GUILTY WI - Julie Jensen, 40, dies of antifreeze poisoning, Pleasant Prairie, 3 Dec 1998 *husband guilty*

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

I hope this jury can follow this prosecution's train of thought with the video & live testimony. The previous jury was smart. They happened to lay Julie's letter and the list from Jensen's planner side by side and suddenly realized her letter was her response to everything in Mark's list explaining why her death would not be a suicide. She would have no way of knowing what if any weight the jury would put on Jensen's list, but it was clearly the turning point for her finally admitting to herself the possibility of what he was capable of.
 
AnnInOhio said:
I assumed it was about Klug's ex-wife not remembering. However, Jensen's now ex-wife Kelly also took the stand and IIRC had to read out loud all of the steamy emails between her and Jensen. I still think she (Kelly) knew what he intended to do but not sure they could prove she actively participated. I hate that she ended up raising Julie's boys.
Click to expand...
You‘re probably right. Has Kelly already testified again? I haven’t watched all of the retrial and it can get confusing.
 
AnnInOhio said:
I assumed it was about Klug's ex-wife not remembering. However, Jensen's now ex-wife Kelly also took the stand and IIRC had to read out loud all of the steamy emails between her and Jensen. I still think she (Kelly) knew what he intended to do but not sure they could prove she actively participated. I hate that she ended up raising Julie's boys.
Click to expand...
BBM I didn’t know that! I wonder if she allowed Julie’s relatives to see them? I hate it when kids are cut off from the deceased spouse’s family.
 
I've been trying to play catch-up on this case after watching some of the current re-trial. I didn't follow the first trial, but during the past few days I've watched some of the 2008 trial testimony.
My position for many cases is often 'on the fence', generally acknowledging the existence of 'reasonable doubt' more readily than many others.
For this case, it seems that the circumstantial evidence is overwhelming. There is some doubt, but I think the doubt is not reasonable.
For those who think MJ is Not Guilty, what explanation would you provide to convince a fellow juror who is 'on the fence' to vote NG?

www.courttv.com

WI v. Mark Jensen: Man Accused of Poisoning Wife | Court TV Trials

Former stockbroker Mark Jensen is accused of poisoning his wife with antifreeze in 1998 so that he could be with his mistress.
www.courttv.com www.courttv.com
joe jones said:
I am probably one of the few that would have voted NG, I think his defence lawyer did a stellar job, especially in relation to anti freeze, the jail house snitch shouldn't have been allowed and the ME was changing and adding to her findings on the word of a jail house snitch. I am on the fence as to whether he is guilty but it got nowhere near BARD for me. I hope they stream his new trial.
Click to expand...

Gardenista said:
I think he's guilty as sin. It's a great trial with excellent attorneys and judge--I watched it along with many other during Covid lol. It can be watched here:

WI v. JENSEN (2008) - Court TV
Click to expand...

madison.com

Pleasant Prairie homicide re-trial: Former co-worker testifies Mark Jensen researched poisons

A former co-worker of Mark Jensen, the former stockbroker accused of poisoning and suffocating his wife to death in Pleasant Prairie in 1998, said Mark told him he had researched
madison.com madison.com
  • Jan 13, 2023
[...]
Klug said Mark Jensen would talk about the "strangest things" and "I had never heard anybody talk like that."
"It was really weird," he added. "He was looking up poison. ... He said you could put it in drinks, have them drink it."
Klug, who testified during the first trial of Mark Jensen some 15 years ago, said Mark Jensen told him he researched poisons and "items that would be non-detectable in a normal autopsy."
[...]
Chambliss, who conducted the autopsy the afternoon of Dec. 4, 1998, said the manner of death was homicide. Chambliss said the cause of death was asphyxiation with the ethylene glycol found in her system as a contributing factor.
[...]
 
Re-watching testimony on the post-it list in Jensen's planner I think the words are "bag hands" not "bag handles". My guess is he was going to put his hands in something like a plastic grocery bag to avoid getting his prints on anything he gave Julie. There would be no need to bag Julie's hands. I suppose he could have also planned to suffocate her with a bag over his hands. There also notes about property either with or upon which to place a log cabin. Would be curious to see if he and Kelly moved to a log cabin after Julie's death. A lot of the 2 and 3-letter notations would probably be stock symbols since he was a stockbroker.
 
Bobbisangel said:
I hope that the Pros doesn't have to use the laws of 1998 to charge him with.
That is what they usually do. They use the laws of the year the murder took place instead of the year that they are prosecuted in.

That is what happened in my daughter's case. The murder took place in 1994 but he wasn't caught until 8 years later. He was prosecuted by the laws of 1994 and only got 27 years for 1st degree murder. What that does is reward the person for being on the run or getting to live his life until he goes to trial.
I wonder what the sentence would be in his state...Milwaukee... for 1st degree murder by the laws of 1998...anyone know? Hopfully LWOP or the death penalty but I doubt it.
Click to expand...
Wi does not have death penalty
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 95 more.
Total: 501 (members: 96, guests: 405)

Online statistics

Members online
96
Guests online
405
Total visitors
501
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,347
Messages
18,238,044
Members
234,348
Latest member
Allira93
Back
Top