Defense calls no witnesses, says case vs. Rezko weak
BOTH SIDES REST | Witness says he decided to help feds after he was threatened
The prosecution and defense both rested Monday in the Tony Rezko corruption case, but not before the final witness leveled a new allegation.
Ali Ata, a former executive director of the Illinois Finance Authority, testified that he decided to cooperate with the prosecution after being threatened.
(AP/Courtesy files)
Upcoming: Closing arguments are expected next Monday.
Ata said he wore a wire and secretly recorded a conversation in a separate, undisclosed case involving "one person who delivered a threat to me."
Ata took the witness stand just days after it was made public that he was pleading guilty to charges in a separate Rezko case. Ata decided to cooperate after the threat, which "played a huge role in his decision to do that," said his lawyer, Thomas McQueen.
Though he didn't say Monday who threatened him, Ata had made a veiled reference last week to a threat. Rezko's lawyer Joseph Duffy had asked then if Ata was concealing criminal conduct of his own by blaming Rezko.
"I was avoiding a threat from Mr. Rezko through one of his friends," Ata replied, a response that the judge in the case ordered stricken from the record.
The threat investigation in which Ata wore a wire is separate than the current Rezko case and separate from a business loan fraud case for which Rezko still faces trial. Ata pleaded guilty to charges tied to that loan fraud case.
Rezko, 52, of Wilmette, is accused of manipulating state board votes so he could share in kickbacks or shakedowns of companies seeking state business.
In deciding not to call any witnesses in Rezko's defense, Duffy said, "We do not believe the government has met their burden in proving its charges against Mr. Rezko."
Len Cavise, a DePaul University law professor who has sat in on the trial, said that strategy will allow the defense to focus the jury on the credibility of the prosecution's case.
"There's no pressure on the jury to choose one side or the other," Cavise said. Instead, the defense is likely to argue there's a lack of evidence linking Rezko to a kickback and to question the credibility of many of those who testified for the prosecution -- including star witness Stuart Levine.
"It allows the defense to stand on the table ... and say, 'We can't let [the prosecution] convict on this evidence," Cavise said.
Closing arguments are set to begin Monday.