably."

MICHAEL KANNE
68, a former federal district court judge from Rensselaer, Ind., appointed by Reagan in 1987, dissented.
"My colleagues in the majority concede that the trial of this case may not have been 'picture-perfect' -- a whopping understatement by any measure."
"This case was inexorably driven to a defective conclusion by the natural human desire to bring an end to the massive expenditure of time and resources occasioned by this trial -- to the detriment of the defendants. . . . I have no doubt that if this case had been a six-day trial, rather than a six-month trial, a mistrial would have been swiftly declared. It should have been here."

Dave McKinney, Abdon M. Pallasch, Chris Fusco