|
|
Wife Poisoning Trial
|
|
T O P I C
|
Discussion Started: 01-31-2008, 3:31 PM
|
|
|
|
Mark Jensen is accused of first-degree intentional homicide in the mysterious poisoning death of his wife, Julie Jensen.
Jensen died in 1998 at the age of 40. It took prosecutors three years to charge Mark Jensen in the death.
Much of the case to date has centered around a letter Jensen gave a neighbor before her death, with instructions to give it to police if anything would ever happen to her. She believed her husband was plotting to kill her.
Jensen has contended that his wife commited suicide, and essentially framed him by leaving a bogus note, as revenge after learning he was having an affair.
What do you think? Do you believe Mark Jensen killed his wife, or do you think the defense's argument, that Julie Jensen killed herself and framed her husband, holds up?
Full coverage: WISN.com/jensentrial
|
|
View Messages: [newest first] | [oldest first]
|
Misun
|
07-04-2008, 5:58 AM
|
|
|
I know they're saying it was supposed to be Julie framing her husband for murder. The thing that bothers me the most about it is if I were to kill myself to frame him why would I chose a slow painful way to die instead of having an instant death to accomplish the same thing?
|
|
danibert23
|
04-28-2008, 7:01 PM
|
|
|
I knew David Jensen on a personal level. We went to Elementary school together. David was and I imagine still is a very very bright person. The letter that he wrote to the judge pleaing for his father definately sounds like something he is capable of writing. While I personally am not sure of the verdict because of my connection to the family, I do believe that this has caused David and Doug more grief than anything. First they lost their mother and now they have lost their father. I truly feel for the boys.
|
|
poomie123
|
04-22-2008, 1:03 PM
|
|
|
Unfortunately, I did not see the telecast of this trial. I?m way down south in TX.
But thanks to the internet and WISN.com videos and reports, the Griffin brothers? site, and the comments you guys are making here, I?m becoming more and more informed.
I?ve seen videos of much of the prosecutor?s closing argument, but none of the defense?s.
Can anyone give me links or some information as to how I can get to see or read:
1. The opening statements of both the prosecutor and defense attorneys.
2. The defense?s closing argument.
3. A transcript or video of the police interview of Mark. I would at least like to know what were the main things that were learned from the questioning. What was his demeanor? Did he appear sincere, truthful? Or did he act evasive, like someone trying to hide something? All I've seen is a brief clip from the 48 hours program. Did the 20/20 show (I missed it) show more of the interview?
Thank you so much, nice people.
Poomie
|
|
Herky505
|
04-22-2008, 9:36 AM
|
|
|
Holy crap.
I lived with Kelly LaBonte in New Mexico in the late 80's. I currently live in the midwest and have followed this story without making the connection until today. I was saddened by this to begin with but to have a personal connection is well, horrifying. My sincere condolences to to Julie Jensen's family.
|
|
MWP
|
04-17-2008, 6:15 AM
|
|
|
I'm an author. I've written ten books. I've followed this case for a long time. Rarely does one come across such a victim as Julie, and a family so united to share her memory and keep it alive. I'm humbled by that.
I'm thinking of pursuing a book about this case. I've never done anything like it. I was wondering how those of you in Wisconsin felt about seeing this case in print. My book would focus, in part, on Julie's life story. I believe she's had an incredible life--one that was only touched upon throughout the process of Mark's trial.
Thanks.
Best, M. William Phelps Author www.mwilliamphelps.com
|
|
wow18
|
03-04-2008, 11:50 AM
|
|
|
I can't believe that someone would have the audacity, when referencing Julie Jensen, to say that "she won this round." Um, she's dead and was denied the privilege of raising her own children. I would hardly call that winning. I would say that Mark won the 1st round because he went for 10 years without being convicted, but in the end got what was coming to him. At least finally someone wiped that smug, sick look off of his face . . .
|
|
sukeylu
|
03-01-2008, 1:58 PM
|
|
|
Hope my last post in support of the jury's decision made it into the discussion. Haven't seen it yet. I feel it's important that the jury know they are supported and did the right thing. There will always be critics who didn't see all the evidence or didn't want to. How someone can defend that very distrubed man is beyond me. It is painfully obvious how he controlled this woman who lived in fear of losing her children because of his many threats that he would make her look "crazy" so she'd never see her kids again if she ever left him. That was very clear. How someone can seriously believe it is that easy to just up and leave your kids, your home, when you are in such a trap is just plain naive. Anyone in such a trap feels forced to stay rather than lose her children. Also she did not have any other source of income. I am sure she did not want to believe that her husband was capable of the behaviors he exibited so a certain amount of denial was also in the mix. Until you are in such a situation, it would be plain nuts to judge someone for not leaving. These types of marriages exist everywhere you go. Working in the mental health field, I see them over and over again. You people who actually think he is innocent, wake up to reality. Stop defending men like this. The judge stated it correctly with regards to the emotional abuse this woman went through. It's more than obvious.
|
|
sukeylu
|
02-29-2008, 8:23 PM
|
|
|
To the jurors: I just want to say how proud I am of these jurors. I followed the Jensen trial closely and know how very stressful it is to be on a jury. Last year, I served on a death pentalty case and it consumed me for a long time. You eat, sleep, and drink the trial- even after it's over- for a long time. In the Jensen case, there was FAR more convincing evidence, a "mountain" of evidence, really, as compared to the trial I served on and we convicted the defendant. I know how VERY hard you all must have worked on this case and how you wanted so much to do the right thing. After listening to all the evidence and not being allowed to talk among yourselves, it is SO hard, when the time comes to deliberate, you just let loose. And you want to give the defendant every benefit of doubt you can. The evidence in the Jensen case was just overwhelming beyond any doubt to me. There were so many reasons why it was almost impossible that Julie killed herself, I can't even count them. One being, the internet searches, the fact that no anti-freeze was found, the behavior and lies of Mark, on and on and on. I was so relieved when the verdict came in. All the jurors should be very proud of the hard work and dedication they put into their duty. Always know you did the right thing. There will always be critics out there who have their own agenda, or whatever, and didn't even listen to the evidence like you did. And I think the judge completely supported your verdict and was completely convinced of the prosectution's evidence too. Be proud! You did your job well!! There is no doubt this man was a very sick person and we can only pray for his sons who lost their real mother and must be very confused living with the knowledge of what their father did, even though they will try hard as they can to deny it to themselves. Thank You.
|
|
free2judge
|
02-29-2008, 6:07 PM
|
|
|
Again, to the relatives of Mark Jensen, oh I mean bloggers, who seem free to believe in Mark's innocence, where is your reasonable doubt? You keep saying Mark is innocent and Julie was nuts. That's not proof. That's not reasonable doubt. Reasonable doubt would have been a defense expert testifying that the handwriting in Mark's day planner was not his. Reasonable doubt would have been an expert testifying that the photos Julie gave to police were doctored. Reasonable doubt would have been putting witnesses on the stand, to point out what a vindictive person Julie is. Reasonable doubt would have been anyone standing up and saying, "I was with Mark Jensen the day Julie died." Or how about Mark getting up and telling everyone about his actions over those few days? For such a professional, he sure is a chicken and an easily pegged liar. That's why Mr. Albee couldn't have him take the stand.
Mark's a good liar, but not good enough. Mr. Albee knew he couldn't make it through cross eximination...because he did it!
There is no reasonable doubt. The defense doesn't have any. Mr. Albee, good fight with what you had, but it's time to throw in the towel. Don't tarnish what's left of your career fighting a fight that just can't be won. Throwing out the letter would only mean a weaker case for suicide. The letter was the only thing that gave me any doubt, in the begining, that Mark may have been telling the truth. That letter, pointing the finger at Mark, was the only thing that made me think, "maybe she was trying to set him up."
|
|
abshoemake
|
02-28-2008, 3:30 PM
|
|
|
I did not get to see any of the sentencing phase. I understand David, Julie's son, wrote a letter that was read in court. I seem to be reading that it was implied that he loved his stepmother more than his mother. This I cannot believe is a letter written by this child. Would someone please help to clarify this. I still believe 200% that Mark Jensen is guilty as guilty can be. He is most fortunate that he didn't get what he deserved, the death penalty. He is still alive whereas Julie's family is without their loved one.
Sammy
sammy
|
|
Top
WISN 12 News Talkback