Silver Alert CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 *ARRESTS* #20

[MemPat]

Yup. This is smoke and mirrors, nothing more.

Evidence is what matters, and the state has it. There is absolutely no innocent explanation for FD dumping bloody items from Jennifer’s house.

I can’t wait to see how Norm approaches that one.

Well, there's that secret alibi, MG. Don't dare forget that for a minute.

 

[Midwestmom2019]

Maybe Jennifer and her father are whispering in the ears of those that are listening.
I believe that.
Just a notion. Or an idea. Or a thought out of nowhere.
Many times I was lead in the direction of an answer. I ignored the thought. I finally learned to trust whatever manifests. Since then, it has never failed me.
Trust.
“In God We Trust,” right?
I trust that God will lead us in the right direction.
Jennifer Farber Dulos deserves God’s guidance. God never fails us. God will not fail Jennifer.
I’m sure.

 

[oceancalling]

Yes, I believe you are correct that the person that wrote the draft report 'left the stand' and departed the courtroom. The report was in draft form and its believed that due to the draft status and incomplete testimony of the good doctor involved that the report could not be used as evidence. Further, it is believed that Judge Heller had read the report but was unable to reference it in her recent order that awarded temporary custody to GF.

This entire report being excluded from evidence seems to have been an unfortunate turn of events for FD/Team Pattis as they are claiming there is something in the report that is 'favorable' to their client. They are repeating this word 'favorable' endlessly to every reporter that will listen to them. Its curious the only news outlet that has repeated the heresay account of the report being 'favorable' is the Hartford Courant (they have reported about this exact situation twice).

This same draft report was mysteriously (or not) in the possession of FD and somehow made it into the hands of No Case Norm who then proceeeded to leak said report or part of it, to the press in order to fend off a 'hit report' on his client FD. It is believed that FD former atty had gotten the report from GAL Meehan. Both sides (Plaintiff and Defense) have motions in (not yet heard) to terminate the services of GAL for his role in the leaking of this psych report.

Judge Heller then asked that all reports in the hands of attys be returned to the court and she sealed the report. But the genie was out of the bottle and Rochlin and Pattis continued to talk about the report and reporters continue to report on the comments of Rochlin and Pattis IMO without having read the report itself. GF Atty has not yet complained to the court about the ongoing references to the sealed report or requested a gag order for the Family Court case.

Also as part of this situation No Case Norm was allowed to exit stage left from Family Court and resign rather than face termination as JD and GF atty's had written motions for to the court. Pattis exited and Rochlin took over with the Pattis agenda.

Let's not forget, a copy of that draft report, which was NOT supposed to be in Mr. Dulos' possession, was seized by LE when it executed a search warrant at his residence. That is a fact. IMO this seized "report" is going to come back and bite the C Team where the sun don't shine! It was all part of Mr. Dulos' plan.

 

[Midwestmom2019]

Ha! We should have shirts made.

I remember that story recently where cops monitored an event with shirts on that said “Not a Cop.”

Disagree. Shirts should say “I’m a cop and proud of it.”
LE, fire, first responders and teachers all deserve a raise. Raise my taxes to cover it.

 

[afitzy]

Yup. This is smoke and mirrors, nothing more.

Evidence is what matters, and the state has it. There is absolutely no innocent explanation for FD dumping bloody items from Jennifer’s house.

I can’t wait to see how Norm approaches that one.

@MassGuy, No Case Norm has already dealt cleanly with that particular issue.

He said Albany is an 'anomaly'.

Yep, its done and dusted and Pattisville is moving on.

Nothing to see here good people of Pattisville.

Its actually my favorite line from Pattisville.

No Case Norm looked the reporter square in the eye when asked about Albany Ave and said, "its an anomaly".

I was initially so baffled by this that the folks here had to explain it to me! I actually stupidly expected correct word usage from Pattis but the joke was absolutely on me!

 

[MassGuy]

@MassGuy, No Case Norm has already dealt cleanly with that particular issue.

He said Albany is an 'anomaly'.

Yep, its done and dusted and Pattisville is moving on.

Nothing to see here good people of Pattisville.

Its actually my favorite line from Pattisville.

Ha! I missed that.

Imagine being able to overcome something that incriminating, with a single sentence.

“Ladies and gentleman of the jury, what happened that night was an anomaly.”

How compelling!

 

[MemPat]

What strikes me about this constant filing of motions, this constant leaking of info to NP's obvious media "buddy" (very, very common), this constant need for battle! for vindication! for complete annihilation! by the C Team, is that this very conduct proves what we know to be true about Mr. Dulos. He is a malignant narcissist (not a psychopath).

I keep bringing up Ted Bundy, but Dulos reminds me of Bundy. Not in the crime, not even in surface demeanor, but in his need for constant attention. Dulos is more polished and sophisticated than Bundy was, not so raw. Underneath that veneer, though, is the complete need for control, domination, and attention. Me,me, me, 24/7.

His narcissistic rage and need for control caused Dulos to murder Jennifer, and now his narcissism is being stroked by the ongoing antics of the C Team. IMO his lawyers are doing exactly what he wants them to. That is why he has consistently surrounded himself with a certain type of lawyer. I believe most lawyers would be appalled by the tactics we have seen here. But for Dulos, and his lawyers, this is just more "winning."

I am old enough to know the good guys don't always win, and that evil can be quite cunning, Still, the State has a rock solid case. It would be easy to get lost in each and ever distraction the C Team slaps together just in time for the latest NC "exclusive". From afar, I have observed this prosecutor, though. He seems to be someone who is not going to let Dulos get away with murder. Evil isn't gonna win this time.

So keep filing those ridiculous pleadings. It is going to change nothing.

Never, never, never did I ever, ever, ever expect to read a sentence calling FD (who is not a psychopath, by the way) polished and sophisticated.

I say, "Here, here!" at most everything you write, Oceancalling, but you got me on this one.

On all the rest of it, "Here, here, my friend!"

; > )

 

[MassGuy]

Never, never, never did I ever, ever, ever expect to read a sentence calling FD polished and sophisticated.

I say, "Here, here!" at most everything you write, Oceancalling, but you got me on this one.

On all the rest of it, "Here, here, my friend!"

Well, he appears to be “polished and sophisticated.”

As we know, he’s a murdering sleazeball.

 

[afitzy]

Well, he appears to be “polished and sophisticated.”

As we know, he’s a murdering sleazeball.

FD = FO = FAUX

As you point out, under that fake veneer is a "murdering sleazeball" who is not a psychpath.

MOO

 

[MassGuy]

FD = FO = FAUX

As you point out, under that fake veneer is a "murdering sleazeball" who is not a psychpath.

MOO

I’m literally laughing out loud at the “not a psychopath” thing.

I want that included in all the news articles.

“Fotis Dulos, the high-end home builder who is not a psychopath, appeared in court today...”

 

[sleuth66]

I realize I will probably regret asking this question but does anyone understand why FD Atty. might think it would be a good idea to put out to the media that a psychologist has stated that his client is "not a psychopath"?

I guess to some people getting this news from a psychologist might be good news (perhaps FD was pleased) but what could Pattisville be thinking about with this entire article?

Originally I thought there was some context someplace in the article for the statement about not being a psychopath but there isn't anything other than the amt of time FD met with the good doctor.

Sorry but I'm confused by all of this and trying to understand how it is remotely relevant.

MOO

“Not a psychopath” goes along with FD statement to Heller in court during divorce: “I’m not Charles Manson”
And FD statement on NBC interview: “I’m not a monster”
And he had us fooled, silly us. Doesn’t everyone go out for some Friday night fun tossing their wife’s bloody clothes, cleanup tools, and car mat around Albany Avenue?

 

[oceancalling]

I keep thinking about Jennifer's bloody shirt and bra. They are different from the other items retrieved from the garbage bags because she was wearing them the morning she was killed (we know this is 100% true with the shirt). They weren't a sponge or a mop or something used to clean up the crime scene(s). She was wearing them and then she wasn't. Why were they removed and where? And why were they disposed of separately from her body?

He took her clothes off for a reason and it was not to prevent her identification if her body happened to be located. Even he had to know she could easily be id'ed by her dental work. So that would not be the reason and, while he most certainly wanted to show his control over her, IMO removal of her clothing was not for overt sexual gratification.

He had a "practical" reason for taking off her clothing and that is what I am trying to figure out. It must have something to do with how he disposed of her body. I can't think of any other reason for him to do it.

 

[HopeForTheBest]

It’s sad. SMH. There’s got to be more education about personality disorders, Abusers/DV, and mental illness. IMO!

Just MOO but as with any field, there are different levels of expertise and excellence in psychologists. Some specialize in forensic clinical psychology where their daily work is with people who are being held for psychological assessment and competency assessments, for example, related to criminal and related issues. A relative does this type of work and it is specific and evidence-based with cross assessment measures to help discern those who are trying to fake or hide issues. Other friends are psychologists in various fields and they all talk a great deal about the ethical code related to practicing in an area beyond their own scope; they can lose their licenses and it’s taken very seriously in MOO. In other words, of course it is possible for a psychologist to misdiagnose or miss an issue with a person and, again, there are differences in those trained with a clinical focus (Psy.Ds) and those trained with a research focus (Ph.D.) but competent, well-trained psychologists working in their scope and area of qualification aren’t easily fooled in MOO.

 

[MassGuy]

I keep thinking about Jennifer's bloody shirt and bra. They are different from the other items retrieved from the garbage bags because she was wearing them the morning she was killed (we know this is 100% true with the shirt). They weren't a sponge or a mop or something used to clean up the crime scene(s). She was wearing them and then she wasn't. Why were they removed and where? And why were they disposed of separately from her body?

He took her clothes off for a reason and it was not to prevent her identification if her body happened to be located. Even he had to know she could easily be id'ed by her dental work. So that would not be the reason and, while he most certainly wanted to show his control over her, IMO removal of her clothing was not for overt sexual gratification.

He had a "practical" reason for taking off her clothing and that is what I am trying to figure out. It must have something to do with how he disposed of her body. I can't think of any other reason for him to do it.

Yeah, that’s a really good point.

If her body was found, then he had failed. If she was found fully clothed, who cares?

It makes absolutely no difference in the grand scheme of things, and represents an unnecessary step.

As you say, he had to have had a practical purpose for this.

The best I can come up with is dismemberment, but I’m absolutely not sold on that.

 

[sleuth66]

I keep thinking about Jennifer's bloody shirt and bra. They are different from the other items retrieved from the garbage bags because she was wearing them the morning she was killed (we know this is 100% true with the shirt). They weren't a sponge or a mop or something used to clean up the crime scene(s). She was wearing them and then she wasn't. Why were they removed and where? And why were they disposed of separately from her body?

He took her clothes off for a reason and it was not to prevent her identification if her body happened to be located. Even he had to know she could easily be id'ed by her dental work. So that would not be the reason and, while he most certainly wanted to show his control over her, IMO removal of her clothing was not for overt sexual gratification.

He had a "practical" reason for taking off her clothing and that is what I am trying to figure out. It must have something to do with how he disposed of her body. I can't think of any other reason for him to do it.

On the body ID, you don’t need dental records, even FD has to know that DNA can establish identity better than even a favorite T-shirt can. Heck, they can even extract DNA out of Neanderthal remains, so I doubt he stripped her of her clothes to evade identification. For what its worth.

 

[Tink56]

I keep thinking about Jennifer's bloody shirt and bra. They are different from the other items retrieved from the garbage bags because she was wearing them the morning she was killed (we know this is 100% true with the shirt). They weren't a sponge or a mop or something used to clean up the crime scene(s). She was wearing them and then she wasn't. Why were they removed and where? And why were they disposed of separately from her body?

He took her clothes off for a reason and it was not to prevent her identification if her body happened to be located. Even he had to know she could easily be id'ed by her dental work. So that would not be the reason and, while he most certainly wanted to show his control over her, IMO removal of her clothing was not for overt sexual gratification.

He had a "practical" reason for taking off her clothing and that is what I am trying to figure out. It must have something to do with how he disposed of her body. I can't think of any other reason for him to do it.

Don't have an answer....BUT, you ask a very, very good question.

 

[MassGuy]

This is probably giving him way too much credit, but what if he was worried about DNA?

Perhaps he nicked himself, or was worried about sweat or touch DNA.

Or his fingerprints in her blood.

Any trace of him on her, would be damning.

Then again, this is FD we’re talking about, and he was probably entirely confident that her body wouldn’t be found.

Ever.

 

[Steelslady]

Yup. This is smoke and mirrors, nothing more.

Evidence is what matters, and the state has it. There is absolutely no innocent explanation for FD dumping bloody items from Jennifer’s house.

I can’t wait to see how Norm approaches that one.

The part I bolded- I don't think I could take it, to be honest. Where in the h e double hockey sticks did this arse come from? Does he think he's the star of a reality show or something? Every time he opens his mouth, I start to cringe, then want to laugh maniacally. He's really a lawyer? For real?

 

[MemPat]

“Not a psychopath” goes along with FD statement to Heller in court during divorce: “I’m not Charles Manson”
And FD statement on NBC interview: “I’m not a monster”
And he had us fooled, silly us. Doesn’t everyone go out for some Friday night fun tossing their wife’s bloody clothes, cleanup tools, and car mat around Albany Avenue?

I know I do (and I'm also not a psychopath).

 

[MemPat]

I keep thinking about Jennifer's bloody shirt and bra. They are different from the other items retrieved from the garbage bags because she was wearing them the morning she was killed (we know this is 100% true with the shirt). They weren't a sponge or a mop or something used to clean up the crime scene(s). She was wearing them and then she wasn't. Why were they removed and where? And why were they disposed of separately from her body?

He took her clothes off for a reason and it was not to prevent her identification if her body happened to be located. Even he had to know she could easily be id'ed by her dental work. So that would not be the reason and, while he most certainly wanted to show his control over her, IMO removal of her clothing was not for overt sexual gratification.

He had a "practical" reason for taking off her clothing and that is what I am trying to figure out. It must have something to do with how he disposed of her body. I can't think of any other reason for him to do it.

I agree that it has something to do with how he disposed of the body.

I bet he didn't think it through that the clothes would gum up the Sawzall.