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

[afitzy]

Norm's response before the hearing call by the GAL was:

"Pattis said Tuesday he doesn’t think his comments violated the court order but would listen to the judge if she disagrees.

“I have enormous respect for Judge (Donna) Heller,” Pattis said. “If I erred, I’m sure she’ll tell me.”

He chuckled as he delivered the bolded comment. He knew he had stepped out of line, but he also knew that most judges don't want to tangle with him about First Amendment rights....His argument would be, "I'm only doing the best I can for my client." UGH!

The Advocate's story has a few more details:
Jennifer Dulos case: Search ends at trash plant, Pattis accused of violating court order

I re-read your post and wonder if this is a 1st Amend. issue or perhaps its only a 1st Amend. issue in the mind of No Case Norm?

I truly would like to see a legal argument presented by Pattis to support the idea that illegal actions by an Officer of the Court are justified if they are being undertaken in defense of a client? I hope Judge Heller punishes this behavior in a very harsh way as if it isn't punished now it will simply continue IMO.

Who else would have the sheer audacity to claim that they didn't know the status of the report and use their ineptitude to justify their behavior? There was zero accountability or responsibility shown by Pattis so far as any of the comments in MSM so far as I can tell. He justified his behavior as being OK as he was defending his client. Last time I looked laws and court rules still had to be followed by legal professionals. I would have respected him just a bit if he had said he made a mistake, saw the error of his ways and apologized to JD and her family.

Now, I am simply waiting for Pattis to make the argument to the court that the report is already public and so as such should be Exhibit A of his criminal case evidence. IMO if this happens there is something seriously wrong in CT Judiciary as this document was never meant to be public and some level of court accountability has to exist for the psych records and documents of people involved in litigation in the St of CT. IMO what Pattis did was reprehensible and the fact that he showed remorse for such a despicable deed told us all precisely who he is as a person-he is simply a legal who has a convenient grasp of the law and blusters on in a lawless manner while shouting from the rooftops that his lawless behavior is in defense of his client. I am totally calling BS on this entire episode and I hope Judge Heller calls out Pattis in a very public and punative way!

To me the issue is that the document released had been sealed by the Family Court and contained confidential and sensitive personal information and was never meant for public consumption. Further, the document was in draft form and by all accounts didn't even qualify for admission as evidence in Family Court.

I think the legal violations by No Case Norm in this situation involved a) not checking status of the psych report and b) taking what he knew was highly personal information and releasing it to the press. I won't even get into the idea that the report was in draft form so on that basis alone most likely should not have discussed with the press.

I hope there are consequences for No Case Norm imposed by the court. But its CT so we shall have to wait and see what happens....

MOO

 

[afitzy]

I have recently read about two cases in Florida where women have gone missing and it is believed the bodies of both women were disposed of at a garbage dump. Apparently, this type of disposal is not that uncommon. In one case, a co-worker has been charged with murder based upon DNA found in a dumpster. A video of the accused purchasing a carving knife is also some of the circumstantial evidence obtained by the prosecutor.

In the other case, the victim's uncle is the prime suspect, but has not yet been charged. He presently is in custody for committing other crimes, which will keep him in prison for the rest of his life. The State is continuing to investigate the murder, but is in no hurry to charge because the defendant obviously is not going anywhere.

I mention these two cases because it seems that NP is trying to infer that, because JD's body has not been located, a prosecution of FD for his wife's murder is not possible. While that may have been the case many years ago, the absence of a body will not stop this prosecution. The evidence of a serious physical assault in the garage, coupled with JD's disappearance, along with the DNA in JD's home, the garbage dumps, the altered tags are more than enough to charge and convict.

In one of the cases I read about in Florida, the State knows the defendant dismembered the body and the State strongly suspects the victim's remains ended up at the local dump. After many weeks of searching, it has been unable to locate the remains. It makes me wonder if FD did something similar to JD. According to news reports, FD dumped materials into a large number of garbage cans, the majority of which had already been taken to the dump before LE began to search them. Is it possible that that JD's body (or parts of it) were in each one of those cans? If so, where did FD take JD's body to commit the ultimate act of inhumanity?

I strongly believe that FD, perhaps with the assistance of others, disposed of JD's body on the day of the murder. I also believe the "garbage dump"is a part of the murder which was planned in advance. FD had to have researched when those cans were going to be picked up. He also had to have planned how he was going to get JD's remains there quickly. There is no way he could have timed using this method of disposal otherwise. Every step of the way, FD is left trial of evidence in his wake. It is my hope such evidence is now in LE custody.

FD's conduct before the murder, combined with the altered tag, the leaving of the phone at home, the trading of the vehicles with an employee, the comments to the GAL during the supervised visitation at JD's home prior to the murder, constitute strong evidence of premeditation. It makes me wonder what other evidence LE has located. Are there videos of him purchasing the garbage bags seen in the video? Are there videos of him purchasing other items used in the crime? Something as innocuous as packaging tape can usually be traced. Has DNA been found elsewhere? Are any construction tools missing? There are so many areas of investigation, all of which LE is no doubt exploring.

I hope JD's body is recovered, but I do not believe FD will escape punishment even if he never discloses her whereabouts. I continue to believe that the "forensic horsemen of the apocalypse" will be FD's downfall. If MT has any sense of self-preservation" she will not refuse to accompany FD on his hell bound train. Whether she chooses to do so is entirely within her control.

Great stuff! Seems like we have been on parallel paths of inquiry!

Law is ever evolving and trying a murder case on circumstantial evidence only is doable. Challenging but doable IMO. Totally respect the challenges of presenting such a case by the State and understanding the challenges it makes the radio silence and time passed completely understandable. I respect the lack of leaks from the State and its been refreshing to not see Pattis engaged on any level by the State no matter how ridculous his claims might be. Still would prefer to see a gag in place on the case but maybe the Judge is letting Pattis hang himself and his client! If so, the Judge know who/what Pattis is and knows how all the public Pattis chatter will impact FD over time. Who knows?

No Case Norm understands that time in this process won't be his friend which is why we continue to see the public shouting from the rooftops for a speedy trial, more discovery/information the endless ridiculous theories.

Found some incredible cases on this topic and will post some information as I make my way through the cases.

MOO

 

[afitzy]

I think I actually understand Norm on some level. He's all about every life is valuable , even the lowest of the low. Unfortunately, he takes it to the extreme.

Criticizing Dr. Petit was over the top. MOO.

Agree. Its sad that with Pattis the soundbite and the press coverage and the never ending quest for attention overshadow the occasional interesting comments and ideas. I think this pattern of behavior can have negative consequences for his clients and we will have to see how his antics change over time. His behavior in my mind is a high rish strategy and I'm not yet sure if the high risk behavior is given a corresponding high return in terms of positive outcome in court for his clients.

I'm surprised actually that FD is letting No Case Norm roll the dice on the risks associated with victim shaming and shotgun crazy theory of the day etc. as I know FD understands math! The tone of the Pattis chatter has altered slightly over time but the underlying messages remain the same IMO.

 

[oceancalling]

He may like to hear himself speak and may be a complete blowhard, but IMO he is quite talented. It's maddening, I know!

I do not agree. Not to disparage Connecticut, but he is a big fish in a little pond. He has made a lot of tactical missteps that a seasoned defender would never make. Like many lawyers who believe that all press is good press, he talks when he should be silent. Time and again, he has floated theories, only to later rescind them.

He has also committed the ultimate defender sin, which is to trash an innocent mother of five. When he said, on more than one occasion, that he was "sick and tired" of hearing about JD, you could have picked my jaw up off the floor. If good lawyers speak in a high profile case (most don't), they do so after spending a lot of time and money developing a PR campaign with paid professionals is the field. Since NP is handling this case pro bono (which again, most renowned non-public defenders would not), he must not have the funds to do so...and it shows.

Many people mistake a loud advocate for an effective one, and the two are not even close to being equivalent. In a high profile case, good lawyers typically say as little as possible and never, ever give away their defense strategy before trial (not that I believe NP has much of a strategy here, other than to trash the victim). Compare NP's verbal vomit antics to the strategy of someone like Judy Clarke, and his shortcomings become clear.

His pleadings are pro forma and even then, are full of typos. He admits to have a stolen GAL report, and he acts as if Judge Heller is responsible for telling him what is and is not acceptable in her courtroom. The list goes on and on. He is a blowhard seeking another 15 minutes of fame. He believes a big case will get him a slot on Court TV, and maybe it will. Unfortunately for his client, such antics have done nothing to enhance his cause.

 

[sds71]

The other recent filing is from the mother of Jennifer Dulos, Gloria Farber. She was already granted physical custody of her five grandkids last week. Now she’s filed a motion for legal custody

 

[afitzy]

Afitzy, I wish I had stayed on top of the basics of SA and could explain it to you. I don't think I'd be allowed to link Peter Hyatt's work here but if you google his name and the sentence, "If he will not say it we cannot say it for him," you will get a number of case studies. This might also take you to the blog.

Yes, there are a limited number of people who can outright lie but SA teaches methods to get the truth out of even them. It's quite fascinating.

If the initial interview of FD is made public, much could be made of the ways he answered the questions....how many additional words he used instead of simply saying, "I didn't kill Jennifer," would be important. Whether he dropped pronouns would matter. When he gave a timeline of his day a trained analyst would be able to pretty much pinpoint when the crime occurred. Liars also often drop "admissions" into their interviews. Peter says the more you can get them to talk the more they "spill marbles" of truth. Truth sort of rolls out without them even realizing it.

You'll enjoy reading about this because it helps you pick out liars in your everyday life.

Got it! Will add this to my reading list as god knows we need all the tools we can get to discover the liars in our lives! Good stuff, and thanks so much for this! Curious though if you have a perp that simply won't talk as by all accounts FD didn't/hasn't spoken to LE how this all works.

To me, the body language and of FD and the words used in the Channel 4 interviews has been facinating to watch as has the body language and words used by Pattis and Smith/PT2!

Will keep reading, learning and watching and won't give up as this case needs many brains and many hearts in order to get justice for JD and her 5 children IMO!

 

[sds71]

Farber vs Dulos
189.86 07/29/2019 C ORDER

RESULT: Denied 7/29/2019 HON DAVID SHERIDAN
http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=17436967

 

[afitzy]

"I believe that the state is a necessary fiction, and that failing to combat it is the first step toward tyranny." - Norm Pattis
This guy is fit to be practicing law?!

Its open to debate IMO!

 

[afitzy]

Farber vs Dulos
189.86 07/29/2019 C ORDER

RESULT: Denied 7/29/2019 HON DAVID SHERIDAN
http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=17436967

@sds71, is this for FD or MT deposition? Can't tell.

 

[sds71]

@sds71, is this for FD or MT deposition? Can't tell.

It’s for MT
She doesn’t have to testify

 

[citygirl]

It’s for MT
She doesn’t have to testify

I wondered how this would play out. It's not being denied as such , just considered not to be an emergency hearing.

 

[afitzy]

It’s for MT
She doesn’t have to testify

I read it that the Court doesn't believe the Emergency Hearing was necessary (believe this was GF motion but was it a Bowman filing? IDK) and then was denying Bowman request to not have MT testify (this motion was filed last week I believe).

What is confusing me is the second half of the order today that talks about the fact that the witness has to be readily available to testify and that the short calendar will be used, if as you are saying that MT is being told by the court that she doesn't have to be deposed. I think there was another motion from GF to clarify the scope of their inquiry in the deposition (filed after the original request for Emergency Hearing) and so maybe this satified the Court and why they said no Emergency Hearing was needed. But this order looks like MT does have to be ready to be deposed. Confused

Thanks a million for your help sorting this out as I am just using phone so can't search back to the original filings.

 

[Midwestmom2019]

Sorry you've had such a rough go of it in Connecticut, @thekirbyfamily . I have lived in Fairfield County since college in the late 80s, early 90s. The state has its challenges, as all do, but I have also found great opportunities and a wealth of amazing relationships, both personal and professional. I hope better times com to you, or you find a way to move elsewhere.

Do not move anywhere along the Mexico USA border. Same.

 

[Midwestmom2019]

I re-read your post and wonder if this is a 1st Amend. issue or perhaps its only a 1st Amend. issue in the mind of No Case Norm?

I truly would like to see a legal argument presented by Pattis to support the idea that illegal actions by an Officer of the Court are justified if they are being undertaken in defense of a client? I hope Judge Heller punishes this behavior in a very harsh way as if it isn't punished now it will simply continue IMO.

Who else would have the sheer audacity to claim that they didn't know the status of the report and use their ineptitude to justify their behavior? There was zero accountability or responsibility shown by Pattis so far as any of the comments in MSM so far as I can tell. He justified his behavior as being OK as he was defending his client. Last time I looked laws and court rules still had to be followed by legal professionals. I would have respected him just a bit if he had said he made a mistake, saw the error of his ways and apologized to JD and her family.

Now, I am simply waiting for Pattis to make the argument to the court that the report is already public and so as such should be Exhibit A of his criminal case evidence. IMO if this happens there is something seriously wrong in CT Judiciary as this document was never meant to be public and some level of court accountability has to exist for the psych records and documents of people involved in litigation in the St of CT. IMO what Pattis did was reprehensible and the fact that he showed remorse for such a despicable deed told us all precisely who he is as a person-he is simply a legal **** who has a convenient grasp of the law and blusters on in a lawless manner while shouting from the rooftops that his lawless behavior is in defense of his client. I am totally calling BS on this entire episode and I hope Judge Heller calls out Pattis in a very public and punative way!

To me the issue is that the document released had been sealed by the Family Court and contained confidential and sensitive personal information and was never meant for public consumption. Further, the document was in draft form and by all accounts didn't even qualify for admission as evidence in Family Court.

I think the legal violations by No Case Norm in this situation involved a) not checking status of the psych report and b) taking what he knew was highly personal information and releasing it to the press. I won't even get into the idea that the report was in draft form so on that basis alone most likely should not have discussed with the press.

I hope there are consequences for No Case Norm imposed by the court. But its CT so we shall have to wait and see what happens....

MOO

“Zealous representation” of your client does not include lying, covering up or other shenanigans. You are also required to reveal exculpatory evidence.
He’s walking a very thin line and gambling that he’ll get away with it. That’s part of his “pony tail persona.” Pushing the envelope.
The body will be FD nail in the coffin. I’m starting to think he’s going to “get away with murder.”

 

[sds71]

I read it that the Court doesn't believe the Emergency Hearing was necessary (believe this was GF motion but was it a Bowman filing? IDK) and then was denying Bowman request to not have MT testify (this motion was filed last week I believe).

What is confusing me is the second half of the order today that talks about the fact that the witness has to be readily available to testify and that the short calendar will be used, if as you are saying that MT is being told by the court that she doesn't have to be deposed. I think there was another motion from GF to clarify the scope of their inquiry in the deposition (filed after the original request for Emergency Hearing) and so maybe this satified the Court and why they said no Emergency Hearing was needed. But this order looks like MT does have to be ready to be deposed. Confused
Thanks a million for your help sorting this out as I am just using phone so can't search back to the original filings.

I just reread that and I can’t tell if she has to testify tomorrow or not

 

[Gardenista]

I do not agree. Not to disparage Connecticut, but he is a big fish in a little pond. He has made a lot of tactical missteps that a seasoned defender would never make. Like many lawyers who believe that all press is good press, he talks when he should be silent. Time and again, he has floated theories, only to later rescind them.

He has also committed the ultimate defender sin, which is to trash an innocent mother of five. When he said, on more than one occasion, that he was "sick and tired" of hearing about JD, you could have picked my jaw up off the floor. If good lawyers speak in a high profile case (most don't), they do so after spending a lot of time and money developing a PR campaign with paid professionals is the field. Since NP is handling this case pro bono (which again, most renowned non-public defenders would not), he must not have the funds to do so...and it shows.

Many people mistake a loud advocate for an effective one, and the two are not even close to being equivalent. In a high profile case, good lawyers typically say as little as possible and never, ever give away their defense strategy before trial (not that I believe NP has much of a strategy here, other than to trash the victim). Compare NP's verbal vomit antics to the strategy of someone like Judy Clarke, and his shortcomings become clear.

His pleadings are pro forma and even then, are full of typos. He admits to have a stolen GAL report, and he acts as if Judge Heller is responsible for telling him what is and is not acceptable in her courtroom. The list goes on and on. He is a blowhard seeking another 15 minutes of fame. He believes a big case will get him a slot on Court TV, and maybe it will. Unfortunately for his client, such antics have done nothing to enhance his cause.

Thank you for taking your time to refute the post. NP's antics have done nothing but hurt FD's case.

 

[sds71]

Spencer Allan Brooks (@SpencerSays) on Twitter
Update to our story from Friday: Farber’s attorneys filed a motion clarifying/arguing that the deposition would have nothing to do with the disappearance of Jennifer Dulos or the criminal case against Michelle Troconis.

 

[Midwestmom2019]

Sorry you've had such a rough go of it in Connecticut, @thekirbyfamily . I have lived in Fairfield County since college in the late 80s, early 90s. The state has its challenges, as all do, but I have also found great opportunities and a wealth of amazing relationships, both personal and professional. I hope better times com to you, or you find a way to move elsewhere.

So sorry to hear of your plight. But after reading the article, especially the probate section, makes me wonder if FD considered this information in his over all scheme. Getting control over everything jointly held with JFD. Through probate.
Here’s a possibility:
“JFD is dead, your honor. I get all of it. And oh, by the way, see you at the country club for dinner later?”

 

[sds71]

@MarissaAlter
In essence, Farber is asking the court to permit her to make legal decisions concerning the kids’ health, education & welfare. For example, schools & health care providers would likely ask Farber to demonstrate that she has the legal authority to act on their behalf.
@News12CT

 

[Midwestmom2019]

Great stuff! Seems like we have been on parallel paths of inquiry!

Law is ever evolving and trying a murder case on circumstantial evidence only is doable. Challenging but doable IMO. Totally respect the challenges of presenting such a case by the State and understanding the challenges it makes the radio silence and time passed completely understandable. I respect the lack of leaks from the State and its been refreshing to not see Pattis engaged on any level by the State no matter how ridculous his claims might be. Still would prefer to see a gag in place on the case but maybe the Judge is letting Pattis hang himself and his client! If so, the Judge know who/what Pattis is and knows how all the public Pattis chatter will impact FD over time. Who knows?

No Case Norm understands that time in this process won't be his friend which is why we continue to see the public shouting from the rooftops for a speedy trial, more discovery/information the endless ridiculous theories.

Found some incredible cases on this topic and will post some information as I make my way through the cases.

MOO

The more a judge let’s a party get away with this kind of action, the less likely the offending party has any basis for an appeal when the ultimate verdict is against them. What’s he going to argue?
“But, but, but judge, I didn’t get xyz and that would have helped me” avoid the electric chair.
Judges can be very clever.
IMO. Everyone is playing poker with cards close to the chest. Chips are stacked very high. God is dealing the cards. It’s time to hold ‘em.