Mark Jensen's Prison Manuscript | Antifreeze Murder Retrial
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 янв 2023
- Mark Jensen reportedly began writing his manuscript around 2010 to get his side of the story on paper and to protect his legal rights to sell his story in the future. What do YOU think? ⚖️👇
MORE HERE: www.courttv.com/trending/wi-v...
#MarkJensen #AntifreezeMurderRetrial #CourtTV
COURT TV IS BACK! 24/7 LIVE gavel-to-gavel coverage, in-depth legal reporting, and expert analysis of the nation’s most important and compelling trials.
WATCH COURT TV LIVE:
www.courttv.com/title/court-t...
WATCH TRIALS ON DEMAND:
www.courttv.com/programming/t...
WHERE TO WATCH:
www.courttv.com/where-to-watc...
Depressed women do not kill themselves slowly to stage 3 by ingesting anti-freeze. Horrible painful death.
What do you mean "stage 3"??
@@FLo-jc7ig “stage 3” taken from pathology testimony
Except that hundreds do every year. It isn't that uncommon.
@@settame1 key word is slowly. Too painful. Suicide by antifreeze is done by rapid consumption to avoid failure due to the grinding pain.
Right? I mean she had all those other drugs to do herself in quicker and painlessly! Plus him not calling a Dr or 911 the day prior is enough proof for me!
How can anyone say he’s done his time? He took all of Julie’s time.
He was found guilty again.
Watching this new trial, it's pretty clear he murdered his wife. What a waste of time and money.
💸🔥
The lawyers, media, courts dont mind.
They get that money. 💰
What makes it clear? Hear say?
Very clear. I hate this man and I don’t even know him. How was the conviction overturned?
@@ET-hc4wl Appeal court threw out a letter his murdered wife had written, which stated, "something happens to me, it was my husband." This would be hearsay, because due to US law he must be accorded a chance to confront his accuser. The decision took almost 5 years to make and the new trial an additional 10 to prepare!
The inadmissibility of the letter seems totally ridiculous.
"the right to face your accuser"?
He killed his accuser!
What kind of twisted judicial system do we have?
An American one, corrupt to the core.
Yeah, it's weird, but he isn't the convicted killer until the jury decides that. So, how can you say, let the letter in because she is unable to testify because he killed her. Maybe if she testified, she could have said, "no, that was a joke on my part." It's like bringing in an expert witness report without having the witness come in to testify about his/her report - everyone could interpret the report as they wished. However, I STILL think it’s strange... it's evidence the victim has deliberately left for this purpose, how can it not be admissible? It's like if a victim wrote the name of the killer in blood on the wall just before they died. Wouldn't it be admissible just because the victim has died? The victim cannot leave clues to her killer?? Is there another rule for last minute writing vs. writing left behind a week before? How bizarre.
There are many cases of people being framed by ex partners who commit suicide as one last f-you. It isn't all that uncommon. If their case is so strong they don't need the letter. Unfortunately it doesn't look so strong.
@Sfilano why doesn't it look strong? Everything in the letter has been transmitted to the jury by numerous people in which she confided. Even by Mark's own sister. The question is why the letter would be inadmissible... not what will be the verdict without the letter. There are many more people who are killed by their partners than people who commit suicide to try to frame their partner. The latter would be a rarity. Don't know why you would bring it up.
@@BluesClues31 Exactly. The letter doesn’t even matter. There is so much evidence that he killed her.
WoW , just WoW ! Overturned conviction , after years of legal battle , and that letter not allowed , my goodness , the depths of his depravity !!
The fact that this has always depended on him insisting he'd be believed, not his all-women-are-worthless-liars wife angers me. The fact that her words in death are not valued by the Men of the Supreme Court angers me.
His conviction was overturned on appeal, then his conviction reinstated, and then overturned again and he was granted a new trial.
@@bitfenix90 We all have the right to confront our accusers. Since Julie is dead, she cannot be cross examined on the contents of the letter. It is messed up for sure, but is our right as US citizens. There is so much more evidence against him though. I’d rather he be convicted once and for all while not violating any of his rights.
@@daCubanaqt I have been unsure how he has a 2003 trial then the 2008/9 convicting trial. That's always confused me.
@@daCubanaqt I understand that Wisc has some synthetic number of witnesses to authorize "dying utterance" as testimony, and this fantasy-number was violated so they tossed out the evidence. Julie intended to hand the letter to Husband & Wife across the street, but only Hubby was home. And this "only one recipient" was the 'violating condition'. sigh.
It’s really sad that the boys were manipulated by their father AND grandfather at a very young age to believe their mother framed their father and killed herself. They were taught to hate her and believe him to this day. He’s so evil. She died because she refused to escape without her kids.
I find that part super hard to swallow as well.
@@mwest3191 and Kelly his mistress literally raised the sons. So Julie carried, gave birth and love her kids than the mistress gets to raise them! Julie's poor sons especially younger one probably doesn't even remember his Mama or her unconditional love
All true, and all the more heartbreaking. I wish I were watching documentaries about the full retrial already, I can’t take the suspense.
It’s really really sad because she loved her kids so much. Mark didn’t care about anyone but his “Boy Scout”
@@hannah3146 Kelly and Mark also had a son together. I feel bad for all the children.
Doesn't the mention of the letter in his manuscript open the door for the letter to be put in evidence again??
I would certainly believe the letter would be mentioned. How could you hide it from there.
The letter is grounds for mistrial. No matter how the prosection tries to bring it in, Jeremy Perry one of the defense lawyers was the head of the appeals division for WI. He will get it tossed.
I think Every single court in Every state should be televised. This guy needs to be Under the prison!! He's such a Creep!
tell that to New York State, they love to keep their courtrooms secret and with no cameras whatsoever.
@@Ann.1686 I can't believe how Much he was smiling! The dude is a Total Creep, this poor woman went thru hell it seemed with this guy. Listening to the medical examiner describe the injuries on her, the look on his face just made this all that much more worse. Trials are fascinating & a great way to learn more about the justice system. I agree 100% actions speak louder then words! I sure hope the jury sees how much he's smiling & flirting with his lady attorney. I'd be Devastated if I had to hear what happened & see the photos of the 1 I love in such shape. I guess the cherry on top for this guy is he wrote a manuscript of how he killed her. Unreal! He deserves the exact same punishment in my eyes. He should be forced to drink antifreeze & have some1 on his back smothering him! Makes me sick that men can do things like this! I will never understand people who think murder is better then a divorce. Just heartbreaking for her children too 😥 But I really do hope laws can be changed to televise All court proceedings in the future. Its the Ultimate transparency! 🙏
May Julie Jenson Rest in Peace! 💞🕊💞
I agree, for different reasons. This trial has shown how the state manipulated the media and withheld and misrepresented evidence. After seeing the whole trial so far, i started at definitely guilty, to guilty but they haven't proven it beyond reasonable doubt to "holy crap this innocent guy has been kept in prison for 20+ years"
Its definitely the ultimate transparency to have court televised
Justice served twice!! Rip Julie🙏
She still has the antifreeze in her body... to me the letter was good evidence but the antifreeze is the best evidence... Rest in peace, Julie 🙏💕😇
Because she couldn't have taken that herself? It's very difficult to be forced to swallow the pills she had as well.
@@settame1 antifreeze suicide is a slow and very painful death. Litteraly no one would ever pick that if they ever wanted out of this world.
@@settame1 you sound like Marks groupie
#AntifreezeMurderRetrial WI v. Mark Jensen | MORE HERE: www.courttv.com/trending/wi-v-mark-jensen-antifreeze-murder-retrial/?
Vinnie Vinnie your guests please! They speak so boldly about nonsense regarding the devastating crimes, bashing the prosecution case, the murderer’s rights, etc etc, but guess what? The guy was convicted unanimously and obviously not one single juror bought any of the defense’s bs! I’m sure the panel in your very chairs know how that feels! Love you anyway Vinnie!
You're right but for the wrong reasons. They have a burden shift. The prosection needs to prove their case, someone does not need to prove their Innocence. The panel has the burden of evidence completely backwards. If there is a reasonable doubt, he is not guilty. Full stop.
I've been following this story for years
Please please they get it right this time ...... hope the prosecutors make a good case to keep this fiend in jail
Keep him in prison for Life
Just because Julie wanted to conceive naturally, doesn't mean what MJ's manuscript implies
Yeah it sounds really made up on his part. No indication of incest until the brother wants to have a child and then suddenly Julie is super into incest. The goal is to have a baby and suddenly the best option out of all options is to have a baby with increased possibilities of malformation. The brother and his wife want to start a family and the best way would be for both the brother and the surrogate to spend some time in prison for incest when there are numerous other ways of doing it. They're looking for a surrogate and she wants to conceive naturally its probably because they need an egg and sperm from other people (her egg (since its not in vitro) and the sperm of someone completely different). Her saying "natural" could even mean she didnt want to go through the extraction of her eggs which is a long, painful and expensive process and she intended on using a turkey baster to insert that random person's sperm. It's just super unlikely that she as well as her brother and his wife would entertain the ideia of her and her brother sleeping together with the sole purpose of creating a baby and then tell Mark about this plan over breakfast. It doesn't make any sense. I hope they bring in the brother to testify about this in order to clear up what feels like a probable lie.
Has her family filed a civil case against him for wrongful death?
Why is Mark always smirking ?
He's a sociopath, and he's happy to be out of prison and getting all of this attention.
Because he’s a narcissist and psychopath
Because the jury hates Jambois. According to people in the room they roll their eyes, put their notebooks down and try to take a nap whenever he starts talking.
her children stood up for him she died to protect them
Love this new set!!
That's the Rittenhouse judge
And he is still impatient with prosecution. 🙄
Is he, really? I thought the Rittenhouse judge was skinny and bald.
The Rittenhouse judge was the one in the first case.
If his wife, Julie had any inkling that her husband Mark was going to kill her, why in the world didn't she immediately and safely leave him?!!!
The ‘being too nice’ syndrome & a lack of understanding of his toxicity
Her children!! She would not leave them knowing he’d try to say she’s crazy and keep her away from them. Even after her death he committed parental alienation and the boys thin their hire mom framed him. Just gross.
She was given multiple opportunities by friends and family. Her best friend/sister in law, the neighbor who had a cabin far away from Mark (he didn't know where) and a couple of other friends all offered to help her escape, she turned all of them down because she knew there wasn't actually a threat. The only evidence of Mark being abusive or manipulative came from Julie and what Julie told others.
Right! She doesn't get a pass for being naive.
I think the Petri dish comment is a good example of how Mark would manipulate the truth and mischaracterise Julie as "crazy"
That was his whole plan. It was his idea for her to go to the doctor, and he brought up that she was depressed. Once he had that evidence, very soon after, he killed her.
I don't believe for one minute that she ever said that she wanted to sleep with her brother. That's outrageous! There wasn't a hint of her being weird in any way. He's disgusting, and he killed her.
He wants his sons to read this? Especially what he said about their mother wanting to get pregnant “the natural way” by her brother! There is no end to man’s depravity.
he is beyond disgusting. accusing her of wanting to incest with her own brother. I hope another prisoner slams his head into the concrete
We had a case here in the UK whereas a woman died of a poison ingestion lovely woman by everyone's statements runs parallel to this case In so many aspects. The husband was charged and convicted and his punishment was the death sentence by hanging this was pre 1965 early 60s. Months after the deaths of both as it was a shorter wait in the UK and the prosecution wanted this husband punished and it was going through parliament to abolish the death sentence anyway months after the deaths going through the wife's paper s and personal belongings the family found a letter from her stating she had killed herself as she couldn't face life without him as she suspected he was leaving her . She showed no signs of this anxiety she suffered and in retrospect they both died as he died by hanging 6 weeks after she died of arsenic poisoning .
He’ll be convicted….Justice for Julie 💐
Is he out of jail right now?
@@ET-hc4wl on his way to prison….sentencing April 14! 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
Our justice system sucks. 25 years later and this guy gets a retrial?
Smiling in court very guilty
If you want to face your accuser, don't kill them, Mark, mmmk? ....... So, if the victim had called 911 screaming "My husband Mark Jensen is trying to kill me" before he did, would that be inadmissible too? I don't get it.
I enjoy Vinny P, but I turn it off when he goes to the "Think Tank". People sitting around getting in their two cents is not a THINK Tank.
The definition of a think tank is a set of experts that sit around and discuss political or economic issues ….. but I think the use of those words for a similar platform is acceptable.
Prefer the think tank to Drama 🎭 Vinnie. He grates in my nerves. I want News not over the top speculation.
How it can be overturned?
Can someone please explain how the letter isn't considered a dying declaration?
If your eye twitches, you’re certified guilty
Why does Mark Jensen look like quarterback Tom Brady's evil older brother 🤔
I bet he is acquitted
Ed's coworker should be locked up as well. How the hell do you go 10 years without talking to the police? Coward!
Please stop having these 3 on especially the slimeball right next to you Vinnie
He's been in prison 14 years. Not 20 as your panel thinks.
Isn’t the letter her testimony? You can never confront your accuser if they murdered you.
If the letter can now come in, why can’t they NOT retry the case, if that was the error?
No, her letter CAN'T come in, so that's why they're retrying the case.
His manuscript is allowed to come in which supposedly talks about her letter.
The prosecutor decided not to bring in the manuscript because of completeness which likely would have been more damaging than helpful for them.
They dont catch the smart ones folks lmfao 🤣🤣🤣 yes sir, u got that right
Vinnie, tell me this, please, what happen to the dying declaration aspect of the letter. A letter is not good enough. Just like a victim that saw her attacker before death and name the person - that wouldn’t b admissible?
So good to see different guests
I don’t know - was an autopsy completed?
Yes autopsy. Determined stage 3 poisoning. Think she did that to get even with him? Leave her boys to that creep? NOT.
@@maryfitzpatrick3252 yea what a slow and painful to commit suicide.
@@maryfitzpatrick3252 Absolutely agree 💯
Why is the guy constantly sniggering?!
It's like if a victim wrote the name of the killer in blood on the wall just before they died. Wouldn't it be admissible just because the victim has died and connot be cross examided? The victim cannot leave clues to her killer?? Is there another rule for last minute writing vs. writing left behind a week before? How bizarre.
Someone slits their wrists and writes the name of the ex on the wall doesn't mean their ex did it.
@Sfilano murderers hardly ever kill their victims by slicing their wrists. But yes, the victim's writing would be admissible and the defense would show that the deseased slit their own wrist and that the writing means nothing. I don't see how your example justifies not letting a dead person's writings be shown in trial.
Can not introduce the letter!! Then what if the witnesses bring up the letter?
That testimony will be struck and they have to change subjects. If it does manage to get in, it becomes a mistrial and has to be re prosecuted.
What’s with the ear phones?
They're for hearing impaired people.
They are going to convict this monster. Antifreeze poisoning is an extraordinarily painful death. You just don't administer it to yourself
Except hundreds do every year. It is easily accessible, cheap and often overlooked so your family can still claim insurance.
@@settame1 Hundreds of people are being poisoned in this fashion. I don't think so
@@settame1 They do not do it slowly and over a course of days, they get it done and dusted in one go. Don't be naive you know he did this.
Waste of time and money 💰 ridiculous
I would really like to sit where Vinny is sitting. I have lots of questions I would ask the lawyer sitting next to him. He seems very interesting..
Letter or not he's not defendable at all!! David said to Eric, my mom sick, breathing like such such and my dad wouldn't take her to the hospital!! That's nail in the coffin sufficient enough!! 😆 And he said to the school superintendent who called to offer his wife a job, she s sleeping and for a long time, plus a smirk in the end!! A second nail on his coffin!!
Its called hearsay and shouldn't be admissible. Its also very strange that both David, David's mom and the teacher remember the exact phrasing David said 25 years after the fact, except it was in three separate occasions where David just happened to use the same exact phrasing. I don't trust that evidence at all. Plus on Monday were like to actually hear what David said, and seemingly it isn't what the witnesses said.
Letter or no letter, I'm watching the retrial, and he's already screwed himself. The jail-buddy testimonies were SOLID and the manuscript.... LAUGHABLE and let him submit it... Jury is going to convict.
How is the jail buddy testimony screwing him? I don't believe it at all.
1) the guy had access to Mark's records, we know that for sure since we have the time stamp on when and where the docs were delivered
2) mark easily could have disclosed parts of his case to others
3) no one saw Mark talking with the jailhouse snitch despite the snitch saying they were taking with others
4) the snitch actually admitted his MO is to get info from people and then immediately use it against them for his own gain
5) second snitch clearly was just trying to get a deal and no one knew what was going on. Mark clearly was trying to give him money because the guy said he couldn't even get legal counsel and Mark was being to nice.
6) a jury member actually has first hand knowledge of Dillard screwing over his sister, he said he could keep an open mind but i bet is gonna be the first thing out of his mouth the guy is a liar.
Would you want this man on the street
HE KILLED HER
I can not wait for him to know, He is going back to Prison for Life!!
If someone is found not guilty, is the evidence destroyed?
the evidence that was collected and used in the trial is typically returned to the person or organization that provided it. However, there are some exceptions. If the evidence is illegal or poses a danger to the public, it may be destroyed or otherwise disposed of. Additionally, if the evidence is needed for an ongoing investigation or another trial, it may be retained by law enforcement or the prosecution.
In better words,
After an acquittal, evidence may be retained by the prosecution or law enforcement agency that collected it for a period of time as determined by state or local laws. This is typically done in case of appeals or future investigations. However, the defendant or their attorney may also request that the evidence be returned or destroyed. In some cases, the court may issue an order for the evidence to be retained or destroyed.
Guilty!!! Lol no letter BAM!!!!! 😅😅😅
Despite the suspicion surrounding the harassment, the substance of Julie's conclusion that Mark could potentially harm her, still could've been solely linked to her finally catching on to the idea of Mark himself being the perpetrator of harassment, so long as their aren't any allegations of physical abuse or threats. That said, in addition... she could only be more likely to jump to the conclusion of Mark's potential to harm her, being that Julie originally seemed to be in denial at one time, that he could've been the source of such ongoing harassment... ultimately coming to more of a shock to her as the processing of Julie's conclusion would've required pretty close to a total flip. The glycol evidence leaves a bigger question Mark at this point of speculation... it's a wonder what the defenses claims are. Although the options would seem somewhat narrow, it's not impossible and even something of imaginable for Julie to have mentioned suicide (even if it was synically-based at the time) after perhaps concluding and even confronting Mark about the harassment issue. She could've felt poisoned by him for years so to speak... and maybe even symbolically referred to poisoning herself to death by comparison, as the final product of his alleged actions.
But there's evidence of him searching for "poison" and "ethylene glycol" on his computer. And he got drunk at a convention and literally told a guy that he could kill his wife by putting ethylene glycol in her drink.
@@zxy78267 If you could please verify... I'd appreciate it.. However, if the internet searching you speak of took place on December 3rd, then that sounds like it could've very well been Julie according to the timeline of an eyewitness next door. And if this convention took place at a hotel... Mark's defense said that people in the surrounding didn't reaffirm the claims based upon a single individual regarding choices of words by Mark.
@@ryanjansen8785 besides that it would mean he has only started searching after she is showing symptoms. Julie as a nursing student likely would have known what was going on as well since she didn't drink and her acting drunk was bizarre behavior she would have recognized something was wrong.
@@settame1 It also could've been Julie researching poisoning on the internet for that matter. I took the prosecution's word for it that Julie never used the computer, but the defense made a couple or so points to indicate potential otherwise. And in the event that an individual was keepng thoughts of suicide confidential (besides Julie allegedly mentioning this inside the dentist office while upset and crying), then they could perhaps even easily be secretive regarding any issues with consuming alcohol too, especially considering how common the consumption of alcohol is associated with suicide.
They are crying about the letter and not being able to cross examine Julie, well that’s no one’s fault but his own! The Original judge is a hard Ass judge he is the one that was over the Kyle Rittenhouse Trial that didn’t play the prosecutor’s game! I’m glad that prosecutor wasn’t trying this case or it would be over before it began! The letter SHOULD be allowed in IF his manuscript is allowed in and if his letter is allowed in then he should have to take the stand so he could be cross examined just as they said about her letter
The Rittenhouse judge threw out the letter initially because it's hearsay and improper evidence. The WI supreme court over ruled him and allowed it in, then the appeals court over ruled the supreme Court and that's why he's being retried.
Lol, in a petri dish. 🤣 I suppose petri dish is not excluded in the definition of "in vitro" but I've never heard of it being described as pregnancy via petri dish.
Really? That was super common misconception in the 90s. And he'll IVF does take place in a petri dish to start with.
Don’t think much of this panel, especially the overly aggressive woman who thinks she knows everything.
Is that going to be allowed in court - that his wife wanted to have her own brother's baby the "natural" way?
The whole letter is coming in, so they could bring it up, but I doubt they'd want to. No rational person would believe she'd want to be with her brother, and they could easily argue that she meant that she wanted to have the baby with Mark and let her brother adopt it.
No. None of it is coming in. They can't introduce the letter, that's already been declared grounds for a mistrial. These guys are talking out their asses. If part of the manuscript would come in the rest would for completeness and likely there is some damning evidence to Julie in there as well. So none of it is coming in.
It sounds like he hasn't had any quality of life for last 20 years
I hope not
Live A,
Aww...poor baby..NOT!
IDK! Those notes that his wife was journaling, was kind of strange behavior! Why was she journaling? Was she plotting something? It just makes it more plausible that she was detailed enough to commit suicide and blame it on the man that she was journaling! 🤨🤔
Innocent beyond a reasonable doubt. The jury won't say "well we aren't sure and he has served time". That's not how this works. If they say "we aren't sure" that's it, there's nothing more to it. The prosection hasn't proven their case. It would be "we're sure he did it but we want to be nice and let him out", not the other way around.
I expect better from CourtTV.
Why is he wearing headphones?
He was injured in prison and has hearing loss.