In a move virtually unheard of until recently, prosecutors in Wisconsin will be able to use evidence given by a murder victim in court. Julie Jensen was allegedly poisoned by her husband Mark using antifreeze in December of 1998, but she suspected he was up to something and told others that if she died, her husband was most likely responsible. In a letter she gave to a neighbor, she said that she feared for her death and that she was suspicious of her husband. Up until this point, evidence given by the dead was not used in court because the defendant did not have a chance to confront his accuser. Wisconsin, however, has changed their laws, making this sort of evidence usable in court. A judge ruled that Mark Jensen’s actions prevented his wife from being able to testify in the case, so her voicemails and the letter that she wrote to her neighbor, overturning the original ruling that only testimony given by the neighbor who received the letter as well as a teacher whom Julie Jensen confided in would be allowed.

Do you think it is fair to allow this evidence? Will it give the prosecution an unfair advantage to use a dead woman’s words since the defense cannot cross-examine her?