Silver Alert CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 *ARRESTS* #16

[afitzy]

Family Court Case:
526.00 07/29/2019 D WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION

Withdrawal of Motion for Stay: 521.00
527.00 07/30/2019 P MOTION FOR CUSTODY OF MINOR CHILDREN

Intervenor's Motion for Sole Custody, Pendente Lite
528.00 07/30/2019 D MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW APPEARANCE

 

[afitzy]

For Reference:
HHD-CV-18-6088970-S Hartford JD D-02
DULOS FOTIS FARBER, GLORIA, EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF HILLIARD v. DULOS, FOTIS

HHD-CV-18-6088971-S Hartford JD D-01
DULOS JENNIFER FARBER, GLORIA, EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF HILLIARD v. DULOS, FOTIS

HHD-CV-18-6088971-S Hartford JD D-02
DULOS FOTIS DULOS,JENNIFER v. DULOS,FOTIS

FST-FA-17-5016797-S Stamford JD D-01
DULOS JENNIFER R DULOS,JENNIFER v. DULOS,FOTIS

FST-FA-17-5016797-S Stamford JD P-01

 

[afitzy]

For Reference:
FORE GROUP, INC. GLASCO HEATING & AIR CONDITIONING, INC. v. FORE GROUP, INC.

HHD-CV-19-5060300-S Hartford JD D-01
FORE GROUP, INC. FARBER, GLORIA, EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF HILLIARD v. FORE GROUP, INC.

HHD-CV-18-6088970-S Hartford JD D-01

 

[gitana1]

Attorney for Jennifer Dulos’ mother won’t ask Troconis about disappearance

Can I just say she looks disturbingly like the opposing party I have in a case, who is a cruel and insane woman?

Anyhow, the deposition should be interesting. Her relationship with and knowledge of financial structures and issues at Fore Group could indeed be incriminatory to her.

 

[sds71]

Marissa Alter (@MarissaAlter) on Twitter
Pattis motion to withdraw

 

[merrymary]

Marissa Alter (@MarissaAlter) on Twitter
Pattis motion to withdraw
View attachment 195876

Love reading his stuff....its kinda like a word search. How long before you find the spelling or grammatical error. lol

 

[Twistinginthewind]

After seeing the motion to withdraw from Pattis representing FD in family court, answers in the negative my question from my previous post:
"... and now they're motioning to withdraw FD making an appearance at the divorce proceedings (Dulos v. Dulos) if that is correct?".
No, NP is requesting to withdraw.

So last week, FD's attorneys withdrew their previously filed motion to 'discontinue' the divorce proceedings IIRC, and now they're motioning to withdraw FD making an appearance at the divorce proceedings (Dulos v. Dulos) if that is correct?

I wonder if they will try to put the divorce proceedings on hold or cancel in another way due to JD's disappearance, in an attempt to take one of the court battles off the table?

"DIVORCING A MISSING SPOUSE
If you actively pursue locating your spouse through the methods outlined in the Affidavit of Diligent Search, and still can't locate your spouse, then a "Divorce by Publication" is your likely method of getting a divorce."

3 Step Divorce: Divorce by Publication - Missing Spouse

ETA (BBM): There's no evidence in MSM that FD has 'tried hard' to find JD, but maybe the PI his lawyers hired was tasked with doing this?
"When a Spouse Cannot Be Found in Connecticut
When one spouse wants to call it quits but cannot find his or her missing partner, or when he or she is hiding, divorce by publication comes into play. Divorce by publication happens "only after a judge has been convinced, based on a sworn declaration, of the serving party's inability to find the Defendant after trying hard. Service by publication is commonly used in a divorce action to serve a spouse who has disappeared without a leaving a forwarding address..."

3 Step Divorce: Connecticut Divorce by Publication - Missing Spouse

 

[enelram]

just a note to let everyone still involved in this thread, that some of us are still reading and
really appreciate your time and efforts to
keep this case of the front burner.
You all are doing a great job. thanks!!

 

[afitzy]

Can I just say she looks disturbingly like the opposing party I have in a case, who is a cruel and insane woman?

Anyhow, the deposition should be interesting. Her relationship with and knowledge of financial structures and issues at Fore Group could indeed be incriminatory to her.

@gitana1, curious if you think we still might see her simply show up and take the 5th even though the court scheduled the deposition. Do you see some version of this as being possible?

 

[Jmoose]

@gitana1, curious if you think we still might see her simply show up and take the 5th even though the court scheduled the deposition. Do you see some version of this as being possible?

I wonder if we can extrapolate from taking the 5th on the questions about FD’s finances, that it means MT is not cooperating with prosecutors? This is where I’m heading, although I suppose that she could still be protecting herself and not him, if she was complicit in some sort of financial deceit (falsifying loan applications, cheating subcontractors, moving Fore Group money overseas). I’m thinking if she does end up presenting herself at a deposition, that she will decline to answer questions.

 

[afitzy]

After seeing the motion to withdraw from Pattis representing FD in family court, answers in the negative my question from my previous post:
"... and now they're motioning to withdraw FD making an appearance at the divorce proceedings (Dulos v. Dulos) if that is correct?".
No, NP is requesting to withdraw.

Yes, No More No Case Norm in Family Court.

Haven't seen ruling from Judge Heller on JD atty motion to terminate Pattis. My suspicion is that these two events are closely tied. Not sure if the JD atty motion will simply be withdrawn in the next few days.

I totally agree with your great post on the stolen psych report in prior thread. Judge Heller couldn't let the behaviour of FD, Pattis and GAL on the psych report stand. I am waiting for next announcement to be that GAL Meehan is no more after his role in the psych report game of pass the football. We will have to wait and see.

Total speculation but my guess is that Judge Heller told Pattis either you voluntariy resign or I will terminate you. Even if this isn't what happen it leaves a happy image in my brain as to what might have happened to spare us Pattis Patter in Family Court!

I do think that Pattis is the ringmaster is this particular group/circus of FD attorneys so my guess is that Rochlin is by no means an independent operator.

We will see how this all pans out!

 

[MollyDDD]

This is terrifying to me....hopefully being charged with a felony will slow down this process.

It’s disgusting. To think that FD knew this while planning the murder just gives me chills!!! I pray to a God, the judges in these cases can use their common sense and rule accordingly. JMO

 

[afitzy]

I wonder if we can extrapolate from taking the 5th on the questions about FD’s finances, that it means MT is not cooperating with prosecutors? This is where I’m heading, although I suppose that she could still be protecting herself and not him, if she was complicit in some sort of financial deceit (falsifying loan applications, cheating subcontractors, moving Fore Group money overseas). I’m thinking if she does end up presenting herself at a deposition, that she will decline to answer questions.

I'm heading in your direction...

I just keep going back to the former bank officer that gave the loan to FD friend for the real estate transaction and how involved MT was in that entire transaction for the house in Avon. In that one if I recall the bank officer was called as a witness by Family Court. FD tried to keep his hands clean in that transaction but he did involve MT with the transfer of $75,000 if I recall to his friend and frankly the entire transaction looked shady and as if he was trying to move money around to keep it away from JD. I don't think we ever got to the bottom of that case so will have to go back and take another look as it was certainly a 'red flag' raiser IMO!

Maybe the deposition will shed light on that transaction too.

 

[afitzy]

I wonder if we can extrapolate from taking the 5th on the questions about FD’s finances, that it means MT is not cooperating with prosecutors? This is where I’m heading, although I suppose that she could still be protecting herself and not him, if she was complicit in some sort of financial deceit (falsifying loan applications, cheating subcontractors, moving Fore Group money overseas). I’m thinking if she does end up presenting herself at a deposition, that she will decline to answer questions.

Kept thinking about your post as there is alot there to chew on.

I've never been a big believer in MT as a cooperating witness as in most things it was hard to see where FD ended and MT began and visa versa. So, I agree with you that how the deposition goes in the Civil case might show us how she might be working the criminal case in terms of cooperation. I do think that MT is fighting for her freedom on many levels and will do almost anything to stay out of prison. My guess also is that if she doesn't cooperate with the deposition tomorrow in a way that GF finds satisfactory that she might find herself in a separate legal action with GF associated with her role in the operations of FORE. Not sure about you but I would NOT want to mess with GF! Nope, not at all! GF has proven to be a pitbull about seeking justice and seems to be leaving no stone unturned in seeking justice for her daughter. Nothing but admiration for everything GF is doing and she is doing it IMO with great courage and grace.

My impression is that GF is not messing around and if MT doesn't cooperate then the gloves come off and more civil litigation will be rained down upon her head about all things FORE. Not sure if the Arrezza/Troconis clan wants to be involved in protracted civil litigation with GF on what MT might or might not have done while she worked at FORE.

Its a game of legal hardball I think and GF has had this civil case kicking around for quite awhile and it was stalled for a long time due to FD motion after motion, 2 missed FD depositions and ongoing non compliance with financial disclosure requests from GF to FD/FORE.

I think many here have believed that financial improprieties and possibly crimes occured at FORE and that the real possibility existed for MT to have been deeply involved in the activities. GF is up against it too in that she has a potentially sizable claim against the assets of FORE. But, FORE by all accounts is a crumbling financial mess but does have some assets to sell. Its in GF best interest I think to advance this civil litigation as quickly as possible, get her judgment, get the cash (don't think this will ever be possible as its long gone) or assets and liquidate the assets as quickly as possible and move on.

MOO

 

[afitzy]

It's pretty hard to follow, seems like we need a flow chart or something to track all the moving parts and pieces!

But hey, maybe that's what works for FD (turbulence, obfuscation, tampering, alot of 'noise' to distract), and it's just another day at the office of Machiavellian manipulation for him and his legal team. MOO!

Summary of 3 cases going on at the moment:
1. Civil Litigation - GF vs. FD/FORE - seeing repayment of loans made by her late husband to FD. Last I read FD was claiming that these funds were 'gifts' and not loans even though a loan agreement existed.
2. Family Court - JD/GF vs. FD - divorce action, custody process
3. Criminal Court - State vs FD and State vs MT - both are charged with hindering and tampering with evidence.

 

[Myvice]

Is there any way GF can force the sale of Fore's assets? Is she representing JD's interests in the business?

 

[afitzy]

Love reading his stuff....its kinda like a word search. How long before you find the spelling or grammatical error. lol

HaHa! Absolutely! I have this vision of him sitting in the back of his car typing out these motions and printing them out on a cordless printer and delivering them to the court. He just seems like a fly by the seat of his pants kinda guy! I realize this isn't true but it just seems that way between the suits, hair and the scruffy look and his general crankiness. What a character. MOO

 

[afitzy]

Is there any way GF can force the sale of Fore's assets? Is she representing JD's interests in the business?

JD didn't have an interest in FORE so far as we are aware (owned solely by FD).

I've been wondering what would happen if GF won the civil action, FD didn't have the cash to pay and GF said she wouldn't settle for FORE assets (hard to value in a bad real estate market and pain to deal with in general due to time and cost to sell). The part of this case that I have to go back and look at is what @gitana1 was talking about last week or week before regarding GF returning to the civil court and increasing the amount of her claim amount as if I recall correctly there was some ability of the court to give protection to GF that the assets of FORE would be sufficient to cover her claim if she prevailed in the litigation. My explanation of this is probably incorrect but the court gave some protection to GF in one of the last motions if I recall correctly.

What might trigger the appointment of a receiver by the State to deal with the assets of FORE? Or, could the trade claims trigger the appointment of a receiver to settle their claims?

Or, would FD put FORE into bankruptcy in advance of all this happening to protect at least something of the assets? Bankruptcy is a tricky legal beast and my guess is that FD might want to avoid it due to discloure requirements that he seems to find troubling. But perhaps bankruptcy might be his only option if he think receivership will sell the assets for cents on the dollar? IDK. Roll the dice!

Hard to say but my guess is that none of this is impossible. Curious what the legal folks think is the most likely course of action for GF here or how FD might respond in advance of civil suit trial.

 

[afitzy]

Attorney for Fotis Dulos files to drop out of client's divorce case

 

[afitzy]

Jennifer Dulos case: Norm Pattis withdraws as divorce attorney, grandmother seeks sole custody