AUSTIN – The fate of former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay is now in the hands of a Travis County jury – more than five years after a political money laundering indictment drove him from the heights of power.


They also argued about whether the case was little more than pure politics.

Defense lawyer Dick DeGuerin argued the case was brought solely because Democrats were unhappy with DeLay because of a congressional redistricting he pushed through in 2003.

"I don’t agree with criminalizing the debate that ought to be on in a free society," DeGuerin said. "I don’t believe in tearing someone down in a free society because of what their beliefs are."

Lead prosecutor Gary Cobb told the jury that the week the DeLay trial began, prosecutors tried a Democratic legislator, referring to the corruption conviction state Rep. Kino Flores, D-Palmview. Cobb said a murder trial was going on down the hall and no one was asking that defendant how he voted.


Prosecutors focused their closing arguments on DeLay’s own words as an indication that he was aware of the alleged money laundering.

Prosecutor Beverly Mathews played tapes of an interview DeLay, R-Sugar Land, gave to investigators in August 2005, in which he admitted knowing beforehand of a $190,000 political money swap between his Texas political committee and the Republican National Committee. Mathews said the swap was done to get around a Texas law prohibiting corporate money from being used in candidate campaigns.

"They had to come up with a way to circumvent the law, bypass the law, to get that corporate money to those candidates," Mathews told the jury.

Mathews also described as a "rabbit trail" DeLay's contentions that all his actions and those of two political aides were approved by lawyers. She said a lawyer cannot give someone permission "to violate the law." She said DeLay and two other defendants came up with the lawyer story after getting caught.

Through most the trial, the jury has been dressed casually, but most showed up Monday dressed as if going to a semi-formal event or church. About half wore black.

DeLay, R-Sugar Land, was the U.S. House Majority Whip in 2002 when he set up Texans for a Republican Majority, modeled after his Americans for a Republican Majority. TRMPAC's purpose was to win a majority in the Texas House as a precursor to congressional redistricting in 2003.

DeLay in 2003 helped push a redistricting plan through the Texas Legislature that favored Republicans and specifically targeted rural Anglo Democrats for defeat. The plan resulted in the 2004 elections in Texas Democrats losing their 17-15 congressional majority and the Republicans gaining a 21-11 majority.

DeLay was elected U.S. House majority leader by the Republican caucus. DeLay's indictment in 2005 forced him to step down as majority leader, and he resigned from Congress the following year.

The case had been on hold for five years as pre-trial appeals by DeLay's co-defendants slowly wound through the Texas appellate court system. The trial began Nov. 1. The jury heard 38 witnesses and received hundreds of pages of documents during 11 days of testimony.

According to testimony in the case, TRMPAC had trouble meeting its goals of raising money from individuals so the committee could make donations to key House races. TRMPAC Executive Director John Colyandro sent a blank check to ARMPAC Director Jim Ellis. Ellis then negotiated with Republican National Committee Political Director Terry Nelson to give the RNC $190,000 in corporate money from TRMPAC in exchange for the RNC sending $190,000 in donations raised from individuals to seven specified Texas House candidates.

Because corporate money cannot be used in Texas candidate elections, prosecutors contend the transaction was an illegal money laundering attempt to circumvent Texas election law.

DeLay's defense has claimed TRMPAC legally could raise corporate money for the RNC and that the RNC legally could send money raised from individuals to the Texas candidates. Since the money was not commingled, the defense contends no money laundering occurred.

Defense attorney Dick DeGuerin told the jury that no crime occurred because DeLay's political aides kept corporate donations separate from money raised from individuals.

"No one tried to circumvent the law. What they tried to do is follow the law," DeGuerin said. "No crime was committed because no corporate money went to candidates in Texas."

DeGuerin complained that prosecutors called the candidates who received the money the "Texas Seven," saying that sounded like escaped prisoners.

"That's what the prosecution has done throughout this trial – try to make politics dirty," DeGuerin said. "To criminalize it, to make it dirty just so you won't like it, so you won't like Tom DeLay, I just don't think is fair."

There also has been an issue of what did DeLay know and what role did he play in the transaction. DeLay has said he did not learn of the Sept. 13, 2002, deal between Ellis and Nelson until Ellis told him about it Oct. 2. DeLay said he might have been able to stop it before the checks were cut Oct. 4, but he thought the exchange was legal.

But prosecutors showed DeLay could have learned of the deal as early as Sept. 11, 2002. In a statement DeLay gave to prosecutors in August 2005, he said he knew of the deal in advance and spoke about it in future tense throughout.

The defense won a major victory in the charge visiting District Judge Pat Priest gave to the jury. It, essentially, said DeLay merely knowing Colyandro and Ellis and what they were doing was not enough to convict him.

"Mere association with persons involved in a conspiracy, if there is one, is insufficient to prove participation in a conspiracy," the charge said. "Likewise, participation in a conspiracy cannot be proven merely by the fact that a person knew of a conspiracy and was associated with or in the presence of persons involved in the conspiracy."

However, the charge also said: "An agreement constituting a conspiracy may be inferred from acts of the parties."

DeLay faces a possible sentence of up to 20 years in prison on a charge of conspiracy to commit money laundering and up to 99 years in prison on the money laundering charge, with fines of up to $10,000 on each, though probation is possible on both charges. The sentence will be determined by the judge if DeLay is convicted.