Uncensored Justice System Discussion    FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in  Supreme Court ruling could have implications on Jensen          Uncensored Justice System Discussion Forum Index -> Mark Jensen View previous topic :: View next topic   Author Message SaberGal Joined: 12 Dec 2007 Posts: 349 Location: Oregon Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 5:55 am    Post subject: Supreme Court ruling could have implications on Jensen http://www.kenoshanews.com/article_comments/view_comments.php?articleNum=969698912 Quote: U.S. Supreme Court Justices have reversed the conviction of a California man whose case could have implications for convicted Kenosha killer Mark D. Jensen. In a 6-3 decision, the justices decided today a California appeals court erred in ruling that Dwayne Giles did not have the right to confront his accuser at his murder trial. Similar to the Jensen case, the California court decided Giles had forfeited his Constitutional right to cross-examine the alleged victim because Giles likely was the reason the victim could not testify. In the Jensen case, Wisconsin justices created a new evidence standard, called forfeiture by wrong-doing, which said that if a judge found Jensen probably killed his wife, then statements she made implicating him in her death could be used at his trial. In the past, such statements could not be used because they could not be cross-examined; the Constitution guarantees every defendant the right to confront accusers. Will be interesting to see how this unfolds. _________________ "Evil triumphs when good men do nothing." - E. Burke __________________________________________ That's OK. I wasn't using my civil liberties anyway. (Insert rolly eye emoticon here) Back to top SaberGal Joined: 12 Dec 2007 Posts: 349 Location: Oregon Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 5:37 pm    Post subject: Another article http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=766306 _________________ "Evil triumphs when good men do nothing." - E. Burke __________________________________________ That's OK. I wasn't using my civil liberties anyway. (Insert rolly eye emoticon here) Back to top JUSTICE1st Joined: 13 Dec 2007 Posts: 715 Location: USA Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 11:43 pm    Post subject: Re: Supreme Court ruling could have implications on Jensen SaberGal wrote: http://www.kenoshanews.com/article_comments/view_comments.php?articleNum=969698912 Quote: U.S. Supreme Court Justices have reversed the conviction of a California man whose case could have implications for convicted Kenosha killer Mark D. Jensen. In a 6-3 decision, the justices decided today a California appeals court erred in ruling that Dwayne Giles did not have the right to confront his accuser at his murder trial. Similar to the Jensen case, the California court decided Giles had forfeited his Constitutional right to cross-examine the alleged victim because Giles likely was the reason the victim could not testify. In the Jensen case, Wisconsin justices created a new evidence standard, called forfeiture by wrong-doing, which said that if a judge found Jensen probably killed his wife, then statements she made implicating him in her death could be used at his trial. In the past, such statements could not be used because they could not be cross-examined; the Constitution guarantees every defendant the right to confront accusers. Will be interesting to see how this unfolds. I honestly don't know whether Mark Jensen is guilty of her death or not, and to me, the whole case was very murky. Too many questions, many of which went UNanswered by the prosecution, IMO. In short, I disagree with the "Guilty" verdict, both then and now. As you said, Saber, it will be interesting to see how the case unfolds. I think there were a lot more "wrinkles" than the prosecution was willing to admit. Even though I didn't like Jensen, one doesn't convict a person of first degree (or was it second? I forget which) murder simply because he wasn't a likable defendant. J _________________ "We must remember, always, that accusation is not proof, and conviction depends on evidence and due process of law." EDWARD R. MURROW, 1954 Back to top Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First         Uncensored Justice System Discussion Forum Index -> Mark Jensen All times are GMT Page 1 of 1   Jump to: Select a forum Announcements----------------Announcements Open Discussion----------------Open Discussion Legal Cases----------------Jude LaCour CaseCasey Anthony CaseRyan Ferguson CaseSears Tower BombingAnthony PellicanoCynthia SommerO. J. SimpsonMarc Benayer CaseMark JensenPhil SpectorRaye Dawn SmithSean Bell Shooting CaseSteve "Happy" GilmoreTexas Polygamous SectWest Memphis 3"Other Cases"Judge Elizabeth HalversonSean Fitzpatrick Innocence Project----------------Innocence Project The Fully Informed Jury----------------Jury Education Misconduct----------------Judicial MisconductProsecutorial MisconductLaw Enforcement Misconduct Criminal Justice Reforms----------------Criminal Justice ReformsJuvenile JusticePrison/Jail Reform Issues Books----------------Books Politics----------------War in IraqImmigrationDeath PenaltyElectionsPolitics in General Other----------------ReligionGeneral Philosophical Ideas Fun and Creative Stuff----------------GamesJokesFunny CrimesPoetry Suggestions----------------Suggestions  You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum