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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Perhaps this explains Atty AF's claim that she'd seen only four pages, maybe that's all the Defense was permitted.

Regardless, it was that one page that Inmate #433612 was over-displaying for anyone and everyone to see. Mighty coincidental.

Is it reasonable to assume the State has lodged a complaint to the Connecticut bar and that's why we see no court filing?
No, not reasonable assumption imo at all. None of FD attorneys (except Pattis and I think his being reported was by a Judge in Alex Jones Case iirr) who all did various things on his behalf in Civil Court and Family Court and Criminal Court for years never were reported. I kept checking but zero ever showed up. The Judges don’t seem to care and State doesn’t seem to report either so far as I can see. So, if people feel strongly then they have to report it themselves imo.

The reason I don’t believe the State will do anything is because it doesn’t appear the State filed a motion against Schoenhorn for holding on to case evidence for a year. Don’t see where this is allowed in any Practice Book and I don’t think CSP is routinely raiding and searching attorney offices either. Atty the Jon Schoenhorn hired to hand in the box to CSP is now a StaTe Judge in Brideport. Welcome to CT as this is imo how the Judiciary rolls.

The State did try to disqualify Jon Schoenhorn from the MT trial in a pretrial matter but this if I understand it properly was because he might have had to testify about the “held inventory in the box” and not because he withheld the box of evidence from the investigation. Judge r ruled against the state on this so sadly we had to listen to Horn Horning for weeks!

I’m not an atty but I wonder if the state pursued dismissal of Schoenhorn based on their stated case rather than pursuing a disciplinary action because they might have thought that was fruitless. The benefit of what they did is that it’s forever on the record as to what Schoenhorn and the now CT Judge did with regard to the matter.

Iirc the box held by Jon Schoenhorn contained a hoodie with MT and PG hair on it and tools. My conjecture was that the items in the box were used in NC by FD on the murder date and could have been what was in the backpack seen on FD while on Weed street on his French bike. We never heard about this box of items at trial because it was excluded by prior agreement of the parties. But, we did see Jon Schoenhorn try to weasel his way out of the stipulation in the MT trial but a sidebar and Judge R shut this down.

For those interested I dug up the motion to disqualify Jon schohenhorn presented to judge white which was denied:


Here from the document was the “threat” imo issued by Schoenhorn to the State on how he intended to use the evidence found in the box.

IMG_1059.jpeg
Moo
 
Last edited:
This needs to be said again.

FD and Inmate #433612 revealed their joint motive at the dinner party on 5/24. FD had already repositioned the Tacoma. His head was shaved. He met up with KM, probably repositioned the Suburban, jogged home haggardly... and boasted to his picnic friends that the divorce was finally going to be resolved and he was going to get his kids. Two things that weren't at all going to happen any time soon unless he took matters into his own hands, a plan he had already launched. I don't know how those four guests aren't still vomiting, to realize they weren't toasting a courtroom victory but FD's solution. It was a toast to murder.

Sickening.

 JMO
Well said.

I hope each of the folks at the “murders eve” dinner reflect on the testimony they provided at the MT trial.

I rewatched the testimony of the dinner participants and “pond guy” Hutch in particular and I’m not sure reflection is in their DNA but this is my speculation.

I do wonder though about the FD Hutch text traffic and whether FD could have stored JF body at his locker or another locker or outbuilding for later removal in the event the body ever left NC? Could have been as simple as asking Hutch to store the Thule for a few days imo. LE searched the “sacred pond” as we know but did they search all the lockers and outbuildings? We simply don’t know.

Moo
 
Last edited:
No, not reasonable assumption imo at all. None of FD attorneys (except Pattis and I think his being reported was by a Judge in Alex Jones Case iirr) who all did various things on his behalf in Civil Court and Family Court and Criminal Court for years never were reported. I kept checking but zero ever showed up. The Judges don’t seem to care and State doesn’t seem to report either so far as I can see. So, if people feel strongly then they have to report it themselves imo.

The reason I don’t believe the State will do anything is because it doesn’t appear the State filed a motion against Schoenhorn for holding on to case evidence for a year. Don’t see where this is allowed in any Practice Book and I don’t think CSP is routinely raiding and searching attorney offices either. Atty the Jon Schoenhorn hired to hand in the box to CSP is now a StaTe Judge in Brideport. Welcome to CT as this is imo how the Judiciary rolls.

The State did try to disqualify Jon Schoenhorn from the MT trial in a pretrial matter but this if I understand it properly was because he might have had to testify about the “held inventory in the box” and not because he withheld the box of evidence from the investigation. Judge r ruled against the state on this so sadly we had to listen to Horn Horning for weeks!

I’m not an atty but I wonder if the state pursued dismissal of Schoenhorn based on their stated case rather than pursuing a disciplinary action because they might have thought that was fruitless. The benefit of what they did is that it’s forever on the record as to what Schoenhorn and the now CT Judge did with regard to the matter.

Iirc the box held by Jon Schoenhorn contained a hoodie with MT and PG hair on it and tools. My conjecture was that the items in the box were used in NC by FD on the murder date and could have been what was in the backpack seen on FD while on Weed street on his French bike. We never heard about this box of items at trial because it was excluded by prior agreement of the parties. But, we did see Jon Schoenhorn try to weasel his way out of the stipulation in the MT trial but a sidebar and Judge R shut this down.

For those interested I dug up the motion to disqualify Jon schohenhorn presented to judge white which was denied:


Here from the document was the “threat” imo issued by Schoenhorn to the State on how he intended to use the evidence found in the box.

View attachment 488643
Moo
Edit: judge white ruled against the motion by state to disqualify Schoenhorn and not Judge R.
 
TROCONIS CONTEMPT WARRANT: Here’s the arrest warrant affidavit detailing the contempt charge against Michelle Troconis from her criminal trial. Most of what’s in here was already alleged by prosecutors in court.
@News12CT
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1742.jpeg
    IMG_1742.jpeg
    190.1 KB · Views: 48
  • IMG_1740.jpeg
    IMG_1740.jpeg
    204.3 KB · Views: 45
  • IMG_1739.jpeg
    IMG_1739.jpeg
    204.4 KB · Views: 39
  • IMG_1743.jpeg
    IMG_1743.jpeg
    206.6 KB · Views: 35
  • IMG_1741.jpeg
    IMG_1741.jpeg
    76.8 KB · Views: 39
Quotes from HC article:

"The Stamford State’s Attorney’s Office, which charged Troconis with contempt, said in the warrant affidavit that Troconis was aware that the report was sealed and “knowingly violated” at least two judges’ orders by viewing it and displaying it".

"The new warrant for Troconis, signed by Judge Gary J. White on March 1, offers further insight into how the court became aware of the alleged criminal activity through a note from Farber Dulos’ close friend, Carrie Luft".

"Luft provided a written statement to investigators on Feb. 15, in which she outlined what happened that day that led her to pass a note to inspector David Edwards. Luft said that during a court recess on Feb. 15, she became aware of something on Troconis’ laptop that mentioned a doctor of Farber Dulos’, according to the warrant affidavit.
While seated in the courtroom later that day, Luft told investigators she “looked at Troconis’ monitor after a while and I saw, clearly visible, the words “borderline personality disorder” displayed as the top line of what she had pulled up on her computer. ”

"In the next paragraph, she said she could read the name of the doctor as well as the words “treating psychiatrist” and “Jennifer Dulos,” the warrant affidavit said".

"Luft estimated that the words were in a large font because she could read them from the courtroom. “The words were clearly visible to me. I was seated in the front row, on the aisle, behind the prosecution. I would say the words were in about 70-point font,” she said, according to the warrant affidavit".

"She said the writing was not quoted, as if in a news article, but appeared to be a first-person account, the warrant affidavit said".

“I was one of Jennifer Farber Dulos’ closest friends, and she had told me about the family psychological evaluation while it was happening and when it was shared with her in late April 2019,” Luft said in her statement, according to the warrant affidavit. “This is how I am aware of some of the contents of that report. I have never seen the actual report. However, what I know of it, and what I was able to read on Michelle Troconis’ monitor, leads me to believe that she was displaying some part of that report.”

"Luft told investigators that she tore off a piece of paper and wrote a note to Edwards because she was worried that the sealed report was being shown publicly and illegally, the warrant affidavit said".

“It concerned me greatly that Michelle Troconis was displaying this material in a clearly visible fashion, while the proceedings were being livestreamed for public consumption,” Luft said in the statement to investigators.
Michelle Troconis appears in court on day 22 of her criminal trial at Connecticut Superior Court in Stamford, Conn. Thursday, Feb. 15, 2024. Troconis is on trial for charges related to the disappearance and death of New Canaan resident Jennifer Dulos. (Tyler Sizemore/Hearst Connecticut Media/Pool)

Tyler Sizemore/Hearst Connecticut Media/Pool

"Michelle Troconis is accused of reading parts of a court-sealed custody report on her laptop while seated beside her defense team on Feb. 15 during her criminal trial. (Tyler Sizemore/Hearst Connecticut Media/Pool)

"Her note prompted prosecutors Michelle Manning and Sean McGuiness to look over to see what was on Troconis’ screen. Throughout the trial, Troconis usually had a family portrait displayed. Luft told investigators that Troconis’ mother Marisela Arrezza, who was usually seated behind her daughter, “rose from her seat in the front row” and got Troconis’ attention, according to the warrant affidavit".

“Troconis immediately pulled down the document and returned her screen to her usual background, a group of people in white shirts and khakis against a green grassy backdrop,” Luft said in the warrant affidavit".

"McGuiness brought the concern to the court’s attention, prompting a sidebar conversation between Judge Kevin A. Randolph and attorneys for both sides. The issue was addressed toward the end of the day on Feb. 15, with Randolph noting the seriousness of the potential issue and making mention of a contempt hearing".

"The issue was addressed the next morning when prosecutors said they had confirmed the allegations by watching videos of the trial".

"In the warrant affidavit, the State’s Attorney’s Office wrote that they reviewed a video stream from the Law and Crime Network in which “the broadcast video moved in closer to Troconis and captured the full screen of her computer. The picture was brought in closer to include the left section of her computer screen, as everything to the right was cropped off.”

"Division of Criminal Justice Inspector Christopher Gioielli wrote in the warrant affidavit that he took a screenshot of the video that showed nine partial sentences containing about 82 letters, numbers and punctuation marks that mirror page 50 of the sealed report. That page, the warrant affidavit said, included a forensic evaluation of the Dulos family as it related to the family court case of Jennifer Dulos vs. Fotis Dulos."

"The Courant reviewed Law and Crime’s video stream and the timestamp noted in the warrant and also captured a screenshot of the moment Troconis’ laptop was shown".

"The warrant affidavit also noted an article by Hearst Connecticut Media, in which reporters noted that Troconis had previously had an article pulled up that made mention of fabricated forensic evidence while a forensic analyst was on the witness stand".

"The article Troconis had pulled up was from the Associated Press, with the headline “Judge Finds Forensic Scientist Henry Lee Liable for Fabricating Evidence in a Murder Case,” and detailed how a judge found famed forensic scientist Henry Lee liable for fabricating evidence in a murder case that sent two Connecticut men to prison".

"Prosecutors in February made mention of this article and concerns about Troconis’ family’s behavior, with McGuinness moving to have Troconis’ mother barred from the courtroom".

"Randolph did not kick Troconis’ mother out but ruled that other than attorneys and court staff, no one would be on a laptop in the courtroom during the trial. Troconis did not use her laptop in the courtroom again".

"The warrant affidavit mentioned that Troconis had been in court for all criminal pretrial and trial proceedings when Randolph and all counsel consistently referred to the report as a “sealed” report consistent with Judge Heller and Judge John F. Blawie’s prior orders".

"In April 2021, Troconis’ defense attorney, Jon Schoenhorn, filed a motion regarding the report that was granted by Blawie in May 2021. Blawie’s instructions, according to the warrant affidavit, stated that the “report is released to defense counsel; restrictions pursuant to Practice Book Section 25-60 apply to its further dissemination.”

"The State’s Attorney’s Office said Troconis was present during that proceeding".

"Randolph first ordered that a contempt hearing would be held after the defense rested its case, then set a date of March 5. After the jury delivered its verdict on March 1, he moved the contempt hearing to March 21 and recused himself from the case".

"Troconis was officially charged with contempt on March 1 when she was taken into custody on an increased $6 million bond and brought to York Correctional Institute in Niantic, where she remained this week according to Schoenhorn. She is being represented by attorney Bob Frost in the contempt case. He did not return a request for comment".
MT's Attorney both said they had no idea what was on MT's screen that day. JS said he was involved in cross examination. AF said she had only seen the last 4 pages of the report.

However, on Day 21 of the trial, JS explained he had a copy of the report per Judge Blawie's ruling and only he AND AF had seen the report. AF is a liar????
Law and Crime connection....it's at 27:10
 
MT's Attorney both said they had no idea what was on MT's screen that day. JS said he was involved in cross examination. AF said she had only seen the last 4 pages of the report.

However, on Day 21 of the trial, JS explained he had a copy of the report per Judge Blawie's ruling and only he AND AF had seen the report. AF is a liar????
Law and Crime connection....it's at 27:10
Yes, it appears atty Audrey Felson Felson etc. might have told a porkie pie word salad.

She previously said only 4 pages that she had seen but as she did the “testimony cross” of GAL atty Michael Meehan it never made much sense that she hadn’t read the entire report.

I hope this situation is investigated and she is held to account.
Moo
 
TROCONIS CONTEMPT WARRANT: Here’s the arrest warrant affidavit detailing the contempt charge against Michelle Troconis from her criminal trial. Most of what’s in here was already alleged by prosecutors in court.
@News12CT
Glad it was made clear on video that mt had a translator so she can’t claim she didn’t understand what they were saying!
 
No, not reasonable assumption imo at all. None of FD attorneys (except Pattis and I think his being reported was by a Judge in Alex Jones Case iirr) who all did various things on his behalf in Civil Court and Family Court and Criminal Court for years never were reported. I kept checking but zero ever showed up. The Judges don’t seem to care and State doesn’t seem to report either so far as I can see. So, if people feel strongly then they have to report it themselves imo.

The reason I don’t believe the State will do anything is because it doesn’t appear the State filed a motion against Schoenhorn for holding on to case evidence for a year. Don’t see where this is allowed in any Practice Book and I don’t think CSP is routinely raiding and searching attorney offices either. Atty the Jon Schoenhorn hired to hand in the box to CSP is now a StaTe Judge in Brideport. Welcome to CT as this is imo how the Judiciary rolls.

The State did try to disqualify Jon Schoenhorn from the MT trial in a pretrial matter but this if I understand it properly was because he might have had to testify about the “held inventory in the box” and not because he withheld the box of evidence from the investigation. Judge r ruled against the state on this so sadly we had to listen to Horn Horning for weeks!

I’m not an atty but I wonder if the state pursued dismissal of Schoenhorn based on their stated case rather than pursuing a disciplinary action because they might have thought that was fruitless. The benefit of what they did is that it’s forever on the record as to what Schoenhorn and the now CT Judge did with regard to the matter.

Iirc the box held by Jon Schoenhorn contained a hoodie with MT and PG hair on it and tools. My conjecture was that the items in the box were used in NC by FD on the murder date and could have been what was in the backpack seen on FD while on Weed street on his French bike. We never heard about this box of items at trial because it was excluded by prior agreement of the parties. But, we did see Jon Schoenhorn try to weasel his way out of the stipulation in the MT trial but a sidebar and Judge R shut this down.

For those interested I dug up the motion to disqualify Jon schohenhorn presented to judge white which was denied:


Here from the document was the “threat” imo issued by Schoenhorn to the State on how he intended to use the evidence found in the box.

View attachment 488643
Moo
Page 13 of cloud and actual page 10 of above document detailing that Jon Schoenhorn refused to tell the state where the box came from.

IMG_1060.jpeg
Clarification by State of job schoenhorn obligation with regard to case evidence which per the State, “supersedes Attorney client privilege” - see below excerpt.


IMG_1061.jpeg
 
Last edited:
I made an incorrect assumption above that if the report was released to Horn, it must have been shareable with his client. Why on earth does an attorney get access to “evidence” that he can’t share with his client? The attorney advocates for the client - for what purposes does an attorney get a document that he/she can’t share with the client?

I suppose - if I’m reaching (and possibly thrusting) - a court could say - okay Horn - you can have the document but you can only use it for the purpose of seeking discovery from other sources that aren’t sealed; and you can’t share the report with your client. But this doesn’t hold water because if it’s sealed, derivative evidence from it is fruit of the poisonous tree and not admissible.

Sometimes opposing parties agree to share confidential and/or potentially inadmissible evidence/information for the very limited purpose of settling a case. As in - okay - let’s hypothetically say your client thought the victim was bipolar, does it follow that she would then help FD cover up a murder? In other words, if the State had the document, could they have agreed with the judge that Horn could have a copy to put him on a level playing field in trying to reach a plea deal. Again - 100% speculation.

I’d like to see the exact words.

There are quite a few pertinent facts that I for sure do not know regarding how an electronic copy of a sealed document is on her computer. But I still think the issue in the Contempt of Court case is she knew, and nevertheless intentionally displayed that document. And she did it with the same lack of remorse or regard for authority that she displayed while committing the crimes she is guilty of, and for lying about them to LE three times over.
Amen to that!
 
Is it possible that her lawyer, or his assistant, made a sloppy mistake of uploading all case files to a password protected client folder, and the Herman/Custody report was accidentally uploaded to that folder? Troconis may have found the custody report within her case files without intent by her lawyer to provide the file to her. Careless lawyer or assistant.

It's interesting that she chose to reveal to the courts and TV cameras that she had the report in 72 font during trial. She knew that she was demonstrating that her lawyer had violated his commitment to the courts. What's the long game?
Omg, could that be a reason for a mistrial?
 
Troconis was present in the courtroom a few years ago when her attorney Jon Schoenhorn was told that only her defense team could view the report and that its contents were otherwise sealed from public view, including herself, the warrant stated.

3/6/24 -- https://www.ctpost.com/news/article/michelle-troconis-jennifer-dulos-contempt-of-court-18707575.php
Boy, she’s somethin’, huh. A defiant, manipulative, lying “dog”.
I hope the judge throws the book at her, literally!
 
MT's Attorney both said they had no idea what was on MT's screen that day. JS said he was involved in cross examination. AF said she had only seen the last 4 pages of the report.

However, on Day 21 of the trial, JS explained he had a copy of the report per Judge Blawie's ruling and only he AND AF had seen the report. AF is a liar????
Law and Crime connection....it's at 27:10
Excellent. I just want to say thank you to everyone here who works so hard to research, post and explain in such a clear and concise manner, the details about this case. I’m so impressed with your dedication and keen commentary and I’ve learned so much from being here.
 
Can she be charged with contempt in multiple courts? She violated several judges' sealings.

Idk, I’d asked the question of @lucegirl as I’m not an attorney. Idk either if Judge Rodriguez can refer the matter back to Judge heller in Family court? It’s a procedural matter that I think needs an atty to answer.
Moo
 
No, not that the public are aware of. Many local defence attorneys have criticised the lack of agreement for MT doing the interviews but imo the relationship between MT then attorney (Bowman), local LE and then States Attorney Colangelo could have been collegial in nature and longstanding trust might have existed between the parties based on working together for many years is my personal speculation. I base this in part on the presence of then States Attorney Colangelo at MT LE Interview 2 as I believe it unlikely that the States highest LE official (he was also running the investigation into the disappearance/murder of JF at the time personally iirc) attends many such similar interviews.

Clearly, the three LE Interviews done by MT effectively in the opinion of many sunk her with the Jury and the Court of Public Opinion, but she was always represented by Counsel and knew that she didn't have to speak as was clearly explained to her at the start of each interviews. IMO (pure speculation) it seemed like Atty Bowman initially might have believed that MT was telling the truth and did want to work with LE to assist the investigation to find JF (or the body) but at some point he realised this simply was not the case as the situation evolved.

FWIW it was bizarre watching the interviews as it was clear she very much wanted to put her narrative forward to LE but stayed in line with the alibi script and variations of it for a good amount of time and then started lying about lies she had previously made to the point where I would believe that her then Attorney might have finally realised there was no way LE would find her credible and finalise any type of cooperation or immunity agreement. By then the 'cow had left the barn' and MT had spoken as there was no way any agreement could happen. This is my speculation as clearly we don't know what happened between MT, Attorney Bowman and LE but no cooperation agreement was ever put in place.

Attorney Bowman has a long history locally of successfully keeping clients out of the spotlight and out of Court via working with LE. From watching his client MT speak in the three interviews I do wonder at what point it became clear to him that she was simply lying about lies and no deal would ever be forthcoming even though he pushed his LE and States Attorney's hard to put some kind of deal in place? We simply don't know the answer to what he might have been doing as he only spoke to the Press once and simply said that he (unlike Pattis and Schoenhorn) would 'never speak to the Press about a client'. Atty Bowman and MT severed their working relationship at some point for reasons unknown (much speculation on this issue here on WS and much commentary in MT and Troconis Crew Social media seeming to blame Atty Bowman for 'betraying' MT). Atty Bowman as per his policy has never spoken about his former client MT publicly.

PG, whose wife owned the Red Tacoma driven by FD on the Murder Date to NC, initially had a verbal immunity agreement from then States Attorney Colangelo and this was followed up by a formal agreement at a later date as we learned at the MT Trial. PG was also represented by local counsel who I believe started working with PG around the time of his first formal interview with LE, although the circumstances of PG (vs MT) involvement with LE appeared quite different imo as he seemed to want to assist the investigation to find JF (MT never exhibited any interest in JF or finding her body imo) but was smart enough to realise the circumstances surrounding some of his activities might look suspicious (he was in NC on the Murder Date working at FD Sturbridge House) so he engaged Atty Lindy Urso on his behalf and then spent many months working with LE under his immunity agreement.

This same type of trusting and collegial relationship seen with Bowman never existed with MT current Counsel Jon Schoenhorn and he also fought to have the 3 interviews of MT dismissed from her trial and also fought to discredit her prior Counsel for ineffective representation based on MT not having some type of agreement in place for the 3 LE Interviews. Schoenhorn also fought hard in pre trial period to discredit lead Detective Kimball and his supervisor Sgt. Ventreska with a particular focus on what he claimed were 'errors' in the various AAs prepared and approved by Judge Blawie and White iirc.

MT prior atty (Atty Bowman) we believe was operating under the early assumption that MT was telling the truth and so the 3 interviews she did had the appearance of her cooperating with LE with the somewhat veiled assumption that she was cooperating imo. There was no immunity or other agreement in place at the time of these 3 interviews for MT. What was interesting was that the then States Atty (Colangelo) himself attended the second interview to listen to what MT had to say and he was on video saying something to the effect of 'she doesn't know'. We don't know for sure what exactly he meant by this statement but many believe he was referring to the body of JF which at the time was the top priority of LE to find (its never been found which is why I'm so happy you are here my friend as we have long been stumped by this pesky detail (as has LE despite an investigation that some in the Press put at costing between $5-$10 million).

MT prior attorney was believed to have a longstanding strong relationship with the former States attorney such that many believed he was trying to work out some kind of plea or other deal for MT at that time but so far as we know, no such deal was ever formalised.

On your issue in OP about "MT wanting to disparage' the victim JF, I agree with you completely on this as MT waved off her attorney telling her not to speak about the contents of the discredited Herman report. I believe MT also defiantly repeated her claims about the discredited Herman report again when she spoke in a later LE Interview of writing the '67 questions for the meeting with a psychologist that she lined up with FD because she claimed to be in fear of JF'. We never heard more about this particular meeting at MT trial and we never got to hear about the protective order that MT allegedly had KM write on her behalf and that she supposedly filed with Farmington PD. The protective order document is public and was placed here somewhere on WS ages ago when we first learned about it. All we know is that at the MT trial there was a sidebar on the protective order and it was never mentioned to the jury iirc.

From the Schoenhorn comments post MT conviction it seemed to me that he was again raising the argument of 'ineffective counsel' from Attorney Bowman to be pursued post conviction. Schoenhorns prior argument on this topic had previously been heard by Judge R I believe in pretrial motions and had been dismissed. Those motion documents or portions of them along with the final Order are also here in WS somewhere. So, we have no idea what might happen on this topic going forward as its probably too early to tell at this point.

MOO
Thank you for filling in many gaps. I tend to agree that she should have exercised her right to remain silent. However, if her lawyer genuinely believed her initial claims and script - appears he did - she has no one to blame but herself. She appears sincere and cooperative until she is presented with truth. She is very good at keeping her false story straight. Her courtroom lawyer does his best with what he has to work with, but most of his objections are over-ruled.

The location of the body is the important question. I think Troconis knows more than she has said. The plan for May 24 was very detailed, including pre-planning access to Pawel's truck. Troconis was part of those details, as we know from the alibi she constructed for him. Investigators make a good point when they challenge her on her disinterest in where he was that morning without his phone. It's hard to believe that she knew everything about the plan except where he put the body.

She mentions the pond a few times. There's also the dirt-bike trip, but I don't see Dulos carrying a body on a dirt bike. That brings me back to the missing 40 minutes near Waveny Park. If he had a solid plan, and prepared the body in the garage (remove clothing, etc.), then somewhere South of Waveny in the water - never to be found - seems like a good possibility. Travel time to and from Waveny Park is 25 minutes, which leaves 15 minutes to weigh down the body in water.

Maybe she can make a deal in sentencing by revealing the location of the body.
 
Thank you for filling in many gaps. I tend to agree that she should have exercised her right to remain silent. However, if her lawyer genuinely believed her initial claims and script - appears he did - she has no one to blame but herself. She appears sincere and cooperative until she is presented with truth. She is very good at keeping her false story straight. Her courtroom lawyer does his best with what he has to work with, but most of his objections are over-ruled.

The location of the body is the important question. I think Troconis knows more than she has said. The plan for May 24 was very detailed, including pre-planning access to Pawel's truck. Troconis was part of those details, as we know from the alibi she constructed for him. Investigators make a good point when they challenge her on her disinterest in where he was that morning without his phone. It's hard to believe that she knew everything about the plan except where he put the body.

She mentions the pond a few times. There's also the dirt-bike trip, but I don't see Dulos carrying a body on a dirt bike. That brings me back to the missing 40 minutes near Waveny Park. If he had a solid plan, and prepared the body in the garage (remove clothing, etc.), then somewhere South of Waveny in the water - never to be found - seems like a good possibility. Travel time to and from Waveny Park is 25 minutes, which leaves 15 minutes to weigh down the body in water.

Maybe she can make a deal in sentencing by revealing the location of the body.
This has always been my thought.
 
Idk, I’d asked the question of @lucegirl as I’m not an attorney. Idk either if Judge Rodriguez can refer the matter back to Judge heller in Family court? It’s a procedural matter that I think needs an atty to answer.
Moo
Generally, a defendant is charged when/where they get caught committing a crime.

Judge Randolph and those before him have all opined that they're not inclined to interfere with the sealing Order of another Judge (i.e., Heller), and all of JLS Motions and appeals surrounding the Herman report were denied with the exception of allowing the defense attorney to view the report.

ETA: See item #21 for report released to defense counsel with restrictions.

1709838503826.png
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
229
Guests online
1,998
Total visitors
2,227

Forum statistics

Threads
599,805
Messages
18,099,789
Members
230,930
Latest member
Barefoot!
Back
Top