Silver Alert CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 *ARRESTS* #31

[afitzy]

Trial???
Mr. Weinstein is entitled to all of that information before trial. Way before.
Speaking of trial, I thought that they had continued the trial setting. No way is it ready to try.

Yes, I agree that he is entitled to it before trial. I also believe Atty Weinstein has a few motions to compel outstanding on various items. I am not convinced that Discovery is 'flowing smoothly' for lack of a better word. The MT deposition situation will take awhile to resolve, Thanksgiving holiday is around the corner and so I agree with you that a 12/3 trial seems to be a 'pipe dream'.

Maybe we will see some movement this week in advance of trying to make the trial a reality? IDK.

 

[afitzy]

Set a hearing. Argue each unanswered question as to how it could affect MT especially the ones like do you know FD? Address? Some things are already out there. Bowman’s wasting time.
Better yet, let them write a brief and explain why MT should not answer. By the question. Not generally. What are you trying to cover up that LE hasn’t charged MT with as of now? If she’s not charged with a crime, on what basis of self incrimination does MT argument rest? An example might be good. Did FD move any cars from Greece back to the USA. Yes or no answer. Not do you know why he moved them back here. If know why, yes or no then say can’t tell you more.
Blanket assertion might be a bit too much. Had they answered some, it wouldn’t appear obstructionistic.
Whatever the judge decides, just DECIDE. So this can move forward. Appeal, ok, too. That’ll get answered in time, then could be sent back to trial level.
Just get off your cush (chairs) and do something.
Force the issues.
Taxes. Quickbooks. Statements. FD is so arrogant bc no judge is stopping him.

I love the suggestion of 'setting a hearing' and going through it all in open court question by question.

But, can you see this happening given the starting point that Atty Bowman has established?

I guess the Judge has discretion here but public discussion of each and every point might be 'explosive' but it also might be the only way to handle it given that both attys and the Judge need to be involved.

Curious to see how the Judge resolves this situation.

What is hard to trust is whether Atty Bowman has so overplayed his hand on the 'further charges' issue for MT and his POV that blanket invocation of the 5th is MT 'only option' to protect her, that he has limited credibility at this point on even answering the Judges questions regarding the individual deposition questions. Seems like there might be a game of cat and mouse going on and while I recognise Atty Bowman is an officer of the Court it seems like the Judge might need to do some investigation work on his own to figure out the creditability of the claims made by Atty Bowman.

I don't think the Judge is just going to believe "trust me its true from Atty Bowman" on any of this and if the Judge does believe this then I think there are other factors at play that are simply above my pay grade here! If this does happen I would hope that Atty Weinstein files for immediate appeal.

MOO

 

[LosAngeles]

Indeed.He did think he was a big fish in a small pond in the Farmington Valley. Not a lot of old money in those towns. Nothing like Fairfield, Darien and Greenwich.
IMO, he was a legend in his own mind.
I would love to know how successful he was in his early years in finance. Tough competition on Wall St. Could his temperament and ego take it?
MOO.

If I recall correctly, after he graduated with his MBA from Columbia in 1997, he worked for a multi-national firm called Cap Gemini (Paris, France HQ). In 2002, Ernst & Young, LLP sold their consulting practice to Cap Gemini, where he worked as a manager for an additional two years before marrying Jennifer in 2004 and starting The Fore Group. IMO, it seems odd that he wasn't promoted beyond a manager in the many year's that he worked in consulting, so I can't speak to how financially successful he was, but it appears he certainly didn't track with the typical promotions at a large consulting firm such at Ernst & Young, LLP. Again, JMO!

 

[sleuth66]

IMO its all a bit ridiculous to try and distance MT from FD at this stage of the game! Its actually amusing to follow along with the Atty Bowman comments in the Civil Case deposition. Its as if the name Fotis Dulos is the equivalent of a piece of gum that is attached to the bottom of your shoe and you simply can't get it off no matter how hard you scrape your shoe on the ground. The issue is though that IMO as it relates to this particular absolutely heinous crime against JF that FD AND MT will be like that piece of gum on the bottom of the shoe, it will always stay there and FD and MT will always be part of whatever happened to JF TOGETHER.

MT and FD appear to have been connected at the hip for over 3 years and actually quite similar to a modern day "Bonnie & Clyde". Not sure how Atty Bowman will seek to reinvent this 'relationship history'?

Now, Atty Bowman doesn't even want MT to acknowledge in a deposition as to knowing FD?

Really? How is that supposed to work? Does anyone honestly think that just because the name of FD isn't mentioned in connection to MT that these 2 individuals aren't intimately connected? DREAM ON!

Up until AW1 MT listed her ADDRESS as being 4Jx! I realise its a large house but does Atty Bowman simply believe the public is stupid and will not believe that FD and MT were a couple and lived together at 4Jx?

AW2 has MT and FD working in tandem to clean 80 MS, detail EE red truck, hide EEs keys from him when he wants the truck back and then follow FD to the car wash to have EE truck professionally detailed. This was in addition to FD driving MT to Westport to meet with Atty Bowman IN ADVANCE OF HER ARREST on 6/2.

AW1 shows FD and MT in the Ford Raptor on Albany Ave for their "Date Night Ride of Stupidity". How will Atty Bowman explain this situation? Oh, they were just running out for a pizza and needed to get rid of some debris that was inside the Raptor? Not sure this will fly with the jury as AW1 mentions the ability of LE to see a 'blood like substance' on some of the debris that was disposed of on Albany.

Right now IMO Atty Bowman looks like an attorney that is fighting against reality on behalf of his most likely very guilty client and that is always an uncomfortable place for a legal professional to be.

Presently the multiple charges against MT I believe each have sentence guidelines of up to 10 years. My only suggestion to Atty Colangelo (who I believe has this entire situation well in hand) is to JUST KEEP ON ADDING to the list based on the evidence found. JUST KEEP GOING.

MT IMO minds as well stock up on long underwear as she is going to be in CT for a very long and won't be seeing the sunny skies of Miami ANY TIME SOON.

MOO

I think it is very generous of you to compare FD to a piece of gum. There is something else that one can step in and get stuck on the sole of the shoe (which is also hard to scrape off) that I think would be a more apt analogy.

 

[afitzy]

I think it is very generous of you to compare FD to a piece of gum. There is something else that one can step in and get stuck on the sole of the shoe (which is also hard to scrape off) that I think would be a more apt analogy.

Yes, @sleuth66 , but I have been skating on thin ice recently in places that shall remain nameless and I didn't want to go to "banned camp" for the summer in case something happens on the case before Easter!

I probably should have used [REDACTED]! You are totally right, my bad!

I think that Atty Bowman is perhaps reaching if he believes that MT will ever be anything different from a co-conspirator in this tragic case. There can be no contact orders in place and motions filed in Civil Court regarding the deposition in an attempt to distance MT from FD, but there will never be a separation of these cases IMO as these 2 are forever linked like "Bonnie and Clyde" IMO.

For the math oriented FD the equation in this alleged crime has always been:

FD + MT = alleged crime perpetrated against JF



MOO

 

[Jmoose]

Set a hearing. Argue each unanswered question as to how it could affect MT especially the ones like do you know FD? Address? Some things are already out there. Bowman’s wasting time.
Better yet, let them write a brief and explain why MT should not answer. By the question. Not generally. What are you trying to cover up that LE hasn’t charged MT with as of now? If she’s not charged with a crime, on what basis of self incrimination does MT argument rest? An example might be good. Did FD move any cars from Greece back to the USA. Yes or no answer. Not do you know why he moved them back here. If know why, yes or no then say can’t tell you more.
Blanket assertion might be a bit too much. Had they answered some, it wouldn’t appear obstructionistic.
Whatever the judge decides, just DECIDE. So this can move forward. Appeal, ok, too. That’ll get answered in time, then could be sent back to trial level.
Just get off your cush (chairs) and do something.
Force the issues.
Taxes. Quickbooks. Statements. FD is so arrogant bc no judge is stopping him.

I am not a lawyer, so I do not understand on what basis FD is permitted to proceed like this-isn’t anyone going to put a stop to this ridiculous nonsense? Can FD’s records requested in the civil case be subpoenaed? And if so, isn’t he required to relinquish them?

 

[Jmoose]

So much in your OP that I keep coming back after giving it a bit more thought!

Sadly we don't know when things went 'off course' for FD once he moved to Farmington with JD in terms of his financial affairs.

It would be hard to disagree with you that 2015 was a pivotal year for FORE/FD as that is the year that the spigot from FIL was turned off in terms of funding.

My guess is that FD acclimated quickly to a lifestyle fuelled by the JF funds and that this part of things happened long before 2015. I suppose at some point that we might learn if FD was at all involved in the financial affairs of JF during their marriage and whether he had direct access to any of her funds?

We have heard accounts of the FD 'generosity' to the "Greek Family and Friends" during the Financial Meltdown of Greece directly from the sister of FD who also was involved with FORE per her linkedin profile from the beginning and we also learned that FD 'took care of' his ageing parents by bringing them to the US. Did FD do this with income earned from FORE or using funds from JD? We don't know the answer to this unfortunately.

I would think that if any records exist at FORE (nobody really has seen anything) and all we have seen I think is the testimony in Family Court where FD gave handwritten financial information to Atty Pyetranker who then seemed to 'transcribe it' for the Court. We also saw information from Family Court that FD provided different financial information to the bank for loan purposes vs. what was submitted to Family Court. So far as I am aware Judge Heller never really got to the bottom of FD financial affairs as this wrangling was ongoing at the time of the JF disappearance (this issue features prominently on the Motives list IMO!).

Atty Weinstein has made extensive requests for financial information for the Civil Case so it will be interesting to see what if anything is made available from FD/FORE.

IME greed is interesting to watch in people and I wonder at what point it set in for FD and when did he simply want MORE MORE MORE and feel in some way entitled to the wealth of the Farber Family? IDK. To conduct a clandestine affair with MT for over a year while still married to JF took some money IMO and I very much wonder where it came from? I also wonder if JF realised that FD might have been financially fleecing her for years?

We know FD didn't pay anything towards the finances of his 5 children as he was labeled a 'deadbeat dad' effectively by Judge Heller in her ruling awarding temporary custody to GF. One of the more sick/hilarious comments about this topic came from Atty Rochlin who when questioned about this topic responded, "the court did not require Mr. Dulos to pay anything on behalf of his children". Yes, this is true because the Court couldn't figure out his financial situation, JD pitbull lawyers couldn't figure out FD financial situation and FD pulled the delay delay delay tactics brilliantly in Family Court all while pleading poverty.

FD has managed to keep 4 white elephant properties going now for nearly 2 years and seems to pay his insurance for vehicles and is now paying for 5 attorneys I believe (Pattis, Rochlin, Murray, Habib and new Pattis sidekick whose name IDK). We've all been asking HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE?

I have any number of guesses/pure speculation on how this is possible, but probably the most basic way its possible is that FD has been sending money to Greece most likely via his sister for 'architectural services' for years and also most likely took anything/everything from JF that wasn't nailed down and hid it or converted it to bitcoin. Sounds a bit wild but if FD needed cash he would have cut the prices on the 4 remaining properties of FORE and bit the bullet and moved on. We have seen no reduction or cut back in FD lifestyle as demonstrated clearly by the Atty Weinstein MT deposition questions. FD/MT were in Greece/Spain/FL/Vail/Argentina during their time together. I do wonder if LE will unravel this convoluted tale? Will any of the other players we have seen involved in this case from KM to DF to 'Greek Friends' to 'Greek Benefactor' play out in either the Civil Case, the Criminal Case or perhaps new charges for alleged new crimes Federal or State?

Lots of questions but few answers but I hope the State is ALL OVER IT!

MOO

We did see him shopping at HomeGoods for dishes, so at least it wasn’t Bloomingdales...I am sure he never set foot in there before all of the s*** hit the fan! But seriously, you are right; he has been living like he is still high on the hog, and with no way of showing how he supports it. How does he get away with all of this? Why do all of these judges let him continue to give everyone the finger when he is told to comply with document demands for court proceedings?

 

[Jmoose]

I love the suggestion of 'setting a hearing' and going through it all in open court question by question.

But, can you see this happening given the starting point that Atty Bowman has established?

I guess the Judge has discretion here but public discussion of each and every point might be 'explosive' but it also might be the only way to handle it given that both attys and the Judge need to be involved.

Curious to see how the Judge resolves this situation.

What is hard to trust is whether Atty Bowman has so overplayed his hand on the 'further charges' issue for MT and his POV that blanket invocation of the 5th is MT 'only option' to protect her, that he has limited credibility at this point on even answering the Judges questions regarding the individual deposition questions. Seems like there might be a game of cat and mouse going on and while I recognise Atty Bowman is an officer of the Court it seems like the Judge might need to do some investigation work on his own to figure out the creditability of the claims made by Atty Bowman.

I don't think the Judge is just going to believe "trust me its true from Atty Bowman" on any of this and if the Judge does believe this then I think there are other factors at play that are simply above my pay grade here! If this does happen I would hope that Atty Weinstein files for immediate appeal.

MOO

I wonder if judges do just take an attorney’s word for the fact that they are protecting a witness’s right to keep from incriminating one’s self? Somehow I can’t see any of these Ct. judges looking too deeply into the motives. These defendants and their lawyers seem to continue to get away with avoiding answering all questions and producing no documents.

 

[Hair of the Dog]

No, I don't believe so. I thought that the collateral for the 4Jx mortage consisted of liquid collateral (stocks, bonds etc. that I think totalled $2.3 million or so).
MOO

I find the whole collateral situation and structure of the deal interesting; if it was provided as additional security for the mortgage, either 4JC didn't appraise at a high enough amount for the mortgage requested and/or FD & JD did not have the income to support the mortgage payments. It really is a mystery to me how they thought FD would ever have the income to support such an expensive mortgage, even if it was interest only, and pay the property taxes, insurance, utilities, upkeep and maintenance, etc. That is a big house to care for, heat and cool and the elements are harsh. I suppose you could argue that a percentage could be written off as business expenses but he would have to have the appropriate income to write something off against it and we still haven't even touched upon the costs of doing business, like payroll, payroll taxes, insurance. IDK, as best as I can figure, all of the parties to the transaction had different agendas.

FD: 4JC a compound that will serve as an homage to my greatness, people will come from miles around to see it and envy ME and all that I have achieved.

JD: A lovely home to raise our family, celebrations, holidays ....it will make FD so happy and he/we can work from home.

HF/GF: This is really important to JD and FD, his plan is sketchy but let's see if we can help them out, it will ease JD's stress level, give them some space for the kids.

Lender: Big loan booked, big fees collected.

MOO, MOO, MOO until Patrick Frazee's cows come home (and they are running in the other direction as fast as they can). His chickens on the other hand have come home to roost! #justice for Kelsey

 

[Hair of the Dog]

If friend’s liens were funded, there would be checks going to FD or Fore. Show us the money trail. Or paper trail. Or SOMETHING to prove you gave FD anything in exchange for the lien.
Filing a fraudulent court clerk/real estate document is a crime in most places.
Oh, you gave him cash? Did you get a receipt from FD? Where did you get the cash from? Oh. Under your bed? Stuffed in your mattress? I see.
FD has a really wide circle of friends. Talking all these people into nefarious plots astounds me. Pied Piper of Hartford and surrounding areas.

Totally agree! Funny how files documenting questionable transactions seem to "disappear" at a higher rate than other transaction files at least in my experience.

 

[Hair of the Dog]

The loans from friends.....if they are secured by a recorded deed of trust or a mortgage (absent that, good luck collecting!). There is information to be gleaned from that document that could point to who prepared the document and the next step in the trail to find the settlement statement and record of funds moving in and out of the transaction. If the transaction is legit, the "friend-lender" or his attorney should be holding the original promissory note that the mortgage/deed of trust secures. I wonder if the "friend-lenders" had funds that they needed to "park" or if they were just seduced by FD too?

MOO, MOO, MOO have a lovely day!

 

[afitzy]

IMO you nailed it! We've seen over and over where a CT makes a request of FD and he doesn't comply and there are no consequences or there are endless motions of objection etc.

Atty Weinstein has been making various discovery requests to FD/Atty BM and previously Atty KM now for nearly 2 years. Sometimes we see Atty Weinstein come back with a motion to the Judge to 'compel' compliance and we have also seen a couple of motions for 'default' due to FD/Atty BM non compliance.

Its hard to track these 'compel' motions so I usually assume that the 'compel' motion from Atty Weinstein was successful unless I see Atty Weinstein come back with a 'default' motion on the same issue (to me this implies/confirms FD non compliance).

So far as I know the Judge has denied the 2 most recent 'default' motions and so far as I know the Quickbooks (due in 2018) still haven't been delivered but I also haven't seen another default motion for this item recently from Atty Weinstein. It also seems that Atty Weinstein finally got all the credit card and bank statement information as he had been asking for that for a long time too. My guess is that this is where the Home Goods, trips and restaurants for MT and FD allegations came from.

Getting visibility on this discovery process is IMO hard but I keep trying my best to figure it out and putting together puzzle pieces absent any assistance from the Press on the details of the process or commentary from the Attys.

MOO

 

[afitzy]

I wonder if judges do just take an attorney’s word for the fact that they are protecting a witness’s right to keep from incriminating one’s self? Somehow I can’t see any of these Ct. judges looking too deeply into the motives. These defendants and their lawyers seem to continue to get away with avoiding answering all questions and producing no documents.

Presently I'm having a tough time giving CT Judges the benefit of the doubt on much but will try to remain positive in this case!

From everything I've read, its highly unusual to successfully be able to invoke the 5th Amendment on every question in a deposition in a civil case. Atty Weinstein in his motion goes into this issue in detail and I believe he is right to essentially call "BS" on this course of action from MT and Atty Bowman IMO. Given the deterioration of the 'trust level' IMO between Atty Weinstein and Atty Bowman in this process, I'm not sure that the Judge can simply take the word of Atty Bowman on anything and it seems the Judge must either conduct his own investigation and interview in Chambers maybe to verify the veracity of the Atty Bowman claims that MT saying anything would/could result in other charges (however this is defined). The Judge has a potentially tricky situation on his hands here IMO.

I remain quite sceptical that there wasn't another way to handle this situation by Atty Bowman as what he has done is create a situation that yet again simply delays the Civil Case and puts the trial date in jeopardy and frankly IMO on the surface seems to be just yet another move to abuse the process and delay delay delay. I can only guess that we see these CT lawyers using this tactic because they know its effective and is simply never punished and motion claims such as Atty Bowman has made might never be investigated? IDK, I'm just guessing about this situation and as disappointed as anyone that we aren't seeing Atty's wanting to move forward in the case but rather they seem to want to push a case back or delay it forever.

My guess is that this was his intention all along, but who knows, IDK? But if his legal maneurvering on behalf of MT was designed to delay the inevitable and it is somehow discovered to be a sham pure and simple I hope that there are consequences imposed for Atty Bowman and his client as this could all very well be a waste of court time pure and simple. The other thing I wonder is whether MT isn't really talking details with Atty Bowman so his over reaching and broad approach to invoking the 5th amendment on behalf of his client is needed to protect her from the unknown. IDK, but I don't think anyone can be legally protected completely from the unknown (even though Atty Bowman claims to know "everything" that the State has in the criminal case), which is why I am so suspicious of what we are seeing from Atty Bowman. I do wonder if like all the other atty's in his case he is simply biding his time to see what other charges are forthcoming for his client? Again, IDK.

I do have faith in Atty Weinstein continuing to push the boulder of this case up the hill and my hat is off to him for trying amidst limited assistance from the CT Judiciary and the other Atty's in this case IMO.

MOO

 

[sds71]

256.00 11/18/2019 P REQUEST FOR ADJUDICATION COMPLEX LITIGATION (JD-CL-77)

EXPEDITED MOTION FOR COMMISSION

 

[afitzy]

Watching the closing arguments in the Berreth case today and some of the parallels to the Dulos case are IMO quite chilling to hear.

How 'bout this quote made by the Prosecution during their closing argument this morning:

"We all wish #KelseyBerreth would walk through that door right now," [BBM] says prosecutor Beth Reed. "That's never going to happen."

In using that last sentence, Reed repeats #PatrickFrazee's own words to another person about Berreth a day before his arrest.
@csgazette

Jakob Rodgers on Twitter

I'm sure most if not all here will recognise where we heart FD utter these exact same words about JF (from the infamous Dateline interview). Sometimes I wonder if there is an online 'playbook' for these tragic situations that I have somehow just missed? I do very much wonder if Atty. P. is behind these words we heard from FD which I do believe will haunt him and this case for a very long time.

MOO

 

[Jmoose]

Watching the closing arguments in the Berreth case today and some of the parallels to the Dulos case are IMO quite chilling to hear.

How 'bout this quote made by the Prosecution during their closing argument this morning:

"We all wish #KelseyBerreth would walk through that door right now," [BBM] says prosecutor Beth Reed. "That's never going to happen."

In using that last sentence, Reed repeats #PatrickFrazee's own words to another person about Berreth a day before his arrest.
@csgazette

Jakob Rodgers on Twitter

I'm sure most if not all here will recognise where we heart FD utter these exact same words about JF (from the infamous Dateline interview). Sometimes I wonder if there is an online 'playbook' for these tragic situations that I have somehow just missed? I do very much wonder if Atty. P. is behind these words we heard from FD which I do believe will haunt him and this case for a very long time.

MOO

Are you “watching” watching closing arguments, or just following it? Curious, because I would watch this, too

 

[afitzy]

Are you “watching” watching closing arguments, or just following it? Curious, because I would watch this, too

Sorry, figuratively I'm watching! There are no cameras and no live tweeting. Reporters tweet on court break periods. Sorry for any confusion, but I wish I had been there in person to hear the closing arguments.

 

[afitzy]

256.00 11/18/2019 P REQUEST FOR ADJUDICATION COMPLEX LITIGATION (JD-CL-77)

EXPEDITED MOTION FOR COMMISSION

This request seems to be for the deposition of Nanny, LA so far as I can tell.

 

[Cloudydiamond]

This request seems to be for the deposition of Nanny, LA so far as I can tell.

Yes, that’s correct. It is suppose to happen on 11/22.

 

[sds71]

the Jennifer Dulos investigation has captivated Connecticut and beyond. Now it’s the focus of a photography exhibit in Bridgeport. See our story starting at 5 on @News12CT.