I read the article and all I can say is . . ONLY 5?

While it may be true that this older man, married to a young, tall, sultry, beautiful, mesmerizing, femme fatale, was being led by the nose (let's call it that), he's supposed to be smart enough to realize such a woman wanted more than just a cozy home and hearth relationship with an old man.

Was he stupid? Yes, that's probably a big part of it. Is he innocent? Oh, hell, NO!

Read the article and then ask yourself the question: When did this black widow plan on killing him?

No case would be complete without a little salacious undercurrent.

The article hints that Nadine was having a little extra-marital tete-de-tete with client (now defendant), Wael Hana, an American/Egyptian businessman, and he was the one showering her with all the money and expensive gifts she had hidden in the rubble that was her walk-in closet, not to mention money stuffed into boots and jacket pockets hanging in the garage, totaling many, many thousands of dollars.

Also, that Hana, at least for a while, was paying her a salary for a no-show job at a company he established. Now, as a defendant, he claims he stopped paying her salary because she never showed up to work.

(BTW, during the FBI search, nothing was found in Senator Menendez's closet.)

So, as the 13th juror sitting on this case, is Senator Menendez guilty or is he a victim of a conniving woman?

One thing that may not fair well for Senator Menendez was his telling of an incident where he walked into his home office and found a black duffel bag sitting in a chair but did not open it to see what was inside or why it was in his office.

When the FBI opened the duffel bag, they found two other duffel bags stuffed full of money.

Now, ~~ I have a home office and if I walked in and found a big black duffel bag sitting in a chair, I'd certainly investigate. Senator Menendez didn't. Did he already know?

WHAT? Nobody interested in the motive behind this "Who Done It" soap opera?