GUILTY CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, deceased/not found, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 *ARRESTS* #71

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

BJarv said:
For some reading amusement with a big dose of pure disgust, here is an article in El Pais with Mama Troconis 'from Ohio'.....

And let the attempt to revise history via the MSM commence imo:

english.elpais.com

Michelle Troconis, ‘the most hated woman’ in the United States

The American of Venezuelan origin was sentenced to 20 years in prison for conspiring with her boyfriend to kill his ex-wife. In the end, he committed suicide before the trial and she was the only one convicted in the case. Her family is now fighting a legal battle to reverse the sentence and...
english.elpais.com english.elpais.com

This comment was classic and it played equally poorly imo in the spanish version:

“Michelle has been unfairly blamed… she’s received all the blame in the absence of Fotis, who’s the one who’s really responsible for [all of this],” says Marisela, in a conversation with EL PAÍS via video call from Ohio. “We’re disenchanted with the American judicial system, even though we’re all American citizens and feel part of this country. The prosecutors weren’t interested in knowing the truth. Instead, they found the weakest person to be able to get [a speedy trial], since Fotis killed himself. He didn’t want to accept the trial that he would have had to endure.” The family believes that Michelle — because she’s Latina — was “the scapegoat of the judicial system.” BBM

It gets better:

"Michelle is currently incarcerated at York Correctional Institution, in southeastern Connecticut. There, “she’s studying and reading a lot, feeding her soul so as not to collapse,” says another of her sisters, Daniela Troconis, with a broken voice, via a video call from Florida. “She’s a strong woman, but this is making her very anxious. Imagine: she lost trust in people, she doesn’t trust anyone. And that’s to be expected. But I believe that the same support that she has from us, her family, is helping her live day-to-day,” Daniela adds. “Besides, she has the truth on her side. I think that helps her get through it.”

Now you will need a shot of something strong imo:

"In love and without any suspicion that she was being manipulated — as alleged by her family — Michelle decided to move to Connecticut to live with Fotis in September 2017. Before doing so, Michelle consulted with her entire family.”When she decided to move, she talked about it with the family. [Fotis] told us that he was separated, in an amicable divorce,” Daniela recalls. “We all asked him questions — it’s obvious that we would ask — and those were his answers. And he said that Jennifer was okay with him [moving out to live with Michelle]. He even showed us text messages he had with Jennifer, so it all seemed to be true. We all approved,” she sighs. “But that was my sister’s mistake.”
Time for a deep breath and a good long laugh imo:

"The Troconis family insists that they were unaware of these details of the divorce battle between Jennifer and Fotis, until everything came to light during the trial. “[When we met Fotis], we accepted what he told us. He said that he was going through a divorce and that his wife, Jennifer, was okay with each of them moving on with life and with Michelle going to live in Connecticut,” Marisela recounts. Daniela adds that her family and Fotis’ celebrated Christmas of 2017 together in Connecticut. “We spent some very nice days with the children... we lived with Fotis for 10 days and everything was normal. He seemed to be a father who was dedicated to his children, kind and patient,” she recalls".
“When you’re in a relationship with a narcissist who has created a fantasy for you, a different, dolled up world — who tells you that ‘this is an amicable divorce, Jennifer agrees with this relationship, don’t worry’ — [this is someone who’s] disguising reality. Later on, when a trial occurs and they’re revealed to the other person…” Marisela trails off. “It was like a bucket of cold water fell on all of us. They removed our blindfolds at the trial,” she shudders.."

Just keeps getting better and better imo:

"The Troconis family is convinced that, if Michelle weren’t Latina, the trial would have progressed very differently. “They manipulated and fabricated stories to incriminate Michelle, the easiest target, the Latina,” Marisela decries. “The Latina is the perfect scapegoat to accuse, [so that the police can] close the chapter and make the victim’s family happy, because they found someone to blame. But what about Michelle and her family? This is the biggest disgrace.”

“To this day, Michelle feels cheated, used and disenchanted. And you start beating your head: how is it possible that I didn’t realize this before? But you can’t tell if the person is wearing a disguise,” Marisela admits. “It’s difficult to digest. Because everything we’re experiencing is because of Fotis Dulos. In other words, he left behind orphaned children [and] he did what he must have done to his ex-wife… and he ruined the life of the person that he supposedly loved — Michelle — and he destroyed her family, too.”


Simply cannot make this stuff up!

MOOView attachment 518741
Click to expand...
Cry me a river.
MOO
 
Megnut said:
The cost/compensation at the barbed wire Ritz works out to about $300 a day....

Michi must not be very good at the maths.

She could have stayed at a REAL hotel leaving FD to abide by the terms of his divorce mandate.

Couple of spa days, a mini fridge, maybe a luxurious bathrobe...

And JFd could still be ALIVE. If greed, entitlement and impatience hadn't gotten the best/worst of Michi.

Amicable divorce? She had NO IDEA? REALLY? Wasn't whining to every ear about her torture? About the INJUSTICE of having to move out of JENNIFER'S BED from time to time? Yeah no. They're STILL condemning JFd and her children. Where's the enlightenment? Where's the shock, the transparency, where are the fried blinders? They knew.

They knew absolutely.

JFd had a lock on the money MT wanted.

MT is why JFd is dead.

JMO
Click to expand...
Not to mention she was privy to the custody reports of which she tried desperately to get on the record.
 
Megnut said:
Generic question about appeals....

In a criminal trial, as we watched here, the State lays out their case with great care. Chronology, chain of custody, etc. The officer who responded, the swab, the analyst. We see the evidence bag, we see the analyst who sealed it unsealed it....

Then we watch the contents move about the room ....

But in a fresh trial, that seal has already been broken, multiple hands have touched it -- so, is THAT what a new jury gets to see? Open, torn, handled evidence? How weird would that be?

I don't think I've ever witnesses an appeal, does a jury know a case has been tried, a verdict reached, but overturned?

How is it not messy as heck?

In THIS case, may her appeal fall flat.

JMO
Click to expand...
I believe that the Justices on the Appellate Court decide the case. Sometimes like what just happened with the MT appeal of the Judge Randolph 'no bail pending appeal' ruling, the two sides submit their motions and the Justices decide 'on the papers' meaning without oral argument (Horn per usual wanted oral arguments but State did not and Court sided with State). Because MT is bringing the request for appeal then the burden is on her to present the record and outline the disputed issues: "The party making the claim on appeal bears the burden of presenting an adequate recordfor review. P.B. § 61-10".

My understanding of the Appellate world in State Court is limited to situations where there were oral arguments (with a time limit usually) and then the Justices decide and this decision process can take a good amt of time and isn't immediate. My recollection is that one case I saw was that the oral arguments were around 20 min and there were questions and some back and forth with the Justices and then it was over and then 6 months later there was an opinion on the matter.

CT Bar website had a short document outlining the process and its attached below. I love the way the document ended its decision tree analysis: "If you reach the end of the decision tree and the answer is no, it is time to give up". My strong suspicion is that the Duchess of York appeal will end the decision tree with a 'no' but its just a guess on my part as a non atty. If you want a good laugh then take a gander at the first couple of pages of the below document regarding, "Lawyers’ Principles of Professionalism"! Will have to send a copy of the list to Horn and Mini Horn as their compliance ratio "ain't that good" so perhaps they both need a list to remind them of proper behavior in Court!

MOO

 
Megnut said:
Generic question about appeals....

In a criminal trial, as we watched here, the State lays out their case with great care. Chronology, chain of custody, etc. The officer who responded, the swab, the analyst. We see the evidence bag, we see the analyst who sealed it unsealed it....

Then we watch the contents move about the room ....

But in a fresh trial, that seal has already been broken, multiple hands have touched it -- so, is THAT what a new jury gets to see? Open, torn, handled evidence? How weird would that be?

I don't think I've ever witnesses an appeal, does a jury know a case has been tried, a verdict reached, but overturned?

How is it not messy as heck?

In THIS case, may her appeal fall flat.

JMO
Click to expand...

I've experienced a few retrials following either a mistrial, and/or following the appellate over-turning a verdict-- thereby granting the defendant a new trial.

The most recent retrial I recall was in April 2023 for David Temple, Katy, Texas -- twice convicted of murdering his pregnant wife Belinda, on January 11, 1999.

In either a mistrial being re-prosecuted or a new trial per the decision of the appellate, the retrial of the case is not an extension of the first trial but a NEW TRIAL, period.

And no matter the number of retrials, a criminal case still involves very high stakes-- the defendant has a right to a fair trial under the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution. This civil right also requires the prosecution to preserve certain evidence obtained during the investigation of the case. It's also why trial watches will see witnesses at trial put on protective gear before touching the subject evidence collected during an investigation (i.e., bagged and sealed for trial) as part of the state's continuous duty to preserve the evidence. Generally, duplicate pieces of evidence will also be packaged and sealed separately,-- as spares, if you will.

Relative to whether or not a 2nd jury is made aware if a case has been prosecuted before, generally, Statute prohibits allowing a jury to hear any reference to a previous verdict in a new trial. For example, CA Section 1180 states that during a retrial, “the former verdict or finding cannot be used or referred to, either in evidence or in argument, or be pleaded in bar of any conviction which might have been had under the accusatory pleading.”

However, that's not to say there have not been rare exceptions or challenges to the Statute where the Supreme Court has ruled that proof of acquittal should be admitted, “to weaken and rebut the prosecution’s evidence of the other crime.” [1967 California Supreme Court ruling in People v. Griffin].

Courthouse News Service
 
BJarv said:
Looks like it...or maybe she filed on behalf of Office and someone else will take it on? I guess we will have to stay tuned....she is out of Hartford and I do wonder if Horn knows her as its a small world up there in Hartford legal circles....MOO

View attachment 518769
Click to expand...

IME, given the notice of a newly convicted defendant's intent to file an appeal is very time sensitive, it's not unusual for the defendant's trial counsel to file the notice, often times as their final act before formally withdrawing from the case.

I'm not aware one way or the other if either of MT's trial attorneys have formally withdrawn from her case, and just saying that it should not be a surprise if JB filed the notice and turns out not to be MT's appellate lawyer. MOO

ETA: After reviewing the linked document, it appears to me that JLS timely filed MT's notice of intent to appeal, Appeal Docket number A.P. 47734 assigned, and the quoted document is in fact the Public Defender's Notice of Appearance dated 7/17/24-- the date the Court granted MT appointed a PD. It appears that Bourn is indeed MT's public defender. I earlier mistook the partial document and her name as the female attorney at the defense table with JLS. Sorry about that...
 
Last edited:
BJarv said:
Looks like it...or maybe she filed on behalf of Office and someone else will take it on? I guess we will have to stay tuned....she is out of Hartford and I do wonder if Horn knows her as its a small world up there in Hartford legal circles....MOO
Click to expand...
They have worked on several appeals together.

Jon L. Schoenhorn, Hartford, with whom was Jennifer L. Bourn, for the appellant (defendant).


 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 153 more.
Total: 2,005 (members: 154, guests: 1,851)

Online statistics

Members online
154
Guests online
1,851
Total visitors
2,005
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
600,186
Messages
18,104,994
Members
230,991
Latest member
lyle.person1
Back
Top