January 30, 2008

The low-tech lowdown on the Jensen trial

Posted: 04:25 PM ET

ELKHORN, Wisconsin – Our satellite dish may be frozen but my blackberry isn't, so here is the latest in Wisconsin v Mark Jensen, the man accused of murder in the antifreeze poisoning of his wife.

Jean Casarez is covering the Jensen trial.

Inmate Bernard Bush is on the stand. Bush has testified he overheard his cell mate, David Thompson, discussing a plan with Jensen to abduct another trial witness and “sit on him.”

Bush said he heard a total figure of $100,000 being discussed with $50,000 up front and $50,000 at the completion of the abduction. Watch what this trial is all about

The would-be abductee? Ed Klug, who testified earlier in the trial about a conversation he had with Jensen at a convention. During a night of drinking in November 1998, Klug said, Jensen told him he was researching how to kill his wife.

The defense just won a victory in argument outside of the jury's presence. They will be allowed to question Bush about a first-degree murder charge that was pleaded down to harboring a felon.

The importance to the defense? Bush knows fully well what it means to cooperate with law enforcement.

Earlier, witness Quinn Yorton seemed to back Klug’s story. Yorton, a former co-worker of Jensen’s, said he spoke with Klug shortly after Jensen was charged with murder in 2002. Klug related the alcohol-fueled conversation he had with Jensen about “doing away with spouses,” Yorton testified. He recalled Klug being astonished by Jensen’s arrest.

On cross-examination, defense attorney Craig Albee made sure the jury heard that Quinn Yorton didn't come forward to law enforcement until 2007, well after Jensen had been charged.

– Jean Casarez, In Session correspondent

Filed under: Trials

Share this on:

del.icio.us

Share post | 8 Comments |

Add a comment | Permalink

ed murtha

January 30th, 2008 5:30 pm ET

good work by jean casarez, as usual!

Sheryl

January 30th, 2008 9:04 pm ET

Great job Jean!! Hope things get thawed tomarrow!

Paco

January 31st, 2008 4:37 am ET

Jean, you did a terrffic A1 job as usual and you proved that no matter what your conditions, your reporting skills stay the same! Stay warm!

AG, IN

January 31st, 2008 9:48 am ET

I feel everyone should wait and hear the defense side of the case before rushing to judgement about Mark Jensen's guilt. I have seen other cases in which the prosecution can paint a very convincing picture about a person's guilt and later find the person to be innocent of a crime. I am sure we all have seen those cases in the news recently. Mark Jensen doesn't seem to have any morals, however, that does not make a person a murderer.

Sherry

January 31st, 2008 10:32 am ET

I am curious as to why during the videotaped police interview with Mark Jensen he didn't seem to have that nervous smile/smirk on his face. I am led to believe that that it is just more of his lies.

LJE

January 31st, 2008 10:46 am ET

Where are the children currently and will the oldest son be part of the trial for his feelings or comments?

Sandra

January 31st, 2008 1:45 pm ET

Hi Jean,
Congratulations on handling that -30 weather. You are a real trooper and one of the best correspondents anywhere. You bring intelligence and integrity to your reporting. It is a joy watching a beautiful, smart woman do her thing.

By the way, based on the testimony so far, I think Mark Jensen is guilty as sin. He has that same deameanor as Scott Peterson. We know how far a psychopath will go when someone gets in the way of what he wants.

joe a sali8sbury

July 24th, 2009 2:59 pm ET

I think the Judge was right to , stop thing,s as they were heading into combat defence and a very wise witness.the man didn,t do it. Joe A Salisbury Perrysburg Ohio

Leave Your Comment

« Back to main

Previous article:
Noteworthy events at Jensen trial

Next article:
What was Wesley Snipes thinking?

About this blog

Sidebar takes you behind the scenes of the day's legal headlines with breaking news and in-depth analysis from In Session's anchors and correspondents.

Questions or comments? E-mail