GUILTY CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, deceased/not found, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 *ARRESTS* #70

[Jmoose]

I would also add that when legislators, those in executive roles, and the judiciary are seen as soft on crime and pandering to criminals, then less crime - including violent crime - is reported. Why bother if a criminal is quickly turned free to offend again? Or, if convicted, faces minimal consequence?

Under those conditions, one knows crime is increasing as one sees or hears of it all around them, but crime statistics (based upon reported crimes) don’t reflect that. The data isn’t intentionally misrepresenting, it just isn’t true because it isn’t complete.

If you don’t charge people, the crime stats go down, too!

 

[Jmoose]

I have silently followed Jennifer Dulos murder for the many years. Please forgive my confusion, because I've read it both ways - Will JT serve 14.5 years in prison, then 5 years probation, or only 4.5 years in prison with 5 years probation. I'm shocked either way.

she will allegedly serve 14.5 years, then 5 years of probation. But likely less than 14.5 years, really, because of “good behavior”.

 

[Jmoose]

If they drop the charges or negotiate a plan then no, no trial.

Not sure what they have been waiting for as all the evidence is in. OR, perhaps there has been more investigating going on by CSP. The thing with KM is that the people he surrounds himself really define SCUM and I do very much wonder if States Atty could be trying to negotiate with some of these bottom fish to provide information on KM? I stopped following all the legal drama around KM after his ex wife received zero support imo for her claims against KM. But, there was this case that I believe is still ongoing relating to KM providing a mortgage to I believe a convicted sex offender who defaulted on the mortgage. I mean, what are the chances? Anyway, my point is that there was "Can Man" who tried to burn down or start a fire at KM ex wife house who might be available to provide info for a deal, the I believe Armenian car dealer/chop shop/import export business contact who I am sure LE could dig up some infractions to flip etc. The list of KM associates is LONG AND DEEP and no doubt could be mined by a Prosecutor interested in finding out more information about KM.

But, KM DID NOT lose his law licence and the last time I checked it was listed as SUSPENDED.

CT NEVER FAILS TO DISAPPOINT.

Dulos defendant Kent Mawhinney sues convicted child sex offender over defaulted mortgage

Kent Mawhinney, charged in the Jennifer Dulos disappearance, has filed a lawsuit against...

www.ctinsider.com

In my opinion, much of the judicial system, even in CT, is the “He-man women haters club”. KM’s poor wife was never going to get any real support for her rape charge, and zero assistance when the guy with the crowbar and gasoline can came by to “fix the garage door” at a house that KM no longer resided at. It’s outrageous that she was treated so badly, likely because KM is a member of the legal profession, and he’s been getting professional breaks all along.

 

[Jmoose]

Michelle is nearly 50 (she will be in Sept). Think she’s gone through menopause yet? Wonder how she’ll like it in a facility without air conditioning? Those hot flashes and night sweats are brutal…

 

[Tiger Stripes]

@Niner, you are an absolute FORCE OF NATURE and I have no clue how you manage to do what you do so brilliantly, but you create a record that imo is easier to follow AND more complete than the sorry records kept by the Courts and certainly the Press.

So, big thank you for your time and effort as its an amazing contribution to this case and thread!

@Niner is a WS "rockstar" (and... she's powered by popcorn, by the way, making her energy all the more amazing)!

 

[Seattle1]

I struggled mightily with that particular imo only partial truism we heard from the Judge yesterday. Still sitting with it all actually as I think it is an absolutely incomplete explanation of the sentencing process and I frankly disagree absolutely with sentencing being fully explained as being dispassionate. Wrong word and poor explanation imo.

I've seen too many cases where a jury gets things partially right or absolutely wrong based on the facts of the case and where the Judge has to 'adjust the scales' at sentencing but within the guidelines of course. If sentencing truly were dispassionate then why bother hearing from the VICTIMS? AND certainly why the farce with listening to hours of commentary about the DEFENDANT? WHY?

In a million years I will never understand the circus Judge Randolph let play out yesterday in his courtroom yesterday with a good 1/2 day or more of MT supporters allowed to speak.

WHY?

The Jury had rendered a verdict and imo by virtue of Judge Randolph permitting the circus of hearing from people that only knew MT for a short period of time and on rinse and repeat, it was as if he took a huge MUD PIE and smooshed it in the face of BOTH the Jury that worked LONG AND HARD and with great courage to convict on all six counts against MT and the VICTIMS who have to live with the consequences of the murder of JFD. The entire episode was imo made even more of a joke because any of those MANY people that spoke yesterday for MT could have been brought to her defence AT TRIAL and subject to cross examination. BUT, we didn't see any of that happen (not a surprise as to why). It was a feeble attempt by the Defence to simply ambush and hijack an event that is supposed to be about the VICTIMS.

Frankly imo yesterday was only worthy of something you might see in a banana republic which made the Troconis Family and Schoenhorn comments comparing the Stamford Courthouse experience of MT to the situation of justice in Venezuela quite ironic and darkly humorous. I know the situation in CT Judiciary is horrifically soft on crime but its not yet on par with Venezuela - getting closer every day but not all there yet!

IMO yesterdays presentation was a farce that was allowed by Judge Randolph. But more importantly I thought it was an absolute slap in the face and knife in the gut to the friends and family of JFD.

Since when are VICTIMS RIGHTS and CONVICTED DEFENDANTS RIGHTS EQUAL? MT had a trial and was convicted by a Jury of her peers, PERIOD THE END. IF the Defence wanted these people to speak then bring them to trial and have them subject to cross examination!

Maybe Judge Randolph was announcing that he wasn't one of these Judges that looks at the totality of the evidence presented and then compares it to the jury verdict and then sentences accordingly based on the guidelines established by the legislature? Colour me confused but I am with his entire long statement yesterday. He wasn't confused as he spouted out his ruling in a rapid fire way as if he just wanted it all just done. He imo absolutely DID exercise GREAT discretion with the concurrent ruling that imo effectively dismissed the Class D felonies in the 'lesser' charges. He absolutely DID exercise GREAT discretion in effectively suspending a good portion of the maximum sentence for the top charge of 20 years by reducing it to 14.5 years imo.

Nope to all of yesterday with the exception of the Victims statements. An ABSOLUTE NOPE imo to the extensive word salad heard from Judge Randolph. I had believed him to possibly be an individual of courage, integrity, wisdom and compassion and yesterday I saw none of these qualities as he seemed more than a bit defensive imo for his 'sentencing ruling' in the face of the demands for something quite different from the true VICTIMS of the MT crimes. I found Judge Randolph severely lacking yesterday because I don't believe he made any attempt within the wide discretion available to him to make ANY ATTEMPT to hear the Victims. NONE.

Am I surprised by Judge Randolphs choices yesterday? Nope. The man is a product of the system in which he operates and so I instead take issue with the system which as we have all seen is absolutely broken in CT. But, it did bother me greatly that he sought very much in my opinion to justify doing what he did but imo he hid his justification behind a false narrative that little to do with the actual wide discretion that Judge's possess. I just wish he had had the personal courage to be honest about it all and not choose to hide behind a word such as 'dispassionate'.

IMO it was a sad day for justice on so many levels and it disappoints me greatly that Judge Randolph didn't have the personal courage to stand up for VICTIMS and do so within the bounds of his judicial sentencing discretion.

MOO

If the process truly were dispassionate the role could be assigned to robots or computers and the Judicial role as it relates to sentencing dismissed. Perhaps the correct word might be unbiased as this seemed more along the lines of what he spent so much time talking about yesterday? IDK, but dispassionate in my mind implies so many other issues.

Judge Randolph seemed imo to be struggling mightily on getting across an idea on sentencing to the Courtroom that imo never quite made it or I didn't understand it. Perhaps he was attempting to explain that sentencing ought to align with the verdict provided by the jury of peers in a way that was consistent with established guidelines and wasn't capricious? Whatever his intent with all the word salad for me it fell quite flat. It also seemed that he was attempting to minimize his role or discretion in sentencing and I felt this was incorrect as well.

Judges have substantial discretion and imo we the public expect that this discretion will be properly, responsibly and fairly applied to mete out JUSTICE to those convicted. I would have respected Judge Randolph more if he had focused on the concept of JUSTICE and his role in that process rather than his robotic explanation of sentencing. I'm simply not sure how JUSTICE was served by anything done by Judge Randolph yesterday given that the VICTIMS (not the church clowns surrounding MT and the Defence) asked for the maximum sentence to be applied to MT. Judge Randolph COULD have done this BUT HE CHOSE NOT TO imo and this is where I'm calling BS on his argument about sentencing being a dispassionate exercise. ABSOLUTE BS.

Judge Randolph spoke at length about the many various 'inconsistencies' in MT behaviour that the jurors could have reasonably seen in rendering their verdict. His list of 'inconsistencies' was thorough and I just thought of a few others that probably weren't that material. that could have been added The thing with all the ones he mentioned though was that all involved very clear INTENT and diligent action by MT to accomplish and I wonder if this is why he listed the ones he did? I think Judge Randolph was attempting to build a bridge between the role of the jury verdict and their possible analysis of the evidence and his role as Judge in sentencing MT for the crimes but somehow remove him from having any role other than just reading the sentencing grids that are public for all to see. I think Judge Randolph saw the MT clear role in the crime of murder YET for whatever reason in his mind could not connect what he heard at trial and heard from the jury verdict with the maximum sentencing guidelines that clearly we available to him.

TBH, I had to twice replay the 18 minute summation on Sentencing by Judge Randolph, and I truly believe Friday's Sentencing was according to his interpretation of CT law, and the dispassion, as intended by the legislators-- shocking as it may seem.

Randolph has served as a CT Superior Court Judge since 2006-- so this wasn't his first rodeo.

I don't recall another Sentencing in CT so I have nothing to compare it to.

I'm just pleased that the Federal Court does not share this clinical approach. And I'm equally pleased for the Western States.

For example, Colorado and the sentencing of another murder's girlfriend (Krystal lee Kenney), or step mother, Letecia Stauch, where the Court does not treat Sentencing as a "dispassionate experience."

Sentencing - Letecia Stauch

Before he handed down the sentence, the judge admonished Letecia Stauch for claiming mental illness as the reason for her actions and said that it did a disservice to those who actually suffer from mental illness. "You have shown no remorse during this process," said the judge....

“The facts in this case are the most horrific I have ever seen. Your conduct in this case deserves the maximum punishment that I can impose under Colorado law,” Judge Gregory Werner said. Before the sentencing, the family gave powerful impact statements, asking for the maximum sentence.

Sentencing -- Krystal Kenney

Just before 11 a.m., Judge Scott Sells made the decision on her sentence.

“Simply saying I’m sorry is not enough,” he said.

Sells leaned forward in his chair and, in an abbreviated way, listed out Kenney’s involvement in the case: She made a conscious decision to use Berreth’s phone to mislead her coworkers, family and law enforcement and created the false impression that Berreth was still alive. She went to Nash Ranch with Frazee, where he removed a black tote containing Berreth’s body from the top of a haystack, and drove to his property in Florissant. She was present when he burned the tote. And she took the phone to Idaho before burning it to conceal her actions, he said. All the while, she didn't alert authorities.

“You made an ongoing, multi-day effort to tamper with evidence that spanned hours and hours and hundreds of miles,” he said.

Saying she was sorry wasn’t enough, he said, and she deserved the maximum sentence.

 

[waldojabba]

“What’s next in the Jennifer Farber Dulos case?”​

I will also post this over in Kent’s thread if it has not already been posted. Anxious for a date on this. My sense has always been that he played a bigger role than what he has been charged with.

“The senseless murder of Jennifer Farber was a horrific crime,” Jeffrey Kestenband said in a written statement following the March verdict. “We hope the verdict in the Troconis case provides a measure of relief for Ms. Farber’s family and friends. That verdict has nothing to do with Kent Mawhinney, however. His name was barely mentioned over six weeks of trial, and for good reason – he was not involved in the death of Jennifer Dulos.”

https://www.wtnh.com/dulos/whats-next-in-the-jennifer-farber-dulos-case/

Apologies if this has already been posted and I missed it.
JMO

 

[MollyDDD]

You all are quite welcome. Manage - used to be an office manager/bookkeeper before my retirement! I guess I still want to work a bit! LOL!

Thank you so much.

 

[Niner]

@Niner is a WS "rockstar" (and... she's powered by popcorn, by the way, making her energy all the more amazing)!

Yes! It IS that popcorn that powers me! LOL!

And am guessing nothing new on KM yet?

 

[Southernsnooper]

I do think she knows what happened to Jennifer’s body, but I’m afraid it was completely destroyed in some way, and there is nothing left to recover now. But she’d never admit to that information now because it would make her appear more monstrous than she already is.

100%!

I feel even more sucker punched that the judge brought up mt’s “ irregularities “ because she knew what she was doing…. Yet gave such a light sentence.
Js please do go ahead and appeal. I want another judge and jury to find her guilty again and give her 50+ or better yet life with no parole. That Is what she deserves.I know it says 20 years,(upper limit) so make her SERVE 20 YEARS.

Yes! 20 years should be served at the least! So disappointed!!!!

I’d like some reporter to ask the T clan if MT was innocent, why the lies on the alibi scripts, why did she describe what Fotis was wearing when she said she saw him in the office that morning, why did she answer the alibi call and unlock his phone all morning etc…..

Claiming he is a monster does not explain HER actions that morning, before and after.

MT lied to police and lied to her family.

MT cried because they believed her and she knows her lies brought them to this point. The truth would have set her free but she had already lied and didn’t want to admit to her lies.

Now she can don her jump suit, no stilettos, no hair appointments, no Botox, no Starbucks for a long time. Not long enough.

MT… enjoy living with your lies…. I hope they haunt you while you sleep on the hard mattress.

Moo

 

[Southernsnooper]

@Niner, you are an absolute FORCE OF NATURE and I have no clue how you manage to do what you do so brilliantly, but you create a record that imo is easier to follow AND more complete than the sorry records kept by the Courts and certainly the Press.

So, big thank you for your time and effort as its an amazing contribution to this case and thread!

Yes! Thank you so much! Your records and posts, phenomenal!!!

You too, BJARV!

 

[BJarv]

This is priceless. So it sounds like a plane and flight on which you can smoke. Endlessly. They are indeed getting rare. I imagine you can even smoke in the lavatory. And seatbelts are always optional too it would seem. Thank you for the bit of levity in this so sad and unfortunate case. MOO

@iamnotsherlockH, YES! The goal with this wonderful promotion was to provide a full service experience where the participants would effectively go, "UP IN SMOKE"!

MOO

 

[Silverstorm]

Does anyone know where I can read some of Jennifer’s writings? I have read her articles in the Patch.com, but if there was anything else I would love to read it. CL mentioned something she wrote in the 1990’s in her closing victim statement, for example.

 

[BJarv]

This is true, but our own perception lies to us as well: public perception on crime
Ct is referred to specifically with NH and Maine in one section. Unless each of us personally counts each and every crime in our state it is always possible that errors, by mistake or on purpose, have been made somewhere, but for now I will use the figures which seem consistent from publication to publication.
Does it make this crime any less horrifying? Absolutely not, but the present numbers don't back up the claim overall.

@2manyhorses, I'm glad to debate this topic until the cows come home purely on the basis of the statistical presentation of the CT crime stats but in a separate thread on crime and not on this thread as imo its a distraction to the tragedy of JFD.

Frankly my preference is for the FBI statistics but even the FBI has pages and pages of caveats around their own presentation of macro crime stats for the US. Its a minefield imo and even with extensive background in math and statistics (that I sadly have) it is difficult to analyse. I realise you are well intentioned with your desire to put the 'facts' out on this thread and I truly applaud that goal. Issue though is that these days 'facts' along with the 'truth' arent quite that clear sometimes and sadly imo crime stats fall into this category. But, we can agree to disagree of course if you choose to rely and trust the CT stats but I sadly do not accept those stats or their methodology. C'est la vie!

For what its worth, strongly suggest going back 10 years and then 20 years in CT and seeing how even the CT presented stats stack up to the ones that are touted today by CT GOV. and AG (BTW I'm sending you on a snipe hunt here as this task is made virtually impossible by the 'adjustments' over the years to the underlying statistics so don't waste your time as academics have been trying for years and I don't thing they can agree on anything on the topic - sorry!). Very different story imo and sobering even with the imperfect stats imo. Gun violence and prevalence of guns in everday life in CT is another stat that is tough to track given the number of illegal firearms.

My area of personal (not professional) interest and philanthropy is DV which is how I came to follow the tragedy of the murder of JF by FD/MT/KM and possibly others. DV is grossly underreported but in parts of CT even on a REPORTED basis is up over 40%+. NCPD Police Chief called DV a hidden crime but I don't think its hidden anymore as most people know someone that has been sadly impacted by its horror.

IMO crime statistics are best followed on a micro and not macro level as crime is experienced personally and usually quite close to home.

My HUGE disappointment with Judge Randolph and his oddly stated self described 'job description' in his sentencing IMO sadly sent an absolutely CHILLING message to victims of DV who are working to separate from their abusers or who are working to coparent with a known abuser. @Seattle1 I believe spoke about this issue and I can say from following other DV cases in CT that what Judge Randolph did WAS UNUSUAL. I am not sure why he did it and perhaps he did it for reasons of his perception of it helping to preserve the appeal. But, I've seen Judges let loose on abusers, liars and perpetrators of DV in CT and I've not seen these cases reversed on appeal. Make no mistake, just because MT was the mistress of a DV abuser DO NOT THINK THAT SHE DIDN'T PARTICIPATE in DV activities targeted at JF and her children FOR YEARS! Frankly I've never thought that FD was any different from MT - they are simply two sides of the same coin and it makes me sad that Judge Randolph didn't see this quite as clearly as I do.

The sustained cruelty and frankly evil of MT is not to be underestimated and her lack of remorse (despite her penchant to 'fake cry') is imo suggestive of a psychpath. The somewhat related issue is that I absolutely think that MT family know and understand quite clearly who their daughter/sister/aunt etc. is as a human being as they have watched her life choices closely over many years. How could they not? I think it was this inevitable knowledge by the family about MT that makes the Press coverage of them as a group beyond offensive and the claims of "innocence" simply farcical. At this point I think them all best simply tuned out as imo they should carry a PSA warning as being "dangerous to mental health"! Judge Randolph and all the other Judges erred greatly imo in not imposing a gag order on the MT case YEARS ago as the family and friends commentary from MT has been focused on victim shaming and blaming and has been horrific. Shame on Judge Randolph and the sleeping Victims Advocate for the State of CT for not shutting this down ages ago to protect the Victim/s! Shameful.

I sat in on a group therapy session yesterday for a group of 6 DV survivors, all of whom had children, and all they could talk about was the MT sentencing outcome. All these individuals had followed the JF case from DAY 1 and are local to Stamford, understood well the psychological abuse that JF endured for years until she could safely remove her children and many also understood well physical abuse AS WELL AS the THREAT of physical abuse. As the session went on, under the guidance of a certified social worker who was trying to keep things on track, things unravelled quickly and most in the group simply started to weep about how the MT case ended with a light sentence as a couple knew that they could have been murdered just like FD murdered JF with the assistance of MT and KM.

The sentence imposed on MT scared them and frightened them due to the message it sent in their view to those that directly assist known DV abusers aren't treated the same as the actual murderer (even though in many respects they are worse than the actual murderer). The other line of commentary that was interesting was the responses of people to the body language of Mama Troconis and her daughters to the commentary from the friends and family of JF. Multiple people also brought up the disrespect from MT attorneys who alternately were reading papers, rolling eyes and smirking or staring into space when the Victims presented their testimony. It was shameful and disrespectful in the view of all the conversation participants and didn't go unnoticed.

Most these folks well understand that abusers have their enablers and their assistants that make DV sometimes a multi person family situation. MT was very much viewed as one of these 'enablers' who didn't have to know JF to have had a PROFOUND IMPACT ON JF anyway. Schoenhorn and MT made a big deal about how MT didn't know JF. These women well understood understood that MT didn't have to know JF at all as it wasn't necessary to know her in order to participate in torturing and tormenting her FOR YEARS. I could go on and on about the comments of these brave souls but I won't as its making me cry yet again but I think you get the jist of what I'm trying to describe here. The people in the group all said they cried to hear the children talk about lying to their mother about about MT AND HER DAUGHTER about their presence at 4JX BECAUSE MT COULDN'T BE BOTHERED TO LEAVE AND FOLLOW THE COURT ORDERS.

So many in the group session experienced similar issues but thought MT and FD having their children LIE was quite simply evil. They also all sadly saw the role that MT daughter played in circumventing Family Court rules and thought this was evil as well and they were very disappointed to not see MT daughter stand up and give testimony to her role as an enabler for FD and MT in circumventing Family Court guidelines and they were offended by her chattering on and on about skiing etc. when JF will never be able to go skiing with her 5 children EVER! MT daughter is a victim but in the view of these women she was either a knowing or unknowing ENABLER of FD and MT and this very much bothered them.

MT and Schoenhorn did everything in their power during the trial to NEVER MENTION THE NAME OF JF and they did everything in their power to DEhumanize the victim in the forensic analysis discussion by referring to her DNA via reference to an inanimate object namely the infamous TOOTHBRUSH. Make no mistake that this was all done intentionally and Judge Randolph allowed ALL OF IT. SHAMEFULLY WRONG by Judge Randolph to have allowed this. The Court should have heard the name JF EVERY SINGLE TIME her blood or DNA was mentioned yet instead Judge Randloph thought the proper approach was to refer to her as a TOOTHBRUSH. It was a true WELCOME TO CT COURTROOM MOMENT IMO!

MT was intimately connected to JF and her 5 children and didn't have to know her in order to inflict harm both directly and indirectly. Sadly I don't think Judge Randolph got this message as I frankly don't think he understands much about DV even though he has been on the bench I believe per @Seattle1 for a good long while.

Sad times for victims of DV in CT based on this sentencing result imo. I do wonder if some of the leaders of large DV organisations in CT will speak out? We shall see but I wont hold my breath as its a fragile community at best imo.

MOO

 

[BJarv]

TBH, I had to twice replay the 18 minute summation on Sentencing by Judge Randolph, and I truly believe Friday's Sentencing was according to his interpretation of CT law, and the dispassion, as intended by the legislators-- shocking as it may seem.

Randolph has served as a CT Superior Court Judge since 2006-- so this wasn't his first rodeo.

I don't recall another Sentencing in CT so I have nothing to compare it to.

I'm just pleased that the Federal Court does not share this clinical approach. And I'm equally pleased for the Western States.

For example, Colorado and the sentencing of another murder's girlfriend (Krystal lee Kenney), or step mother, Letecia Stauch, where the Court does not treat Sentencing as a "dispassionate experience."

Sentencing - Letecia Stauch

Before he handed down the sentence, the judge admonished Letecia Stauch for claiming mental illness as the reason for her actions and said that it did a disservice to those who actually suffer from mental illness. "You have shown no remorse during this process," said the judge....

“The facts in this case are the most horrific I have ever seen. Your conduct in this case deserves the maximum punishment that I can impose under Colorado law,” Judge Gregory Werner said. Before the sentencing, the family gave powerful impact statements, asking for the maximum sentence.

Sentencing -- Krystal Kenney

Just before 11 a.m., Judge Scott Sells made the decision on her sentence.

“Simply saying I’m sorry is not enough,” he said.

Sells leaned forward in his chair and, in an abbreviated way, listed out Kenney’s involvement in the case: She made a conscious decision to use Berreth’s phone to mislead her coworkers, family and law enforcement and created the false impression that Berreth was still alive. She went to Nash Ranch with Frazee, where he removed a black tote containing Berreth’s body from the top of a haystack, and drove to his property in Florissant. She was present when he burned the tote. And she took the phone to Idaho before burning it to conceal her actions, he said. All the while, she didn't alert authorities.

“You made an ongoing, multi-day effort to tamper with evidence that spanned hours and hours and hundreds of miles,” he said.

Saying she was sorry wasn’t enough, he said, and she deserved the maximum sentence.

@Seattle1, FWIW, my area of personal Court interest in CT (and NY) is DV and related domestic crime and I can attest to the fact that what we saw from Judge Randolph imo was unusual. I've seen Judge's speak extensively to the actions and choices of convicted Defendants at sentencing so I'm not sure what Judge Randolph might have been thinking about! My guess is that he was attempting to distance himself from his decision and perhaps absolve himself personally of actual responsibility as an individual (as differentiated from his professional role) from what he did at sentencing. Perhaps he was afraid of sentencing appeal for whatever reason as he has run this entire trial from the standpoint of appeal risk imo? Perhaps he was told by the Admin Judge or some other senior Judge what the sentence was to be? We will never know. But, I can honestly say I have never seen a Judge anywhere (Federal or State) backpedal so damn hard to distance themselves from an outcome of a process for which they are professionally responsible. It was stunning and when my anger has passed I will go back and listen yet again. Judge Randolph in a way was saying that it wasn't his job to tip the scales of justice via his sentencing (but then he turns around and slams down his hand on the scale imo via the concurrent instruction). Thing is then OK, BUT THEN LISTEN TO THE JURY AND ACT ACCORDINGLY AND HE DIDN'T EVEN DO THIS FULLY IMO!

I applaud the continued grace and graciousness of CL as she spoke of the impact on the sentence of MT and the Judge's CHOICE (regardless of what HE SAID, it was HIS CHOICE) of concurrently for the sentence on the lesser charges. I disagree with this approach as if these decisions aren't called out they will simply continue and frankly get worse. But, there is a long game afoot in the prosecution of this case and CL is most clearly playing a LONG GAME and not burning bridges.

There were imo many things that Judge Randolph did well to get this long fought trial over the finish line and to the Jury. Won't go into my many issues with him again BUT I think what I found most profoundly wrong about his sentencing CHOICE was that he CHOSE to not give credence that I could see to the very clear message delivered by the JURY in this case. I'd have to go back and listen again but I can only recall one reference by him to the JURY. If I were the JURY in this case I would be enraged about Judge Randolph not taking our sentence and sentencing MT accordingly. Judge Randolph very 'cutely' simply paid administrate 'lip service' imo the hard and challenging work of the Jury by in effect referencing the maximum charge possibilities present in the sentencing BUT THEN in effect nullifying them via judicial discretion.

I don't know whether Judge Randolph is a man of god or not but make no mistake here as imo he imposed GREAT judicial discretion in this tragic case and that his CHOICE is between him and his maker at this point as nothing of what he did imo represents the wishes of the Jury and in this respect I believe him to have been profoundly wrong.

I do hope that the State pursues their right to appeal the dropped charge and SO PERHAPS that might have an impact on the time served as at this point its likely MT could be out many years before the 14.5 yrs as it doesn't appear Judge Randolph even took the time or cared to specify that the 14.5 yrs represented ACTUAL TIME SERVED and as such would not be subject to the imo ridiculous rules of CT in terms of good behaviour.

MOO

 

[Megnut]

Question: why is there EVEN a concept for concurrency?

Let's take the vacated charge. That one makes me mad. The time for arguing and vacating charges was BEFORE the trial began. BEFORE the jury troubled itself to reach a verdict on all of them.

But as to the vacated charge, I think it should have stood. Or the jury should have been instructed, if you find the defendant on this one charge, stop. You don't need to reach a verdict for the other charge (the one he later vacated). Just like Murder and manslaughter. If the jury finds a defendant guilty of murder, they DON'T go on to deliberate a manslaughter charge!

Anyway, why didn't he just give her a concurrent sentences on the duplicate charge?

All other charges, I DO NOT UNDERSTAND why those shouldn't AUTOMATICALLY be consecutive.

If the Judge was worried about appeal to bad. Let the Defense file it.

He did give maximum sentences on each charge, did lay out plainly -- make no mistake, the jury rightly found her guilty -- but IMO he erred greatly, erring on the side of appeal risk and general conservation, in giving her a concurrent sentence.

It's not right.

She earned every last day of 45.

JMO

 

[pernickety]

I think they have evidence and case but won't bother given the MT sentencing outcome.

BUT, maybe in the context of CT and in the view of States Atty the 14.5 yr sentence is a win? I don't see it that way but I'm not them and perhaps in their world this was a WIN?

I think KM should be tried and all the evidence heard so that the JFD case can be put to rest.

We heard Schoenhorn horning yesterday about the bluetooth connection to JFD Suburban in the afternoon. There is an answer for that situation imo that can be found and perhaps KM can answer that question as his timeline is murky AT BEST on the murder date.

Also very much hope to see GF instigate civil action for wrongful death as it appears Judge Randolph HEARD NOTHING from the victims yesterday. It would be a blessing to see profiteering from MT and her entire family as well as Shoenhorn stopped.

I also hope that Attorney Manning takes the time to have a CSP officer gather up ALL COPIES of the discredited HERMAN report from Pattis, Schoenhorn, unnamed attorney on Defence, MT and members of the Troconis family that might have copies and return them all to the care of Judge Heller in Family Court.

MOO

https://www.tiktok.com/video/7374408305298378027

Norm Pattis says a few words on why he's not saying more.

 

[BJarv]

https://www.tiktok.com/video/7374408305298378027

Norm Pattis says a few words on why he's not saying more.

IDK, Seeing the words "Truth & Norm Pattis" in the same headline simply seems odd and frankly offputting imo. But, whatever. Pattis is a creature of opportunity and reinvention both of facts and history as we have all sadly had to bear witness to for years.

Listening to his chatter in the TikTok really is a sheer entertainment as who that has watched this CLOWN stomp through the Courts of CT even FOR A SECOND thinks that he would respect a Probate Court or the Atty's handling FD estate etc.? HA!

Nah. Pattis has zero respect for the Courts of CT based on how he has chosen to behave imo over the course of his very LONG career. JMO but I think retirement would be a good course of action for him now. His firm seems to have imploded and it seems that he might just have a bunch of paralegals and one other atty? IDK, I find him a miscreant and frankly a disgusting representation (although quite an accurate representation imo) of the composition of the CT BAR. If there was some way to exploit FD and JF to make money then IMO Pattis could find it. Curious though about how he never talks about the case evidence he withheld and where precisely it came from and how exactly he gave it to Atty Bowman and how it ended up with another miscreant Schoenhorn? Pattis has imo never been one to let facts stand in the way of his speech and representation of his client. Everytime you think the already ground level bar of ethics and conduct has been reached you then see Pattis with his shovel to simply go below ground level with his conduct. Victim shaming and blaming is just a standard tactic for Pattis and if I had to make him a tee shirt I think I would put on it, "ALWAYS GO LOW or LOWER"! Just how he rolls.

But, my recollection also is that GF and Atty Weinstein sued Pattis I believe about his large unreturned retainer from FD and this effectively precluded him from speaking about the case and JF but my recollection could be fuzzy.

The thing is that Pattis could simply write one of his lurid 'fiction' books and pour all he claims to know about the case and I truly wonder how much could be done to him. Probably not much money in this and as we saw in his workings with FD, Atty Pattis is all about the benjamins $$$$.

MOO (beyond angry and simply bored with this individual)

 

[BJarv]

Question: why is there EVEN a concept for concurrency?

Let's take the vacated charge. That one makes me mad. The time for arguing and vacating charges was BEFORE the trial began. BEFORE the jury troubled itself to reach a verdict on all of them.

But as to the vacated charge, I think it should have stood. Or the jury should have been instructed, if you find the defendant on this one charge, stop. You don't need to reach a verdict for the other charge (the one he later vacated). Just like Murder and manslaughter. If the jury finds a defendant guilty of murder, they DON'T go on to deliberate a manslaughter charge!

Anyway, why didn't he just give her a concurrent sentences on the duplicate charge?

All other charges, I DO NOT UNDERSTAND why those shouldn't AUTOMATICALLY be consecutive.

If the Judge was worried about appeal to bad. Let the Defense file it.

He did give maximum sentences on each charge, did lay out plainly -- make no mistake, the jury rightly found her guilty -- but IMO he erred greatly, erring on the side of appeal risk and general conservation, in giving her a concurrent sentence.

It's not right.

She earned every last day of 45.

JMO

I'm sadly with you on all of this.

Will see if I can corner some folks (will send up a flare for the sadly long missing @lucegirl too) that might have some insight on what appears to be a GIANT SNAFU as it relates to the MT charges as I agree that this is a shocking turn of events. What is also sad is that I do wonder if the appeal risk was as great as Judge Randolph believed on the dropped charge or did he simply take the easy way out?

Simply boggles the mind that the 3 most senior Judges in Stamford have been on this case for 5 years and that this charge related issue comes up at SENTENCING?

I hope the State takes a GOOD HARD LOOK at this entire dropped charge issue as I do wonder if it as an issue itself could be grounds for them to Claim mistrial and retry MT? If I were the State and States Attorney I WOULD BE INCANDESCENT WITH RAGE that the Judge AFTER 5 years removes a charge that the Jury has ruled on AT TRIAL as I think the issue should have been decided by the Appellate Judges and/or CT Supreme Court OR HIGHER!

Frankly it could also give the State the opportunity to sharpen their pencils on the charges chosen to be filed and perhaps EXPAND the LIST! More crimes were committed by FD beyond the ones they were charged with and so far as I'm concerned the State should GO TO TOWN on the MT involvement in the crime. Go back on the issue of MT Phone data and use it to expand broadly the charges imo! Go back on the excluded evidence in NC and the excluded MT trip to Probate Court and MT trip to Farmington PD to file a protective order and on and on.

Simply enraging.

MOO

 

[pernickety]

But, my recollection also is that GF and Atty Weinstein sued Pattis I believe about his large unreturned retainer from FD and this effectively precluded him from speaking about the case and JF but my recollection could be fuzzy.

AIR, it was all done through the Probate Court, with administrator Christopher Hug negotiating between Weinstein and Pattis, because FD owed the Hilliard Farber estate a judgment from the civil case-- NP had to pay back part of his retainer fee from FD to satisfy part of that judgment.