GUILTY CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, deceased/not found, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 *ARRESTS* #68

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Last I heard phone calls were free now.

Also necessities are made available to any one who does not have a balance in their inmate account for X amount of time. That stops people from buying all their goodies one week with money from home or a job assignment then crying poor the next so they get what they actually need for free.
According to the handbook upthread, all prison phones are collect-call only. And yes, if I read correctly, an inmate is considered "indigent" if either their entering commissary balance is under $5.00 or if it is below $5.00 for a period of at least 90 days. I personally still agree with @Ruminations that it's disgusting the things we force inmates to pay for, basic toiletry items every person should have access to.
1709430920240.png
 
“As for her chances of a successful appeal, Sherman said it will likely center around the large amount of evidence brought forward.
“They let a lot of the divorce case bleed into the criminal case. I don't know how appropriate that was,” said Sherman. “I think that could have clouded the jury's perception of a motive of why this murder took place.”


Huh? Was this guy following the case? It was the DEFENSE that was straining to get those sealed divorce documents in.

And yes, the divorce case DID bleed into the criminal case quite literally - as in the horror of JFDs bloody shirt and bra.

MOO.
 
After we moved into a new place , everyday I would get a vm on my machine from someone in a FL correctional facility trying to make a collect call. I had to change the outgoing message to include our name so the person would know they had the wrong number.
 
Hmmm. That analyst said that he thought a lot of the divorce case "bled into" the criminal case, clouding the issues of motive; the implication is the jury was more inclined to convict based on divorce court stuff causing the jury to assign a motive, and presumably making them more likely to convict.

1) Holy-inappropriate-figure-of-speech.

2) It was the defense who was emphasizing that divorce court was going so well the murderers had not motive. As a rebuttal MM famously emphasized that nothing had changed.
 
We are relieved that Michelle Troconis was convicted of Jennifer's brutal murder. The relief is born out of the loss of Jennifer Farber Dulos, mother of five. Who wouldn't want to read a blog post today about her sweet children? Who wouldn't prefer to see snapshots of her walking in the park this weekend with her children? Jennifer's loss is incalculable. Jen lost everything when Michelle conspired to murder her.

We've seen the State's evidence and watched JS perform. An appeal will be filed but will be denied although it's not due to lack of effort on his part. How may times did he request a "running objection?" < ianal >

Michi may feel abandoned, cold and alone up in that prison cell but I don't care. My greatest joys have come from being a mother. Michelle stripped that privilege, all of that joy from five beloved children, from Jennifer Farber. She had no right to do that. I hope she's sentenced to whatever the law will legally allow on all six counts, plus the contempt sentencing. She's a danger to the wives of married men.
 
I meant to post this shortly after the verdict. I was listening to Surviving the Survivor YouTube video and they had a guest on, clearly a defense lawyer. He said that because the judge allowed a bond after the verdict it was clear that the judge did not agree with the verdict. The guest went on to say that he expected that MT could negotiate a plea deal in light of this.

I think this guy was smoking dope. Am I crazy?
 
I meant to post this shortly after the verdict. I was listening to Surviving the Survivor YouTube video and they had a guest on, clearly a defense lawyer. He said that because the judge allowed a bond after the verdict it was clear that the judge did not agree with the verdict. The guest went on to say that he expected that MT could negotiate a plea deal in light of this.

I think this guy was smoking dope. Am I crazy?
It’s like the defense lawyers interviewed in the Scott Peterson trial. They insisted he was not guilty. I never listen to the prosecutors or defense attorneys opining on a trial. They never give unbiased opinions.
 
BBM

The State's Only Prison For Women Began as a Working Farm​

One hundred years ago, after much debate, misgivings and opposition, the Connecticut State Farm for Women, set up in a collection of cottages in the fields of Niantic, opened its doors to 12 inmates.
One could hardly call it a prison. It was a working farm.

[...]

What were their offenses? Harrison’s research turned up some of them: lascivious carriage, prostitution, manifest danger of falling into habits of vice, intoxication, delinquency, vagrancy, theft, forgery, being a habitual offender, neglect of children, impairing the morals of a minor child, frequenting disorderly houses, street walking, incorrigibility, and being lewd, wanton or lascivious. A woman could also be sent to the farm if she “led a vicious life” or possessed “obscene pictures.”
Many years later, when Harrison was a correction officer at the former farm, renamed the Janet S. York Correctional Institution, the women incarcerated there had been convicted of much more serious crimes, such as assault or murder. Although it was no longer a farm, it retained progressive programs, including the acclaimed women’s writing course led by novelist Wally Lamb.

Harrison thinks Connecticut residents should be proud of the facility, which he notes became a national role model for how to set up and run a women’s prison. After reaching a height of 1,427 inmates in 2007, the population has seen a decline since, falling to 936 this past July and bucking the national trend in women’s prison populations.

[...]
However, when a new bill was presented in 1917 amid greater public support, the General Assembly approved it. The women’s farm opened in July of the following year.

The farm included woods and pastures that could be tilled. Harrison found a listing of the animals there in 1925; they included cows, heifers, bulls, horses, hens, chickens and swine. The women split wood, sawed and burned brush, did the gardening and worked at the dairy barn. A women’s hospital also was built there in 1919. (Some of the inmates were mothers with babies.)

[...]

Wally Lamb! :)
 
I meant to post this shortly after the verdict. I was listening to Surviving the Survivor YouTube video and they had a guest on, clearly a defense lawyer. He said that because the judge allowed a bond after the verdict it was clear that the judge did not agree with the verdict. The guest went on to say that he expected that MT could negotiate a plea deal in light of this.

I think this guy was smoking dope. Am I crazy?
You are not crazy - he is! Did he even watch the trial? The prosecution asked for double the original bail and the judge tripled it. He did not have an option under CT law to grant no bail before sentencing. This was all clear to anyone paying attention. The judge's tone of voice and swift reply were not signs he disagreed with the jury at all - MOO
 
MT now has an inmate number in case anyone wanted to add to her commissary (commissary list below as I was curious what folks had access to in prison and its everything from toothbrushes to high ticket items like lasagna):


View attachment 487575View attachment 487576

Commissary Order Form:
They order on a scantron! Didn’t realize they have to buy their own toilet paper. I am sure mama and papa have filled her account, so I’ll pass. LOL
 
You are not crazy - he is! Did he even watch the trial? The prosecution asked for double the original bail and the judge tripled it. He did not have an option under CT law to grant no bail before sentencing. This was all clear to anyone paying attention. The judge's tone of voice and swift reply were not signs he disagreed with the jury at all - MOO
I agree.

What's more, Judge Randolph was very respectful of the jurors and the job they were there to do. I doubt he would undermine their decision in any way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
69
Guests online
1,522
Total visitors
1,591

Forum statistics

Threads
605,883
Messages
18,194,202
Members
233,622
Latest member
cassie.ryan18
Back
Top