I was afraid I would be the only one who thought Jambois' rebuttal sub-par. He missed a great opportunity to do some effective rebuttal of the defense's closing. I thought MJ was guilty after first trial, and think it was proven again this time. Just hope the juror who knew the jail snitch says nothing during deliberations to cause another overturned verdict.
GUILTY WI - Julie Jensen, 40, dies of antifreeze poisoning, Pleasant Prairie, 3 Dec 1998 *husband guilty*
- Thread starter Mysticchic
- Start date
A bit relieved to hear that someone else thought similarly. I thought the whole overarching “just look at the evidence folks, you were here” type statements combined with the peppering of (as I stated previously) him having to correct himself multiple times for getting dates wrong, for getting times mixed up; it seemed to undercut his own argument a bit. Who knows, he may very well be emotionally and mentally tired from this case.
Even the Judge who literally told the Jury “everyone take a big sigh of a relief now we are done with the testimony” seemed over this case lol. But I was kinda surprised such a comment was made & you could hear the audible sighs on stream. JMOO.
Recidivist
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2019
- Messages
- 780
- Reaction score
- 6,573
His relentless quest to get Mark Jensen has been continued since before the first trial. He will get Jensen at all costs, misrepresenting facts, trading favors for snitch testimony, and even having the autopsy changed based on Dillard's story. To make up for the lack of real evidence, he relies on the salacious details of Mark's life, clutches his pearls over penis pics.
Julie had every opportunity to flee whatever situation she claimed was dangerous. She was offered help by multiple people. Cash, a private cabin, relatives homes, shelters. My husband is trying to kill me, yet she stays, and she let her children stay too. She tells everyone who would listen, she felt afraid and in danger, but made absolutely zero attempt to help herself. THAT doesn't make sense to me.
imo...of course.
Fascinating to me State Jambois is very adamant of not wanting exactly what the jury asked for to go back to them. Defense was right - my opinion - when he said that Jambois said you could “look at the doctor’s notes” but they may not be able to read them. I wonder if he’s worried; he sure seems to be with all the arguments of needing redactions, whether it is something that is hearsay, whether it was admitted but not testified about, etc
Weki
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2019
- Messages
- 2,794
- Reaction score
- 19,328
I don’t think Jambois’ flamboyant style is effective or good lawyering. He’s a showman. I also think this style is what caused the conviction to be overturned as I have said before. Overzealousness.
But IMO there is no doubt that Mark Jensen killed his wife. Jambois is lucky that this is a good circumstantial case.
But IMO there is no doubt that Mark Jensen killed his wife. Jambois is lucky that this is a good circumstantial case.
I suspect there is at least one holdout who can't get past Julie not leaving Mark. It would have been interesting to go deeper into how and why society blames the victims of domestic abuse for not leaving obviously dangerous situations and how common it is. She stayed through years of being told Mark was behind the gaslighting, so why would it be a surprise that she would have trouble believing he would go so far as to actually kill her? In a way Julie WAS delusional - but it was to think MJ's behavior would not actually escalate to murder.
- Joined
- May 15, 2013
- Messages
- 55,637
- Reaction score
- 192,630
Mark Jensen Kenosha murder trial: Verdict watch as jury deliberates
Jurors wanted to see written notes by Julie Jensen's physician.
legalmomma
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2014
- Messages
- 1,818
- Reaction score
- 17,713
VERDICT is in
NotMyselfNEMore
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2013
- Messages
- 1,229
- Reaction score
- 272
I believe the jury has a verdict.
NotMyselfNEMore
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2013
- Messages
- 1,229
- Reaction score
- 272
Guilty!
legalmomma
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2014
- Messages
- 1,818
- Reaction score
- 17,713
April 14th 10 am sentencing date
I sincerely hope you aren't directing this comment to me. My point was that victims often don't leave for many reasons, so Julie should not have been singled out by the defense witnesses as being "delusional". Mark was simply a pathetic excuse of a husband and man - a total narcissist. Julie deserved better.
Would be interesting to see if his sister keeps paying $200/month into his commissary account. What a bully, and I suspect his parents are much the same.
Weki
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2019
- Messages
- 2,794
- Reaction score
- 19,328
Listened to Jambo’s presser. He explained the legal wrangling over Julie’s letter and while I understand his desire to have Julie’s voice heard I think a dispassionate prosecutor would have known it was a bad move and excluded it. He didn’t need it. I don’t mind Jambo’s emotionality and passion but it also makes me appreciate the more somber prosecutors who are meticulous and organized. Jambo def had it out for Mark Jensen and I always appreciate that in a prosecutor! That’s how a prosecutor should be imo.
It seems even MK’s father knew this and called Jambo the smartest rat in the sewer who was up at night looking at the ceiling with his beady eyes thinking about ways to get Mark Jensen!! Haha! I didn’t realize MK’s father was also an ex-con! Well Jambo got his man AGAIN! RIP Julie Jensen! My God what a sadistic animal!
It seems even MK’s father knew this and called Jambo the smartest rat in the sewer who was up at night looking at the ceiling with his beady eyes thinking about ways to get Mark Jensen!! Haha! I didn’t realize MK’s father was also an ex-con! Well Jambo got his man AGAIN! RIP Julie Jensen! My God what a sadistic animal!
Didn’t realize until the presser that apparently Jambois & wife weren’t getting any money for this….maybe that explains some of his frustrations seem in the courtroom [kidding, of course]
I thought it was interesting - but I understand his feelings on it - that Jambois came out at presser to explain why he thought he the jurors should’ve got to see the letter. I think at this point he should be happy at the verdict he got without it; and he does seem to be but he definitely has some strong feelings on that letter for better, worse, or indifferent.
I thought it was interesting - but I understand his feelings on it - that Jambois came out at presser to explain why he thought he the jurors should’ve got to see the letter. I think at this point he should be happy at the verdict he got without it; and he does seem to be but he definitely has some strong feelings on that letter for better, worse, or indifferent.