ELKHORN, Wisconsin - He may have been just another witness in the antifreeze murder trial, but to defendant Mark Jensen, this was the man his wife Julie Jensen had an affair with in 1991. We have heard in testimony that Mark never got over that affair and now in the courtroom he stares intently at Julie's ex-lover.  

Jean Casarez is covering the Jensen trial for In Session.

The grey-haired man with glasses, Perry Tarica, sits in the witness chair. From my vantage point in the courtroom, Jensen seems to be fixated on Tarica, who admitted spending the weekend with Julie at the Jensen's home while Mark was out of town.  

Tarica choked up as he described Julie as sweet and lovely. They met at work, started talking a lot and began to go to lunch. He said Julie told him her marriage was not good.  

When Julie invited him over on a Friday night, Tarica said his intent was to go as a friend. But when Julie invited him into her and Mark's bedroom, he agreed.

He became emotional on the stand as he told the jury he loved Julie.  Watch a video update

Defense attorney Craig Albee brought out a harassment citation Tarica had received from Kenosha Police after he sent a letter several months later to Julie via her sister-in-law. We didn't hear the letter, but it appeared to be one of friendship.  

Why a citation? Mark and Julie had started receiving mysterious porno pictures and strange calls after the one-weekend affair ended. Police could only believe it was one person: Julie's friend and lover. 

Those pictures have now come into this murder case by the prosecution as a "prior bad act" of the defendant's to show it was Mark who could never forgive Julie for her weekend. That continuing rage, they say, was one motive for her murder.  

During a break in the middle of Tarica's testimony there was an awkward moment. Only a few people remained in the courtroom, including Jensen, accompanied by a sheriff's deputy, and Tarica.  They looked at each other and looked away.

–  Jean Casarez, In Session correspondent

ELKHORN, Wisconsin – We have just seen the crime scene video in the case of Wisconsin v Mark Jensen. It was taken at the home of Mark and Julie Jensen on December 3, 1998 - hours after police were told Julie Jensen had died. The video shows Julie laying in bed with her face into her pillow.

It is sad, it is stirring, it is important evidence. As the lights were dimmed, the jury watched with the intensity they have had from the beginning. Video recap

Prosecutor Robert Jambois alerted Julie’s four brothers of what was going to be on the big projection screen. Only one brother remained in the courtroom, he bowed his head when Julie’s body appeared.

The defendant stared intently at the screen as police video showed close-ups of Julie’s face and body as the sheets were pulled back. When the video ended there was a stilling silence in that courtroom … hollowness as the reality of this death became front and center in the courtroom.

– Jean Casarez, In Session correspondent

NEW YORK – Last week, disgraced former prosecutor Mike Nifong filed for personal bankruptcy, claiming as much as $180 million in potential liabilities as a consequence of the lawsuits directed at him by the Duke players.

Mike Nifong spent a day in jail for criminal contempt.

I’ve heard several commentators asking, “Hasn’t Nifong suffered enough?” I guess the answer depends upon who is answering the question.

Clearly, the former players would suggest that Nifong’s travails are faint retribution for his illegal conduct. They faced the real possibility of spending a significant amount of time in jail—not to mention the complete destruction of their reputations—before the justice system belatedly rescued them from Nifong’s excesses.

And it would be hard to disagree with them. This is a public official who held these men and their families, and indeed the entire justice system, hostage while he engaged in an entirely unprofessional, inept, and ultimately terrifying campaign fueled entirely by misguided and self-gratifying motives.

Fortunately, this “rogue” prosecutor was stopped before the Duke players found themselves in a prison cell, but the damage inflicted upon the public perception of the justice system will certainly linger.

Once, during my career as a prosecutor, I convicted an innocent man. There was nothing sinister about the prosecution—it was an armed robbery conviction based upon the eye-witness testimony of the victim. As it turned out, the victim had made an innocent—yet drastic—mistake in her identification and, fortunately, we were able to free the man within a few months. But I’ve always been haunted by the specter of jailing an innocent man.

Apparently, Nifong allowed his desire for fame and job security to pervert all concepts of justice and fairness. As a result, he has lost his job, his career, and his reputation—and now his financial standing. Some would say that’s a small price for him to pay for the injustice he created.

– Jack Ford, In Session anchor

ELKHORN, Wisconsin – There is quite a dynamic going on in the Mark Jensen courtroom here. Currently on the stand is Jensen's wife Kelly. She and the defendant were having an affair at the time of Julie's death and later married. The couple now has a small child.

Prosecutors are reading e-mail after e-mail that Kelly and Mark exchanged during the fall of 1998. Legally, this goes toward motive. The emails are XXX-rated but prosecutors believe one of the reasons Mark killed his wife Julie was to be with Kelly.

The defense is objecting continually, raising issues of relevance and due process. Watch a trial update

Kelly and Mark never looked at each other during testimony - I kept watching - and the jury seemed fixated on the e-mails themselves, writing notes on what was almost a short book of Internet exchanges.

The jurors didn't seem to look at the defendant but I did see one male juror look at Mark Jensen to see his reaction to these very sexual and graphic communications.

Mark Jensen's mother was in the courtroom at the beginning of Kelly's testimony but left in the middle.

At the end of the day, after the jury left the courtroom. I saw husband and wife exchange big smiles.

– Jean Casarez, In Session correspondent

NEW YORK – So, I'm not sure what Darren Mack was thinking when he asked District Judge Douglas Herndon to let him withdraw his guilty plea. And I’m not surprised that the judge denied the do-over.

Video: Jami Floyd almost always has the Last Word.

After four days of testimony, the judge ruled that Mack had accepted the plea deal voluntarily. And that he knew the legal ramifications when he pleaded guilty to murdering his wife and when he entered the equivalent of a no contest plea on the attempted murder in the shooting of Family Court Judge Chuck Weller in Reno, Nevada.

I gotta say, Darren Mack impresses me as a very smart man. Way smarter than most criminal defendants. So I’m thinking Judge Herndon got it right.

But Mack's attorney filed an immediate appeal to the Nevada Supreme Court. And Darren’s brother, Landon Mack, is criticizing the ruling, saying Heardon is biased toward the two defense lawyers who worked the plea deal.

I’m open to what they have to say and that’s why on Wednesday Landon Mack will join me on Best Defense to make his brother’s case. Until then, that's the Last Word.

– Jami Floyd, In Session anchor

OVER MILWAUKEE, Wisconsin – "I want to keep you all updated," the pilot announced over the airplane's intercom system. "The Milwaukee airport has been closed."

My producer and I were flying back to Milwaukee, Wisconsin, after spending a long weekend in New York with our families, and the snowfall was so fast and furious the airport was no longer allowing planes to land. So that gave me time to keep thinking about the Mark Jensen case in Elkhorn. Read about the case

Aaron Dillard is still on the stand and is one of the state’s star witnesses. The prosecution brought out (and the defense re-emphasized) that he is a self-admitted con man with a list of convictions as long as your arm. He also has been in the construction industry and has taken part in home improvement scams (just like what you hear about on TV).

But according to Dillard that is what led him to bond with Mark Jensen just a few months ago at the Kenosha County jail. Jensen had opened up a construction company after he was charged with murder and lost his stockbroker position. See a video update

This jailhouse informant testified that Jensen confessed that he killed his wife Julie. Is this another con just like all the other ones? The curious thing that cannot be ignored is that Dillard testified that when Julie wasn't dying fast enough, Mark said he rolled her over, sat on her back and pushed her face and neck into the pillow and suffocated her.

Although the detective who interviewed Mark in April 1999 asked him that very same question, none of it had become public, nor had pictures of Julie's face shortly after death where her nose and mouth are pushed over to one side.

This information is what the jury will have to weigh as they decide Dillard's credibility - information that had not gotten to the media but according to the prosecution is corroborated by the evidence.

"We have been cleared for landing,” the pilot announced. "They have re-opened the airport and we are third in line to land". I put away my Mark Jensen notes and began to focus on my snowy ride to the hotel. I will look for you all on-air from Elkhorn, Wisconsin!

– Jean Casarez, In Session correspondent

WASHINGTON – Lawyers call them “swearing contests.” Opposing witnesses take the oath–and tell absolutely contradictory stories.

It happens all the time (been in divorce court lately?),  and nobody suggests either witness should face perjury charges.

So the public should take with a grain of salt the claim that New York Yankee pitcher Roger Clemens will precipitate a “possible perjury showdown” (the New York Times’ words, not mine) when he comes to Capitol Hill on Saturday to be questioned by Congressional staff lawyers about allegations by a former trainer that he injected The Rocket with performance-enhancing drugs.

Clemens and the trainer, Brian McNamee, have been issuing contradictory statements for weeks—Clemens saying the injections contained legal substances, McNamee insisting they were illegal steroids and human growth hormones. Now both men have said they will repeat their conflicting stories under oath to Congressional investigators.

On the face of it, this would make a perjury prosecution inevitable—one of them is lying, and should be prosecuted for perjury. Not so (remember all those divorce cases?).

Perjury cases are historically difficult for prosecutors to prove, and here, there seems to be little evidence other than the two men’ claims. Clemens can swear he thought the injections were benign. McNamee can point out that he has no motive to falsely accuse the formidable Clemens, and indeed, under a plea bargain he could go to prison if he is not telling the truth.

So the much-anticipated face-off between the two men under oath on Capitol Hill (currently set for Feb. 13) is not likely to produce a “perjury showdown.” The two men will repeat their now-familiar stories in a “swearing contest” under oath. Then, if reason prevails, the matter will end at that.

– Fred Graham, In Session Senior Editor

NEW YORK – On Monday we celebrate the birthday of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and this year also marks the 40th anniversary of his death. Dr. King had a dream, but has it been realized?

Jami Floyd frequently comments on issues of the day.

Well, we have the right to vote.  And soon a black man may very well be president. Watch the Last Word video

But we also have a country that is warehousing black men in prisons with 200,000 black college-age men behind bars. We still have lynchings in this country.

And we have schools that are still segregated despite the law that they not be – schools so poorly funded we’re leaving generations of children behind.

Change has come, but it comes slowly. After all, Dr. King was shot and killed not all that long ago for fighting for that change.

I still believe little children will some day live in a world where they are judged not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.

But "some day" is not here. Not yet. And that is the Last Word.

– Jami Floyd, In Session Anchor

NEW YORK - The fate of a black trash collector convicted of murdering a well-known white fashion writer now rests with the judge who heard the case, which aired live on In Session (then Court TV) last year.

Barnstable Superior Court Judge Gary Nickerson yesterday heard juror testimony in a rare public hearing to decide whether racial bias tainted the jury’s decision.

Judge Nickerson is facing unchartered legal territory as he weighs whether to grant a new trial to Christopher McCowen. Uncharted legal territory but not an uncommon occurrence.

Bias in the jury room is a pervasive problem in our system of justice. The McCowen case simply presents an extreme and terribly clear example.

Whatever the judge decides, his ruling will be appealed to a higher court, prolonging a sad saga that has captivated Cape Cod and beyond since Christa Worthington’s body was found in her Truro home in 2002. If there’s even a hint of prejudice in the jury deliberations, McCown should get a new trial.

– Jami Floyd, In Session anchor

NEW YORK – Some commentators have made much of Judge Glass’ strong words to O.J. Simpson in court yesterday, but clearly only one thing mattered to O.J.: getting out of jail, which he did, after the brief tongue-lashing. He’s free again, as he will be until trial.

O.J. Simpson sits in court with attorney Yale Galanter.

How could the judge find he violated a condition of bail and yet spring him? Because he’s entitled to bail in this non-capital case. The judge did all that she could do: gave him a stern warning, raised the bail, required him to pay 15% of the new $250,000 amount.

O.J.’s friends – he’s always got entourage – came up with the money, and he’s home free, again.

As one of the few people who actually read O.J.’s 2007 book,” If I Did It,” I cannot help thinking of his vivid description of his long, tortured relationship with Nicole Brown Simpson, his explanation of he did it WHY he did it (hypothetically) - that skirt was too short for his taste on the last day of her life - and HOW he did it (hypothetically) - driving home via a different route than everyone thought.

In my view, the only interpretation of his book is that he is now a confessed double murderer, and yet no jail can hold him. He’s a master at playing the system.

– Lisa Bloom, In Session anchor