CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, deceased/not found, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 *ARRESTS* #64

[Ruminations]

Good evening!

This is the first half of my jury-facing impressions (what would a juror think about MT’s 5/24 conduct/role/culpability at this point in the trial?) (also including “my color commentary”; phones and cameras don’t lie!) AMOO

After finally finishing the third interview, it dawned on me (and I have no doubt on most of you), that the State organized its case to put everything that LE knew, before it conducted the third MT interview, in front of the jury before the jury saw the third MT interview yesterday - such that the jury is “in the shoes” of law-enforcement, as if the jury is asking the defendant the questions in the third interview themselves, and hearing MT’s lies in real time with the benefit of a lot of facts in evidence that contradict her responses.

I was kind of starting to accept a certain media theme as far as the “nothing burger” case against MT - the State looks disorganized - blah blah. But the State’s timeline is massive and multilayered, and in many cases anchored by irrefutable electronic/video/cellular evidence (beyond a reasonable doubt IMO)(like in Murdaugh - uhm, yes siree, you were at the kennel, Alick ).

The D’s defense is essentially that MT was totally **clueless** about the whole deal. The D, and the pro-D media, love their innocent explanations. But the innocent explanations do not hold water against reality when you line them up (or weigh evidence like the jury will be instructed) and look at everything cumulatively.

The Jury will be instructed on circumstantial evidence and reasonable inferences. They will also be instructed about “credibility” of D - something the judge has highlighted a whole bunch as the actual issue at hand - “this is not about cell towers, it’s about this defendant’s credibility…”. Ouch.

I’m trying to put myself in the jury box; they only have pen and paper; no FBI tools (but they will get it in the jury room). They have to be able to sort out what is relevant and what is weightier to the exclusion of other evidence. So this is just a hypothetical mindset of a juror - trying to find truth amidst so much extraneous clutter and noise (horns).

MT’s Early Morning Activities on 5/24

She admits FD was not in bed (or shower) when she awakes at 6:30am - 6:40am which means she is the only person in the house (except daughter).

FD’s phone is placed at house by cell data from 5:34 am - 12:22 pm.

Within 5 minutes of her waking up, MT is “manipulating” FD’s phone which means the phone is recording user driven events that only a human could have made. If you isolate just the events that can only occur by human manipulation - there is a clear picture of MT literally sitting on top of FD’s phone all morning. Go back and listen to Attorney Manning’s presentation of the cell expert testimony- “Sir, is this another manipulation event that required a user to interact with the phone.”

All of the following manipulations are only the logical actions of MT (no reasonable doubt IMO):

6:45 am Unlocked

6:45 am Orientation change

6:46 am Orientation change

7:01 am Orientation change

7:01 am Unlocked

7:00 am - 8:00am 44 meters/ 66 steps

8:17 am Unlocked

8:26 am - 17 second incoming Andreas call answered

8:26 am - audio output speaker of Andreas call

8:31 am Orientation Change

8:31 am Unlocked

So between 6:44 am and 8:31 am she does not put FD’s phone down (except for the school drop - and she knows the phone has to stay at the house). Once back home, she is watching the missed calls on FD’s phone. She carries FD’s phone around the house. She is glued to it. She keeps unlocking his phone (like someone refreshing a computer screen in anticipation of something urgent). She sees all the activity. She is screening calls, waiting for the alibi call. Her electronic fingerprints are all over the place.

In her third version of the early morning- she didn’t pay any attention to FD’s phone (until it startled her in the office at 8:26 am). Just a mundane school day morning is her innocent “cover”. She was showering, getting ready, making strawberries, toast and Nutella. But she is so preoccupied with FD’s phone, and the impending Greek phone alibi call, that she forgets to make sure her daughter has sunscreen before dropping her off at school before 8:00 am.

Reasonable inference - MT knows FD is not home, and she knows what is happening because she is manipulating his phone (phone #1) in parallel with FD’s movements to provide cover. She knows which calls to take and which not to take. She knows to leave the phone behind for the school drop. Boom. Prior knowledge before the murder and overt acts to establish FD alibi.

Alibi Call

So in her third version, MT comes back to the house from school drop, goes to the office (because she has to print return labels for dresses from Lord & Taylor and certainly not to receive an alibi call at 8:26 am) and poof “Maywhinnie” is there in the office! (And there are sooooo many glass tables - inside and out). And out of literally nowhere FD’s phone “is there” by her computer, near the Lord & Taylor labels, on FD’s desk (“the square one”).

Then, as she is supposedly correcting her earlier lie from a prior interview (that she never saw/manipulated FD’s phone that morning), LE (and now the jury) catch her in a NEW lie. LE: “Was this the first time you saw FD’s phone that morning, in the office, (and not at 6:44 am when you started manipulating the phone - before you made toast…)? You didn’t see the phone in the bedroom when you went to turn off the alarm?”

Reasonable inference - boom again. The jury is now watching her lie to LE (knowing she is lying because of the prior phone manipulation testimony). She is also lying to the jury in real time during their viewing of the third interview. Juries do not like lies. She acts flustered by LE’s question - knowing full well she’s caught in another lie, and her fumbling around isn’t confusion, memory loss, or hunger; it is her realizing (panicking) that she is busted. This isn’t innocent behavior.

Suddenly, after arriving home from the school drop, and encountering KW in the office near FD’s phone, FD’s phone rings at 8:26 am (she is ready because she manipulated (unlocked) the phone at 8:17 am). She does not offer to LE that the FD’s phone rang. LE is starting to refer to their ginormous chart. LE: “And did FD’s phone then ring?” (Objection. Leading!). She says Kent is suddenly moving around the glass table. He is asking her “are you going to pick that up”, more flustering, and then static on the phone, “Hellloooooooo … Andreas is that you?”

Reasonable inference - she was waiting for the call because she found a way to be with the phone, unlock it right before the call, take the call for just long enough to register the call without having to stay on long enough to have an actual conversation that would not need explaining later.

After the Alibi Call and Just Before “Lunch”

She leaves 4JC, straight away, after the static-y call from Greece, to drive around. Lots of calls - called mom, dad, sister. Purses, rugs, supermarket.

Meanwhile, in the digital world, her phone is connecting with FD’s second phone, enroute from the crime scene.

Reasonable inference - if they are chatting away by phone right before lunch, 4 times, why aren’t they planning what leftovers to eat? She could have been warming up the meat and potatoes, so it would be ready, so they could soon thereafter start the cleaning projects at 80MS. But she doesn’t make lunch (even though they have lunch together everyday) and instead - she goes to the POND - but there is no one to pull her!!?

She is then back home at (11:52 am) in plenty of time to be surprised by FD, in the flesh (but not a tie), at 1:31 pm, yelling from atop the stairs, down to her, about lunch. (Oh there you are, FD! How did you get here?)

But there is no lunch (or romantic balcony scene) because they are both on video at 1:36 pm, her in a White Jeep, entering 80 MS (coming from the direction of 4JC) followed by him the Black Suburban with Thule and the FORE magnetic signage.

And we are only mid-day before 1) the driving madness; 2) 3 fires; 3) Starbucks; and 4) trash dumping.

I am completely fine if anyone wants to edit, add to, subtract, add, modify or anything to make sense of this madness!

The phone manipulations begin in plenty of time to call 911 instead of continuing with the plan.

What if the plan were (to Michelle's knowledge) only to "talk" to Jennifer? IMO, Michelle would have come clean.

Or she even may have offered that ("he told me was going to talk to her") as a lie if it had occurred to her soon enough- but she was not oriented to coming to an agreement with LE. This may have gotten her "off" of a murder charge, if she lied, because it woukd have explained her pre-planned behavior in a plausible theory that was not conspiracy to murder. But she offered no explanation, and lied about her pre-planned behavior until cornered. And she was still lying in the third interview, which LE knew, given their questions about touching Fotis' phone, but they were now done doing her the favor of forcing the truth from her with facts.

I don't see her escaping murder conspiracy charges.

MOO

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

Good evening!

This is the first half of my jury-facing impressions (what would a juror think about MT’s 5/24 conduct/role/culpability at this point in the trial?) (also including “my color commentary”; phones and cameras don’t lie!) AMOO

After finally finishing the third interview, it dawned on me (and I have no doubt on most of you), that the State organized its case to put everything that LE knew, before it conducted the third MT interview, in front of the jury before the jury saw the third MT interview yesterday - such that the jury is “in the shoes” of law-enforcement, as if the jury is asking the defendant the questions in the third interview themselves, and hearing MT’s lies in real time with the benefit of a lot of facts in evidence that contradict her responses.

I was kind of starting to accept a certain media theme as far as the “nothing burger” case against MT - the State looks disorganized - blah blah. But the State’s timeline is massive and multilayered, and in many cases anchored by irrefutable electronic/video/cellular evidence (beyond a reasonable doubt IMO)(like in Murdaugh - uhm, yes siree, you were at the kennel, Alick ).

The D’s defense is essentially that MT was totally **clueless** about the whole deal. The D, and the pro-D media, love their innocent explanations. But the innocent explanations do not hold water against reality when you line them up (or weigh evidence like the jury will be instructed) and look at everything cumulatively.

The Jury will be instructed on circumstantial evidence and reasonable inferences. They will also be instructed about “credibility” of D - something the judge has highlighted a whole bunch as the actual issue at hand - “this is not about cell towers, it’s about this defendant’s credibility…”. Ouch.

I’m trying to put myself in the jury box; they only have pen and paper; no FBI tools (but they will get it in the jury room). They have to be able to sort out what is relevant and what is weightier to the exclusion of other evidence. So this is just a hypothetical mindset of a juror - trying to find truth amidst so much extraneous clutter and noise (horns).

MT’s Early Morning Activities on 5/24

She admits FD was not in bed (or shower) when she awakes at 6:30am - 6:40am which means she is the only person in the house (except daughter).

FD’s phone is placed at house by cell data from 5:34 am - 12:22 pm.

Within 5 minutes of her waking up, MT is “manipulating” FD’s phone which means the phone is recording user driven events that only a human could have made. If you isolate just the events that can only occur by human manipulation - there is a clear picture of MT literally sitting on top of FD’s phone all morning. Go back and listen to Attorney Manning’s presentation of the cell expert testimony- “Sir, is this another manipulation event that required a user to interact with the phone.”

All of the following manipulations are only the logical actions of MT (no reasonable doubt IMO):

6:45 am Unlocked

6:45 am Orientation change

6:46 am Orientation change

7:01 am Orientation change

7:01 am Unlocked

7:00 am - 8:00am 44 meters/ 66 steps

8:17 am Unlocked

8:26 am - 17 second incoming Andreas call answered

8:26 am - audio output speaker of Andreas call

8:31 am Orientation Change

8:31 am Unlocked

So between 6:44 am and 8:31 am she does not put FD’s phone down (except for the school drop - and she knows the phone has to stay at the house). Once back home, she is watching the missed calls on FD’s phone. She carries FD’s phone around the house. She is glued to it. She keeps unlocking his phone (like someone refreshing a computer screen in anticipation of something urgent). She sees all the activity. She is screening calls, waiting for the alibi call. Her electronic fingerprints are all over the place.

In her third version of the early morning- she didn’t pay any attention to FD’s phone (until it startled her in the office at 8:26 am). Just a mundane school day morning is her innocent “cover”. She was showering, getting ready, making strawberries, toast and Nutella. But she is so preoccupied with FD’s phone, and the impending Greek phone alibi call, that she forgets to make sure her daughter has sunscreen before dropping her off at school before 8:00 am.

Reasonable inference - MT knows FD is not home, and she knows what is happening because she is manipulating his phone (phone #1) in parallel with FD’s movements to provide cover. She knows which calls to take and which not to take. She knows to leave the phone behind for the school drop. Boom. Prior knowledge before the murder and overt acts to establish FD alibi.

Alibi Call

So in her third version, MT comes back to the house from school drop, goes to the office (because she has to print return labels for dresses from Lord & Taylor and certainly not to receive an alibi call at 8:26 am) and poof “Maywhinnie” is there in the office! (And there are sooooo many glass tables - inside and out). And out of literally nowhere FD’s phone “is there” by her computer, near the Lord & Taylor labels, on FD’s desk (“the square one”).

Then, as she is supposedly correcting her earlier lie from a prior interview (that she never saw/manipulated FD’s phone that morning), LE (and now the jury) catch her in a NEW lie. LE: “Was this the first time you saw FD’s phone that morning, in the office, (and not at 6:44 am when you started manipulating the phone - before you made toast…)? You didn’t see the phone in the bedroom when you went to turn off the alarm?”

Reasonable inference - boom again. The jury is now watching her lie to LE (knowing she is lying because of the prior phone manipulation testimony). She is also lying to the jury in real time during their viewing of the third interview. Juries do not like lies. She acts flustered by LE’s question - knowing full well she’s caught in another lie, and her fumbling around isn’t confusion, memory loss, or hunger; it is her realizing (panicking) that she is busted. This isn’t innocent behavior.

Suddenly, after arriving home from the school drop, and encountering KW in the office near FD’s phone, FD’s phone rings at 8:26 am (she is ready because she manipulated (unlocked) the phone at 8:17 am). She does not offer to LE that the FD’s phone rang. LE is starting to refer to their ginormous chart. LE: “And did FD’s phone then ring?” (Objection. Leading!). She says Kent is suddenly moving around the glass table. He is asking her “are you going to pick that up”, more flustering, and then static on the phone, “Hellloooooooo … Andreas is that you?”

Reasonable inference - she was waiting for the call because she found a way to be with the phone, unlock it right before the call, take the call for just long enough to register the call without having to stay on long enough to have an actual conversation that would not need explaining later.

After the Alibi Call and Just Before “Lunch”

She leaves 4JC, straight away, after the static-y call from Greece, to drive around. Lots of calls - called mom, dad, sister. Purses, rugs, supermarket.

Meanwhile, in the digital world, her phone is connecting with FD’s second phone, enroute from the crime scene.

Reasonable inference - if they are chatting away by phone right before lunch, 4 times, why aren’t they planning what leftovers to eat? She could have been warming up the meat and potatoes, so it would be ready, so they could soon thereafter start the cleaning projects at 80MS. But she doesn’t make lunch (even though they have lunch together everyday) and instead - she goes to the POND - but there is no one to pull her!!?

She is then back home at (11:52 am) in plenty of time to be surprised by FD, in the flesh (but not a tie), at 1:31 pm, yelling from atop the stairs, down to her, about lunch. (Oh there you are, FD! How did you get here?)

But there is no lunch (or romantic balcony scene) because they are both on video at 1:36 pm, her in a White Jeep, entering 80 MS (coming from the direction of 4JC) followed by him the Black Suburban with Thule and the FORE magnetic signage.

And we are only mid-day before 1) the driving madness; 2) 3 fires; 3) Starbucks; and 4) trash dumping.

I am completely fine if anyone wants to edit, add to, subtract, add, modify or anything to make sense of this madness!

Wonderful work and information there! Great summary and synopsis. And it would appear another key aspect, is that with all the phone jockeying and ‘activity’, is it correct that no actual text messages or calls are made from that phone during that early period? If so, almost seems that the individual with the phone (MT) knew that she would not be able to text or construct messages to approximate or truly appear as FD (phone owner) if any actions were made? (Or was even instructed by the phone owner not to do so?) IMO

Qualifier: I am not 100% versed in all of this case, so there is room for my error. MOO. ETA: and it seems that there is an 8:26 am call from Andreas which is answered.

 

[afitzy]

Maybe gas can associate of KM’s? Sounds like he is always happy to help. I wonder if LE thought about him? I mean, the local police gave him a pass when he went to KM’s ex-wife’s house with a can of gasoline and a crowbar, but that ought to have gotten CSP’s attention.

The other obvious culprit is the Armenian car dealer who had a history and knows both KM
And FD. He supposedly was looked at extensively by LE. Maybe him? Or maybe he or a member of the Armenian mob own a crematorium? The pure scum that reside in the contact list of KM is sadly endless. MOO

 

[afitzy]

The phone manipulations begin in plenty of time to call 911 instead of continuing with the plan.

What if the plan were (to Michelle's knowledge) only to "talk" to Jennifer? IMO, Michelle would have come clean.

Or she even may have offered that ("he told me was going to talk to her") as a lie if it had occurred to her soon enough- but she was not oriented to coming to an agreement with LE. This may have gotten her "off" of a murder charge, if she lied, because it woukd have explained her pre-planned behavior in a plausible theory that was not conspiracy to murder. But she offered no explanation, and lied about her pre-planned behavior until cornered. And she was still lying in the third interview, which LE knew, given their questions about touching Fotis' phone, but they were now done doing her the favor of forcing the truth from her with facts.

I don't see her escaping murder conspiracy charges.

MOO

Nope. Done and dusted. Moo

 

[Ruminations]

So, a long game of pass the report. Just like the same long game of pass the box of evidence. Lots of passing in this slimy tragic case by lots of slimy and unethical attorneys such as Pattis and Schoenhorn and mini horn whose name I forget because she is forgettable. Ah yes, Audrey felson…..forgettable….totally.

But, more lies as MT said in interview 2 iirc that everything from the report she knew she knew from FOTIS! But this couldn’t be true as she wrote up 67 questions for the visit to the psychologist to talk about her being unsafe due to JF! MT must have a really good memory!

What I am baffled by is whether by virtue of doing what she did in court did MT create a mistrial event with the report? If the investigation and hearing prove out the facts of what MT did as I expect it will, then why delay the hearing as defence will call for a mistrial in any event? So, instead judge protects the jury and keeps and expensive trial going when it’s seems clear what the facts were and then we are all sitting on a mistrial 4-5 weeks from now instead of now?

Sorry but I’m confused. Judge is killing himself to protect a trial that just might be doomed by definition…..

Why so the State can say it tried?

Stop the insanity….
MOO

I think the judge has to delay the contempt hearing.

1) Better to be accused of prejudicing the contempt hearing with the events of the murder trial than the other way around.

2) Better to reduce the chances of losing another juror with delays related to the contempt hearing. That's why the judge said the earliest for the contempt hearing is when the defense rests. That's when the jury has its own work to do (deliberate) and will not be delayed by the contempt hearing.

MOO

 

[Ruminations]

Maybe gas can associate of KM’s? Sounds like he is always happy to help. I wonder if LE thought about him? I mean, the local police gave him a pass when he went to KM’s ex-wife’s house with a can of gasoline and a crowbar, but that ought to have gotten CSP’s attention.

Yeah. That terrifying man got the good ol' boy break, IMO.

It's really sad. Purple ties worn by an arrest/perp walk team don't erase that sting for me.

And if he does that kind of thing for a living, who can say he wasn't hired for other bit parts in this epic strangers on a train inspired assaults and murders?

MOO

 

[waldojabba]

It is a bit interesting that 4JC's value on Zillow has increased by $+1M since the sale in 2018. That's quite investment!

On top of the post covid bump - IME all houses in CT increased ridiculously, some small houses doubled in price - I believe the original sale was a taint sale or a fire sale - sold at a low price point in 2021 due to the "taint" of the murder and the notoriety of the whole case.
IIRC it was initially listed for over $4m. The price was lowered in 2020 and it sold in 2021 for 1,850,000.
My own personal preference is for cozy vs massive but I would not live in that house even if it were gifted to me
Too much bad energy - not enough sage to get rid of the past imo.
JMO

(realtor.com/zillow)

 

[waldojabba]

On top of the post covid bump - IME all houses in CT increased ridiculously, some small houses doubled in price - I believe the original sale was a taint sale or a fire sale - sold at a low price point in 2021 due to the "taint" of the murder and the notoriety of the whole case.
IIRC it was initially listed for over $4m. The price was lowered in 2020 and it sold in 2021 for 1,850,000.
My own personal preference is for cozy vs massive but I would not live in that house even if it were gifted to me
Too much bad energy - not enough sage to get rid of the past imo.
JMO

(realtor.com/zillow)

here is more clarification :


Farber is the primary creditor of the Fotis Dulos estate, which owes her nearly $2 million from a lawsuit over unpaid business loans her family made to Fore Group. She foreclosed on the property earlier this year.

"Weinstein contends in court papers that the property is actually worth $2.5 million. He is seeking the difference from the value and the sale price from the estate."

https://www.stamfordadvocate.com/realestate/slideshow/Inside-Fotis-Dulos-mansion-211562.php

 

[afitzy]

I think the judge has to delay the contempt hearing.

1) Better to be accused of prejudicing the contempt hearing with the events of the murder trial than the other way around.

2) Better to reduce the chances of losing another juror with delays related to the contempt hearing. That's why the judge said the earliest for the contempt hearing is when the defense rests. That's when the jury has its own work to do (deliberate) and will not be delayed by the contempt hearing.

MOO

I realize this and agree.

I just believe we are sitting on a mistrial one way or the other. So why waste more time?

Defence imo planned the MT laptopgate to get their mistrial so just pull the Bandaid off, recharge her and start again with the report excluded from the trial including the veiled references of defence. Take away mt phone and laptop from day one and impose a gag. Start fresh. All these issues imo were in the control of judge r and frankly he made a grave error trusting MT, Jon Schoenhorn or the forgettable Audrey felson. We have seen a defense strategy from day one to leak evidence in motions and he has been doing this for 4 years. All the judges in this case allowed it, he saw his tactic was working and never punished and so he brought his “gutter ball” into the courtroom. The state tried to have Schoenhorn stopped from doing this in motions and a judge could have easily said submit exhibits under seal but we had one lazy Judge after another in this case that just let details slide until what entered the courtroom imo was nothing but chaos, lying and disregard of rules and protocol. Judge r is simply the last of I believe 3-4 prior judges that have touched this sorry case. The system is premised on attorneys following the rules and imo CT has no mechanism for dealing effectively with attorneys such as Schoenhorn and felson who chose to not follow the rules and ditto for Pattis who originated the practice of communicating with the press via his motion attachments to circumvent the gag and leak evidence.

It’s a tragic outcome and I am incandescent with rage but judge r can admit his many procedural errors in how he handled this case based in great part on judge Blawies earlier error in giving the report to Schoenhorn to begin with. To my knowledge the only person on defence that legitimately had the full report was Schoenhorn. Felson said she allegedly got 4 pages. Believe that if you will. For all we know what MT had on the laptop was Felsons 4 pages!

Draw your own conclusions.

I sadly think we have witnessed yet another great xxxxUp in Corrupticut and per usual the only ones that get away with crimes are the criminals and the only people who pay are the taxpayers and working people.

It’s a shame imo but it’s the reality of the State.

Moo

 

[BUF]

“IF” Lotus coughed up that (very expensive) report by midnight on Friday, then I assume JS will spend an “entire day” on just her 45 page CV. (He has already boasted about her as “probably the most preeminent expert in the country on memory and things that affect memory” too many times).

I would imagine that McGuinness would react in a similar way on cross as the prosecution did in the Durst trial.

In any case, this testimony will be long and painful to watch with more objections than we have seen so far….if that’s possible!

moo

 

[Silverstorm]

I was waiting to see what KM is going to say about MThttps://www.yahoo.com/now/ex-dulos-lawyer-avoids-rape-150700762.html

This guy s right at Fd and mt level. Betond low.Ex-Dulos lawyer avoids rape conviction, sentenced for violating protective order

 

[afitzy]

I was waiting to see what KM is going to say about MThttps://www.yahoo.com/now/ex-dulos-lawyer-avoids-rape-150700762.html

This guy s right at Fd and mt level. Betond low.Ex-Dulos lawyer avoids rape conviction, sentenced for violating protective order

Dv advocates were at the trial and were outraged. It’s a travesty but it’s CT. What is even more offensive is that it happened even after Jennifer’s law happened too. Not one of the KM LE friends in Windsor who protected him for years and didn’t enforce his ex wife’s protective orders have ever been charged or tried. Ditto for the corrupt Farmington pd where km has many friends.

Did you see the litigation of his with the mortgage note and the child *advertiser censored* person? That is one for the record books. KM contact list just has one section and it’s imo “scum”.
Moo

 

[waldojabba]

“IF” Lotus coughed up that (very expensive) report by midnight on Friday, then I assume JS will spend an “entire day” on just her 45 page CV. (He has already boasted about her as “probably the most preeminent expert in the country on memory and things that affect memory” too many times).

I would imagine that McGuinness would react in a similar way on cross as the prosecution did in the Durst trial.

In any case, this testimony will be long and painful to watch with more objections than we have seen so far….if that’s possible!

moo

If I am on the jury
Once I hear the list of her clients
Such as :
Ghislane Maxwell/Harvey Weinstein/Ted Bundy/OJ/Robert Durst
The consclusion I reach ?
She gets hired by despicable guilty rich people as a last ditch effort

Here is an older article about Loftus and her studies. I will be interested to find what recent studies on memory she she has conducted since 1974 / and how long has she been peddling herself as an expert witness at trials

JMO

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pn...ed a,information could distort their memories.

 

[citygirl]

YouTube 4JC property listing (Tea Leaf Realty) from 5 years ago. Video tour of still images, house staged but looks like some items from previous residents, fires in fireplaces probably photoshopped.

1. First image of house actually shows white smoke coming from the “East chimney”

2. There are 2 “traditional” fireplaces in the East stack - one family room with all the French doors to patio area. Second in master bedroom (I’m thinking the 24 May fire was in the bedroom).

Got such a sad feeling watching this.
How many times did JF sit in that rocking chair rocking her babies?

 

[Baby baby Jane]

If I am on the jury
Once I hear the list of her clients
Such as :
Ghislane Maxwell/Harvey Weinstein/Ted Bundy/OJ/Robert Durst
The consclusion I reach ?
She gets hired by despicable guilty rich people as a last ditch effort

Here is an older article about Loftus and her studies. I will be interested to find what recent studies on memory she she has conducted since 1974 / and how long has she been peddling herself as an expert witness at trials

JMO

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.0506223102#:~:text=In 1974, Loftus obtained a,information could distort their memories.

So right Waldojabba!
The Long list of the rich & desperate

 

[Ruminations]

I realize this and agree.

I just believe we are sitting on a mistrial one way or the other. So why waste more time?

Defence imo planned the MT laptopgate to get their mistrial so just pull the Bandaid off, recharge her and start again with the report excluded from the trial including the veiled references of defence. Take away mt phone and laptop from day one and impose a gag. Start fresh. All these issues imo were in the control of judge r and frankly he made a grave error trusting MT, Jon Schoenhorn or the forgettable Audrey felson. We have seen a defense strategy from day one to leak evidence in motions and he has been doing this for 4 years. All the judges in this case allowed it, he saw his tactic was working and never punished and so he brought his “gutter ball” into the courtroom. The state tried to have Schoenhorn stopped from doing this in motions and a judge could have easily said submit exhibits under seal but we had one lazy Judge after another in this case that just let details slide until what entered the courtroom imo was nothing but chaos, lying and disregard of rules and protocol. Judge r is simply the last of I believe 3-4 prior judges that have touched this sorry case. The system is premised on attorneys following the rules and imo CT has no mechanism for dealing effectively with attorneys such as Schoenhorn and felson who chose to not follow the rules and ditto for Pattis who originated the practice of communicating with the press via his motion attachments to circumvent the gag and leak evidence.

It’s a tragic outcome and I am incandescent with rage but judge r can admit his many procedural errors in how he handled this case based in great part on judge Blawies earlier error in giving the report to Schoenhorn to begin with. To my knowledge the only person on defence that legitimately had the full report was Schoenhorn. Felson said she allegedly got 4 pages. Believe that if you will. For all we know what MT had on the laptop was Felsons 4 pages!

Draw your own conclusions.

I sadly think we have witnessed yet another great xxxxUp in Corrupticut and per usual the only ones that get away with crimes are the criminals and the only people who pay are the taxpayers and working people.

It’s a shame imo but it’s the reality of the State.

Moo

I hope you are wrong.

But I'm not a lawyer.

I am under the impression that a mistrial can't be created deliberately by the defendant/defense. And/or they can't call for it based on their own behavior. I hope I am right.

Maybe a real lawyer can chime in to the danger of mistrial based on this incident- I call it a cyber bullying with use of a sealed document.

The defense is utterly shut out of credibly claiming the defendant has different head-space from Fotis, or a different head space from 2019 Michelle. You know, the one who claimed she was healthy and Jennifer was not. Grrr. It's infuriating, but it only reinforces Michelle's motive.

"Fotis made me do it," does not work for this incident, and if there were a tiny chance it would work for previous incidents for which she is on trial, that tiny chance is gone. (I think "Fotis made me do it," is a confession. And people manage to deal with or flee DV without committing crimes. So it wouldn't fly as a defense for me. DV is no excuse for murder.)

MOO

 

[Mimi in London]

Got such a sad feeling watching this.
How many times did JF sit in that rocking chair rocking her babies?

In the rocking chair, in the windowless basement room. That has always made me feel angry. All those rooms, all that space and the children and the nursing mother are relegated to the basement.

 

[Mimi in London]

YouTube 4JC property listing (Tea Leaf Realty) from 5 years ago. Video tour of still images, house staged but looks like some items from previous residents, fires in fireplaces probably photoshopped.

1. First image of house actually shows white smoke coming from the “East chimney”

2. There are 2 “traditional” fireplaces in the East stack - one family room with all the French doors to patio area. Second in master bedroom (I’m thinking the 24 May fire was in the bedroom).

I'd be really grateful if anyone with a higher-resolution screen than I have, could possibly scroll in and have a look at something in more detail. It's the library/study shot (the one with big globe/drinks cabinet in the foreground). There is a pile of books by the armchair, and I'm curious about the paperback on the top of the pile. It looks to have a sea-themed cover. Are there any visible clues to the title or author? TIA!

 

[Ruminations]

Thanks so much @lucegirl ! Will read the article now. But I will go back and look at MT AA also as iirc she in fact handed her phone to LE at 4Jx and to me it didn't look much different than what happened to FD at NCPD when he handed over his phone and then provided his password to NCPD Officer. In the case of NCPD they went back and got a warrant after seizing the phone and in the case of MT I think Judge R disallowed the cell phone and then we saw the State go back recently (think it was October 2023) with a new search warrant to AT&T for MT 'data' if I understood it correctly as Judge had previously disallowed the phone. But, I admit to being somewhat confused on the difference between the 2 search warrant from the State and the first (seemed like second search warrant provided data as to location but not access to texts and voicemail). It was also confusing as it seems MT and FD and their friends used WhatsApp and I'm not sure the 2nd SW gave access to data from apps.

Im with you on being 'stuck' on the issue of MT lying and ongoing manipulation in the 3 LE interviews. Just wonder if it could be as simple as its the way MT operates always to control and manipulate? But like you said, its stunning to see the behaviour played out for such long periods of time. I can only imagine how LE felt listening to it and even though I laughed my way in horror and discomfort through today's portion of interview 3 as the behaviour was sustained for 2-3 hrs at a pop, I did find it disturbing to see someone not be able to answer a direct question or even show any interest or emotion for a missing mother of 5.

There was just something so 'off' for lack of a better word about the entire 'performance' and it got me wondering if MT is as we all see her in the interviews in everything she does where she might perceive herself to be under threat? Its a bit shocking to watch the interview to tell you truth and after watching it for awhile, I have to say I began to question whether what I was even seeing was real from MT as it simply seemed so off and just not justified behavior or even 'normal' behavior when the questions being asked by LE were largely perfunctory in nature. I found it disturbing to watch and I think so far we have seen over 6 hrs of it or even possibly more!

It was also fascinating to see LE call MT on her what seemed to me aggressive tracking of FD location in their typical days but on the day of the murder there was no such texting or anger at FD by MT (LE used the example of MT sending FD a middle finger emoji if he didn't text her it seems to 'check in'). MT never responded to this line of questioning which didn't surprise me but it put her on notice that LE knew she was lying about not knowing where FD was on the murder date which I thought was well done by LE.

But I just wonder if MT alternates between being super aggressive and controlling and then passively withdrawing? She seems like she almost see saws between the two ways of dealing with FD and I would think it would make for a difficult relationship to say the least. I do wonder if her manipulation even though it was very different from the overtly aggressive control of FD, I wonder if it just could have pushed FD over the edge? Hard to say as I'm not convinced FD valued or cared for MT or felt her important to his long term existence? Just a curious relationship dynamic and I wonder if it had any impact on the couples decision to murder JF? But, it could also be that MT knew that FD had a wandering eye and she alluded to this a little bit with LE but it was subtle. IDK how chronic cheaters do it as it seems like they always have to be watching their partners closely and never can trust them either but the net effect is that it seems to make both partners paranoid too.


MOO

This kinda illustrates my point of Fotis' control over Michelle which in no way excuses her conspiracy to murder.

Fotis assumed he had no responsibility for relationship fidelity and put all the work on Michelle to catch him if she could.

It was early enough in the retuonship where she was allowed to throw phones and send middle finger emojis. He just laughed, maybe slightly altered his behavior to placate her, and tallied these incidents to later use them against her- look, she's hot-headed and crazy. I needed to have lunch/schmooze with my (banker, realtor, electrician, kids' water ski coach....etc.) who just happens to be hot. Michelle is always jealous. He woukd feign good natured tolerance of her "crazy" baseless outbursts.

Later in the relationship, Fotis would insist that she stop being crazy/jealous/accusatory/like my ex. He'd stop altering his behavior to placate her and instead make himself out to be explicitly the victim of her jealousy. He'd play mind games with her that she is unreasonably jealous.He'd lash out ant her for each question of his whereabouts. And eventually, she'd avoid all that by looking the other way . After all, who wants to be the aggressive, jealous wife at the barbecue? Or, the single, former aggressive jealous wife who is not invited? Better to be the nice wife who has no reason to question her husband.

MOO

 

[afitzy]

I'd be really grateful if anyone with a higher-resolution screen than I have, could possibly scroll in and have a look at something in more detail. It's the library/study shot (the one with big globe/drinks cabinet in the foreground). There is a pile of books by the armchair, and I'm curious about the paperback on the top of the pile. It looks to have a sea-themed cover. Are there any visible clues to the title or author? TIA!

@Mimi in London I don't think the issue is computer screen but the quality of underlying video. Not a tech person but I could capture the book image but it can't really be altered that I can figure out to display the book cover.