She can be ordered to bring them to CT IMOAt least the kids are in NYC and he cannot leave Connecticut, then there isn't a chance he can surprise them. Thank goodness for the guard.
She can be ordered to bring them to CT IMOAt least the kids are in NYC and he cannot leave Connecticut, then there isn't a chance he can surprise them. Thank goodness for the guard.
Interesting - prosecutor anticipated FD saying he had reason to be in the house and already had interviewed witnesses to counter this argument IMO. But I thought his visitation was only Saturday and Sunday and was supervised - how did he see the children on a Wednesday unsupervised???
Ah thank you. It is usually 10% elsewhere.Because the law in Connecticut limits the bail bondsman fee to 7% when the bail amount is more than %5,000. Given the $500,000 bail, $35,000 is what the bail bondsman can charge.
2012 Connecticut General Statutes :: Title 29 - Public Safety and State Police :: Chapter 533 - Professional Bondsmen :: Section 29-151 - Maximum commission or fee. Reports to commissioner.
If this money was an option, why didn’t he use it before? Also, wouldn’t a 401k withdraw be disallowed considering there is a pending divorce? Getting rid of assets isn’t allowed.
FD yes but its unclear on MT.
Once DNA found investigators would seek to determine if there was a legitimate reason for its being there. I’d assume that would be SOP.Interesting - prosecutor anticipated FD saying he had reason to be in the house and already had interviewed witnesses to counter this argument IMO. But I thought his visitation was only Saturday and Sunday and was supervised - how did he see the children on a Wednesday unsupervised???
Perhaps his MIL will hire a private detective to follow him where ever he goes.IMO he has additional passport(s) that no one knows about. If he's THAT insistent on taking the kids and running off to Greece, there's no way he doesn't have more than one passport because I think he might be a dual citizen. Greek consulate has to make sure he can't walk as well.
Because he knows his client is guilty.Pattis is quite combative IMO to the press in his commentary thus far!
I guess it could've been epithelial. I wonder if MT knows what happened or doesn't and is about to scratch that "Dulos" off her bracelet.
Para 10 shows FD and his attorney provided his Iphone and the detective seized it because it could have evidence of a crime and/or lead them to JD. paraphrased by me. So if he provided it, and the detective seized it - why wouldn't it be allowed as evidence? And if he was innocent why wouldn't he just answer questions with his lawyer? Because he did it and knows it. IMOHer bail stipulation (see the warrant here: Lawyers for Dulos children, grandmother in court for custody status) is no contact with victim family and surrender passport.
Samara AbramsonVerified account @Samara_Abramson 15m15 minutes ago
Norm Pattis says his client plans to tap into his 401K, and “if he is exonerated...” he should not have to pay increased taxes on it
Aw, he's just doing his job, IMO. Must be frustrating for him with all of the speculation. He's a good lawyer. Unfortunately. MOOWow, Norm is really nasty. IMO
Snooty B. Reminds me of Chris Watts’ girlfriend.I'll bet she's shaking inside, though.