Silver Alert CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 *ARRESTS* #33

[waldojabba]

https://www.middletownpress.com/middletown/article/Attorney-CT-jury-selection-process-eliminates-14908481.php

interesting article re gag order hearing

 

[NWLady]

For some reason today I was thinking about MT role in the overall situation and her relationship with Fd. MT was a 44 yo woman, unmarried, one child and single parent who had a poor relationship history and no career who seemed content to randomly bounce around from job to job and relationship. At the time of JFd disappearance MT had been in CT probably a little over 2 years, the Dulos divorce was ongoing with no end in sight as no trial had been scheduled and MT was 44 years old and not getting any younger. Did she want another child and was committed to the Fd relationship or was she satisfied with being a mistress and working for FORE Group? What exactly was the relationship status with Fd? Was MT simply being used by Fd to torture and torment JFd and as such was disposable? We saw Fd say in the Dateline interview that he was 'enamoured' with MT? The word choice might not have been the best but to some this might imply infatuation rather than commitment to a relationship. But, IDK. We see in AW1 and AW2 that MT and Fd are together every step of the way from going to the ATM to get the cash for EE truck detailing to MT picking up FD and returning him to car wash. We also see FD and MT working as a very clear team to do whatever it was they were doing at 80MS IMO too?

But, is this who MT really is? How much involvement does she have in what happened to JFd?

I started a list of some of the 'knowns' and 'unknowns' so feel free to add/substract to the list to see if we can make progress even with very little information:


Fd and MT seemed inseparable in AW1 and 2 (Albany trip and Cleaning at 80Ms). Perhaps, Fd just doesn't like to be alone and just wants constant attention and companionship and MT was his covenant companion who did what she was told? With 5 young children there was no way JFd could do this and I very much wonder how much it bugged Fd?

Just putting the few known details about her for consideration:

MT:
-44/45 yo
-Bilingual - Spanish English - language at home believed to be Spanish
-Twin and her brother died (not sure we know when?)
-Possibly troubled childhood - time spent in NYS ranch for troubled kids - was it due to death of brother or drugs/alcohol or other issues?
-Parents divorced (we don't know when - Father believed to be in another relationship presently)
-College Psychology in Venezuela
-Training in MI for equine Therapy
-Work history spotty and uncommitted - no professional focus
-By all accounts simply likes to ride and ski with no other interests or focus on work
-marketing in Argentina for Begue ski resort, club promoter in Miami, equine therapy in Dubai, misc for FORE Group believed to be social media and web work
-one failed Long Term Relationship with child
-receiving child support from bio dad - will eventually end and MT has zero track record of being able to financially support herself
-marriage to motorbike racer ended due to her affair most likely with Fd
-affair with Fd started in 2015
-conducted affair in Miami and eventually moved in CT in 2016/2017
-worked for FORE Group (salary in range of $120,000/yr)
-not believed to own real estate in CT
-owns condo in Vail CO with Begue (interesting choice IMO as JFd had lived in Aspen and gone to Aspen for years)
-openly conducted affair in Farmington with Fd which couldn't have endeared her to locals
-her daughter attended same school attended by the Dulos children when her daughter first came to CT - We don't know if this was Fd or MT driven choice - but IMO there is a story here that could be telling.
-traveled extensively with Fd (Greece, Argentina, FL, Spain, Vail)
-her family seemed to 'embrace' the relationship with Fd - numerous trips to CT by all it seemed - Why? Daughter with troubled past, multiple failed relationships starts an affair with a married guy and is involved in complicated and acrimonious divorce - not sure what family would see this as a positive move for their daughter and might question moving from FL to CT to get involved
-MT and her daughter move into 4Jx when JFd and the 5 children depart
-daughter goes to school in CT at EW school as a daily student
-MT supposedly drives daughter to school and back daily and does not use the bus program
-MT to date has not been cooperative with LE (stated in AW1 and less clear statement in AW2, even after she admitted to lying for 2 months) - open issue I believe
-AW1 shows MT lying to LE for 2 months about basic details of 5/24 missing date
-AW1 shows MT in the Raptor on Albany Avenue with Fd disposing of items
-AW2 introduces the idea of the 'alibi scripts' - Unlikely IMO that 'innocent and uninvolved folks' need 'alibi scripts' and what I find fascinating is that Fd had MT write HER OWN 'alibi script'
-AW2 shows MT admitting to LE that she lied but she only seems to respond to questions if shown a picture or direct evidence
-AW2 shows MT assisting Fd with cleaning EE truck at 80 MS
-AW2 shows Fd tossing a contaminated rag that most likely had JFd blood on it to MT
-AW2 shows MT assisting Fd by going with him to ATM to pick up cash to pay for the EE truck detailing
-AW2 shows MT picking up and dropping off Fd at Car Wash for EE truck detailing
-AW2 shows MT playing 'hide the keys' with EE truck keys to keep him from taking truck for the weekend
-The DM photos of MT and Fd at 4Jx as they were being escorted to Litchfield show a MT seeming to 'take charge' with LE which I always found quite fascinating. Fd was more in the background and observing while MT made the rounds and was interacting with LE based on what we see. Was the MT role in the relationship to 'take care of Fd and things in their lives in general'?
-MT supposedly 'breaks up with Fd' in 11/2019 and removes her belongings from 4Jx

Questions:
When exactly did MT move to CT? 2016 or 2017?
Where did MT live when she came to CT? Was 585 Deercliff Property really developed for MT or was it part of a scheme to hide money from JFd? IMO something about that transaction really bugged JFD which was why her atty's went to the mat in Family Court fighting about it? Not sure we know exactly why though.
Did Fd really think that JFd would remain at 4Jx with the children and that MT would live at Deercliff and that he was surprised when JFd fled with the children?
Did MT contribute anything financially to relationship with 4Jx?
Did MT have 'assigned' house duties or any responsibilities in the relationship or did Fd hire people to clean and take care of the property?
Does MT have any 'voice' in the relationship with Fd or was her role simply as the classic passive mistress?
Did MT want more children and was pressuring FD to wrap up the divorce?
Was MT fed up with the divorce drama?
Did MT have any interest in step parenting 5 Dulos children?
Was MT just an accessory to FD and travel/living companion or was there something beyond this to the relationship?
What did MT think about JFd? Resentment, Anger, Indifference, Rage etc.
Did JFd make MT feel powerless and as if JFd controlled the MT/Fd relationship? Keep thinking about how mad FD must have been to give up access to his children due to the MT relationship. Did he do this for MT or did he do it to JFd to send the message that you can't control me/us MT/Fd?
We have the story from @thekirbyfamily from MT hairdresser about MT 'killing mice or bats (I don't recall which)' with pleasure which was deleted by Mod, but I thought it was significant.
-MT timeline on 5/24 and the space before and after this is largely undefined.
-Was MT job on 5/24 to simply watch Fd phone which was left at 4Jx or was she actually in NC on the missing date?
-Why does MT continue to not cooperate with LE? Or, is this false?


Other:
Fd seems to have worked hard based on what we see in AW2 IMO to directly implicate MT and ditto for EE. I would think MT would have had to be pretty stupid not to see this and I do wonder if she didn't see it or it wasn't an issue, simply because she was much more or equally involved at Fd.


MOO

Thank you for sharing - you sum things up so very well.

Something that has always bothered me (as I'm sure everyone else here too) is WHY did MT go see Attorney B. before her arrest even? IIRC, she went to see Atty B. the same day as the car wash incident (and I cannot recall where this was in the timeline of her and FD's arrest), but WHY was she going to see Atty. B before she was even charged with anything??

 

[NWLady]

For some reason today I was thinking about MT role in the overall situation and her relationship with Fd. MT was a 44 yo woman, unmarried, one child and single parent who had a poor relationship history and no career who seemed content to randomly bounce around from job to job and relationship. At the time of JFd disappearance MT had been in CT probably a little over 2 years, the Dulos divorce was ongoing with no end in sight as no trial had been scheduled and MT was 44 years old and not getting any younger. Did she want another child and was committed to the Fd relationship or was she satisfied with being a mistress and working for FORE Group? What exactly was the relationship status with Fd? Was MT simply being used by Fd to torture and torment JFd and as such was disposable? We saw Fd say in the Dateline interview that he was 'enamoured' with MT? The word choice might not have been the best but to some this might imply infatuation rather than commitment to a relationship. But, IDK. We see in AW1 and AW2 that MT and Fd are together every step of the way from going to the ATM to get the cash for EE truck detailing to MT picking up FD and returning him to car wash. We also see FD and MT working as a very clear team to do whatever it was they were doing at 80MS IMO too?

But, is this who MT really is? How much involvement does she have in what happened to JFd?

I started a list of some of the 'knowns' and 'unknowns' so feel free to add/substract to the list to see if we can make progress even with very little information:


Fd and MT seemed inseparable in AW1 and 2 (Albany trip and Cleaning at 80Ms). Perhaps, Fd just doesn't like to be alone and just wants constant attention and companionship and MT was his covenant companion who did what she was told? With 5 young children there was no way JFd could do this and I very much wonder how much it bugged Fd?

Just putting the few known details about her for consideration:

MT:
-44/45 yo
-Bilingual - Spanish English - language at home believed to be Spanish
-Twin and her brother died (not sure we know when?)
-Possibly troubled childhood - time spent in NYS ranch for troubled kids - was it due to death of brother or drugs/alcohol or other issues?
-Parents divorced (we don't know when - Father believed to be in another relationship presently)
-College Psychology in Venezuela
-Training in MI for equine Therapy
-Work history spotty and uncommitted - no professional focus
-By all accounts simply likes to ride and ski with no other interests or focus on work
-marketing in Argentina for Begue ski resort, club promoter in Miami, equine therapy in Dubai, misc for FORE Group believed to be social media and web work
-one failed Long Term Relationship with child
-receiving child support from bio dad - will eventually end and MT has zero track record of being able to financially support herself
-marriage to motorbike racer ended due to her affair most likely with Fd
-affair with Fd started in 2015
-conducted affair in Miami and eventually moved in CT in 2016/2017
-worked for FORE Group (salary in range of $120,000/yr)
-not believed to own real estate in CT
-owns condo in Vail CO with Begue (interesting choice IMO as JFd had lived in Aspen and gone to Aspen for years)
-openly conducted affair in Farmington with Fd which couldn't have endeared her to locals
-her daughter attended same school attended by the Dulos children when her daughter first came to CT - We don't know if this was Fd or MT driven choice - but IMO there is a story here that could be telling.
-traveled extensively with Fd (Greece, Argentina, FL, Spain, Vail)
-her family seemed to 'embrace' the relationship with Fd - numerous trips to CT by all it seemed - Why? Daughter with troubled past, multiple failed relationships starts an affair with a married guy and is involved in complicated and acrimonious divorce - not sure what family would see this as a positive move for their daughter and might question moving from FL to CT to get involved
-MT and her daughter move into 4Jx when JFd and the 5 children depart
-daughter goes to school in CT at EW school as a daily student
-MT supposedly drives daughter to school and back daily and does not use the bus program
-MT to date has not been cooperative with LE (stated in AW1 and less clear statement in AW2, even after she admitted to lying for 2 months) - open issue I believe
-AW1 shows MT lying to LE for 2 months about basic details of 5/24 missing date
-AW1 shows MT in the Raptor on Albany Avenue with Fd disposing of items
-AW2 introduces the idea of the 'alibi scripts' - Unlikely IMO that 'innocent and uninvolved folks' need 'alibi scripts' and what I find fascinating is that Fd had MT write HER OWN 'alibi script'
-AW2 shows MT admitting to LE that she lied but she only seems to respond to questions if shown a picture or direct evidence
-AW2 shows MT assisting Fd with cleaning EE truck at 80 MS
-AW2 shows Fd tossing a contaminated rag that most likely had JFd blood on it to MT
-AW2 shows MT assisting Fd by going with him to ATM to pick up cash to pay for the EE truck detailing
-AW2 shows MT picking up and dropping off Fd at Car Wash for EE truck detailing
-AW2 shows MT playing 'hide the keys' with EE truck keys to keep him from taking truck for the weekend
-The DM photos of MT and Fd at 4Jx as they were being escorted to Litchfield show a MT seeming to 'take charge' with LE which I always found quite fascinating. Fd was more in the background and observing while MT made the rounds and was interacting with LE based on what we see. Was the MT role in the relationship to 'take care of Fd and things in their lives in general'?
-MT supposedly 'breaks up with Fd' in 11/2019 and removes her belongings from 4Jx

Questions:
When exactly did MT move to CT? 2016 or 2017?
Where did MT live when she came to CT? Was 585 Deercliff Property really developed for MT or was it part of a scheme to hide money from JFd? IMO something about that transaction really bugged JFD which was why her atty's went to the mat in Family Court fighting about it? Not sure we know exactly why though.
Did Fd really think that JFd would remain at 4Jx with the children and that MT would live at Deercliff and that he was surprised when JFd fled with the children?
Did MT contribute anything financially to relationship with 4Jx?
Did MT have 'assigned' house duties or any responsibilities in the relationship or did Fd hire people to clean and take care of the property?
Does MT have any 'voice' in the relationship with Fd or was her role simply as the classic passive mistress?
Did MT want more children and was pressuring FD to wrap up the divorce?
Was MT fed up with the divorce drama?
Did MT have any interest in step parenting 5 Dulos children?
Was MT just an accessory to FD and travel/living companion or was there something beyond this to the relationship?
What did MT think about JFd? Resentment, Anger, Indifference, Rage etc.
Did JFd make MT feel powerless and as if JFd controlled the MT/Fd relationship? Keep thinking about how mad FD must have been to give up access to his children due to the MT relationship. Did he do this for MT or did he do it to JFd to send the message that you can't control me/us MT/Fd?
We have the story from @thekirbyfamily from MT hairdresser about MT 'killing mice or bats (I don't recall which)' with pleasure which was deleted by Mod, but I thought it was significant.
-MT timeline on 5/24 and the space before and after this is largely undefined.
-Was MT job on 5/24 to simply watch Fd phone which was left at 4Jx or was she actually in NC on the missing date?
-Why does MT continue to not cooperate with LE? Or, is this false?


Other:
Fd seems to have worked hard based on what we see in AW2 IMO to directly implicate MT and ditto for EE. I would think MT would have had to be pretty stupid not to see this and I do wonder if she didn't see it or it wasn't an issue, simply because she was much more or equally involved at Fd.


MOO

Thank you for sharing - you sum things up so very well.

Something that has always bothered me (as I'm sure everyone else here too) is WHY did MT go see Attorney B. before her arrest even? IIRC, she went to see Atty B. the same day as the car wash incident (and I cannot recall where this was in the timeline of her and FD's arrest), but WHY was she going to see Atty. B before she was even charged with anything??

 

[CTGrammy]

If MT truly did go and attempt to poke her nose into the private family business to see if she could find out what the elements of the trust were, then to me, that’s another layer of guilt in Jennifer’s death. That she was “all in”. That would not be the action of a person who is merely personally, intimately involved with a man who wants a divorce from his wife. The trust(s), which by anyone’s standards, would be considered to be none of her business-even if they were planning to stay together long-term. For her to have allegedly gone and pooched around looking at the trust documents really looks like motive to me. IMO

Definitely.

Just the fact that MT traveled to NYC to look at HF's Will in Probate Court, speaks to the Motive for the murder of JFd and puts MT right in the middle of that murder.

I am just glad that she did Not get to see the Trust Documents, since they are exempt from being filed in Probate Court.

This is Why Fd/Pattisville keeps trying to get access to the Trust Documents. IF, Fd Knew how the Trust was set up, he would not need to keep trying to get access to the Trust Documents.

Fd/Pattisville have absolutely no idea what the stipulations are and they are in for a rude awakening if they ever see the documents.

I have No Doubt that the Trusts are 110% protected and Fd will Never have access to or receive funds from any of the Trusts.

IMO.

 

[Daisyeve]

Thank you for sharing - you sum things up so very well.

Something that has always bothered me (as I'm sure everyone else here too) is WHY did MT go see Attorney B. before her arrest even? IIRC, she went to see Atty B. the same day as the car wash incident (and I cannot recall where this was in the timeline of her and FD's arrest), but WHY was she going to see Atty. B before she was even charged with anything??

Maybe a relative of MT’s was in on the plan and made the appt for her?

 

[Jmoose]

Thank you for sharing - you sum things up so very well.

Something that has always bothered me (as I'm sure everyone else here too) is WHY did MT go see Attorney B. before her arrest even? IIRC, she went to see Atty B. the same day as the car wash incident (and I cannot recall where this was in the timeline of her and FD's arrest), but WHY was she going to see Atty. B before she was even charged with anything??

I think that bothers all of us...I t would seem as if it’s related directly to the disappearance of Jennifer, but maybe she went to ask some general questions, such as “well, my boyfriend’s wife is missing, and even though he didn’t have anything to do with it, the police may want to talk to me-do I have to speak with them, or can I say “no”?

 

[sds71]

Atty Pattis On Dulos, Gag Order
BREAKING: Atty Pattis On Dulos, Gag Order | The Vinnie Penn Project | 960 WELI

 

[Jmoose]

I think that bothers all of us...I t would seem as if it’s related directly to the disappearance of Jennifer, but maybe she went to ask some general questions, such as “well, my boyfriend’s wife is missing, and even though he didn’t have anything to do with it, the police may want to talk to me-do I have to speak with them, or can I say “no”?

Oh, and I also wanted to say that she could have gone to see Bowman, and thinking that she would never be charged, because those two creeps thought they covered it all-just wanted to make sure she had a lawyer in case of trouble, because it would only be natural for police to question the two of them. I don’t think she thought she’d be arrested.

 

[ajksmom]

In regards to MT attempting to see the Probate documents another thought has crossed my mind.
Perhaps she went to verify the “story” that FD had given her. Just maybe she had started to question his version of the divorce proceedings holding up his inheritance from JDs dad.

 

[BellaVita]

Thank you for sharing - you sum things up so very well.

Something that has always bothered me (as I'm sure everyone else here too) is WHY did MT go see Attorney B. before her arrest even? IIRC, she went to see Atty B. the same day as the car wash incident (and I cannot recall where this was in the timeline of her and FD's arrest), but WHY was she going to see Atty. B before she was even charged with anything??

I would have gone to an attorney. It's a very smart thing to do. I wouldn't have waited for charges either. I would have gone even if I did not go on a garbage run or to a car wash. Of course, it's most helpful to tell your attorney the truth! Anybody in MT shoes, knowing where fingers will be pointed, should go. But NOT with FD in tow. IMO.

 

[waldojabba]

Attorney: CT jury selection process eliminates need for gag order in Jennifer Dulos case

interesting article re gag order h

Thank you for sharing - you sum things up so very well.

Something that has always bothered me (as I'm sure everyone else here too) is WHY did MT go see Attorney B. before her arrest even? IIRC, she went to see Atty B. the same day as the car wash incident (and I cannot recall where this was in the timeline of her and FD's arrest), but WHY was she going to see Atty. B before she was even charged with anything??

Pure speculation but I think there is some connection with Bowman and the MT family.
She did not just pick his name out of the yellow pages. She was told to go visit him proactively.

 

[CTGrammy]

In regards to MT attempting to see the Probate documents another thought has crossed my mind.
Perhaps she went to verify the “story” that FD had given her. Just maybe she had started to question his version of the divorce proceedings holding up his inheritance from JDs dad.

Great thought.

 

[Alathea]

I don't think its unrealistic to expect that the order might be tweaked by the CT Supreme Court and the covered parties possibly narrowed as well.

But, IMO Judge Blawie did an excellent job of surveying the universe of people touching the Dulos case, saw where the 'weak links' in terms of questionable speech existed and crafted a fair order to cover most of the behaviour that could jeopardise having a fair trial down the line. I do wish that Judge Blawie had sealed the court files at the same time the 'gag order' was imposed so that Atty. P. using motions as a PR tool to circumvent the 'gag order' had been cut off. Even if the 'gag order' is revised upon appeal, I do hope Judge Blawie gives serious consideration to a total seal as it will serve to focus Atty. P. on his job and not using motions to communicate with the Press.

Atty. P. made zero attempt IMO to work with the order and simply wanted to say whatever he wanted and say it whenever as he knew that nobody would ever call him on compliance with 3.6a or 3.6b, which to me is the total tragedy in this situation!

CT has a fairly robust set of Professional Standards and neither Judge Blawie nor Atty Colangelo were willing to call out Atty. P. or Pattisville for non compliance IMO. This is hugely disappointing but sadly not inconsistent with what we have seen in terms of compliance requirements in other courts. Judge Heller didn't call out Atty. P. publicly for his leaking a sealed psychological exam document and instead let him resign under his own steam. Judge Noble IMO did an ever poorer job policing the behaviour of Atty's KM and BM in Civil Court. I guess my question is why have rules if atty's aren't bound by them?

The CT Supreme Justice's IMO were absolutely correct IMO to ask why the lower court didn't exercise its available remedies in advance of imposing the 'gag order'. Good question and one where we have zero answer. There has to be a Judge somewhere that is willing to call Atty. P. on his ongoing decisions to not comply with professional standards. So far we just have the Judge from Danbury in the Jones case. So, there is so far 1 judge in CT that is willing to stand up for professional standards! But I suppose that the Judge had to make the citation for Atty. P. non compliance as forging an affidavit in the Jones case might just be a bridge too far even in CT! Entire situation on non compliance with professional standards defies logic IMO. We saw Atty Bowman send in his famous [REDACTED] memo without proper notification to the Plaintiff, which in other States would have earned him censure and a fine but in CT, nobody blinked and eye and Judge Noble did nothing. Not sure where the AG and Senior Judges in CT are on all these issues but its shocking to watch all this play out over and over.

What I do find interesting is that the 'gag order' as drafted by Judge Blawie allows quite a wide range of room for conversation topics. But, instead of working within the bounds of the order, instead what we saw was Fd and Atty. P. violate the order immediately out of the box with the Greek Interviews. There was ZERO attempt that I saw by Atty. P. to work with the 'gag order' and Judge Blawie. Nope, it was just immediate temper tantrum and immediate appeal. IMO he did it all for personal publicity and because Fd was willing to pay for the process of 3 long briefs and a day trip to Hartford. The entire process seemed 'frivolous' and absolutely consistent with what we have seen Fd now seem to make a career out of which is filing questionable and possibly frivolous legal actions with the purpose of delay and distraction.

What I do find fascinating about Atty. P. is that he doesn't seem to learn much from past mistakes or questions. Judge Blawie asked Atty Smith about the 6th Amendment argument when he was in Stamford for a Fd hearing and Atty Smith couldn't do much with the issue because of the poorly drafted motion from Atty. P. and so just gave up the point to Judge Blawie. You might have thought that with the revised motion to CT Supreme Court that Atty. P. might have redrafted that section of his brief to refine his thinking given that the original motion language was incomprehensible. Nope, Atty. P. just recycled the same ill formed and ill conceived notion and did no better in his verbal arguments on the point than Atty Smith did with Judge Blawie. I wish I had a panorama shot of all the Justices at the same time when Atty. P. was arguing for Fd right to waive his 6th Amendment rights! The looks ranged from jaws dropped to eyebrows raised to head scratching to others who simply wanted to jump out of their seats at the lunacy of the proposal. Why waste the time of the Court with such obvious nonsense and half baked and ill conceived ideas? I wish the Senior Justice had simply said we won't hear this aspect of your brief Atty. P. and simply shut it down as the conversation wasn't even worthy of 1st year law class just learning about the 6th amendment at a fifth tier law school, it was quite simply that bad IMO and a total waste of court time. Yet, Atty. P. did it and he will sadly probably do something equally half baked again and again.

The idea that NP brought to the CT Supreme Court which was that the 'gag order' was unconstitutional on its face and was some kind of 'unique' and 'punitive tool' created by Judge Blawie is truly nonsense IMO and the Justice's saw through this for the hyperbole that it was IMO. I still find it incredible that Atty. P. takes zero responsibility for why the 'gag order' was necessitated in the first place.

I also find it fascinating that Atty. P. really seems to take very little personal pride in the quality of his arguments and the drafting of his motions or focusing much on the task at hand in terms of the nuts and bolts of defending his client. He seems to be all about the verbal argument and so it was interesting to see him lose his train of thought a couple of times and not be able to cohesively present his case, particularly on the at best half baked 6th amendment argument. It just seems like Atty. P. likes to argue for the sake of argument rather than to actually accomplish much and certainly this entire topic had very little to do with his client too IMO. There seems to be little in the way of focus or discipline in the approach and I'm surprised that Fd isn't fixated on this issue as he will no doubt pay a very heavy price down the line for the Atty. P. approach IMO (to say nothing of the huge cost involved!). In a way I do wish that that this silly notion of Atty. P.'s regarding the gag order made it to DC as it would be eviscerated in nanoseconds by the personal assistant's of the CLERKS, let alone the Justice's themselves IMO!

What is sad IMO about all of these manoeuvres from Atty. P. is that they seem to have little to nothing to do with his defense of his client or ensuring a speedy and fair trial for Fd. Atty. P. and Fd look no further along in having an alternative theory after 6 months than they were on 5/25/19; the day after JFd went missing and 5 children lost their mother and GF lost a daughter. Nope. Instead, Pattisville seems intent on a strategy of revenge against an 85 yo woman now charged with the well being of 5 motherless children. Exhibit A on this strategy was Atty. P. referring to GF as 'Mama Warbucks' and Atty BM reference to GF and Atty Weinstein persecution and harassment of Fd in the Civil Trial. We saw Atty BM and Fd harassing and attempting to intimidate LA during her deposition in the Civil Case and IMO their behaviour was unprofessional at best and unlawful at worst; but to be noted is that Atty BM knew this but still persisted. It was IMO it was a shameful display but par for the course in terms of how Pattisville rolls professionally.

Some of the best defense atty's in the world never or rarely speak publicly about their clients or their cases and instead let their work in the courtroom on behalf of their clients speak for itself. Maybe Atty. P. does what he does with extrajudicial speech because CT does nothing to police it and it perhaps has worked for him in the past. But if you look simply at win/loss stats for Atty. P. I'm not so sure that the strategy is working for him. I think there is that old definition of insanity as being someone that does the same thing over and over and expecting a different result, that truly seems to apply to Atty. P. most days IMO!

MOO

***** keeping track of this one, as it's full of important points.

If I had to call out part of it, it's this paragraph:

What is sad IMO about all of these manoeuvres from Atty. P. is that they seem to have little to nothing to do with his defense of his client or ensuring a speedy and fair trial for Fd. Atty. P. and Fd look no further along in having an alternative theory after 6 months than they were on 5/25/19; the day after JFd went missing and 5 children lost their mother and GF lost a daughter. Nope. Instead, Pattisville seems intent on a strategy of revenge against an 85 yo woman now charged with the well being of 5 motherless children. Exhibit A on this strategy was Atty. P. referring to GF as 'Mama Warbucks' and Atty BM reference to GF and Atty Weinstein persecution and harassment of Fd in the Civil Trial.

We saw Atty BM and Fd harassing and attempting to intimidate LA during her deposition in the Civil Case and IMO their behaviour was unprofessional at best and unlawful at worst; but to be noted is that Atty BM knew this but still persisted. It was IMO it was a shameful display but par for the course in terms of how Pattisville rolls professionally.

 

[Alathea]

Why is it impossible for Pattisville to just make a simple response?

"Mr. Doulos vehemently denies the charges and the implications of said charges. We are doing our own investigation and we look forward to our day in Court. Thank you."

Nothing else needed and yet disputes the accusations.

It is not that hard to make a defense statement, yet keep within the bounds of appropriate attorney behavior. Gag or no gag. It is not that hard.

Look at Bowman. We have Only heard one statement from Bowman that MT 'is presumed innocent and should be.' Where is Bowman's Wild and Crazy [sREDACTEDt] hitting the wall? There is None and yet Bowman is effectively defending his client.

We do not see LE pulling [sREDACTEDt] out of their [aREDACTEDs] and floating unheard of and unsubstantiated day dreams of a toddler having a tantrum. Instead, we see LE with their search warrants and evidence 'in order' while making the appropriate advances in this case without having a 'free for all' press conference every time they turn around.

We do not even have confirmation that the knife, car mat, and a man named fudge along the more than 4 mile stretch of Albany Avenue in the Hartford Area, is anything more than people looking for their 15 minutes of fame. Yet, NP wants to disparage LE with unfounded accusations.

We have not heard any disparaging remarks or accusations to the character of Fd in either AW#1 or AW#2. Yet, from Pattisville, we have heard Nothing But Disparaging Remarks and Accusations against the character of JFd, THE VICTIM in this case. A Victim and her family that Continue to be Victimized by the Wild Accusations of Pattisville.

We have seen LE use Serious Detective Work and Technology to prove their Arrest Warrants were Substantive - Definition of Substantive: having a Firm Basis in Reality and therefore important, meaningful, or considerable.

It Contrast, Pattisville has thrown Non substantive [sREDACTEDt] at the wall to see IF anything will stick and Absolutely NOTHING is based in Reality.

It is just like the Civil Court documents from Pattisville that have no rhyme or reason and just list Everything in hopes that one of the items Might stick to that Imaginary wall. Example: Case against FD regarding the 4JC Mortgage, currently held by Dr. GF. How many defenses were listed in that brief? 12, 16, 18??? I forget. Regardless, they cannot All be true and accurate since most are cancelled out by other points on the list.

WHY does Pattisville Not show themselves to be Respectable Attorneys that Conduct business with Decorum and an effective defense of their client? Again, I go back to Bowman. MT is in the same boat as Fd and yet we do not hear this Absolute Nonsense from Bowman. We do not even hear from MT herself, but yet, we see Fd spouting lies that he 'loves' the children every time he steps in front of the Press. Judge Heller has imposed a NO CONTACT order in Family Court that prevents Fd from contacting and/or communicating with the children, and yet he continues to circumvent that Court Order, by talking to the children through the press and by having his 'sister' try to contact the children.

This is Nothing More than a Continuation of the Domestic Violence involved in this case. The Children are now the Victims of this Domestic Violence perpetrated by Fd as he continues to disparage their Mother and at the same time says that he 'loves' them. It is Domestic Violence to tell children lies and especially lies that their mother abandoned them. Fd AND Pattisville is Abusing the children by continuing to speak out in this horrific way. This too, is Domestic Violence and it MUST STOP NOW.

WHEN will the Sanctions Occur in this case? Which CT Judge will be the first to Stand Up against this malignant narcissist and the Non 'dream team' called Pattisville?

IMO.

***** another fabulous post, need to keep this one on radar... important points throughout but stressing these points below:

"This is Nothing More than a Continuation of the Domestic Violence involved in this case. The Children are now the Victims of this Domestic Violence perpetrated by Fd as he continues to disparage their Mother and at the same time says that he 'loves' them. It is Domestic Violence to tell children lies and especially lies that their mother abandoned them. Fd AND Pattisville is Abusing the children by continuing to speak out in this horrific way. This too, is Domestic Violence and it MUST STOP NOW.

WHEN will the Sanctions Occur in this case? Which CT Judge will be the first to Stand Up against this malignant narcissist and the Non 'dream team' called Pattisville?"

 

[Alathea]

Oh, and I also wanted to say that she could have gone to see Bowman, and thinking that she would never be charged, because those two creeps thought they covered it all-just wanted to make sure she had a lawyer in case of trouble, because it would only be natural for police to question the two of them. I don’t think she thought she’d be arrested.

Agreed - she thought she'd never be charged. Neither of them did! Agreed, too: "those two creeps thought they covered it all."

IMO, MT knew exactly what was up, knew full well she was guilty and all of the details as she may well have been in on the planning of all of it. She went WITH Fd to see the attorney - as if for both of them at once - to see what steps to take next.

What they didn't know was all the info LE had. They both thought they were getting away with it all, I think, and this was very much a joint venture for them.

 

[afitzy]

The only thing I disagree with is that "one night stands" story. She was known to be baby daddy's wife in their country. Not a ONS-er.

I believe that info about ONS was actually from the child financial support arrangement as there was a very specific reference about the nature of the relationship. This document was posted in an early thread.


Girlfriend of Jennifer Dulos' husband has a lovechild with Argentinian Olympic skier | Daily Mail Online

The DM article above has the actual document filed with the court and details the financial arrangement.


Quotes from article:

Court documents obtained by DailyMail.com reveal that Begue and Troconis were more than colleagues, however, and had 'engaged in sexual intercourse' during a 2006 trip to Florida.

The tryst led to the birth of a minor child 'out of wedlock' in December of that year.

Troconis filed for paternity in Miami Dade County when the daughter, Nicole, turned six.

Begue admitted Nicole was his and entered voluntarily into a lengthy parenting plan that allowed the girl to split time between Argentina and Miami Beach, where Troconis was living at the time.

Court documents show he agreed to pay $4,000 a month in child support as well as an advance of $24,000 and $200,000 towards the cost of an apartment.

The parents agreed Nicole could spend the summer and winter vacations with her father, who regularly posts photos of his daughter on social media, describing how proud he is of her.

 

[CTGrammy]

Agreed - she thought she'd never be charged. Neither of them did! Agreed, too: "those two creeps thought they covered it all."

IMO, MT knew exactly what was up, knew full well she was guilty and all of the details as she may well have been in on the planning of all of it. She went WITH Fd to see the attorney - as if for both of them at once - to see what steps to take next.

What they didn't know was all the info LE had. They both thought they were getting away with it all, I think, and this was very much a joint venture for them.

I am thinking along the same lines.

Then MT won the toss up with Bowman when they were arrested.

Either because Bowman is a family acquaintance or MT reached out to him before Fd had the chance.

Unfortunately, Bowman will not be able to use anything Fd may have said during this little heart to heart, if indeed he was meeting with both of them.

IMO.

 

[afitzy]

Thank you for sharing - you sum things up so very well.

Something that has always bothered me (as I'm sure everyone else here too) is WHY did MT go see Attorney B. before her arrest even? IIRC, she went to see Atty B. the same day as the car wash incident (and I cannot recall where this was in the timeline of her and FD's arrest), but WHY was she going to see Atty. B before she was even charged with anything??

IMO MT behaviour was not atypical of folks that are savvy regarding the arrest and bail process and who know that they need legal assistance. My suspicion is that the Atty Bowman pick can be tied directly to Mama and Papa A/T. MT had a much easier arrest/bail experience vs Fd who didn't have counsel arranged in advance of his arrest. MT engaging Atty Bowman when she knew she was in trouble isn't surprising IMO. What is surprising to me is lying for such a long time to LE and not having your atty resign.

IMO MT made her atty look to be an incompetent and willing participant in her games and it also looked as if he was complicit in the strategy of lying to LE for months. IMO not many atty's would let a client behave like this and if they had any suspicion that their client was lying they would simply not have their client meet with LE until the situation could be resolved. Was Atty Bowman the person that orchestrated the MT choice to LIE to LE for 2+ month? I don't see how this is operating in good faith at all.

Did Atty Bowman do NO due diligence or investigation on the disappearance of JFd to know if what he client was saying were remotely plausible? Why let your client lie to LE for 2+ months? Entire situation was pathetic and the fact that Atty Bowman is still representing MT after everything that has happened tells me quite a bit about both parties unfortunately.

From her actions I can only assume that MT was lying to Atty Bowman as well. The fact that Atty Bowman sat by the side of his client for over 2 months and ALLOWED HER TO LIE, tells me quite a bit about Atty Bowman and sadly none of that information is remotely positive. He followed up with the MT 2+ months of lying to LE with his infamous [REDACTED] memo in Civil Court and where he chose to disregard any and all standard courtroom procedures and did not properly notify Atty Weinstein on his motion. To me, this 180 degree flip flop from Atty Bowman told us quite a bit about MT and her involvement in this sad case.

IMO this handling of MT deposition in Civil Court told me precisely all I need to know for now as to MT involvement in this case. IMO it was Atty Weinstein and possibly the States Atty 'poking the bear' Atty Bowman and MT and seeing how they would respond on the deposition. I'm not sure a more 'ham handed' handling of the overall situation by Atty Bowman would have been possible! You know the situation is bad when MT didn't even have to answer the 18 questions required by Judge Noble. IMO Game Set and Match Atty Weinstein. MT is now officially TOAST!

The timeline that we are aware of would have made it clear to Fd and MT that they were on the radar of LE almost immediately. MT and her family planned accordingly while Fd for whatever reason wasn't able to find counsel and raise bail.

MOO

 

[afitzy]

Attorney: CT jury selection process eliminates need for gag order in Jennifer Dulos case

interesting article re gag order hearing

I believe we have gone down the path with interviews from Atty Maddox previously. My suspicion for what its worth is that he is a well known 'friend' of the Defense.

IMO its disappointing that the Middletown Press chose to only interview a SINGLE atty and didn't seek alternative perspectives. Last I heard we have Yale Law School in New Haven, UCONN Law School in Hartford and Quinnipiac Law School in Hamden, and my suspicion is that there are any number of esteemed academics qualified to give a view on 'gag orders'. Why did the Middletown Press not seek out an academic POV on the topic or present a range of views?

Alternative perspectives on the gag order issue do exist across a spectrum of views IMO. CT has the antiquated process of voir dire as Atty. P. correctly points out but the point that Atty. P. will be facing potential jurors is in the VERY distant future and the gag order protects the pool until the point of voir dire IMO too.

Atty. P. is all about the now and not really caring much about the future IMO and this is the problem. The risks and results of unfettered Atty. P. speech are unquantifiable and to me this is the biggest risk to having a fair and timely trial for Fd. I can just see Atty. P. a year or more from now screaming to any and all that can hear him that his client Fd can't get a fair trial in the State of CT and I can see him taking this situation to the CT Supreme Court and the US Supreme Court and simply wasting more time and keeping Fd out of prison potentially for a very long time while its all sorted out.

Wait for it, if the gag order is overturned IMO we will experience this nightmare of Atty. P. claiming to not be able to get a fair trial in CT and this circumstance might just have ripple effects through the rest of the CT judiciary. Are the Supreme Court Justices willing to take a risk that this might happen? Are the Supreme Court Justices willing to trust in the professional integrity of Atty. P. and believe that he has the ability to comply with Professional Standard and Guidelines? IMO given the track record on compliance with Professional Standards in the Dulos case as well as his behaviour and choices in the Jones case, I'm not sure if I were a St of Ct Supreme Court Justice if I would trust him further than I could toss him. AND, given that he is a large and heavy weight of a person that wouldn't be very far IMO! I simply don't see anything trustworthy about Atty. P. and so I don't see why the Justices would extend him ANY benefit of the doubt as to his behaviour. The leaking of the sealed psych report by Atty. P. in Family Court to protect his client from a 'hit report' by a reporter told me that this was a legal advocate that is bound by no rules and regulations put forward by the State of CT or elsewhere and will do anything and everything on behalf of his client. IMO this Atty. P. represent dangerous behaviour and does zero credit to the CT Bar association and the CT Judiciary as there are no boundaries and no limits, including sadly the laws of the State of CT. Judge Heller let Atty. P. resign behind closed doors rather than face censure IMO and yet again Atty. P. escaped to simply do something similar in another Judges courtroom. Sad situation IMO but we keep seeing these acts over and over and nothing gets done ever.

IMO the gag order is providing a bit of insurance that the jury pool won't be tainted as we cannot depend on Atty. P. or Pattisville following 3.6a or b and we cannot depend on the CT Judiciary for holding Atty. P. to any level of professional behaviour at all via censure etc.

I hate to say this but we have already seen it sadly from Judge Blawie and States Atty Colangelo when they chose to not demand compliance with the gag order or 3.6a or b. Its a sad state of affairs IMO and Atty. P. knows that he can 'gamble with his law licence' all day long with no possible consequences. Pathetic state of affairs IMO that there are no Judges (other than the Judge in the Jones case from Danbury) willing to stand up to rogue operators such as Atty. P. and Pattisville.

MOO

 

[Alathea]

I believe we have gone down the path with interviews from Atty Maddox previously. My suspicion for what its worth is that he is a well known 'friend' of the Defense.

IMO its disappointing that the Middletown Press chose to only interview a SINGLE atty and didn't seek alternative perspectives. Last I heard we have Yale Law School in New Haven, UCONN Law School in Hartford and Quinnipiac Law School in Hamden, and my suspicion is that there are any number of esteemed academics qualified to give a view on 'gag orders'. Why did the Middletown Press not seek out an academic POV on the topic or present a range of views?

Alternative perspectives on the gag order issue do exist across a spectrum of views IMO. CT has the antiquated process of voir dire as Atty. P. correctly points out but the point that Atty. P. will be facing potential jurors is in the VERY distant future and the gag order protects the pool until the point of voir dire IMO too.

Atty. P. is all about the now and not really caring much about the future IMO and this is the problem. The risks and results of unfettered Atty. P. speech are unquantifiable and to me this is the biggest risk to having a fair and timely trial for Fd. I can just see Atty. P. a year or more from now screaming to any and all that can hear him that his client Fd can't get a fair trial in the State of CT and I can see him taking this situation to the CT Supreme Court and the US Supreme Court and simply wasting more time and keeping Fd out of prison potentially for a very long time while its all sorted out.

Wait for it, if the gag order is overturned IMO we will experience this nightmare of Atty. P. claiming to not be able to get a fair trial in CT and this circumstance might just have ripple effects through the rest of the CT judiciary. Are the Supreme Court Justices willing to take a risk that this might happen? Are the Supreme Court Justices willing to trust in the professional integrity of Atty. P. and believe that he has the ability to comply with Professional Standard and Guidelines? IMO given the track record on compliance with Professional Standards in the Dulos case as well as his behaviour and choices in the Jones case, I'm not sure if I were a St of Ct Supreme Court Justice if I would trust him further than I could toss him. AND, given that he is a large and heavy weight of a person that wouldn't be very far IMO! I simply don't see anything trustworthy about Atty. P. and so I don't see why the Justices would extend him ANY benefit of the doubt as to his behaviour. The leaking of the sealed psych report by Atty. P. in Family Court to protect his client from a 'hit report' by a reporter told me that this was a legal advocate that is bound by no rules and regulations put forward by the State of CT or elsewhere and will do anything and everything on behalf of his client. IMO this Atty. P. represent dangerous behaviour and does zero credit to the CT Bar association and the CT Judiciary as there are no boundaries and no limits, including sadly the laws of the State of CT. Judge Heller let Atty. P. resign behind closed doors rather than face censure IMO and yet again Atty. P. escaped to simply do something similar in another Judges courtroom. Sad situation IMO but we keep seeing these acts over and over and nothing gets done ever.

IMO the gag order is providing a bit of insurance that the jury pool won't be tainted as we cannot depend on Atty. P. or Pattisville following 3.6a or b and we cannot depend on the CT Judiciary for holding Atty. P. to any level of professional behaviour at all via censure etc.

I hate to say this but we have already seen it sadly from Judge Blawie and States Atty Colangelo when they chose to not demand compliance with the gag order or 3.6a or b. Its a sad state of affairs IMO and Atty. P. knows that he can 'gamble with his law licence' all day long with no possible consequences. Pathetic state of affairs IMO that there are no Judges (other than the Judge in the Jones case from Danbury) willing to stand up to rogue operators such as Atty. P. and Pattisville.

MOO

BBM (^ expand to see)
I've got hope that the Supreme Justices are aware of this "game" and are taking it into consideration for their decision - to ensure NP's client (Fd) has a fair trial.

NP doesn't seem interested in the concept of a fair trial; at least not as much as he does about being on TV/in the news/ spouting misogynist conspiracy theories.