Chicago Sun-Times
Inside the Rod Blagojevich investigation and related cases

Blagojevich vs. Schar. The dance begins

| 2 Comments | No TrackBacks

Reporting with Lark Turner

The federal courtroom has turned into a chaotic, fast-moving place.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Reid Schar and Rod Blagojevich are sparring, talking over each other. Judge James Zagel is trying to interject. Blagojevich's lawyers are objecting but their own client is ignoring them and answering anyway.

It takes a good 10 minutes for Blagojevich to answer the first question. He keeps squabbling.

"Mr. Blagojevich You are a convicted liar, right?" Schar asks. "It's fair to say, within hours of being convicted you went and lied again."

Schar said after his conviction on just one count, Blagojevich marched downstairs and gave a press conference where he said that he was convicted of lying to the FBI after he was interviewed and not given a chance to have a court reporter. Schar repeatedly asked Blagojevich why he didn't tell the public that the FBI offered to tape the interview.

Schar said Blagojevich wanted to communicate to the public that his conviction was unfair.
"I had a strong opinion about it if you want to hear it," the ex-governor says.
"This is why we have appellate courts ... there's a process that will still unfold."

Blagojevich: "What is your question again?"

Schar: "You wanted people to believe that the process that led to your conviction was unfair."
Blagojevich: "No, that is erroneous."

"What kind of recording equipment was it? I just don't remember seeing recording equipment," Blagojevich said.

Blagojevich says he has no recollection of the FBI offering to record. Schar needles him, in a high-pitched sarcastic tone, recalling Blagojevich's hyper-detailed testimony including, times, places and dates, but now he couldn't recall something he witnessed in an interview.

Jurors aren't taking notes. Their eyes are glued on Schar.

No TrackBacks

TrackBack URL:


Schar should have to provide evidence of the offering to tape, but I am skeptical of this because there have been many cases that the fbi has refused to tape, and they have specific policies against it that people have suggested they change.(they should be required to tape all conversations) And I still adamantly believe they shouldn't convict based on one persons words or a team, people lie all the time and cover it up think John Conner or Burge.

Why didn't the prosecution have him sign a piece of paper saying he refused to be recorded???

Leave a comment

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Natasha Korecki published on June 2, 2011 4:22 PM.

PROSECUTORS TO BEGIN CROSS NOW. Blago concludes direct questioning. was the previous entry in this blog.

Prosecutor digging, Blagojevich wriggling is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.