Silver Alert CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 *ARRESTS* #18

[rjay]

I know this is not a popular opinion here and I also know I've shared it before but until FD is convicted, or at the very least charged with murder, I really can't claim he's guilty. Hell, LE doesn't believe he's guilty enough to charge him. And as long as that's the case, he has every right to try to see them, get medical records, want custody, get them legal representation. Given that there appears to be no evidence that he killed JD or had her killed, he should get custody. Let's say he was a jerk. Say he yelled, was a philanderer, was irresponsible with money. Those aren't reasons to take his kids away from him. The way he probably sees it is that GF and JD were vindictive. GF has lots of money and lots of lawyers and can get her way and he sees this as unfair. And if it were you or me, I think we'd feel the same way. Folks on this site have convicted him or murder based on the trash dump and the personality we see from the media. Sure, it makes me highly suspicious too. But this belief that he's not entitled to due process or to raise his kids is not correct. It doesn't matter how much money, or how little, money he has or how much GF has. If he's guilty, charge him and convict him. If LE can't do that, or if it is going to take a long long time to do that, then let him raise his kids. I know it's an unpopular opinion, but I believe it's the correct one. If my wife disappeared, LE could not charge me with her disappearance, and I had a rich mother-in-law that could hire better lawyers than me and was holding the kids against their own will (presumably), I would be upset and I would feel I was treated unfairly. So, until LE charges this guy, give him a break. And if LE knows he did it, then charge him already and I'll go back under my rock.

It’s inaccurate to say there is no evidence...

LE has plenty of evidence and probably does believe he is guilty of murder. It’s just a question of sufficient evidence to hold up in court. What is highly suspect and likely sometimes doesn’t mesh with the evidence obtained to secure a conviction.

The family court judge had already denied visitation without a court ordered representative before all this mess. Doesn’t that tell you something?

 

[HopeForTheBest]

She did say it-it was the school employee who talked about the charts he kept for each kid.

Is that still in the threads, do you know?

 

[NWLady]

Well said!!

Rochlin seems to enjoy the limelight perhaps a bit too much so I wonder how it will play out with No Case Norms love the limelight and deep need to control ALL! IDK.

Rochlin is also sadly an attorney that feels compelled to be active on social media and I believe in contravention of court orders in a specific divorce case that he was involved with recently. Rochlin made the choice to post demeaning photos of the STBX female spouse who at the time was undergoing treatment for breast cancer on social media (Rochlin was representing her husband in the case).

Both wife and Rochlin had court orders to stay off of social media regarding the case. His decision to attack someone online that was undergoing treatment looked petty at best and cruel and highly unprofessional at worst. Then, to top things off and in an interesting twist he wrote a 'letter of explanation' about the matter to a FB Group involved with the JD Case. So, it seems we might just have another individual that has issues with questionable personal choices and is lacking in impulse control. I would love to see what the CT Bar Association would make of this overall situation as it looks like this is an attorney that believes that attacking his clients STBX on social media is ok and part of his brief EVEN when the court had told him to stay off of social media.

Sadly, these are the kinds of attorneys that FO has in his "corner". IMO they are sad, pathetic and highly unprofessional.

MOO MOO MOO MOO MOO MOO MOO MOO MOO

Thanks for sharing this. It seems as if they are all the same type and all in the same boat - very unprofessional and will go to whatever lengths they need to, no matter who it may hurt in the end.

I can see now why so many people show frustration with how things are handled in CT courts, etc. It seems a lot of things are allowed to go on and rules broken, court orders not followed, yet nobody ever reprimanded for it! JMO

 

[HopeForTheBest]

I'm playing devil's advocate a bit here. Clearly I don't know what I don't know, but I also believe that GF and JD, with the right lawyers, can get a significant advantage in family court. Family court is not always fair.

Devil’s advocates can be so helpful in illuminating situations, certainly. Quite the norm.

 

[Jmoose]

Is that still in the threads, do you know?

I don’t know-It wouldn’t surprise me if she requested that a moderator remove it; seems to me that someone could figure out who wrote it, and I can’t recall if the teacher was still at the school where the kids went (it could have gotten the person fired, I think)

 

[Jmoose]

I'm playing devil's advocate a bit here. Clearly I don't know what I don't know, but I also believe that GF and JD, with the right lawyers, can get a significant advantage in family court. Family court is not always fair.

Now, these statements, I agree with!

 

[Twistinginthewind]

FD has been charged and was jailed and is out on a $500,000 bond for tampering with evidence and obstructing justice in LE investigating the disappearance of his wife.

He pleaded his 5th amendment right in court regarding these charges, which means he refuses to testify on the basis that it may incriminate him in the disappearance of his wife.

There are motions against him by the judge for his non-compliant behavior during divorce proceedings and in Family Court.

His wife was granted full physical custody of their children.

His visitation with the children is restricted to the point where he is not allowed to be alone with them or talk to them on the phone without being monitored and speaking English.

He has pleaded poverty in court and refused to provide financial information to parties he owes money to so their cases could proceed.

There are multiple civil lawsuits against him related to his finances and business.

These are facts about FD and his behavior and the criminal charges and lawsuits against him.

I don't believe anyone in their right mind in this situation ^^^ of current criminal charges related to their mother's disappearance and ongoing civil charges would attempt to regain access to children he had restricted visitation with and is accused of asking to lie and was abusive towards as documented in Family Court, unless they were aggressively pursuing some ploy that prevents them from laying low.

I wonder in custody disputes if there's a time limit during which a parent has a window to contest a court ruling, or if the temporary custody of the children granted to GF must be contested within a certain amount of time, with "evidence" from the children what their wishes may be.

Also, I wonder if there's an age limit for the children over which they are legally allowed to weigh in on who they want to live with (such as 13 years old).

It's in divorce court documents that he told JD he would take the two older boys and disappear overseas where no one would ever find them. Sounds like he's going to try to make good on his threat by trying to regain access to them.

MOO

 

[Twistinginthewind]

If I recall correctly, I thought one of the boys had contemplated suicide due to something FD had said or from the pressure FD was putting on him. In my mind, that may be something team FD may want to check on through medical records because it's so dam#ing for him. But I really agree with the idea of needing the records if FD were to run with the kids too.​

I remember this as well. I think they're terrified of him, and are as happy as they can possibly be with their grandmother, and would be spooked to know their dad was lurking, I mean looking, into their records and wanting to solicit their input. MOO

 

[MollyDDD]

I know this is not a popular opinion here and I also know I've shared it before but until FD is convicted, or at the very least charged with murder, I really can't claim he's guilty. Hell, LE doesn't believe he's guilty enough to charge him. And as long as that's the case, he has every right to try to see them, get medical records, want custody, get them legal representation. Given that there appears to be no evidence that he killed JD or had her killed, he should get custody. Let's say he was a jerk. Say he yelled, was a philanderer, was irresponsible with money. Those aren't reasons to take his kids away from him. The way he probably sees it is that GF and JD were vindictive. GF has lots of money and lots of lawyers and can get her way and he sees this as unfair. And if it were you or me, I think we'd feel the same way. Folks on this site have convicted him or murder based on the trash dump and the personality we see from the media. Sure, it makes me highly suspicious too. But this belief that he's not entitled to due process or to raise his kids is not correct. It doesn't matter how much money, or how little, money he has or how much GF has. If he's guilty, charge him and convict him. If LE can't do that, or if it is going to take a long long time to do that, then let him raise his kids. I know it's an unpopular opinion, but I believe it's the correct one. If my wife disappeared, LE could not charge me with her disappearance, and I had a rich mother-in-law that could hire better lawyers than me and was holding the kids against their own will (presumably), I would be upset and I would feel I was treated unfairly. So, until LE charges this guy, give him a break. And if LE knows he did it, then charge him already and I'll go back under my rock.

He’s out on bail and that’s all they need to do for him right now. That’s his “break”, imo. And as for the children, no judge is going to risk the lives or well being of children by allowing him to have access to them in light of their mother being awarded sole custody. It’s common sense, imo.

 

[sds71]

In a blistering response filed Thursday, the attorney representing Gloria Farber in civil matters accused Fotis Dulos and his legal team of being on a “media road show,” purposely ignoring requests for information and downplaying his years of financial troubles.
Farber’s attorney, Richard Weinstein, also said Fotis Dulos claimed he did not know who was paying for his high-profile defense team, but the money was being sent from his native Greece.
Weinstein and Murray are scheduled to appear Monday in Hartford civil court to address Farber’s objection to turning over tax returns and other financial documents dating back to 2005 and to argue a pending motion related to Fotis Dulos not appearing at two previously scheduled depositions.
“Forgive me if I don’t countenance the view that it is open season on Fotis Dulos,” Pattis said Friday in response to the filing. “I have no involvement in the civil case. Indeed, I can’t recall the last time I’ve seen Ms. Farber’s lawyer.”
Jennifer Dulos case: Fotis using funds from Greece to pay lawyers

 

[afitzy]

I don’t know-It wouldn’t surprise me if she requested that a moderator remove it; seems to me that someone could figure out who wrote it, and I can’t recall if the teacher was still at the school where the kids went (it could have gotten the person fired, I think)

I believe it was removed at OP request. We have looked for it before and I believe it was gone.

 

[afitzy]

Also, I wonder if there's an age limit for the children over which they are legally allowed to weigh in on who they want to live with (such as 13 years old).
MOO

Yes, in CT the age 13 is significant in that children this age can be asked for their opinions and have representation. But the court doesn't have to agree with what the children want and goes throught its normal decision making process on these matters as it has final say so far as I know.
MOO

 

[MollyDDD]

Yes...more money for kids means more money for him.

Yep, just like JD was dollar signs for him, so are his children.

 

[MollyDDD]

They're the only two that are over 13 and so the only two he can request this for. Simple as that.



Divorce is tough on the kids regardless. If he is being wrongfully accused (I know, he's my number 1 suspect too), then denying the kids a relationship with their father will provide lots of damage. Believe me, I want to see the case resolved, I suspect him, and would like to see him charged. But we're now at the stage where it could take years. I don't want to accept the premise that suspicion of a crime is enough to deny you a relationship with your kids.

But it’s not just that, it’s the fact that JD won custody of her children. She petitioned the court and providing heart wrenching details about their relationships and statements he’s made and actions he committed. JD was in fear of her life and her children’s lives. If the court just handed them back to him while they were still investigating her disappearance, and he murdered them or someone “kidnapped” them, then what would you say?

 

[enelram]

I remember this as well. I think they're terrified of him, and are as happy as they can possibly be with their grandmother, and would be spooked to know their dad was lurking, I mean looking, into their records and wanting to solicit their input. MOO

In my observations ,IRL, these guys like FD
are all around abusive to others. FD wasn't just abusive to his wife or cohorts or neighbors or clients and then suddenly he decides to be a kind, loving father to his children. No, he was
abusive to them also, no doubt.
Children of abusive fathers know not to cross them. They are usually deathly afraid of them.
But on the surface they will only say good or neutral things about them, certainly wouldn't disparage them for fear of punishment.
FD had his children trained just as he did his wife.
So what the children said or did in public wouldn't necessarily be what they really felt.
Abused children are not allowed to speak out about so many things. Even their abusive father.

 

[Twistinginthewind]

Yes, in CT the age 13 is significant in that children this age can be asked for their opinions and have representation. But the court doesn't have to agree with what the children want and goes throught its normal decision making process on these matters as it has final say so far as I know.
MOO

Thanks, that's good to know, sorry if I missed that already being explained. I think it's a great rule or law in some ways, to give the child a voice, but I also think it could be stressful and unnerving depending on the situation and potential for influencing by their parents. I hope it's for the best for JD's boys if this goes through. MOO

 

[afitzy]

Farber’s attorney, Richard Weinstein, also said Fotis Dulos claimed he did not know who was paying for his high-profile defense team, but the money was being sent from his native Greece.

“Forgive me if I don’t countenance the view that it is open season on Fotis Dulos,” Pattis said Friday in response to the filing. “I have no involvement in the civil case. Indeed, I can’t recall the last time I’ve seen Ms. Farber’s lawyer.”
Jennifer Dulos case: Fotis using funds from Greece to pay lawyers

Oh, the gifts that keep on giving FO + PA!

FD doesn't know who is paying his legal bills? Mmmm. Good one! FO believes that there is a cosmic cash machine that originates in Greece that has the ability to magically make cash show up in the account of an atty in NY whenever he needs to pay his attys? Brilliant! I want one too!

But I would think the attys involved might be a bit concerned about this 'cosmic cash machine from Greece' as who knows who is behind it and how much cash is loaded into the ATM? Does Pattis know, Does Rochlin know, or poor Bill Murray know how they are getting paid? Could be an issue. Wonder which atty will be the last one standing at the cash machine after making a request and getting the error message, "Please call customer service about your account"!

No Case Norms claim of 'no involvement' in the civil case is humorous and IMO false as well. Every gang needs a ringleader and sadly in this gang its Pattis. Probably should have called him the ringmaster in the circus but gang imagery was dancing around my head today thinking about the games being played in Family Court.

I do wonder though how great the contempt is by the FD attys for the judicial system in the State of CT? Not sure any of them treat the system or the Judges with much respect and IMO its sad to see.

MOO

 

[Jmoose]

btw, the advertisements on this page are, well, suggestive. Not that I mind but really, what kind of people are on this site.

Well...you are here, and so am I!
Seriously, what ads? I swear, I’ve never noticed them

 

[bkgregg5]

I don’t know-It wouldn’t surprise me if she requested that a moderator remove it; seems to me that someone could figure out who wrote it, and I can’t recall if the teacher was still at the school where the kids went (it could have gotten the person fired, I think)

If I recall I believe the teacher was from their former school, not NCCS. Also, it was on one of the earlier threads....I couldn’t imagine having to go back and find it.

 

[enelram]

love it @afitzy, cosmic cash machine.
I can't imagine Ct. is so lax about 'funny money'
being paid to finance a legal team.

Here in Fl., even back in the late 70's we had to prove where every dollar came from in financial transactions because we had so many mysterious people walking around with bags of cash. No joke, literally, people coming in to my office off the street w/ nice leather brief cases,
fat leather brief cases- chained to their wrist
with locks. Filled with cash. And sometimes
another mysterious companion (bodyguard).

So banks, closing attorneys, title companies-
everyone wanted to avoid handling funny money.
then we went through a period of when the
perps would turn the cash into emeralds and
they came in to buy real estate using emeralds.
Oh, the good ole days. lol