CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, deceased/not found, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 *ARRESTS* #65

[Baby baby Jane]

JS points out that she gets paid regardless of trial outcome.

JS is asking if she gives her honest analysis...

Can educated people also be subjected to post event contamination--

Do you know anything about education in Venezuela?

JS not even that specific - he said education in “South America” …. As if it’s one big country

 

[Baby baby Jane]

Are we getting memories in Spanish vs English next?

 

[afitzy]

One final question from Schoenhorn.

No further questions.

Dr Loftus is finished in Court today.

Lunch. Resumes at 2:10pm EDT

 

[Baby baby Jane]

Well that was a $1800 morning for Mama T

This expert gets hourly rate for every minute, travel, meals, her overnight, and travel home. Plus hotels & flights. She was vague, and failed to make a point. It’s “old hat” for her now, and it shows. I suspect she also has an agent who gets paid.

 

[afitzy]

This expert gets hourly rate for every minute, travel, meals, her overnight, and travel home. Plus hotels & flights. She was vague, and failed to make a point. It’s “old hat” for her now, and it shows. I suspect she also has an agent who gets paid.

Whole presentation from Dr Loftus seemed to be rehashed old work but the thing that hit me was that physically she seemed absolutely exhausted, more than a bit unfocused, unwilling to engage to present her work in the face of questions AND she said she didn't recall I think over 15 times that I counted.....

Very odd expert testimony imo. Dr Loftus simply seemed tired and poorly prepared on the specifics of the case. 11 hrs of prep that she admitted to on the Stand and most of it was media reporting (and we know about that), AA (didn't recall which one but it was 'long'), and a meeting last night with Defence. She never met MT and didn't know anything about her education or work history.

Prosecution cross imo was on point and well prepared but I was frankly stunned at Dr Loftus unwillingness or inability to engage on any of her work unless DIRECTLY questioned by Atty McGuiness.

MOO

 

[Aquarian]

Whole presentation from Dr Loftus seemed to be rehashed old work but the thing that hit me was that physically she seemed absolutely exhausted, more than a bit unfocused, unwilling to engage to present her work in the face of questions AND she said she didn't recall I think over 15 times that I counted.....

Very odd expert testimony imo. Dr Loftus simply seemed tired and poorly prepared on the specifics of the case. 11 hrs of prep that she admitted to on the Stand and most of it was media reporting (and we know about that), AA (didn't recall which one but it was 'long', and a meeting last night with Defence. She never met MT and didn't know anything about her education or work history.

Prosecution cross imo was on point and well prepared but I was frankly stunned at Dr Loftus unwillingness or inability to engage on any of her work unless DIRECTLY questioned by Atty McGuiness.

MOO

I have not researched her but it’s my impression she rinses and repeats on this memory testimony. I wondered if any other P has questioned her like today? She seemed shocked and insulted.

 

[waldojabba]

This expert gets hourly rate for every minute, travel, meals, her overnight, and travel home. Plus hotels & flights. She was vague, and failed to make a point. It’s “old hat” for her now, and it shows. I suspect she also has an agent who gets paid.

Well said - “old hat” is the perfect term.
She honored the agreed upon rate from 2021 did she say? So she probably charges closer to 900 ish now.
She said she reviewed transcripts, had multiple conversations with defense lawyers
And saw parts of the interviews. A very cursory review.
I imagine most of her conclusions or “theories” came directly from the defense’s suggestions.
The amount of times she could not recall detail from the transcripts/interviews under the states questioning was stunning. Just not well prepared or just going thru the motions.
Probably both. Easy money.
Maybe she’ll see a show and an old college friend in Manhattan tonight and fly home tomorrow. It’s retirement for her but she takes a gig here and there.
Impact to the case ? Imo - none
Imo

 

[citygirl]

This expert gets hourly rate for every minute, travel, meals, her overnight, and travel home. Plus hotels & flights. She was vague, and failed to make a point. It’s “old hat” for her now, and it shows. I suspect she also has an agent who gets paid.

I guess that's worth taking a beating on the witness stand.
JMO

 

[Eli9]

Whole presentation from Dr Loftus seemed to be rehashed old work but the thing that hit me was that physically she seemed absolutely exhausted, more than a bit unfocused, unwilling to engage to present her work in the face of questions AND she said she didn't recall I think over 15 times that I counted.....

Very odd expert testimony imo. Dr Loftus simply seemed tired and poorly prepared on the specifics of the case. 11 hrs of prep that she admitted to on the Stand and most of it was media reporting (and we know about that), AA (didn't recall which one but it was 'long'), and a meeting last night with Defence. She never met MT and didn't know anything about her education or work history.

Prosecution cross imo was on point and well prepared but I was frankly stunned at Dr Loftus unwillingness or inability to engage on any of her work unless DIRECTLY questioned by Atty McGuiness.

MOO

I've read that she is an absolute workaholic and never takes time off.
I felt she was selective with her recall. MOO

 

[afitzy]

I've read that she is an absolute workaholic and never takes time off.
I felt she was selective with her recall. MOO

Yes, she herself said, "I work 7 days a week'.

Could be, but she imo didn't bring any interest or particular zeal on applying her work to this case or this Defendant which frankly surprised me as I was looking forward to hearing it here.

mOO

 

[Mysticeilis]

Will you look at that: When JS does his redirect - he approaches witness and now stands next to her as he rocks - a telltale sign of how he feels about his “Esteemed” Expert now!

 

[nodamselindistress]

As mentioned by others, this witness is more effective when trying to discredit memories of prosecution witnesses, i.e., women who charged Weinstein, Cosby, Epstein with sexual assault. JS missed the boat once again as this was not the correct witness to call.

 

[Baby baby Jane]

Whole presentation from Dr Loftus seemed to be rehashed old work but the thing that hit me was that physically she seemed absolutely exhausted, more than a bit unfocused, unwilling to engage to present her work in the face of questions AND she said she didn't recall I think over 15 times that I counted.....

Very odd expert testimony imo. Dr Loftus simply seemed tired and poorly prepared on the specifics of the case. 11 hrs of prep that she admitted to on the Stand and most of it was media reporting (and we know about that), AA (didn't recall which one but it was 'long'), and a meeting last night with Defence. She never met MT and didn't know anything about her education or work history.

Prosecution cross imo was on point and well prepared but I was frankly stunned at Dr Loftus unwillingness or inability to engage on any of her work unless DIRECTLY questioned by Atty McGuiness.

MOO

Did Loftus even give an example of “memory on trial” specific to this case?
If she did, I missed it. She seemed like a performance of tired phrases, references and anecdotes and I specifically hated the “chuckles”
I’ll bet there is a more sharp, up to date and less “tainted” expert available, but Horn has not updated the experts in his Rolodex since 1995.

 

[sds71]

Memory Expert Pressed in C.I.A. Leak Case:​

Memory Expert Pressed in C.I.A. Leak Case (Published 2006)

The special prosecutor in the C.I.A. leak case tangled with a psychologist who testified about memory research, forcing her to acknowledge errors and misstatements in her research. The prosecutor, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, left, spent three hours cross-examining the psychologist, Elizabeth Loftus...

www.nytimes.com

The special prosecutor in the C.I.A. leak case tangled with a psychologist who testified about memory research, forcing her to acknowledge errors and misstatements in her research. The prosecutor, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, left, spent three hours cross-examining the psychologist, Elizabeth Loftus. She was testifying at a procedural hearing at which the defendant, I. Lewis Libby Jr., Vice President Cheney’s former chief of staff, was trying to persuade the judge to let him call a memory expert at his trial on charges of obstruction and perjury. Mr. Libby wants to use a memory expert to help argue that a faulty memory, brought on by a stressful workload, resulted in his making false statements to investigators about his conversations with reporters regarding a Central Intelligence Agency operative, Valerie Wilson. The judge did not immediately rule on the issue.

 

[waldojabba]

I've read that she is an absolute workaholic and never takes time off.
I felt she was selective with her recall. MOO

@Eli9 totally agree that it felt like she was very selective with her recall - almost passive aggressive or not communicating openly. She seemed very put out that the state would have some young prosecutor questioning her assumptions. She was making faces to the jury. Didn’t he understand her resume was 45 pages or so?
I also bet she has dedicated her life to her job so now, in her older days she cannot let go.
I am sure we have all seen it happen to a lot of people - they just cannot let go even if it’s time.
JMO

 

[Mysticeilis]

Whole presentation from Dr Loftus seemed to be rehashed old work but the thing that hit me was that physically she seemed absolutely exhausted, more than a bit unfocused, unwilling to engage to present her work in the face of questions AND she said she didn't recall I think over 15 times that I counted.....

Very odd expert testimony imo. Dr Loftus simply seemed tired and poorly prepared on the specifics of the case. 11 hrs of prep that she admitted to on the Stand and most of it was media reporting (and we know about that), AA (didn't recall which one but it was 'long'), and a meeting last night with Defence. She never met MT and didn't know anything about her education or work history.

Prosecution cross imo was on point and well prepared but I was frankly stunned at Dr Loftus unwillingness or inability to engage on any of her work unless DIRECTLY questioned by Atty McGuiness.

MOO

I did get a kick out of the end of P’s questioning when JS objected - then withdrew his objection she laughed out loud and smiled!

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

@Eli9 totally agree that it felt like she was very selective with her recall - almost passive aggressive or not communicating openly. She seemed very put out that the state would have some young prosecutor questioning her assumptions. She was making faces to the jury. Didn’t he understand her resume was 45 pages or so?
I also bet she has dedicated her life to her job so now, in her older days she cannot let go.
I am sure we have all seen it happen to a lot of people - they just cannot let go even if it’s time.
JMO

Yes, quite the case. And I thought the platitudes and frankly IMO patronizing interchanges between counsel and this expert witness on direct about forgetting certain things, not remembering something just asked, or I have forgotten, or can you please repeat the question - to be orchestrated and seemed false or manufactured? MOO

 

[Megnut]

Whole presentation from Dr Loftus seemed to be rehashed old work but the thing that hit me was that physically she seemed absolutely exhausted, more than a bit unfocused, unwilling to engage to present her work in the face of questions AND she said she didn't recall I think over 15 times that I counted.....

Very odd expert testimony imo. Dr Loftus simply seemed tired and poorly prepared on the specifics of the case. 11 hrs of prep that she admitted to on the Stand and most of it was media reporting (and we know about that), AA (didn't recall which one but it was 'long'), and a meeting last night with Defence. She never met MT and didn't know anything about her education or work history.

Prosecution cross imo was on point and well prepared but I was frankly stunned at Dr Loftus unwillingness or inability to engage on any of her work unless DIRECTLY questioned by Atty McGuiness.

MOO

JS had to call somebody. He himself said it was unscientific! Wanted her to testify to generalities. $1200 to make it appear he has a defense, has witnesses, has experts. $1200 plus her travel expenses. Couple'a mimosas. Plus the 11-14 hours that she didn't do a whole lot. MT, off limits. "Could you look over some stuff for us, prepare no report, load your C. V. and talk for about an hour about anything? Yes? You're hired".

 

[BUF]

Schoenhorn said he expects a neighbor of Troconis and Fotis Dulos to testify this afternoon, as well as a state trooper who interviewed Pawel Gumienny and attorney Michael Rose.

https://www.ctinsider.com/news/article/michelle-troconis-trial-live-updates-day-26-dulos-18681542.php

Loftus also joined in on the courthouse steps at lunch break media blah, blah, blah. It’s also in this article if you want to read it.

 

[Megnut]

MOO

Besides paid experts, are any defense witnesses appearing voluntarily?

Lotta subpoenas, looks like.