As I listen the defense (is) making Mr. Dillard look pretty lame. And yes, I do wonder if everything he says is the truth, I still have all the other credible witnesses with no axe to grind. IF Mr. Jenson, is so innocent, have his attorney put him on the stand, and explain:
1) The girlfriend ( in the home less than 2 wks after Julie died).
2) Julie’s clothes (15 bags worth) on the curb within a few days of her death.
3) High Fiving his Dad. (No explanation for that).
4) The fact that IF Julie commited suicide, she had to hold a pillow over her face until she no longer was alive. No way someone could humanly do it.
5) His creeply smiling. As if he is some great adonis, and the lowly wifey, killed herself, and got him into this mess.

That is just a few questions I would LOVE for Mark Jenson to answer, I am always amazed how defense attorneys, rather than just questioning the witnesses, they try to make them more slimey than their clients. Mark Jenson in my opinion is guilty and extremely creepy, his 2nd wife also… Maybe the 2nd wife and his Father should be tried as accesories… seems to me to be questionable that he could do it all by himself….

Though as compelling as this testimony is, I wonder if he was led in anyway during his initial interview. Maybe he and Jensen did talk to each other in jail, but maybe it was like Dillard asking, “Hey what are you in for, Oh you killed your wife huh, how did she die?” Maybe Dillard was guessing and just happened to get some of the story right. After all he is an admitted CON man. He knows how to manipulate information and situations.

I never got the evidence on Jensen actually sitting on his wife. Was there a post mortem print of his rear end on her or how did the prosecution decide he sat on her? And if she was on her side, isn’t it conceivable that she turned her head herself, and in her weakened state, was unable to get out of the pillow? Just a few things to think about

Mr. Jambois seems like an ill-prepared, bumbling idiot. Do others feel that way?

Testimony of a con man alone may not sway me or a jury, but when corroborated by evidence, it is much more believable IMO.

Wow this case has been very interesting for me. Mark was a childhood friend of mine. We live a few blocks apart on the same street and spent many a summer days playing together. His Parents were very kind and friendly. Nothing about his childhood would suggest that he would grow up to be a cold blooded killer. But the evidence seems to say otherwise. My heart goes out to Julie’s family and to Mark’s parents and sister as well.

If you thought your husband was actively trying to kill you.
Why would you stay in the home and why leave your kids in that enviornment?

After the sexual testimony, I wonder how much Kelly had to do with provoking the eventual killing.

I am sorry but I was keeping an open mind till Mark Jensen winked at the camera. This is nothing to him.

DF

And what’s with the wink on Mark Jensen’s face that the camera focuses on? Some of the commentators should make a remark about this.

When I heard the testimony that Julie was so sick and Mark kept telling the children he would take care of it later (for 2 days) if she did not get better. That is proof in the pudding for me. He wanted her to die. Even the children knew how sick she was and wanted help for her.

Julie did not want to believe her suspicions regarding Mark because she loved him and her family. She was so under his control regarding the things that were happening around her, i.e. notes, medicines appearing not purchased by her, sexual photos placed around home and in car, and suspicious internet use. I would say these games could depress you and make you feel afraid.

He had finally found the perfect woman (Kelly) to meet his perverted sexual needs and the “control freak” would stop at nothing short of killing his wife to fulfill his desires. He should be called “Freaky” not Kelly’s ex.

I hope the jury can piece it altogether to convict this sicko.

PS

Not impressed with this Judge after watching the Judge in Phil Spector case. He seems so scrambled. One minute he makes a ruling one way the next minute he makes a ruling that counters his other rulings. He is not good!!

Kelly had to know something. Her married “boyfriend” seemed to be telling anyone who would listen that he was going to kill Julie. I think she should be given a second glance to see exactly what she knew before the “accident” instead of after it. She is a nasty piece of work that one. I truly believe in some sick way Kelly encouraged this guy to make room in his home for her at Julie’s expense!

Can someone answer why Kelly Jensen took the stand? Isn’t it true you don’t have to testify against your spouse?

This trial is so confusing to me. I mean, the evidence makes me really think Mark is guilty, but i’m sorry - if you thought your husband was trying to kill you, why would you write a letter about it and still stay in the house? I mean people said you can stay with them and yet, you stay in a house with a man you think is trying to kill you? Hmm, I woulda left!