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

  • #181
I'm excited to watch this. There seems to be an even split on his guilty or not as far as the public goes.
 
  • #182
This prosecution opening is so underwhelming. She’s reading the opening statement. I don’t know why prosecutors don’t have their opening segments and closing arguments practiced and memorized. Especially for a major trial like this.
 
  • #183
It's soooooo creepy how MJ harassed her. He's disgusting.
 
  • #184
Jambois is the man, lol.
 
  • #185
“You have the right but it’s not a good objection. I want it noted for the record!” Yes judge! I can’t stand it when attorneys behave this way. Just prolonging things unnecessarily and acting like every little statement is violating a fair trial.
 
  • #186
This prosecution opening is so underwhelming. She’s reading the opening statement. I don’t know why prosecutors don’t have their opening segments and closing arguments practiced and memorized. Especially for a major trial like this.

Due to the subject matter, my guess is the jury is laser focused ;););)
 
  • #187
I’m sorry but this is a terrible opening. She’s standing still behind a podium and reading. It’s monotone. I’m always amazed at the poor oratorical skills most litigators have. I’m having a hard time maintaining interest. You don’t have to go through all the evidence in detail. Esp if you’re just going to read it. Just a broad overview! How can you do this job day in and day out and be this bad?
 
  • #188
I did watch the first trial and was surprised that the judge allowed the note to be entered. But IMO he is guilty.
 
  • #189
Agreed about the prosecutor. Sitting and reading opening statement that already feels way too long.
Schlubby presentation imo. Can't stand this defendant. Smugged and smirked through the first trial. Imo. Ugh he gives me such creepy gaslighting vibes. Poor Julie. Still don't understand how the letter caused this retrial. I mean I get it regarding how Julie can't be cross examined on this, but beyond that I struggle. haven't letters like this been admitted into evidence successfully in other cases I wonder. So glad you guys are here because no one in my life wants to discuss true crime!
 
  • #190
It's a shame the letter was allowed in the first trial. They didn't need it to find him guilty
 
  • #191
Watching this trial now but not familiar with this case. Has he been out since 2013 when a federal judge overturned his conviction, and ordered he be released from prison?
 
  • #192
I am here firmly on the side of the state didn't reach beyond a reasonable doubt first time round, lets see how it goes this time
 
  • #193
Oh boy, this defense attorney is :eek:
 
  • #194
Watching this trial now but not familiar with this case. Has he been out since 2013 when a federal judge overturned his conviction, and ordered he be released from prison?

No, he's been locked up the whole time.
 
  • #195
I believe that's the first time I've ever seen an attorney apply lip gloss in the courtroom.
 
  • #196
That stare though. :eek:
 
  • #197
  • #198
  • #199
  • #200
I'm excited to watch this. There seems to be an even split on his guilty or not as far as the public goes.
I thought he was guilty after the first trial, but I’m willing to listen again with an open mind. But you don’t want to be so open-minded that your brains fall out.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
138
Guests online
2,921
Total visitors
3,059

Forum statistics

Threads
632,569
Messages
18,628,521
Members
243,198
Latest member
ghghhh13
Back
Top