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

[HopeForTheBest]

No offense meant, but that would mean you wouldn't be a good defense lawyer. A defense lawyer shouldn't him/her self look at the case from the perspective of guilt or innocence. That is for the jury to decide. The lawyer's job is to present the case in the most favorable light for his client. If the jury declares his client innocent, he did his job. If the jury declares him guilty, he also did his job. I don't fault NP. It's not up to him to declare guilt or innocence. It does bother me a little to see this site disparage him so. I not a fan of lawyers, yet in no way do I feel he's a problem here. If FD is guilty, and the prosecutors are competent, he'll be convicted regardless of NP.

So stop ragging on NP. If it were you or me (and we were innocent, as of course we would be), we would want a lawyer who did everything possible to put us in a good light. Yeah NP. If I ever get arrested for something I didn't do in CT, maybe I'll give him a call.

Naturally, you should think however you want. While I hope I never am accused of something I didn’t do and I realize that we never can know for sure how we might act in a given situation, I am very sure that I would not call NP. In my opinion, he has not put FD in a good light at all; I like and admire most lawyers but find NP abhorrent starting with the things he has concocted about JD—the person who is missing and presumed by almost everyone to be dead. I don’t recall anyone saying anything negative about MT’s lawyer even if MT herself is not beloved. The reasons that NP, FD, and MT are not held in high esteem by me at least here are related entirely to their behaviors and statements. I would hate to be innocent and have NP as a lawyer because even if I were vindicated, I would feel like scum if other innocent people such as JD were publicly and ridiculously disparaged along the way. It would be like winning a battle and losing the war in MOO. It also is my opinion that not everyone who is guilty is convicted and that sometimes that may have to do with the defense attorneys. In my opinion again, NP does indeed declare guilt and innocence even about the person most of us call a victim, JD, the one who is missing. The idea that “if” FD is guilty but not convicted then the blame goes to the prosecutors for not being competent while NP has no responsibility regardless of what dirty tricks and unsubstantiated mud he has thrown around about JD seems illogical to me. It’s all my opinion only, of course. Truly, I hope that if ever you are wrongly accused of a crime and hire NP to defend you, that you are vindicated—as you should be. MOO.

 

[MemPat]

No offense meant, but that would mean you wouldn't be a good defense lawyer. A defense lawyer shouldn't him/her self look at the case from the perspective of guilt or innocence. That is for the jury to decide. The lawyer's job is to present the case in the most favorable light for his client. If the jury declares his client innocent, he did his job. If the jury declares him guilty, he also did his job. I don't fault NP. It's not up to him to declare guilt or innocence. It does bother me a little to see this site disparage him so. I not a fan of lawyers, yet in no way do I feel he's a problem here. If FD is guilty, and the prosecutors are competent, he'll be convicted regardless of NP.

So stop ragging on NP. If it were you or me (and we were innocent, as of course we would be), we would want a lawyer who did everything possible to put us in a good light. Yeah NP. If I ever get arrested for something I didn't do in CT, maybe I'll give him a call.

If we had not seen obviously guilty people get off.....Casey Anthony comes to mind.....this might sound valid.

I do fault NP for attempting to manipulate the public with obvious lies and innuendo.

Blatant lies to diss a missing woman are beyond what any of us should tolerate from people who are licensed to uphold the law.

If nothing else, as my old country grandma used to say, "It just don't look nice."

The fact that he can defend Alex Jones, who called the Sandy Hook murders a hoax, would be enough for me not to hire him. Besides, then I'd have to sit in a room with him and I'm afraid I'd lose my lunch!

 

[BellaVita]

No offense meant, but that would mean you wouldn't be a good defense lawyer. A defense lawyer shouldn't him/her self look at the case from the perspective of guilt or innocence. That is for the jury to decide. The lawyer's job is to present the case in the most favorable light for his client. If the jury declares his client innocent, he did his job. If the jury declares him guilty, he also did his job. I don't fault NP. It's not up to him to declare guilt or innocence. It does bother me a little to see this site disparage him so. I not a fan of lawyers, yet in no way do I feel he's a problem here. If FD is guilty, and the prosecutors are competent, he'll be convicted regardless of NP.

So stop ragging on NP. If it were you or me (and we were innocent, as of course we would be), we would want a lawyer who did everything possible to put us in a good light. Yeah NP. If I ever get arrested for something I didn't do in CT, maybe I'll give him a call.

Is there no room for ethics? I wouldn't call him if I was innocent. Maybe if I was guilty. Also, I don't think NP has put his client in a good light. He's made FD and himself look ridiculous with these Gone Girl and Revenge Suicide theories. I think everyone understands what a defense lawyer is for. For people like NP, Geragos, Cheney Mason, IMO, they really are not that interested on an ethical or constitutional level though they claim to be. These case are games to them and they want to WIN. I am willing to bet these types of attorneys are just as character disordered as the clients they represent. IMO.

 

[thekirbyfamily]

If we had not seen obviously guilty people get off.....Casey Anthony comes to mind.....this might sound valid.

I do fault NP for attempting to manipulate the public with obvious lies and innuendo.

Blatant lies to diss a missing woman are beyond what any of us should tolerate from people who are licensed to uphold the law.

If nothing else, as my old country grandma used to say, "It just don't look nice."

The fact that he can defend Alex Jones, who called the Sandy Hook murders a hoax, would be enough for me not to hire him. Besides, then I'd have to sit in a room with him and I'm afraid I'd lose my lunch!

I don't know about you MemPat, I started thinking maybe NP had joined us here undercover. MOO.

I can't say that I ever wanted to be a defense attorney. I can't "Stop ragging on NP" because I haven't done that...there haven't been any personal attacks, comments on ethics, or wether he is or isn't a good attorney from me. The only thing I have ever said about NP on this site is that the cases he takes speak to his character WHICH THEY DO. If I ever need a defense attorney, I can't see myself hiring someone like NP as you would. That would say something about my character. MOO MOO.

 

[Bulldogs2]

Jennifer Dulos case: How CT tracks movements of high-risk defendants

New article on the ankle bracelets

 

[Tink56]

Jennifer Dulos case: How CT tracks movements of high-risk defendants

New article on the ankle bracelets

Thanks for the article. After reading it, I have a few more questions.

• Technically MT and JD are out on bail. Does that require them to report to any type of probation personnel?
• In CA there are still "dead spots" in which there is limited or poor cell reception. Does CT have any similar cell connectivity issues?
• Would the people monitoring the ankle bracelets know if FD and MT were in the same place at the same time? Would this be reported to anyone?
• Does this whole monitoring idea seem strangely ineffective for people (suspects) like FD and MT?

 

[MemPat]

I don't know about you MemPat, I started thinking maybe NP had joined us here undercover. MOO.

I can't say that I ever wanted to be a defense attorney. I can't "Stop ragging on NP" because I haven't done that...there haven't been any personal attacks, comments on ethics, or wether he is or isn't a good attorney from me. The only thing I have ever said about NP on this site is that the cases he takes speak to his character WHICH THEY DO. If I ever need a defense attorney, I can't see myself hiring someone like NP as you would. That would say something about my character. MOO MOO.

tkb, I would be surprised if NP didn't at least have an intern dropping tidbits on WS.

I'd sooner defend myself in court than have someone with such an ethical deficiency!

 

[thekirbyfamily]

tkb, I would be surprised if NP didn't at least have an intern dropping tidbits on WS.

I'd sooner defend myself in court than have someone with such an ethical deficiency!

Right? That comment just seemed so odd imo.

 

[MsJosie]

I agree....NP could be here himself or someone working for him. He is getting many great ideas from all of you....yet he knows his client has a lot against him from the research all of you have done. Think WS have him worried....JMO. All of you are super sleuths!

 

[MemPat]

Thanks for the article. After reading it, I have a few more questions.

• Technically MT and JD are out on bail. Does that require them to report to any type of probation personnel?
• In CA there are still "dead spots" in which there is limited or poor cell reception. Does CT have any similar cell connectivity issues?
• Would the people monitoring the ankle bracelets know if FD and MT were in the same place at the same time? Would this be reported to anyone?
• Does this whole monitoring idea seem strangely ineffective for people (suspects) like FD and MT?

Since LE didn't seem to know MT was back in CT and not on holiday at her friend's, my confidence in these monitors has diminished greatly.

 

[afitzy]

No offense meant, but that would mean you wouldn't be a good defense lawyer. A defense lawyer shouldn't him/her self look at the case from the perspective of guilt or innocence. That is for the jury to decide. The lawyer's job is to present the case in the most favorable light for his client. If the jury declares his client innocent, he did his job. If the jury declares him guilty, he also did his job. I don't fault NP. It's not up to him to declare guilt or innocence. It does bother me a little to see this site disparage him so. I not a fan of lawyers, yet in no way do I feel he's a problem here. If FD is guilty, and the prosecutors are competent, he'll be convicted regardless of NP.

So stop ragging on NP. If it were you or me (and we were innocent, as of course we would be), we would want a lawyer who did everything possible to put us in a good light. Yeah NP. If I ever get arrested for something I didn't do in CT, maybe I'll give him a call.

To give you some perspective on why so many including DV groups in CT are upset with No Case Norm's approach so far you don't have to look much further than the very basic issue of victim shaming of missing mother of 5 JD. Further, IMO his public comments to the author Flynn of the book "Gone Girl" were misogynistic and juvenille to say nothing of being insulting and hateful. From a strategic standpoint the "Gone Girl" argument was a bust because it had no merit in fact and lost him and his client PR point over a public tiff with a respected author. But the bottom line IMO is that the entire episode burned public good will for their client and got them nothing.

No Case Norm has effectively stuck out on every half baked strategy he has put out to the public so far in this case IMO. If you want an atty that strikes out every time he takes a swing then all I can say about your choice to hire him is, "Good Luck and God Bless"!

In this case he and his client from DAY1 have actively engaged in an aggressive campaign to shame the missing victim JD who is clearly not here to defend herself from attack. Read the comments put out by the DV Group in CT to get a flavor for what they think about No Case Norms tactics. IMO tactics from defense counsel matter as people and eventual jury members will remember what they heard over time from an atty.

I don't think anyone disputes the need for effective defense counsel in any case but it is possible to be effective without engaging in petty theatrics, disorganized thinking, outright fabrication and victim shaming - No Case Norm IMO has done all of these. If you want a point of comparison that is local simply look at the behavior of Atty Bowman for MT (doesn't speak about his cases ever to the media). I happen to believe that MT is in a heapload of trouble with this case but I think her choice of atty might just serve her well and the FD choice of Pattis might just be the mistake that costs him 30 years to life IMO. If you want another point of comparison take a look at the motions drafted by the 2 firms too - night and day different IMO!

I also think if you look at the Pattis comments since this case broke (which we all have been doing) it becomes clear he is spending next to no time talking about his client. Just have to wonder why? I have a few ideas!

MOO

 

[afitzy]

Jennifer Dulos case: How CT tracks movements of high-risk defendants

New article on the ankle bracelets

Loved this article! Confirmed that State's Atty was totally out of the loop on what was going on with the bracelets. Odd that the Judge seemed to do zero other than to make the Wizard of Oz like pronoucement that, "...the bracelets should work". I fully expected someone to pull back the curtain and say "Sure Judge" and then crack up laughing.

Quote from article:
"Colangelo was surprised and angered when he wasn’t informed about the malfunction until Troconis appeared in court on July 18".

“I found out about it by reading it in the bail commissioner’s report,” Colangelo said last week. “We were not notified. As a state’s attorney, if there is any violation in a case I’m involved in, one would hope that the court and I would be notified.” [BBM]

Colangelo had said he wanted Troconis on a “tight leash” while traveling out of state and her movement limited to the property where she was staying.

Andrew Bowman, an attorney representing Troconis, said the state probation office was alerted to the issue when it happened. During the July 18 court hearing, Judge John Blawie said there will be no further issues with the GPS because Troconis will remain in Connecticut. [BBM as this logic totally escapes me!]

Between the MT bracelet not working and FD getting to change his bracelet to his wrist I wonder what is going on in CT? Is the communciation solid between the monitors and the courts or even the atty's involved and the parole officers?

After the MT bracelet debacle I wondered how many high risk offenders have these bracelets in CT and whether the State even knows where they are or whether they were all sitting on a beach in Mexico and their bracelets are in some park in CT?

The article follow up was great by the Press IMO but IMO the Judciary needs to step up and audit compliance and tracking of the firm providing the monitoring and if the firm is not up to the task to replace them immediately. IMO this is a major public safety issue and Judge Blawie assuming that the bracelets will always work because the subjects are in CT is something that without data I don't think anyone can assume is in fact true. MOO

 

[afitzy]

A solid article on the Courts and DV:

How Domestic Abusers Weaponize the Courts

Quote from article:
"Many abusers misuse the court system to maintain power and control over their former or current partners, a method sometimes called “vexatious” or “abusive” litigation, also known as “paper” or “separation” abuse, or “stalking by way of the courts.” Perpetrators file frivolous lawsuits—sometimes even from prison—to keep their victims coming back to court to face them. After a breakup, the courts are often the only tool left for abusers seeking to maintain a hold over their victims’ lives. The process costs money and time, and can further traumatize victims of intimate-partner violence, even after they have managed to leave the relationship. Only one U.S. state, Tennessee, has a law specifically aimed at stopping a former romantic partner from filing vexatious litigation against an ex".

"According to a 2017 report from Georgia’s Domestic Violence Fatality Review Project, which tracks domestic-violence-related deaths in the state, “Although there is little data on the frequency of harassing court filings, sometimes referred to as vexatious litigation, use of the court to harass victims of intimate partner violence and stalking appears to be commonplace.” For D, it certainly was".

 

[afitzy]

The Jennifer Dulos case has some questioning the role of a guardian ad litem. Here’s an explanation for why they’re appointed in family court, what their role is, how they help, and why there’s so much controversy around their position.
Jennifer Dulos divorce shows controversial role of court-appointed child guardians

Thank goodness the Press in CT is awake and listening to what is coming out of the JD/FD Family Courtroom! So welcome having this article written.

Remember the psych report (unfinished and believed to be in draft form) that GAL Meehan allegedly gave to FD Atty and the FD allegedly 'stole' the report and gave it to No Case Norm? Why would GAL seem to 'cherry pick' which atty got to see the report? Not sure how this is in the best interests of the Children either. MOO

No Case Norm most likely knowing the report had been sealed by the Court (even though he claims he didn't know until GF Atty Anne Dranginis marched into his office and told him) then made the ethically questionable choice IMO to weaponize the contents of the psych report and use it as ammunition to protect his client in the press. What a guy?! Are we sure that No Case Norm is a bona fide Officer of the Court? This entire episode was about as shady and unethical as almost anything we have seen so far in this case but is consistent with the Pattis approach of blame the victim JD for everything wrong that is happening to his client. Where was anyone on the court to stand up for the person being discussed in the report and protect her interest? Crickets from the court except for the motion filed from JD atty to terminate GAL Meehan.

As far as I know Judge Heller has not decided on the motion filed by JD atty to have GAL Meehan dismissed for his part in the release of the psych report. I also don't think Judge Heller has ruled either on the request of JD atty to penalize No Case Norm for his role in this dispicable event.

On the topic of GALs, it was interesting that the Ruling from Judge Heller on the GF custody issue disclosed that GF herself paid 1/2 of the GAL cost and JD paid the other 1/2. Think about this for a second. Here we have a wealthy individual named JD and even she didn't have enough cash to follow what the CT Family Court was asking of her in terms of the GAL such that she had to seek her mothers assistance to pay the GAL? What would have happened if there were no GF involved in this case? My guess is that we wouldn't see a GAL? Is a GAL only used in cases with wealthy clients? Why would the court impose a requirement on a case that would involve something that neither JD nor FD (he paid zero according to the most recent Judge Heller ruling) could afford? Other states regulate GAL fees but so far as I am aware this is not done in CT where it is not unusual for GAL salaries to exceed $300,000/yr from this activity.

MOO

 

[afitzy]

Article on GF gaining custody and financial issues that the Judge Heller ruling disclosed about FD/Excellent footage of 4Jx and discussion of GF civil litigation:

As grandmother is granted custody of Dulos children, new details about family finances emerge

Quote from article:
In a heavily redacted section of the filing, Judge Heller reveals Jennifer’s mother paid for the 4 Jefferson Crossing property in Farmington, even after Jennifer moved out.

Fotis Dulos

“Ms. Farber [----redacted words----] started paying the monthly mortgage and real estate property taxes on the parties’ former marital residence in Farmington, Connecticut, where [Fotis] resided with Ms. Troconis and her daughter, after [Fotis] ceased making those payments. Ms. Farber’s property was held additional collateral for the mortgage on the Farmington property, so she paid these expenses each month to prevent the Farmington property from going into foreclosure.”

Step back and think about all the previous paragraph is stating. GF was paying mortgage and taxes ON THE HOUSE WHERE FD AND MT WERE LIVING WITH MT DAUGHTER. Further, the reason GF was doing this was because she had other property which was being held as collateral for the mortgage on the Farmingon property and she didn't want to lose her property!

All I can think about was the FD quote from Family Court when he made the statement that he 'wasn't Charles Manson'! IDK but this whole situation seems pretty monstrous to me? An 85 yo woman pledges her property to buy a house for you and your family to live in an what do you do? Do you step up to replace her collateral and buy out her interest in the house at the same time you decide to move your mistress and her daughter into the house? Nope. FD doesn't do this. FD proceeds to stop making any payments FOR HIS SHARE of the house while at the same time living there with MT and her daughter. What a couple! Poster people IMO for the ethically challenged and morally bankrupt IMO!

MOO

 

[ncwsleuth]

5 things to know about judge John Blawie

5 Things to Know About Judge John Blawie, Who Heard Connecticut's Last Death Penalty Case | Connecticut Law Tribune

 

[afitzy]

5 things to know about judge John Blawie

5 Things to Know About Judge John Blawie, Who Heard Connecticut's Last Death Penalty Case | Connecticut Law Tribune

Some impressive work experience while on the court but IMO he was not present on the entire issue of the malfunctioning bracelets most recently seen with MT.

Perhaps he will wake up when MT sends him a postcard of her sunning on the beach in Venezuela and says, "Miss you Judge Blawie, Wish you were Here"! or "Come and Get Me"!

 

[Bulldogs2]

Thanks for the article. After reading it, I have a few more questions.

• Technically MT and JD are out on bail. Does that require them to report to any type of probation personnel?
• In CA there are still "dead spots" in which there is limited or poor cell reception. Does CT have any similar cell connectivity issues?
• Would the people monitoring the ankle bracelets know if FD and MT were in the same place at the same time? Would this be reported to anyone?
• Does this whole monitoring idea seem strangely ineffective for people (suspects) like FD and MT?

I think this raises a lot of questions. The system isn’t fail proof as the article says. I don’t think they have to report to anyone- they’re not on probation. I don’t know why when MT went to NY and there was a poor signal, why it wasn’t reported to the states Atty. They said they reported it to probation- she’s not even on probation. I did my internship for my masters degree at the Court Support Services Division in CT- the same one where the people in the interview work. Yes, I think they could be together and no one would know. The people monitoring are a contracted out service. They must have 24/7 staff. How would a staff know they’re not supposed to be together? I’m sure CT has places where there is little or no cell reception. I don’t have it at my house. Things that make you go hmmmm.

 

[ncwsleuth]

Some impressive work experience while on the court but IMO he was not present on the entire issue of the malfunctioning bracelets most recently seen with MT.

Perhaps he will wake up when MT sends him a postcard of her sunning on the beach in Venezuela and says, "Miss you Judge Blawie, Wish you were Here"! or "Come and Get Me"!

 

[Bulldogs2]

To give you some perspective on why so many including DV groups in CT are upset with No Case Norm's approach so far you don't have to look much further than the very basic issue of victim shaming of missing mother of 5 JD. Further, IMO his public comments to the author Flynn of the book "Gone Girl" were misogynistic and juvenille to say nothing of being insulting and hateful. From a strategic standpoint the "Gone Girl" argument was a bust because it had no merit in fact and lost him and his client PR point over a public tiff with a respected author. But the bottom line IMO is that the entire episode burned public good will for their client and got them nothing.

No Case Norm has effectively stuck out on every half baked strategy he has put out to the public so far in this case IMO. If you want an atty that strikes out every time he takes a swing then all I can say about your choice to hire him is, "Good Luck and God Bless"!

In this case he and his client from DAY1 have actively engaged in an aggressive campaign to shame the missing victim JD who is clearly not here to defend herself from attack. Read the comments put out by the DV Group in CT to get a flavor for what they think about No Case Norms tactics. IMO tactics from defense counsel matter as people and eventual jury members will remember what they heard over time from an atty.

I don't think anyone disputes the need for effective defense counsel in any case but it is possible to be effective without engaging in petty theatrics, disorganized thinking, outright fabrication and victim shaming - No Case Norm IMO has done all of these. If you want a point of comparison that is local simply look at the behavior of Atty Bowman for MT (doesn't speak about his cases ever to the media). I happen to believe that MT is in a heapload of trouble with this case but I think her choice of atty might just serve her well and the FD choice of Pattis might just be the mistake that costs him 30 years to life IMO. If you want another point of comparison take a look at the motions drafted by the 2 firms too - night and day different IMO!

I also think if you look at the Pattis comments since this case broke (which we all have been doing) it becomes clear he is spending next to no time talking about his client. Just have to wonder why? I have a few ideas!

MOO

If FD is innocent why doesn’t he say it? He doesn’t say anything like, “ my children don’t have a mother,” or “I’m upset by this, I hope they find her soon.” He doesn’t even acknowledge that the children are without a mother!