Comments by "Setta" (@settame1) on "Jensen's Jailmate: 'He gave Julie antifreeze'" video.

  1.  @alphaomega5909  I'm sure they do but he had something to gain clearly and provided nothing but bolstering evidence to others claims. The claims he made were either unfalsifiable or the prosecutor decided not to try them.
    2
  2. Except it wasn't corroborated with her toxicology results. The prosection decided not to even test it because they knew it would be negative and they wouldn't be able to use any of his testimony.
    2
  3. What did this witness bring that couldn't be found in the court docs he had access to or what Mark would likely mention when talking about what evidence they had in his case (not admitting to it just saying what they had)? What stood out to me is what wasn't backed up by the prosecutor: 1) the toxicology we've heard only found antifreeze, not the st John's wart, benadryl or the other drug he mentioned mark used. They didn't even test for these others despite knowing this accusations was there. They didn't even believe him and didn't want exonerating evidence to be handed over to the defense. 2) he said Mark made a call to destroy the evidence (i think he said he overheard Mark making the call), there was no such call, otherwise the prosection would have played it (like they did the so called "sit on him" calls that turned out to be taken completely out of context). 3) they didn't take photos of antifreeze in the home, which is completely unfalsifiable and doesn't show anything. Most people have antifreeze in their home. If the cops didn't take photos of it it's on the cops and Mark can't use that in his defense (lack of evidence maybe but it's a nothing since it is easily explainable). 4) he poisoned Julie the week he was at the conference and had to clean up after her. How did Julie live with vomit everywhere for like 3 days while mark was away? She would have had to be to sick to clean up vomit but well enough to care for her son's. If she had help they would have done both of those things. The prosection knows this guy isn't trustworthy because they know (or suspect) that those big accusations are false and yet they still decided to put him up for his testimony.
    2
  4. Much much fraud
    1