Silver Alert CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 *ARRESTS* #27

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
There is something to be said for anyone who can formulate coherent legal arguments off the cuff, complete with citing relevant caselaw, in a criminal matter with such massive public interest. Yes, NP definitely comes across as unethical in some of his requests to the court, as well as his courtroom etiquette, but I have to give credit where credit is due — he knows how to think on his feet. How to reformulate his argument on a moments notice in hopes of getting the judge to reevaluate his position. He is quite good at (apparently) emotionally detaching from the subject matter and sticking to precedent. I really enjoy watching talented litigators go at it in the courtroom. Drama is inherent in law. A courtroom can be as riveting as any Colosseum, IMO. Artists tell stories, and stories about the legal system are laced with human vulnerability. They are cinematic not because they are visual, but because the human experience—in all its complexity—is on full display. Again, not a NP enthusiast by any means, but I have no problem highlighting that he is highly competent at his profession.

Edit: I’ve worked in law for the better part of 15 years, and that experience has definitely shaped my opinion of NP and what he is trying to accomplish in a courtroom. Don’t come for me, ok?? :)
 
MsJosie said:
Yes they are monitored daily. I believe if there is a violation a signal goes off and alerts a human, besides a human can look at a computer screen too. Is that right those that really know?

Yes, the monitors/people should know if the two are together, however does anyone know if there is a way around that?

Afitzy do you know? You are a great source of info. Thanks for all of the sharing!
Click to expand...
Good question! I am not a tech wizard on cell issues and so I wish we had someone that could help with this! But I will take a stab answering your question regarding the manual I read the other day.

The manual I read outlined basic operations of the device and my guess is that a lot of the technical specifics associated with the tracking of perps isn't readily available and public for obvious reasons! What I did learn is that multiple satellites along with cell towers are used to pinpoint the location of the bracelet. The information on bracelet location is available to LE in real time so far as I can tell. The manual I read was a bit hazy (by design I believe) on the issue of signal strength from cell towers and how this might impact the ability of the satellite tracking to work. My question that I couldn't answer is, in the event that cell towers is lost then is the bracelet signal lost too or is the signal just not as strong? LE I am sure understands this and realises that in CT there are areas with weak to no GPS signals (NC still has persistent issues with no or low cell service but I'm not sure about Farmington/Hartford). We did learn early in the process here that Avon Mt. has no cell service so this is why we were joking that it might possibly be a good 'hook up' location! Not sure the 2 would risk it but you never know!

To your question about whether 2 people can meet while wearing bracelets, I think the answer is that LE would clearly have the location data from the bracelets of the 2 people if a signal was present for each bracelet. But IMO LE would have to be tracking both bracelets in real time (or even after the fact) to see if the 2 bracelets were meeting. Is CT LE tracking both bracelets together? IDK. IMO they should be, even if not in real time.

But I can all see a scenario with CT bureaucracy where MT and FD both have different parole officers and both are being tracked independently rather than as a 'pair' of bracelets. We have zero info on the parole people involved with MT and FD, are they both with same parole officer or different parole officers? If separate parole officers, are these folks coordinating bracelet data to confirm that FD and MT aren't meeting and how involved is the State Atty in this tracking? Given that it took 3 weeks for Atty Colangelo to realise MT was back in CT after going to NY, my guess is that he isn't involved with data review and it was even unclear whether LE/State Police wee aware of the situation. IDK. Again, the bracelets will provide the data but someone on the ball has to watching in order for it to have any value IMO.

The other thing though is that with available technology and the difficulty tracking people online, IMO if FD and MT wanted to 'hook up' online it wouldn't be hard to pull off if they were determined. My guess is that LE is on top of the issues but I guess it also depends on how much in the way of resources LE wants to devote to tracking/trailing FD and MT.

I think the major issue we have all had with the bracelets is not the technology of the bracelets but the human aspect of following the data, interpreting the data, alerting the chain of command when issues arise and then following up to make sure the chain of command is acting.

Why did it take so many 'non charging' events for FD to finally get flagged? Clearly FD wasn't taking things seriously IMO as even when he knew he had been called to court on Monday, he still let the charge in his bracelet go down this past weekend. If that wasn't giving the 'middle finger' to the State of CT then I'm not sure what was.

MOO
 
Brooklyngirl84 said:
There is something to be said for anyone who can formulate coherent legal arguments off the cuff, complete with citing relevant caselaw, in a criminal matter with such massive public interest. Yes, NP definitely comes across as unethical in some of his requests to the court, as well as his courtroom etiquette, but I have to give credit where credit is due — he knows how to think on his feet. How to reformulate his argument on a moments notice in hopes of getting the judge to reevaluate his position. He is quite good at (apparently) emotionally detaching from the subject matter and sticking to precedent. I really enjoy watching talented litigators go at it in the courtroom. Drama is inherent in law. A courtroom can be as riveting as any Colosseum, IMO. Artists tell stories, and stories about the legal system are laced with human vulnerability. They are cinematic not because they are visual, but because the human experience—in all its complexity—is on full display. Again, not a NP enthusiast by any means, but I have no problem highlighting that he is highly competent at his profession.

Edit: I’ve worked in law for the better part of 15 years, and that experience has definitely shaped my opinion of NP and what he is trying to accomplish in a courtroom. Don’t come for me, ok?? :)
Click to expand...
 
Brooklyngirl84 said:
There is something to be said for anyone who can formulate coherent legal arguments off the cuff, complete with citing relevant caselaw, in a criminal matter with such massive public interest. Yes, NP definitely comes across as unethical in some of his requests to the court, as well as his courtroom etiquette, but I have to give credit where credit is due — he knows how to think on his feet. How to reformulate his argument on a moments notice in hopes of getting the judge to reevaluate his position. He is quite good at (apparently) emotionally detaching from the subject matter and sticking to precedent. I really enjoy watching talented litigators go at it in the courtroom. Drama is inherent in law. A courtroom can be as riveting as any Colosseum, IMO. Artists tell stories, and stories about the legal system are laced with human vulnerability. They are cinematic not because they are visual, but because the human experience—in all its complexity—is on full display. Again, not a NP enthusiast by any means, but I have no problem highlighting that he is highly competent at his profession.

Edit: I’ve worked in law for the better part of 15 years, and that experience has definitely shaped my opinion of NP and what he is trying to accomplish in a courtroom. Don’t come for me, ok?? :)
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, I agree . He even corrected the Judge who cited an incorrect statute or case . Can’t remember which ..
 
Chicago54 said:
And then there is NP explicating chiming in about the use of “non-verbal gestures”!!!

When my littlest was little, she’d often walk up to me with her hands behind her back and say “I don’t have anything in my hand”. Apparently NP and his astute client are using the same logic, deny verbally what is in ‘hidden’ in plain sight.

I’m a little disappointed here. I expected NP to be up on his body language and statement analysis skills, and throw in some obscuring moves-at least enough to try and make this a challenge.

Maybe he just just banks on using fast, ‘I’m -the-smartest-guy-in-the-room, monologue-like -don’t -you-dare-interrupt-me, and overly thesaurus-similar and wordy style of speaking , along with every literary device he ever learned, to confound and obscure.

MOO.

His strategy has become stale and predictable already. The witty sound bites are now just sounding snippy and whiny. Like the buzz of grating giant gnat.

MOO.
Click to expand...
One word to describe Pattisville in court, "yawn".

Maybe I've just seen too many brilliant litigators to be fooled by bluster, loud talk and simple rudeness. IMO Pattis is like the person in the restaurant that is so irritating because not only are they are just talking nonsense but they are doing it twice as loudly as everyone else is speaking. IMO successful litigation is a mix of style, strategy and substance and IMO also, Pattis has none. MOO and maybe my view will change but I doubt it!

What we see from Pattis is just predictable patter and reversion to textbook paragraphs from law school when he is biding for time or thinking about an answer. Yawn.....eyelids dropping....its all filler and not relevant IMO.

At times its all possibly entertaining but its neither thought provoking or very interesting unfortunately and its usually off point.

IMO this song and dance will get 'real old, real quick' if Judge Blawie isn't on point to maintain order in the court.

IMO so little of what Pattis is actually saying in court actually adds value or has substance. Much is designed to not stay on point, talk to the public, talk to the press, talk to MT etc., put down Colangelo and is not on point by design....its non substantive smoke IMO!

So many trials go off the rails because order and discipline are lost. People like Pattis IMO can game the system with bluster and smoke and mirrors and it takes a tough Judge to make sure this doesn't happen.

IMO Judge Blawie has a solid BS meter and knows what is up. But Judge Blawie has been reluctant to reduce what I'd call the "Pattis smoke blowing" and is letting him have his time to talk. We will see how long this continues. I hope not long!

But the hearing on the bracelet could have been done in a few minutes even with multiple issues IMO had Pattis not used the time to talk to the press/public and work around the gag order and give everyone an 'exclusive interview' on the upcoming gag order appeal.

IMO if things continue as we have seen them in Court, this will be one long and painful process to watch but more importantly if the 'Pattis smoke blowing' isn't controlled then it has the potential to very much confuse jurors as they will simply tune out or become lost, which could have tragic outcome for the case.

Its early days yet in this process, so we will just have to watch and see!

MOO
 
Last edited:
CuriousCat9 said:
An NBC reporter tweeted that GF is seeking permanent custody. Has anyone seen anything on this? It seems early, MOO, since he hasn’t been convicted yet, though it’s obvious that this is for the best.

I just wonder if a lot of legal moves lately are being done to put pressure on FD and run out his financial resources. He’s probably wishing he hadn’t filed so many motions during divorce battle as he could use the money now. Every time I see him in court, I have to laugh at how much it’s costing him. It’s going to run out if it hasn’t already. MOO

Justin Schecker on Twitter


This was filed by GF attorneys in August. Still not settled

“Jennifer Dulos’ mother Gloria Farber is seeking permanent custody of the five children. She’s been taking care of them in NYC since her daughter’s disappearance on May 24. Tips can still be submitted on findjenniferdulos.com”
Click to expand...


Fotis Dulos' Attorney Questions Gloria Farber's Mental Capacity | New Canaan ...
Aug 30, 2019 · Farber has been granted temporary custody of the five Dulos children, and she is seeking sole custody. In an Aug. 28 filing, Farber's attorney, Anne ...
 
MsJosie said:
Interesting...
Click to expand...
The tech on the bracelets is sophisticated and uses US Govt satellites combined with cell towers to track bracelets.

Signal blockers (illegal I believe but still accessible) have been tried on bracelets but the technology on the bracelets is very sophisticated so it is likely that the person would simply be picked up by LE immediately IMO.

Like most things where there is a will and a way to flee, it might be possible but I hope LE has other surveillance in place as a backup to the bracelets.

MOO
 
JillR said:
The disappearance of Ms. Dulos drew national media attention to the couple’s marital strife. It also spurred a host of armchair sleuths to search online for clues about the pair’s disintegrating marriage and Ms. Dulos’s whereabouts, and to post frequently about them on social media.

Of course “Ears” and “Mr. Sloppy pants Pattis” are cruising the internet and especially US! The above paragraph is from the following article.....

Estranged Husband Disposed of Body of Missing Mother of 5, Police Say
Click to expand...
Good article. Put it into the media thread for solid references on timeline. Glad the Times has someone following along.
 
afitzy said:
Good question! I am not a tech wizard on cell issues and so I wish we had someone that could help with this! But I will take a stab answering your question regarding the manual I read the other day.

The manual I read outlined basic operations of the device and my guess is that a lot of the technical specifics associated with the tracking of perps isn't readily available and public for obvious reasons! What I did learn is that multiple satellites along with cell towers are used to pinpoint the location of the bracelet. The information on bracelet location is available to LE in real time so far as I can tell. The manual I read was a bit hazy (by design I believe) on the issue of signal strength from cell towers and how this might impact the ability of the satellite tracking to work. My question that I couldn't answer is, in the event that cell towers is lost then is the bracelet signal lost too or is the signal just not as strong? LE I am sure understands this and realises that in CT there are areas with weak to no GPS signals (NC still has persistent issues with no or low cell service but I'm not sure about Farmington/Hartford). We did learn early in the process here that Avon Mt. has no cell service so this is why we were joking that it might possibly be a good 'hook up' location! Not sure the 2 would risk it but you never know!

To your question about whether 2 people can meet while wearing bracelets, I think the answer is that LE would clearly have the location data from the bracelets of the 2 people if a signal was present for each bracelet. But IMO LE would have to be tracking both bracelets in real time (or even after the fact) to see if the 2 bracelets were meeting. Is CT LE tracking both bracelets together? IDK. IMO they should be, even if not in real time.

But I can all see a scenario with CT bureaucracy where MT and FD both have different parole officers and both are being tracked independently rather than as a 'pair' of bracelets. We have zero info on the parole people involved with MT and FD, are they both with same parole officer or different parole officers? If separate parole officers, are these folks coordinating bracelet data to confirm that FD and MT aren't meeting and how involved is the State Atty in this tracking? Given that it took 3 weeks for Atty Colangelo to realise MT was back in CT after going to NY, my guess is that he isn't involved with data review and it was even unclear whether LE/State Police wee aware of the situation. IDK. Again, the bracelets will provide the data but someone on the ball has to watching in order for it to have any value IMO.

The other thing though is that with available technology and the difficulty tracking people online, IMO if FD and MT wanted to 'hook up' online it wouldn't be hard to pull off if they were determined. My guess is that LE is on top of the issues but I guess it also depends on how much in the way of resources LE wants to devote to tracking/trailing FD and MT.

I think the major issue we have all had with the bracelets is not the technology of the bracelets but the human aspect of following the data, interpreting the data, alerting the chain of command when issues arise and then following up to make sure the chain of command is acting.

Why did it take so many 'non charging' events for FD to finally get flagged? Clearly FD wasn't taking things seriously IMO as even when he knew he had been called to court on Monday, he still let the charge in his bracelet go down this past weekend. If that wasn't giving the 'middle finger' to the State of CT then I'm not sure what was.

MOO
Click to expand...

Disclaimer, as I have not read the manual. But I would assume it is like my GPS in my car that is a Garmin. My Garmin tracks through satellites. And it captures the information and it sticks within the internal software. No matter if I have cell service or not. So pair that with the technology to transmit the GPS, and I would think that would be the way the bracelets work. That way it would be collecting satellite GPS even if it was outside of Tower Service. Which I often often. But my Garmin still keeps on ticking. But my phone and cell service does not.

ETA, I see you said the same thing about 5 post later that I am saying both. Sorry for the duplication.
 
219.00 09/24/2019 P MOTION FOR COMMISSION FOR DEPOSITION
Document.gif
newred.gif
SCHMITT
http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=17803878

220.00 09/24/2019 P MOTION FOR COMMISSION FOR DEPOSITION
Document.gif
newred.gif

GOLUB
http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=17803905
 
Mimi in London said:
Ok. This is one coincidence too far.
IMO
Click to expand...
Lots going on with fingers in this case!

We saw FD in court this week with bruised and infected fingernails and a band aid on his thumb I believe.

Unless he is just sitting at the kitchen table and hammering away at his nails with a hammer for no reason at all due to the frustration of his world imploding, we have seen black and blue and damaged/infected nails at every court hearing!

He isn't a builder and so far as we know does not have a hobby as a woodworker or even a gardener! What else could account for the ongoing situation with the nails?

What is going on with the hands and nails!

MOO
 
A bit off topic, but how is the No Contact order enforced between FD & MT? For example, one can communicate ad nauseam with opponents playing "Word With Friends" app on phone/computer without going noticed, so I'm just curious how this is enforced? Hmmm.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 104 more.
Total: 1,957 (members: 105, guests: 1,852)

Online statistics

Members online
105
Guests online
1,852
Total visitors
1,957
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
601,606
Messages
18,126,747
Members
231,104
Latest member
maxnum
Back
Top