CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, deceased/not found, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 ARRESTS #66

doodles1211 · May 26, 2019

New Canaan Police are looking for a missing woman Saturday, May 25.

Jennifer Dulos, 50, was reported missing around 7:30 p.m. Friday, May 24. A sliver alert has been issued.

New Canaan Police with the assistance of the Connecticut State Police initiated a search and an investigation both of which are ongoing as of 8:45 am. Saturday..

Anyone with information related to Dulos’s whereabouts should contact Sgt. Joseph Farenga at 203-505-1332.

Knitty · Feb 24, 2024

Please continue here.

kaen · Feb 24, 2024

I would love to know the defense strategy as a whole in this case. We could see how JS was trying to get GF to say JD's number so he could get the afternoon phone connection in as evidence. So, I wonder what was he hoping to establish if he got the custody report in or any other things that were precluded.

While the defense seems like it was flying by the seat of their pants, I know one factor is probably funds. There had to be some sort of decision tree of strategies that was agreed upon.

I am not Sherlock H. · Feb 24, 2024

As the previous thread closed, I was not able to make this edit to a prior post - one added note of clarification. I have not made reference to having been ineffective, with regard to defense counsel. MOO

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

pernickety · Feb 24, 2024

I am not Sherlock H. said:
As the previous thread closed, I was not able to make this edit to a prior post - one added note of clarification. I have not made reference to having been ineffective, with regard to defense counsel. MOO

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

I "liked" your previous post, but wd like to add--re your suggestion of consulting with another defense lawyer--that lawyers in CT don't like to point their fingers at other lawyers as to ethical violations.

Baby baby Jane · Feb 24, 2024

[/HEADING]
[HEADING=3]Eli9

I know we have discussed it but HOW did MT get that Herman report on HER current laptop? Can someone remind me if all of her electronic devices were seized? Oh, wait. Maybe she had it in the cloud. Hmmm

Replying to Eli9
If she has had access to this document since 2019, then I think she might have leaked it already.

It may be that in the courtroom she has access to a Shared Drive with her lawyers with all the evidence - why else would she have own laptop?
She’s probably been sneaking looks all week or longer.
She just couldn’t resist trying to leak it without leak being tied to her - surprised she didn’t try to airdrop or similar to her phone or other person.

Like
Report

imstilla.grandma · Feb 24, 2024

Jurors could decide as early as next week the fate of the woman accused of helping cover up the murder of Connecticut mom Jennifer Dulos, the Stamford Advocate reports.

On Friday, 49-year-old Michelle Troconis chose not to testify in her trial on charges of murder conspiracy, evidence tampering and hindering prosecution. The defense subsequently rested its case, and prosecutors also opted not to present a rebuttal case

“The science as we are presenting here, there is an alternative narrative theory to what the prosecution is trying to claim,” Schoenhorn said outside the courtroom, according to NBC Connecticut.

Jennifer Dulos: Woman Accused of Helping Boyfriend Kill, Cover Up Wife’s Murder Refuses to Testify

Jurors could decide as early as next week the fate of the woman accused of helping cover up the murder of Connecticut mom Jennifer Dulos, the Stamford Advocate reports. On Friday, 49-year-old Michelle Troconis chose not to testify in her trial on charges of murder conspiracy, evidence tampering...

www.crimeonline.com

I am not Sherlock H. · Feb 24, 2024

pernickety said:
I "liked" your previous post, but wd like to add--re your suggestion of consulting with another defense lawyer--that lawyers in CT don't like to point their fingers at other lawyers as to ethical violations.

Yes, and perhaps that is part of the problem? MOO.

I was not suggesting they or any other individuals to be consulted need be in CT. And lawyers would know what they could or could not say. But generalities and guidance was what seemed to be helpful as part of the process. IMO the specific lawyer(s) need not be identified when obtaining guidance on lodging a complaint. MOO

Eli9 · Feb 24, 2024

imstilla.grandma said:
Jurors could decide as early as next week the fate of the woman accused of helping cover up the murder of Connecticut mom Jennifer Dulos, the Stamford Advocate reports.

On Friday, 49-year-old Michelle Troconis chose not to testify in her trial on charges of murder conspiracy, evidence tampering and hindering prosecution. The defense subsequently rested its case, and prosecutors also opted not to present a rebuttal case

“The science as we are presenting here, there is an alternative narrative theory to what the prosecution is trying to claim,” Schoenhorn said outside the courtroom, according to NBC Connecticut.

Jennifer Dulos: Woman Accused of Helping Boyfriend Kill, Cover Up Wife’s Murder Refuses to Testify

Jurors could decide as early as next week the fate of the woman accused of helping cover up the murder of Connecticut mom Jennifer Dulos, the Stamford Advocate reports. On Friday, 49-year-old Michelle Troconis chose not to testify in her trial on charges of murder conspiracy, evidence tampering...

www.crimeonline.com

Unfortunately for the defense the 'science' and 'alternative narrative' fell largely flat. The prosecution did an amazing job with Loftus and IMO Dr. Marian's early testimony flew over the heads of the jury and right on out the window - even the judge recognized that and prompted JS about it.
Will the jury be hung up on other details? Perhaps but I don't see it resulting from the two expert witness'. MOO

Eli9 · Feb 24, 2024

Baby baby Jane said:
[/HEADING][/HEADING]
[HEADING=3][HEADING=3]Eli9
I know we have discussed it but HOW did MT get that Herman report on HER current laptop? Can someone remind me if all of her electronic devices were seized? Oh, wait. Maybe she had it in the cloud. Hmmm

Replying to Eli9
If she has had access to this document since 2019, then I think she might have leaked it already.

It may be that in the courtroom she has access to a Shared Drive with her lawyers with all the evidence - why else would she have own laptop?
She’s probably been sneaking looks all week or longer.
She just couldn’t resist trying to leak it without leak being tied to her - surprised she didn’t try to airdrop or similar to her phone or other person.

Like
Report

Good point about a shared drive. IMO she probably had it in the cloud and gave it to her atty's. I hope the contempt hearing is streamed and we learn the truth.

J-Kat · Feb 24, 2024

I have been following Lawyer Lee on Youtube re this case. I was very disappointed to hear her say in answer to a listener’s question that she felt the Judge, in her opinion, had been favoring the Prosecution throughout the trial. WTF?

Eli9 · Feb 24, 2024

J-Kat said:
I have been following Lawyer Lee on Youtube re this case. I was very disappointed to hear her say in answer to a listener’s question that she felt the Judge, in her opinion, had been favoring the Prosecution throughout the trial. WTF?

Wow, I guess I was watching a different trial.

Genieeasy · Feb 24, 2024

Re The Defense strategy:
I didn’t think the two memory experts testimonies added anything at all…Just obtuse linguistic confusion! And the whole language barrier avenue comes off disingenuous. I know the jury was not present when MT was being asked about testifying and answered “si” with the translator beside her saying “yes”…but my BS radar went out of bounds.

Diddian · Feb 24, 2024

Genieeasy said:
Re The Defense strategy:
I didn’t think the two memory experts testimonies added anything at all…Just obtuse linguistic confusion! And the whole language barrier avenue comes off disingenuous. I know the jury was not present when MT was being asked about testifying and answered “si” with the translator beside her saying “yes”…but my BS radar went out of bounds.

Same with my BS meter. And here's the thing: people don't like being lied to. And that includes jurors.

MT's "language proficiency" seemed to take a dive right about the time of the third interview, when the pauses and "aaaayyyeeehm's" increased dramatically. Those of us who have been following the case since long before the trial also noted another alleged dive in proficiency when MT changed lawyers.

Seems reasonable to conclude that was fakery adopted as legal strategy rather than reality.

Also, everyone knows that an expert can be found for sale to say anything about anything and the fact that neither of the experts presenting testimony on behalf of the defense personally interviewed and evaluated MT says it all about whether that happened in this case, no matter how many times JS uses the word "science."

shotgun09 · Feb 24, 2024

Regarding the language issue, I am almost certain from the reports of the jury paying attention, that they ( jury) saw through that BS immediately. The translator present in court was loud, annoying and disruptive. And, completely unnecessary, IMO. It was a defense tactic. They saw MT conversing with her attorneys. They saw her conversing with LE during interviews. Most if not all witnesses testified that they only spoke English to MT.

Lastly...the defense puts up, as their last witness .. a complete clone of MT and her language 'deficiencies.' ( or lack there of ) complete with errmmmmmms and emmmmmm's who DID NOT NEED a translator.

It did fall completely flat. I am certainly hopeful the jury is aware. They were subjected to a 'show' of pity.

Eli9 · Feb 24, 2024

shotgun09 said:
Regarding the language issue, I am almost certain from the reports of the jury paying attention, that they ( jury) saw through that BS immediately. The translator present in court was loud, annoying and disruptive. And, completely unnecessary, IMO. It was a defense tactic. They saw MT conversing with her attorneys. They saw her conversing with LE during interviews. Most if not all witnesses testified that they only spoke English to MT.

Lastly...the defense puts up, as their last witness .. a complete clone of MT and her language 'deficiencies.' ( or lack there of ) complete with errmmmmmms and emmmmmm's who DID NOT NEED a translator.

It did fall completely flat. I am certainly hopeful the jury is aware. They were subjected to a 'show' of pity.

It's actually kind of interesting. MT's BFF testified that she would not talk to LE without an interpreter but she didn't have the same request for testifying in a court of law.

afitzy · Feb 24, 2024

pernickety said:
I "liked" your previous post, but wd like to add--re your suggestion of consulting with another defense lawyer--that lawyers in CT don't like to point their fingers at other lawyers as to ethical violations.

Don't worry, I think the suggestion was very well taken (thank you) so will simply use someone in NY if I need guidance.

The CT brethren of attorneys really is unbreakable absent murder imo. What hit me though is how hard Jon Schoenhorn went after Andrew Bowman to discredit him in the pretrial motions as being ineffective counsel, I think as part of his longstanding attempt to remove the 8 hrs of MT LE Testimony. This fascinated me as I have never seen this done in CT and Bowman has standing in the community along with solid federal level experience too. So, my guess after seeing this is that Schoenhorn really is a 'rogue actor' in his community of the CT Bar and he was from Hartford area and not Fairfield County too, so perhaps he didn't care. Perhaps he doesn't care? IDK, but imo it makes him vulnerable on many fronts. Just saying.

But, Schoenhorn clearly has a relationship with Atty Michael Rose as the two have now worked together to get confidential info out to the public via Stamford Advocate twice now (to attempt to discredit JF which sickened me) and the Rose testimony on the stand this week was imo too damn similar to the "Eat Drink and Be Merry Murder Eve Dinner" guests testimony to be at all coincidental. I do believe the State knows the back story on Atty Rose and the various miscreant attorneys in this tragic case, including Jon Schoenhorn and Audrey Felson and so the issues associated with the Rose testimony were well crafted specifically to him on cross by the State. What has surprised me though was that Felson is a Stamford Atty and so will be back in Court with this Judge or even opposite these States Atty's. Why would she be party to the dirty tricks and lying games we have seen from Schoenhorn as it simply tainted her too? This of course presupposes that she is at all different from Schoenhorn but as I'd never heard of her I have no idea what the make of her but it probably don't matter as I never even remember her name most of the time!

Shocking to see the behaviour of Defence attorneys as can you imagine in the Troconis case having to work with the slimy games and lying and horse trading and general shyster behaviour of Jon Schoenhorn for 3+ years?

But, whoever pointed out the despicable Schoenhorn trick to get GF to say in open court the phone number of JF to backdoor in other evidence was to me a new low at a point in the trial where I didn't thing it would be possible to go even lower.

Schoenhorn never really fails to disappoint as he capped off the GF phone number harassing with the "3 Card Monte" on the 'BB' and 'CC' evidence for the discredited Herman report that Audrey Felson had failed to get into evidence the day prior.

Sickening to see games happening via good old traditional defence work. But, this wouldn't be happening imo without Client Consent as the message from the Defence in Court has been absolutely consistent with the social media of MT and the Troconis Crew as they have sought to defame JF, PG on rinse and repeat and claim persecution for an 'innocent' MT simply due to the death of FD.

Whole thing is unreal but I'm very glad it was streamed and will be held in memories on online via the internet forever as imo there can be no way to deny what was witnessed by all in the trial. For this I am grateful.

MOO

afitzy · Feb 24, 2024

Eli9 said:
It's actually kind of interesting. MT's BFF testified that she would not talk to LE without an interpreter but she didn't have the same request for testifying in a court of law.

Yes, so agree. I think Defence made a big error with Petu. They tried to correct it with having the whole production with the translator for MT for the Judge discussion about testifying on her own behalf. But, overall a big fail imo. That is the funny thing about tricks, games and lies is that you have SO much more to remember than if you simply tell the truth. Defence imo was shambolic but we will have to wait for jury to issue their verdict.
MOO

afitzy · Feb 24, 2024

J-Kat said:
I have been following Lawyer Lee on Youtube re this case. I was very disappointed to hear her say in answer to a listener’s question that she felt the Judge, in her opinion, had been favoring the Prosecution throughout the trial. WTF?

Yes, I didn't get her view on this but maybe she is looking strictly at objection win/loss ratios for the two sides. Not sure this type of analysis works to explain this particular trial but I'm not an atty so perhaps they simply look at this metric. What is hard for me in this trial was that so many of the defence objections weren't fully formed, appropriate or even sometimes understood by Judge R. So, how can you evaluate the success of the Defense in having their objections sustained or look at issue of Judge bias.

No matter what you think of Judge R, I was convinced he was attentive, focused in the extreme, thoughtful, and always had his eye on how the jury was viewing the proceedings. I'm saying this as a non atty and also as someone that didn't always agree with Judge R.

MOO

afitzy · Feb 24, 2024

Eli9 said:
Good point about a shared drive. IMO she probably had it in the cloud and gave it to her atty's. I hope the contempt hearing is streamed and we learn the truth.

It could have also been a recent acquisition too by MT. She has a phone and could have simply taken pictures of pages that Audrey Felson claimed to have (4 pages if I recall). OR, she or mama A could have lifted and copied the report from Schoenhorn in his office as god knows if he had any security or he happened to 'conveniently' leave the office when Mama T and MT were there? OR, MT could have gotten the report ages ago from 4JX or even Pattis (via FD).

Where I am a bit mind blown on the discredited report and MT was going back to her 'story' about the FD/MT visit to the psychologist when she claimed she felt 'unsafe' and wanted to learn more so she would be 'safe' from JF as MT was going to be in the lives of FD an the Dulos children for years etc. Or did FD just give MT a bunch of psycho babble and she went to town researching with mama Troconis? I don't buy it. I simply see FD and MT bonding over reading the discredited report and FD also using it to manipulate MT into believing his lies about the situation in Family Court being favourable (it wasn't as we all know). Its tough because we simply have a bunch of liars who seem to lie to each other all the time so I'm not sure how the investigator in the perjury case will sort this all out by the hearing date. All I can say to them is good luck and GOD BLESS!

How do you come up with what she claimed were 67 questions for FD and the good doctor without the report? Hate to say it but I think that report has been kicking around between FD, MT and mama A. MT and Mama A were all over the divorce proceedings. Frankly, I'd wished we had heard from the psychologist that MT took her 67 questions to but that wouldn't have been possible given the chess game on the report unfortunately.

Anyway, I think Judge Heller has to enter the fray on the issue of the report and how it made its way to MT. Judge Heller did her investigation on the report and gave the hook to Atty Mike Rose and would have given hook to GAL Mike Meehan but for JF being murdered (JF had a motion pending to dismiss GAL Meehan at the time of her death).

MOO

CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, deceased/not found, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 *ARRESTS* #66

Well-Known Member

Moderator

Trying to be a good human.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

[/HEADING] [HEADING=3]Eli9​

Believer of Miracles

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

[/HEADING][/HEADING] [HEADING=3][HEADING=3]Eli9​

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

'Certified' Boomer

Well-Known Member

Former Member

Former Member

Former Member

Former Member

DNASolves

Online statistics

Forum statistics

CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, deceased/not found, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 ARRESTS #66

[/HEADING]
[HEADING=3]Eli9

[/HEADING][/HEADING]
[HEADING=3][HEADING=3]Eli9