Silver Alert CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 #15 *ARRESTS*

[oceancalling]

This is how laymen feel things should be. But that's just not how it works. And it can't. We have due process in this country and unfortunately it can take awhile.

Both parties in this case litigated aggressively filing hundreds of motions. I assume FD was the bad actor and many of her motions were responsive to his behavior but it can be difficult for the court to know who is right in a he said she said case. Until evidence starts to come out.

Again, it appears that custody took center stage, as it should have, and so many of the financial issues and discovery problems were likely delayed while they sorted out custody first.

As I have said repeatedly, I see not one thing that the judge has done wrong in this case or could have done better. It's easy to armchair quarterback.

There is a process to discovery. And it's not simple. Someone might respond that they don't have further documents or don't have access. So the party requesting the information files a motion to compel believing they are lying. But they have to have proof that the other party has more information or access.

Sometimes they find that proof via other means like subpoenas. It by examining the documents that have been produced. Then they can seek more sanctions or bring it back to the attention of the court.

Also, documents aren't produced at court in the typical discovery process. (Except via certain subpoenas). They're served on each other prior to hearings or trial. Or they're produced outside of court in depositions.

Finally, I have no dog in this particular fight. I'm a family law attorney who often has to fight against the limitations of the system and deal with systemic inequities or occasionally judges who are unjust. (Only a couple times in my career for the latter).

I am well aware of how the system works and how it can be abused by wealthy and aggressive litigants.

I don't know Judge Heller from Adam. But I am able to review some of the process these people have gone through and the records or at least lists of records available. And determine the judge seemed to have adequate control. She did what she could do. She issued rulings with serious consequences for FD and so far there is not one hint that she didn't know what she was doing or could have done something better.

The idea that discovery issues are going to come before the judge in the manner that you suggested or that she would be able to simply order him to go home or to his office with a bailiff and bring back documents before she stands and leaves the courtroom with flourish, betrays a bit of a lack of understanding of the process, the court calendar and system or how documents are kept. For example, some of the documents may be bank records for an account a party failed to disclose. Even if the other side discovered evidence of the existence of that account, the account holder probably can't just dash back to his office and obtain records. Many people don't keep hard copies and he might have to make a request from the bank or even subpoena statements himself depending on how far back the request goes, because banks don't typically keep records easily accessible to clients past a year or so.

I'm not sure why I keep seeing so many posters intent on casting blame against the family law judge in this case for various aspects of it or criticizing her in various ways for her handling of it. All I have seen have been well thought out and serious decisions on her part that evidence an unwillingness to be influenced by money or status and that are child-centered.

Judges are not gods. And this is not a Judge Judy show. It's a complex and often quite frustrating process.

Maybe it's just our human nature to try to find ways such tragedies could be prevented in the first place? We all do that I guess in various ways.

I agree. High conflict, high income divorces where children and lots of assets at issue are simply horses of a different color. Even in routine dissolutions, though, there can be a whole lot of back and forth between the parties. When kids, money, and matters of the heart are involved, some people feel the need to fight about every single thing, including who gets the dog's ashes.

Judges are called upon to make decisions based on the information before them. It seems this judge's assessment of FD was on point. After all, she is the one who restricted his contact with the children in the first place.

 

[oceancalling]

He demonstrated that he was unable to put the needs of his children above his own, he was alienating them and making them lie for him, which is emotional abuse, he was violating court orders issued to protect the kids, like not having them around his mistress and he lied to the court.

All of this likely allowed the judge to reexamine past allegations and provided more credibility to those allegations when they were just he said she said allegations at the outset.

Those included that he was abusive to the kids forcing them to practice in grueling trianing sessions that lasted 8-10 hours, in order to make them little stars, that his kids were scared of him, that he had one drive a car on the open highway, that he dictated to his wife where she would live and when with the kids post-separation and that she and the kids would have to share their home with MT and MT's daughter and that he could access her mother's home whenever he wanted and that he chased her and threatened to kill his wife, among others.

Earlier we had posts blaming the family law judge for not issuing harsh enough orders against FD, essentially allowing him to murder her.

Now it's that her orders were too harsh prompting him to lose it and kill his wife.

Poor judge can't win.

IMO the orders were appropriate and well reasoned under the circumstances and everything the judge has done has been centered on the best interests of the kids.

To me it's clear this man murdered his wife. He's a murderer. And it was calculated, cold and evilly planned well in advance, IMO. He had no legitimate reason to be at her house the day she disappeared. I don't think they were even supposed to communicate directly.

The only ones to blame for this are the ones who murdered Jennifer and any accomplices. Not the family court.

 

[oceancalling]

He demonstrated that he was unable to put the needs of his children above his own, he was alienating them and making them lie for him, which is emotional abuse, he was violating court orders issued to protect the kids, like not having them around his mistress and he lied to the court.

All of this likely allowed the judge to reexamine past allegations and provided more credibility to those allegations when they were just he said she said allegations at the outset.

Those included that he was abusive to the kids forcing them to practice in grueling trianing sessions that lasted 8-10 hours, in order to make them little stars, that his kids were scared of him, that he had one drive a car on the open highway, that he dictated to his wife where she would live and when with the kids post-separation and that she and the kids would have to share their home with MT and MT's daughter and that he could access her mother's home whenever he wanted and that he chased her and threatened to kill his wife, among others.

Earlier we had posts blaming the family law judge for not issuing harsh enough orders against FD, essentially allowing him to murder her.

Now it's that her orders were too harsh prompting him to lose it and kill his wife.

Poor judge can't win
IMO the orders were appropriate and well reasoned under the circumstances and everything the judge has done has been centered on the best interests of the kids.

To me it's clear this man murdered his wife. He's a murderer. And it was calculated, cold and evilly planned well in advance, IMO. He had no legitimate reason to be at her house the day she disappeared. I don't think they were even supposed to communicate directly.

The only ones to blame for this are the ones who murdered Jennifer and any accomplices. Not the family court.

 

[gitana1]

Looking ahead to a jury situation concerns me deeply as well. This is probably due to my overall disappointment in the malleability of certain people. NP is certainly working the crowd already. Reasonable doubt depends to some extent on how reasonable the members of the jury are, and personalities worry me.

IMO, juries want tidy, concrete things like a body. If there ends up not being a body in this case, I think we should buckle our seat belts. The defense has already proved that they can and will play the character assassination game. If the jury comprises some members that have a chip on their shoulders about wealthy people (especially if moved to a lower-income area), things could be bad for the prosecution. Yes, FD lives the high life, but only because of mommy-in-law. It's scary what some people can relate to and sympathize with.

MOO. For what it's worth ...

Oh. You're making me cringe. I forgot that we don't even have a body!!!

 

[gitana1]

I agree. High conflict, high income divorces where children and lots of assets at issue are simply horses of a different color. Even in routine dissolutions, though, there can be a whole lot of back and forth between the parties. When kids, money, and matters of the heart are involved, some people feel the need to fight about every single thing, including who gets the dog's ashes.

Judges are called upon to make decisions based on the information before them. It seems this judge's assessment of FD was on point. After all, she is the one who restricted his contact with the children in the first place.

Yes. Exactly.

 

[sleuth66]

Looking ahead to a jury situation concerns me deeply as well. This is probably due to my overall disappointment in the malleability of certain people. NP is certainly working the crowd already. Reasonable doubt depends to some extent on how reasonable the members of the jury are, and personalities worry me.

IMO, juries want tidy, concrete things like a body. If there ends up not being a body in this case, I think we should buckle our seat belts. The defense has already proved that they can and will play the character assassination game. If the jury comprises some members that have a chip on their shoulders about wealthy people (especially if moved to a lower-income area), things could be bad for the prosecution. Yes, FD lives the high life, but only because of mommy-in-law. It's scary what some people can relate to and sympathize with.

MOO. For what it's worth ...

Another vote of concern for the jury situation especially without a body. It’s not just lower income people with chips on their shoulders, but the JD position can be a trigger even for those in her own community, who feel they “worked to get where they are” etc. Also people who have chips about the “government”- I know people who would be in the current jury pool who say, yes, it’s obvious he did it, but will the state be able to prove it? I can already hear it, “the state didn’t do their job, they didn’t prove it beyond a reasonable doubt”.
This is why it’s taking so long. Heller’s recent ruling on the GF custody should be a lesson to us in the payoff of patience- it has to be solid and watertight. Because even then NP will go on attack and appeal, but the satisfaction of having them cover as many bases as possible is worth waiting for.
PS: I think the story is likely to be even more horrifying than we suspect. So hopefully there will be some pieces at least that hit a nerve, and enough of those laid out clearly....one can hope.

 

[MemPat]

Deleted. Bad idea for a question. Apologies.

We've all had a few, MTG!

 

[MemPat]

I hope he wouldn’t hurt them but I can see him doing it if he finds out no money is coming to him and blaming it on GF and the court and everybody he thinks is exposing him for what he really is. It will never be his fault in his mind but people getting what they deserve in his very twisted mind. He is a very scary person and never to be trusted. (MOO)

Unless FD just flips out altogether I don't think he would kill the children, therefore cutting off his meal ticket for life.

If he ever lucked out and got a pardon (stranger things have happened in this day and age) or the conviction overturned, he'd have to go to work and that's not happening!

 

[MemPat]

JUST IN: Attorney Norm Pattis has released a statement in response to Judge Heller’s decision yesterday.

“Fotis misses his children deeply. The irresponsible manner in which the state has proceeded against him is costing his children the chance for a real relationship with a man who loves them deeply. This is a travesty of justice. We are evaluating his appellate options.”

Marissa Alter

Word Salad with Spoiled Lawyer Sauce. Yawn.

 

[Bulldogs2]

I agree. I think he will try to run. That’s why he wants the monitor moved to his wrist so he can take it off easier. Thinking....what can a person do to make his wrists swell? Have the monitor put on the wrist, leaves monitoring center, goes home, stops doing whatever he was doing to make the wrists swell, the swelling goes down, slips monitor off and leaves. Like I said before, put it on a cat or dog in the house so it looks like he is moving around in the house OR take it off as he ‘goes to bed’, leaves it on the bed as ‘if sleeping’ and leaves. He could get a 6 hour head start. Bet he has fake passport already waiting somewhere.

Taking the kids would be a burden, slow him down, and he could not hide as easy. Also, 5 kids would cost him more when escaping.

This case is so bizarre anything can happen.

Like WS has said in the past, Follow the Money and gitana1 and others mentioned above....money.

I think he’s going to run to Greece

 

[Bulldogs2]

Word Salad with Lawyer Sauce. Yawn.

A travesty are you kidding me? What he did to the whole Farber family is a travesty

 

[Bulldogs2]

This article gives some insight into how severe financial losses and divorce can lead to suicide in narcissistic individuals like FD. Based on quote below, it does seem like they should be watching FD carefully, at this point suicide (which might also involve harming the children)might be the only way left for him to “win at all costs”.
If you read it through, you’ll see the “Gone Boy” theme- no coincidence that FD and NP dreamed up their revenge suicide explanation that to most of us seems wacko but to people with narcisstic pathology seems logical.

https://depts.washington.edu/psyclerk/secure/articles/eleven-deaths-narcissist.pdf

”Not every patient who experiences narcissistic destabilization becomes suicidal, however, and in such circumstances, the only possible course for a prudent clinician is to be aware that a suicide crisis may arise and to remain in close contact with the patient until there is evidence of restored emotional equilibrium—and to act if suicide becomes probable on clinical grounds.

After a few months, Mrs. K obtained a restraining order against her husband. Mr. K immediately went home to retrieve his personal belongings and impulsively decided to stage a fake suicide attempt to evoke his wife’s remorse.

Pathological narcissism, that is, a personality structure that unreliably protects self–esteem and internal control, has been connected to suicide (Apter, Bleich, et al., 1993; Arie, Haruvi–Catalan, & Apter, 2005; King & Apter, 1997). People with such functioning can balance suicide–related self–es teem-preserving grandiose ideas, on the one hand, and the actual suicidal behavior and its real self–destructive or lethal consequences on the other (Ronningstam & Maltsberger, 1998). Intolerable affects, aroused by self–esteem-threatening life events such as loss of vital support, aspirations, and perfectionist ideals, can be denied and split off (Kernberg, 1992; Krystal, 1998; Schore 1994). In such cases, suicide may preserve a sense of internal mastery and control, or it may shield against anticipated narcissistic threats and injuries, as the motto “death before dishonor” implies (Ronningstam & Maltsberger, 1998). Sui cide-related aspects of morbid self–esteem regulation make narcissistic individuals reluctant (or even unable) to convey their suicidal intent to a clinician.”

That’s right. Look what’s happening g with that guy who just got caught again with the child porography. I don’t know the name but he’s was trying to off himself in jail- or making it look that way .

 

[Bulldogs2]

Agree.

No Case Norm is the gift that just keeps on giving in this tragic case. Oh, the irony of the phrase, "travesty of justice". Simply no words. What about justice in this case for the missing JD and what about justice for her 5 motherless children?

The irony of No Case Norm saying that his client FD 'loves his children' is also something that isn't lost on those following here on WS IMO. The court record of FD actions and reactions in Family Court are so well documented (painfully so at times IMO) that I think a reasonable person reading the file would have no issue seriously questioning whether FD gave one ounce of caring about his 5 children IMO for the duration of their short lives. I am the last person in the world to defend Judge Heller but I have to say that she (or her clerk) did a very solid job of laying out the case against FD in their decision yesterday IMO.

How can No Case Norm make a case for a caring and loving parent relationship being present with a court file that reads the way it does is simply beyond my capability to understand!

The family court file reads that JD effectively functioned as a single parent for the duration of her marriage and most definately as a single parent post move to NC IMO. Not only was JD primary caregiver but SHE AND HER MOTHER SUPPORTED THE ENTIRE FAMILY.

The fact that Judge Heller included the reference in the decision yesterday to FD using his children to lie on his behalf along with the fact that FD himself showed no remorse when caught lying to family court are both facts that I personally think should damn his chances to ever regaining custody or even visitation of his children to say nothing of the absense of any financial responsibility for providing for the family.

So if No Case Norm wants to seek review of the Judge Heller decision then by all means proceed as no doubt further information regarding his client will become public and I'm scratching my head about how that will play out to his benefit in the criminal case too?

MOO

I would be very surprised if he ever came close to getting the children back.

 

[andalso]

Re: Jury's: I have personally recently postponed 2 jury requests. Why? Because I simply and legitamitely do not have the availability they need. I very much want to serve! I have made arrangement with my county to be available in September.
I do not live in CT.

Who knows if I will be/would have been selected.

It makes me wonder, who are those that are available to serve and is that fact that they are available in and of itself lending to a certain type of juror? (i.e. Casey Anthony jurors)

I mean no offense to those who have served. I just wonder if juror availability plays a role in what type of people will be more likely to be swayed by 'reasonable doubt'?

Just an interesting thought.

 

[andalso]

JUST IN: Attorney Norm Pattis has released a statement in response to Judge Heller’s decision yesterday.

“Fotis misses his children deeply. The irresponsible manner in which the state has proceeded against him is costing his children the chance for a real relationship with a man who loves them deeply. This is a travesty of justice. We are evaluating his appellate options.”

Marissa Alter

I am going to re-write this statement!

Fotis misses his children deeply. The irresponsible manner in which the state has proceeded against him is costing his children the chance for a real relationship with a man who loves them deeply. This is a travesty of justice. We are evaluating his appellate options

My words below.

Fotis misses his children's trust fund deeply. The irresponsible manner in which he killed Jennifer is costing his children the chance for a real relationship with their mother, who loved them deeply. This is a travesty of justice. We are evaluating how the public responds to our motions.

 

[HopeForTheBest]

Another vote of concern for the jury situation especially without a body. It’s not just lower income people with chips on their shoulders, but the JD position can be a trigger even for those in her own community, who feel they “worked to get where they are” etc. Also people who have chips about the “government”- I know people who would be in the current jury pool who say, yes, it’s obvious he did it, but will the state be able to prove it? I can already hear it, “the state didn’t do their job, they didn’t prove it beyond a reasonable doubt”.
This is why it’s taking so long. Heller’s recent ruling on the GF custody should be a lesson to us in the payoff of patience- it has to be solid and watertight. Because even then NP will go on attack and appeal, but the satisfaction of having them cover as many bases as possible is worth waiting for.
PS: I think the story is likely to be even more horrifying than we suspect. So hopefully there will be some pieces at least that hit a nerve, and enough of those laid out clearly....one can hope.

I will hope and hope again that the jury will see that although JD was born to money, she herself seemed to be hands-on such as with the kids and volunteering at their schools when she had enough money to pay someone else to do it all—she never would have had to take the kids to school herself, for example. Repeatedly, we have heard people talk about her giving spirit and the fact that she was kind and unassuming, and she does not seem to have been a jet setter, as people call it. FD, on the other hand, seems to have been all about himself—and that’s based on court information, his own posts and words, and surely by the financial details. He wasn’t born to money like JD was—but he acted as though he were in boastful manners and, based on the information we’ve read and seen ourselves, lived off money from his wife and her parents—and was not helping JD and the kids in day-to-day activities. I don’t care at all (not that it’s my business regardless) if someone marries someone with money and benefits from that as part of the relationship but it seems here like JD and her family did all the giving and FD did all the taking with no giving. Perhaps I can explain it best this way: I am not at all rich, my house is not at all a mansion, and I am not a fashion plate but if JD came to my house, I could see her sitting down at the table, asking about my kids, and being gracious even if one of my rescued pets insisted on being petted. I cannot see FD even getting out of the car if he happened this way; it would be beneath him especially because there is nothing that I could do to benefit him. MOO. JD, it seems, is about, “What can I do to help?” while FD, it seems, is solely about, “What’s in it for me?” Surely, surely, the jurors will see those differences and the effects they may have had on this situation. MOO.

 

[HopeForTheBest]

I wish the court would issue a gag order.

ETA I should have read ahead!!

It’s not the same but I myself gag over the things NP and FD say.

 

[andalso]

It’s not the same but I myself gag over the things NP and FD say.

Lol!
Same!

 

[Bulldogs2]

Very good analysis. Could anyone please refresh my memory about why such harsh conditions were imposed on FD’s visitation with his children... or where I can find that information. Was FD physically abusive to them? If so, it must have been extreme. (all I can remember is he made them water-ski but that surely is not the reason) It troubles me to think that visitation with his children was so harsh/unbearable that it would send FD over the edge and kill their mother. I’m not saying that wasn't one of the reasons. I’d just like to know exactly what made the family court judge decide he’s a menace to his children. TIA

Perhaps gitana1 can weigh in here but myself being in the psychiatric field can give some insight . I’m pretty sure that court documents during the divorce say that FD was caught having MT around the children prior to judge Heller instituting the supervised visitation . FD had regular joint custody of the children for almost the entire time of the divorce action except the last 2 months . JD and her attys we’re trying to get that changed throughout, but in CT courts usually want joint custody. I think it was stipulated that he couldn’t have MT around the children and he ignored that and then tried to have the children lie for him to say MT wasn’t around. I think that coupled with FD blatant disregard for court rules throughout that year and 7 months of divorce proceedings including not producing financial info, not paying health insurance , child support etc, coupled with the over 300 motions they filed against one another with JD stating that she was afraid , verbal and emotional abuse, harsh competitiveness with the children- I think the judge was able to get a more clear picture of FD during that time but the blatant disregard for honoring court rules likely pushed it over the edge so she ordered the supervised visits . I think I also read somewhere that one child text JD that he didn’t want to participate in the waterski activity and that FD was really pushing . I think I read the child had a very difficult time and may have made some self harm comments . Somewhere in this last order I think judge Heller insinuated this. Also we are not privy to the psychological evals but there also may have been something in the children’s evals or they may have said something to their therapist . All in all combined I think it took judge Heller awhile to come to the conclusion that DV is going on and situation is emotionally harming the children . In CT, the court tries very hard to have joint custody and it usually takes something big to order supervision . I personally have done supervised visitations with families and it usually means that a parent (s) have a significant psychological impediment that they are not capable of being alone with the children so as they may cause psychological harm to the children. I hope that’s as clear as mud.

 

[andalso]

Oh. You're making me cringe. I forgot that we don't even have a body!!!

If you are worried then I am worried!
(Should I be worried?)

ETA: I know the answer is yes until we have charges, a jury and a guilty verdict!