Tossing and turning

If Jensen is found guilty, I am betting the farm the conviction will be reversed on appeal. The judge's admission of the wife's statements and letter is the most bone-headed decision I have ever encountered.

I have been watching this trail from the beginning facinated by the defense clain that she committed suicide and framed her husbnd. As I watch each withness get slowly discredited by the defense I have to wonder how in the world did this even get to trial? I realize that with the passage of time ones memory gets clouded but you would think that if someone told you they planned to kill their wife and then she died, that these conversations would be concreted in your mind.

I am not as convinced of Mark's guilt as I am of Julie's suicide.

The decision to allow the letter didn't boil down to one judge. The rules of evidence have been changing. The Wisconsin Supreme Court and the US Supreme Court have impacted this decision.

"Until recent years, using such evidence in court was virtually unheard of because of constitutional guarantees giving criminal defendants the right to confront their accusers.

However, the Wisconsin Supreme Court created new evidence rules, guided by a U.S. Supreme Court decision that laid the groundwork for the use of Julie Jensen's letter and statements to police."

There are many articles about this subject if you google.

To the point of the witnesses being discredited, I disagree. They can make some points about Klug, but his testmony is backed up by these other witnesses. I thought the teacher today was very credible.

There is a long way to go in this trial. Lets see how it all plays out.

Please explain how she mashed her own face into the pillow. I would like to think that you would be able to let yourself up when you could no longer breath, and that you would need assistance to leave smash marks on Mrs. Jensens' face

Im not totally convinced that Mark is guilty and then I see his face every once in awhile and he looks like he knows exactly what he did. I think he should take the stand so they can sink his ship. I feel for her family to have to listen to this. Were do people get that they can take into there own hands to commit this kind of crime.

When they do that close-up on Mark Jensen, is he winking at the camera?

I have a question. Can someone tell me why it took so long to take Jensen to trial? I have missed that! Thank you
Sherry TN

I'm not convinced at all of Mark Jensen's guilt. At first, I really thought maybe this man did kill his wife, but after hearing more evidence and witness statements, I'm not so sure now. How does a wife believe that her husband may "possibly "end her life and she confides this fear, or what I believe to be fear in everyone but law enforcement. Come on, neighbors, friends, family, school teachers and even writes a note to tell investigators "whom" to investigate "if" she dies, but never tells them herself of her "psychic" beliefs of her own early demise. She killed herself to frame him, b/c he carried on a torrid affair right in front of her and she couldn't deal with his outright infidelity and possible verbal abuse and she lost it. Literally!

reference Judy's remark about the decision (to admit the letters) "not boiling down to one judge." That is incorrect. In a criminal trial, there is always just one judge who makes the decision on the admission of evidence. If a defendant is convicted, the trial judge's rulings are subject to review on appeal. This has not yet occurred, because this is the first trial.

I am a criminal defense lawyer with 20 years experience, and stand by my opinion. If the letters from the victim and hearsay statements from the defendant are all the State has, it is in trouble. One would hope there is some independent evidence of guilt.... Incidentally, a defendant's own statements are not considered hearsay; however, if the statement is offered in court by a third party (rather than the person who actually heard the statements), it should not be admitted.

oh and to Patty, the judge did not initially allow the letter. It was appealed to the Wisconsin Supreme court and was overturned, based on the now very right wing US Supreme Court.'s recent decisions. That was one part, of the delay in getting to trial.

I also have seen Mark 'wink' at the camera. The first time I thought it was a coincidence but after that I'm sure it is on purpose.

I believe this case is pure and simple one of an abused wife. She was displaying all the signs of one. She was deathly afraid of this man and her instinct was to stay there and protect her kids from him.

The woman that testified that Mark Jensen was laughing and acting like he was at a cocktail party never dropped a tear. She sniffed and snorted, but I never saw a tear from her eyes. I don't know of course if this man actually murdered his wife or not, but I sure hope the jury doesn't take a bad acting job of a "Mrs. Gladys Kravitz " to heart. I personally didn't think that her testimony was helpful at all for the Prosecution because it was so forced and fake.

MARK JENSON'S ATTORNEY IS TERRIBLY RUDE AND DISRESPECTFUL TO THE COURT. WHY DOES THE JUDGE ALLOW SUCH BEHAVIOR?! C'MON, SCREAMING AT THE JUDGE, CALLING HIM "JUDGE" INSTEAD OF "YOUR HONOR"; NOT TO MENTION TRYING TO MAKE HIS HONOR LOOK A FOOL.
I ADMIT THE JUDGE DOES NOT SEEM WELL VERSED IN THE LAW AT TIMES, BUT HE IS STILL THE TOP OFFICER IN THAT COUTROOM, AND THAT ALONE DEMANDS RESPECT.