Silver Alert CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 *ARRESTS* #34

[BellaVita]

IMO, the 401(k) early withdrawal penalty paper trail is probably the easiest to investigate and report to the IRS tip line.

The IRS would easily be able to retrieve a 401(k) withdrawal request.

The employer's HR department and the brokerage firm administering the 401(k) plan (assuming it is Ernst & Young Cap Gemini, CPA firm of all things and say they used Fidelity to manage 401(k) plan) would definitely have a paper trail.

Fd himself would get a receipt. Collateral, say the 401(k), would be noted on the receipt. I believe Attorney Pattis was described as "sucking lemons" when the court denied bail using a 401(k) as collateral (on a much earlier thread post)?

The Stamford Court or the Norwalk Court (forget where Fd posted his bail) would have a copy of the check and a receipt would be given to the person posting the bond I would presume.

It would be nice if someone familiar with the court system and the mechanics of posting bail would help us out here. A similar discussion was posted on the Kelsey Berreth Trial Thread #66 (see @MassGuy post #1000 November 16, 2019, who made excellent points on the mechanics of how a jailhouse conspiracy where Frazee asked his cellmate to put a hit on witnesses could have been tracked to the source of funds, i.e. the girlfriend who bailed out the informant/potential hitman).

Bottom line, IMO no funds were withdrawn from the 401(k) because Fd is cheap and a natural born unrepentant fraudster. Fd is also not filing tax returns. Fd would be committing tax evasion if he ignored the 401(k) early withdrawal penalty tax form coming this April and did not file a 2019 tax return. Thus, it would be an excellent investigation to conduct - who posted bail (attorney presenting a check through his firm's trust account, the source of funds may or may not be privileged depending on how crooked the judge making the determination on a conspiracy charge is...see @riolove77 in the Kelsey Berreth thread discussing the jailhouse conspiracy to commit future hits). The investigation into the source of funds for Fd's bail may or may not reveal the money laundering source as well. It will, IMO, put a law license at risk once again, this time the result will be definitive. I pray for our judicial system. MOO.

Super informative about bail in CT:
Bail bondsmen are key parts of Connecticut court system
The fees are set by law, said Dan Venditto, an owner of Statewide Bail Bonds. His company has offices in Norwich and New London. Fees are 10 percent for bonds of $5,000 or less. Fees are 7 percent for any amount above that, Venditto said.

In addition, bail bondsmen don’t have to require defendants pay the entire fee. They can accept down payments of 35 percent of the fee, Venditto said, and let the defendant pay the rest later. There is a time limit of 15 months to pay the entire fee, though, he said.

“If it’s not paid in full, we’re required to bring them to civil court,” Venditto said. The lawsuit is filed when the defendant gets 75 days late in making payments, he said.

But bail bondsmen don’t pay bonds based only on a defendant’s finances, Venditto said. “We have to have cosigners on these bonds,” he said. The cosigners, such as parents or other family members, must have good jobs or property to back up their signatures.

HA! Who was the cosigner? If he indeed used a bondsman.

Is it known if FD used a bondsman? I'm guessing the answer is yes otherwise he would have had to post one million dollars in cash personally or someone would have had to post it FOR him. By using a bondsman, he would just have to come up with a small percentage, still a ton of money, and the fee paid to the bondsman is not refundable. The bondsman would post a surety bond guaranteeing the appearance in court. I don't think the court would be informed of the source of the money. The fees paid to the bondsman would be close to $70,000, 35% of that payable immediately. Non-refundable. Wow.

If FD paid cash, then the court would definitely have a record of where it came from. I suppose a bondsman could be subpoenaed by IRS/Federal prosecutors. I think the divorce action is pretty much done. If JD attorney can't consult with her, there is no going forward.

I am surprised but not surprised that there doesn't seem to have been any freezing of assets during the divorce. What about all the FD/FORE properties? No matter how they are titled, they are still marital property and subject to division. Maybe if they are listed as owned by FORE, a new owner can get clear title? I wouldn't touch these properties no matter how they are titled. If it is possible to get clear title without JD signature, it seems like her atty should have attempted to get liens in place. IDK. All JMO.

 

[sds71]

Super informative about bail in CT:
Bail bondsmen are key parts of Connecticut court system
The fees are set by law, said Dan Venditto, an owner of Statewide Bail Bonds. His company has offices in Norwich and New London. Fees are 10 percent for bonds of $5,000 or less. Fees are 7 percent for any amount above that, Venditto said.

In addition, bail bondsmen don’t have to require defendants pay the entire fee. They can accept down payments of 35 percent of the fee, Venditto said, and let the defendant pay the rest later. There is a time limit of 15 months to pay the entire fee, though, he said.

“If it’s not paid in full, we’re required to bring them to civil court,” Venditto said. The lawsuit is filed when the defendant gets 75 days late in making payments, he said.

But bail bondsmen don’t pay bonds based only on a defendant’s finances, Venditto said. “We have to have cosigners on these bonds,” he said. The cosigners, such as parents or other family members, must have good jobs or property to back up their signatures.

HA! Who was the cosigner? If he indeed used a bondsman.

Is it known if FD used a bondsman? I'm guessing the answer is yes otherwise he would have had to post one million dollars in cash personally or someone would have had to post it FOR him. By using a bondsman, he would just have to come up with a small percentage, still a ton of money, and the fee paid to the bondsman is not refundable. The bondsman would post a surety bond guaranteeing the appearance in court. I don't think the court would be informed of the source of the money. The fees paid to the bondsman would be close to $70,000, 35% of that payable immediately. Non-refundable. Wow.

If FD paid cash, then the court would definitely have a record of where it came from. I suppose a bondsman could be subpoenaed by IRS/Federal prosecutors. I think the divorce action is pretty much done. If JD attorney can't consult with her, there is no going forward.

I am surprised but not surprised that there doesn't seem to have been any freezing of assets during the divorce. What about all the FD/FORE properties? No matter how they are titled, they are still marital property and subject to division. Maybe if they are listed as owned by FORE, a new owner can get clear title? I wouldn't touch these properties no matter how they are titled. If it is possible to get clear title without JD signature, it seems like there her atty should have attempted to get liens in place. IDK. All JMO.

FD was bailed out by a bondsman
@35,000

 

[pernickety]

This is a great question IMO... There were some articles last year about giving inmates tablets, if I understand correctly the plan was not to have normal internet access but to instead have their own closed network, like intranet. They would be able to email people from their approved contact list for a price, and they could access some parts of the internet in a job center. Unsure if this only applies to prisons or if it would apply to jail as well.

I read an article on that too--that they were giving inmates tablets, but only for educational purposes--no internet connection.

 

[pernickety]

This is a great question IMO... There were some articles last year about giving inmates tablets, if I understand correctly the plan was not to have normal internet access but to instead have their own closed network, like intranet. They would be able to email people from their approved contact list for a price, and they could access some parts of the internet in a job center. Unsure if this only applies to prisons or if it would apply to jail as well.

I read an article on that too--that they were giving inmates tablets, but only for educational purposes--no internet connection.

RSBM:
» Connecticut General Statutes 45a-186 – Appeals from probate. Venue. Service of process. Referral to special assignment probate judgeLawServer
(2) an appeal in a matter concerning removal of a parent as guardian, termination of parental rights or adoption shall be filed in any superior court for juvenile matters having jurisdiction over matters arising in any town within such probate district.

I believe Juvenile Court is the proper venue. IMO.

Thanks for this. Under the following statute, CGS 45a-187, FD possibly waived his right to appeal if he didn't appear at the hearing, if he had notice of the hearing. It's also a statute of limitations as to time to file.

 

[BellaVita]

You're so right he has taken everything. Or at least trying to take the last bits for his selfish gain. But as this story continues to unfold, with the cast of characters growing, I think this is a WAY wider matter than rich girl marries boy who is a wolf in disguise. CT courts not acting. Real estate/banking/money laundering. Cars. Childhood friends from Greece in high places. The plot just continues to thicken. Are any federal agencies involved in the other criminal areas and not just her disappearance and presumed death? Who’s in charge, here? Or am I dropping off into a conspiracy mind set without all the pieces? Do any of you think this is all somehow related and JFD was in way over her head?

No doubt FD was ALWAYS shady. It's part of his (lack of)character. However, meeting JD really kicked things into high gear for him. Someone posted here way back that his job at Cap Gemini would be paying him a million dollars a year by now. But he wasn't happy with that. He saw an opportunity(Jennifer)and ran with it. She was only $$$$ to him so he set up this pyramid scheme knowing he didn't intend to love, honor, cherish or spend the rest of his life with her. The access to $$$$ kicked off all the other activities. JMO.

 

[pernickety]

IMO, the 401(k) early withdrawal penalty paper trail is probably the easiest to investigate and report to the IRS tip line.

The IRS would easily be able to retrieve a 401(k) withdrawal request.

The employer's HR department and the brokerage firm administering the 401(k) plan (assuming it is Ernst & Young Cap Gemini, CPA firm of all things and say they used Fidelity to manage 401(k) plan) would definitely have a paper trail.

Fd himself would get a receipt. Collateral, say the 401(k), would be noted on the receipt. I believe Attorney Pattis was described as "sucking lemons" when the court denied bail using a 401(k) as collateral (on a much earlier thread post)?

The Stamford Court or the Norwalk Court (forget where Fd posted his bail) would have a copy of the check and a receipt would be given to the person posting the bond I would presume.

It would be nice if someone familiar with the court system and the mechanics of posting bail would help us out here. A similar discussion was posted on the Kelsey Berreth Trial Thread #66 (see @MassGuy post #1000 November 16, 2019, who made excellent points on the mechanics of how a jailhouse conspiracy where Frazee asked his cellmate to put a hit on witnesses could have been tracked to the source of funds, i.e. the girlfriend who bailed out the informant/potential hitman).

Bottom line, IMO no funds were withdrawn from the 401(k) because Fd is cheap and a natural born unrepentant fraudster. Fd is also not filing tax returns. Fd would be committing tax evasion if he ignored the 401(k) early withdrawal penalty tax form coming this April and did not file a 2019 tax return. Thus, it would be an excellent investigation to conduct - who posted bail (attorney presenting a check through his firm's trust account, the source of funds may or may not be privileged depending on how crooked the judge making the determination on a conspiracy charge is...see @riolove77 in the Kelsey Berreth thread discussing the jailhouse conspiracy to commit future hits). The investigation into the source of funds for Fd's bail may or may not reveal the money laundering source as well. It will, IMO, put a law license at risk once again, this time the result will be definitive. I pray for our judicial system. MOO.

Bottom line, IMO no funds were withdrawn from the 401(k) because Fd is cheap and a natural born unrepentant fraudster. Fd is also not filing tax returns. Fd would be committing tax evasion if he ignored the 401(k) early withdrawal penalty tax form coming this April and did not file a 2019 tax return. Thus, it would be an excellent investigation to conduct - who posted bail (attorney presenting a check through his firm's trust account, the source of funds may or may not be privileged depending on how crooked the judge making the determination on a conspiracy charge is...see @riolove77 in the Kelsey Berreth thread discussing the jailhouse conspiracy to commit future hits). The investigation into the source of funds for Fd's bail may or may not reveal the money laundering source as well. It will, IMO, put a law license at risk once again, this time the result will be definitive. I pray for our judicial system.

If FD could easily get bail funds out of his 401k by having his attorney access his account, why then wasn’t his first attorney, Eugene Riccio, able to get those funds for him? See HC article after FD’s first court appearance with NP:

Police return to Hartford trash plant Sunday in search for missing New Canaan mother Jennifer Farber Dulos as estranged husband hires new lawyer

“Attorney Kevin Smith, Pattis’ partner, met with Dulos in prison late Friday night. Bridgeport attorney Eugene Riccio represented Dulos during his first court appearance in Norwalk on June 3 and has been trying to secure a bond for Dulos since then. He was representing him for bond purposes only.”


Why would FD spend 11 days in jail if it was so easy to get a loan from his 401k?

 

[BellaVita]

I read an article on that too--that they were giving inmates tablets, but only for educational purposes--no internet connection.


Thanks for this. Under the following statute, CGS 45a-187, FD possibly waived his right to appeal if he didn't appear at the hearing, if he had notice of the hearing. It's also a statute of limitations as to time to file.

Perhaps FD lawyer filed a written waiver. The statute says it can still be appealed if that is the case. They likely knew how the ruling would go and a waste of time for them. I think the Juvenile court hearing is also a waste of time but hey, got to keep the Greek Grifters thinking he loves the children. JMO.

 

[pernickety]

IMO, something is rotten in Denmark and we are going to have to get to the top of the food chain. The person at the top of the food chain in CT is keeping a very low profile for some reason. Here are some links to get things moving. The more complaints the better. I am looking for the person who Rudy Giuliani used to be when he prosecuted mob bosses in the 80's. Most important: Giuliani was a federal prosecutor. Any letters to a CT state rep/official/old boy network is throwing away time, IMO. The first politician to jump on this will be getting my vote. Any takers?

Some thoughts:

First:

How Do You Report Suspected Tax Fraud Activity? | Internal Revenue Service

https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f3949a.pdf

"If You… Then And
… suspect or know of an individual or a business that is not complying with the tax laws on issues such as:

False Exemptions or Deductions
Kickbacks
False/Altered Document
Failure to Pay Tax
Unreported Income
Organized Crime
Failure to Withhold
Use Form 3949-A,
Information Referral

CAUTION: Do NOT use Form 3949-A to report the issues below
Print the form and mail to:

Internal Revenue Service
Fresno, CA 93888

or, order the form by mail or by calling the Tax Fraud Hotline recording at 1-800-829-0433. Note: we don't accept alleged tax law violation referrals over the phone.

You may also send a letter to the address above instead of using Form 3949-A. Please include as much information as possible, such as these important points:

a. Name and Address of person or business you are reporting
b. The individual’s social security number or the business’ employer identification number
c. A brief description of the alleged violation(s), including how you became aware or obtained information about the violation(s)
d. The years involved
e. The estimated dollar amount of any unreported income
f. Your name, address and telephone number*

*Although you are not required to identify yourself, it is helpful to do so. Your identity will be kept confidential.

Note: Submitters of Form 3949-A will not receive a status or progress update on the referral due to tax return confidentiality under IRC 6103."

Second:

Meet the U.S. Attorney

"On February 22, 2018, John H. Durham was sworn in as the presidentially appointed United States Attorney for the District of Connecticut.

Mr. Durham had served as the interim U.S. Attorney since October 28, 2017, after U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions signed an order appointing him to the position. President Donald Trump nominated Mr. Durham to serve as U.S. Attorney on November 1, 2017, and the U.S. Senate confirmed his nomination on February 16, 2018.

Prior to his appointment as U.S. Attorney, Mr. Durham served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in various positions in the District of Connecticut for 35 years, prosecuting complex organized crime, violent crime, public corruption and financial fraud matters."

Third: The Federal US Inspector General

"Connecticut: Reforming the AG’s Office – The Association of Inspectors General

Connecticut: Reforming the AG’s Office
Editorial from the Connecticut Law Tribune

Now that the long-term incumbent attorney general is about to leave that office, it’s time to re-examine some of the duties of that office and reduce the inherent conflicts that our current statutes create.

Under Connecticut General Statute 3-125, the attorney general has the duty to appear for all constitutional officers and all heads of departments and State boards…in all suits and other civil proceedings…in which the official acts or doings of said officers are called in question.

Unlike some states, the attorney general in Connecticut only has jurisdiction in civil matters; any criminal matter must be referred to the Office of the Chief’s State Attorney.

In addition, CGS 4-61dd, the Whistleblower Act, provides that complaints involving corruption, unethical practices, violations of state laws or regulations, mismanagement, gross waste of funds are to be filed with the auditors of public accounts, and the auditors are to report to the attorney general if an investigation is warranted.

Thus, the attorney general is placed in a position of defending actions of state agencies while also having to investigate them. This obviously puts the Attorney General’s Office in a conflict. Further, such conflict, or even an appearance of conflict is always going to subject the attorney general to criticism for acting with political motives."

See this article on how the State of CT gives secret hush money payments (some 6 figures) to would-be whistleblowers--according to Auditors' report.

Auditors rip pay to departing employees; Report cites many state payouts of $100,000-plus

 

[afitzy]

I'm really frustrated with all the posts about FD "taking money from the children". That is SO the least concern but I keep hearing it over and over. Money is not going to be an issue for these children. They will go to college and not have to worry about student loans. I want FD nailed to the [REDACTED] wall by the criminal courts, civil courts and IRS but money is the very least concern of the children. Even if there was no money, how do they deal with a missing/murdered mom and a father that killed her?

Guilty as charged and here is why I've continued to mention this issue. What about cases where money is very much an issue and to the extent that someone goes missing and the STBX or partner takes everything and leaves nothing for the children? I've not seen any safeguard to protect the assets of missing people in CT and that has me quite concerned. I'm concerned not just for JFd (who had significant assets) but for people of lesser means where the money possibly taken would mean the difference between children going to school and not!

Totally agree that these 5 Dulos children are financially blessed and so don't have to worry about such details as paying for school and keeping a roof over their heads. No dispute on any of this but that isn't why I continue to bring up this issue of 'money' and Fd.

We have seen in many other missing cases where the assets/belongings etc. are routinely ransacked and taken by family and friends with no intervention from LE or the Courts. I do strongly believe that a strong possibility exists that this is precisely what Fd has been allowed to do in this sad case and neither the Family Court nor the State have done anything that I can see to protect the assets of JFd (or those of the 5 children) that Fd might have had access to at the time of the disappearance.

In the Dulos case, there was an ongoing Family Court case with specific guidelines as to the status of marital assets. We saw recently that JFd Atty Midler ask for payment of his fees while at the same time raising the question of the disposition of martial assets by Fd. Has Judge Heller done anything to address or investigate this issue raised by Atty Midler? We sadly don't know.

NOW, we see GAL Michael "Maserati" Meehan filing a motion on Thursday this past week to collect the $43,000 he believes he is owed by Fd and he is also seeking to 'clarify' his role in the Dulos v Dulos case. Mmmmm.

Link: Attorney for Jennifer Dulos’ kids wants to get paid and his role defined in custody battle

I've been quite consistent in commenting on any situation where it appears possible that money/assets is not being used as provided by the Court (Family Court situation is an example) and the Civil Case (many examples of Fd spending habits were presented in depositions by Atty Weinstein and also information he presented in evidence during the Civil Trial). My assumption is that anything belonging to JFd (not part of settlement in the divorce) would go to her 5 children.

We have also seen Fd continuing to pay an entire legal team while at the same time admitting under oath that he has had 'no income' for 2 years? Is Fd using his possibly 'hidden' funds to pay his team or has he been able to access money/funds/assets of JFd or possibly funds that had been earmarked by the couple in happier days for the children? Sadly, we don't know but the Fd Pattisville atty crew continues to grow! What was done in Family Court to make sure that this wasn't possible? Sadly, we don't know.

The reason I've consistently brought up the 'money issue' is I'm not sure if the rules set forth in Judge Heller's court for the marital assets has been followed by Fd OR whether Judge Heller did anything to insure compliance by Fd?

From the time JFd went missing, I'm not sure what ability Judge Heller had to freeze assets or protect the marital assets of JFd but its not clear she did anything to safeguard anything belonging to JFd. Given that the parties were separated and living apart, its unclear what other assets might be involved or if Fd had access to any assets belonging to the children. IDK, I hope Judge Heller knows and the only reason I continue to bring it up is to possibly jog someone's brain that just because someone is missing that its not open field day on ransacking their assets and belongings.

Atty Weinstein was very clear that any collections from the Civil Trial and the 4Jx Foreclosure action would be placed into Trust for the 5 children. Since this was GF's and Atty Weinstein's goal, I respected their goal and felt that anything that belonged to JFd that would have been part of the divorce settlement would belong to her 5 children. We don't know if Fd honoured the rules of the Family Court but my suspicion is that he did not based on his prior behaviour IMO.

I do question whether anyone (including her Attorney, Atty Midler) that had the ability to do something did in fact do anything to safeguard her assets after she went missing and this leaves me feeling very unsettled and lacking confidence in the Family Court process and JFd's attorney.

Do missing people lose their rights just because they aren't here to speak legally for themselves?

MOO

 

[BellaVita]

Bottom line, IMO no funds were withdrawn from the 401(k) because Fd is cheap and a natural born unrepentant fraudster.

Thus, it would be an excellent investigation to conduct - who posted bail (attorney presenting a check through his firm's trust account, the source of funds may or may not be privileged depending on how crooked the judge making the determination on a conspiracy charge is...

The investigation into the source of funds for Fd's bail may or may not reveal the money laundering source as well. It will, IMO, put a law license at risk once again, this time the result will be definitive. I pray for our judicial system.

If FD could easily get bail funds out of his 401k by having his attorney access his account, why then wasn’t his first attorney, Eugene Riccio, able to get those funds for him? See HC article after FD’s first court appearance with NP:

Why would FD spend 11 days in jail if it was so easy to get a loan from his 401k?

RSBM: Good point about spending the 11 days in jail unnecessarily. A previous poster had stated it was a Fidelity account and that in her experience, it was an easy process. NP did ask to have control of the 401K but was denied on 6/11. That very day, FD bonded out. NP has also referred to the 401K as an IRA but maybe that was just misspoken. NP wanted permission to take control of the account and then be the guarantor of the bond. I am sure FD wanted to avoid the penalties and also the fee for a $500K bond is $35,150 and that money is gone forever. And there are 2 separate bonds so HUGE loss of money no matter how it was paid. By NP getting control of the account, he could have been the guarantor of the bond and not had to have dealt with the bail bondsman, fees or withdrawal penalties. So maybe the 401K story is true. That money had probably already been documented in the divorce. I really don't think he wanted to expose any money that wasn't already known of. Somebody would have to have a legal basis for subpoena of the bondsman. IIRC, there has already been a ruling that how his lawyers are being paid is protected info? All JMO.

 

[afitzy]

RSBM: Good point about spending the 11 days in jail unnecessarily. A previous poster had stated it was a Fidelity account and that in her experience, it was an easy process. NP did ask to have control of the 401K but was denied on 6/11. That very day, FD bonded out. NP has also referred to the 401K as an IRA but maybe that was just misspoken. NP wanted permission to take control of the account and then be the guarantor of the bond. I am sure FD wanted to avoid the penalties and also the fee for a $500K bond is $35,150 and that money is gone forever. And there are 2 separate bonds so HUGE loss of money no matter how it was paid. By NP getting control of the account, he could have been the guarantor of the bond and not had to have dealt with the bail bondsman, fees or withdrawal penalties. So maybe the 401K story is true. That money had probably already been documented in the divorce. I really don't think he wanted to expose any money that wasn't already known of. Somebody would have to have a legal basis for subpoena of the bondsman. IIRC, there has already been a ruling that how his lawyers are being paid is protected info? All JMO.

I'm not so sure that the 11 days Fd spent in jail was unnecessary. Given what we have learned in Family Court about Fd/FORE and 'his assets' and 'his personal financial statement', it appears that Fd worked LONG AND HARD to hide any/all assets that could possibly have come into the financial disclosure process in Family Court.

I'm not sure he planned on ever being 'found out' and probably certainly never planned on being 'arrested'. MT by consulting Atty Bowman so early in the process after the JFd disappearance no doubt might have felt differently. IDK.

My suspicion based on the fact that the Fd acct used was a 401K and that this type of acct was referenced in Court by Atty. P. and Judge Blawie, is that Fd had long ago socked any and all cash/assets etc. away from CT and JFd in anticipation of the divorce case.

Further we know via Judge Heller order that Fd had zero interest in providing financially for his children and so if his intent was to not pay anything for his children there wasn't much reason to keep cash or investments lying around and accessible in the US IMO.

My guess is that wherever Fd socked away his cash/investments it took him awhile to gain access and if he did gain access we didn't see it as he was forced to use an acct that he probably couldn't liquidate previously due to penalties etc. Fd hasn't demonstrated much of a respect of the law based on his behaviour in Family and Civil Court IMO but I do wonder if his games in Family Court regarding his personal financial disclosure (or lack thereof) might have had him concerned about contempt charges or fines etc.

MOO

 

[BellaVita]

Guilty as charged and here is why I've continued to mention this issue. What about cases where money is very much an issue and to the extent that someone goes missing and the STBX or partner takes everything and leaves nothing for the children? I've not seen any safeguard to protect the assets of missing people in CT and that has me quite concerned. I'm concerned not just for JFd (who had significant assets) but for people of lesser means where the money possibly taken would mean the difference between children going to school and not!

Totally agree that these 5 Dulos children are financially blessed and so don't have to worry about such details as paying for school and keeping a roof over their heads. No dispute on any of this but that isn't why I continue to bring up this issue of 'money' and Fd.

We have seen in many other missing cases where the assets/belongings etc. are routinely ransacked and taken by family and friends with no intervention from LE or the Courts. I do strongly believe that a strong possibility exists that this is precisely what Fd has been allowed to do in this sad case and neither the Family Court nor the State have done anything that I can see to protect the assets of JFd (or those of the 5 children) that Fd might have had access to at the time of the disappearance.

In the Dulos case, there was an ongoing Family Court case with specific guidelines as to the status of marital assets. We saw recently that JFd Atty Midler ask for payment of his fees while at the same time raising the question of the disposition of martial assets by Fd. Has Judge Heller done anything to address or investigate this issue raised by Atty Midler? We sadly don't know.

NOW, we see GAL Michael "Maserati" Meehan filing a motion on Thursday this past week to collect the $43,000 he believes he is owed by Fd and he is also seeking to 'clarify' his role in the Dulos v Dulos case. Mmmmm.

Link: Attorney for Jennifer Dulos’ kids wants to get paid and his role defined in custody battle

I've been quite consistent in commenting on any situation where it appears possible that money/assets is not being used as provided by the Court (Family Court situation is an example) and the Civil Case (many examples of Fd spending habits were presented in depositions by Atty Weinstein and also information he presented in evidence during the Civil Trial). My assumption is that anything belonging to JFd (not part of settlement in the divorce) would go to her 5 children.

We have also seen Fd continuing to pay an entire legal team while at the same time admitting under oath that he has had 'no income' for 2 years? Is Fd using his possibly 'hidden' funds to pay his team or has he been able to access money/funds/assets of JFd or possibly funds that had been earmarked by the couple in happier days for the children? Sadly, we don't know but the Fd Pattisville atty crew continues to grow! What was done in Family Court to make sure that this wasn't possible? Sadly, we don't know.

The reason I've consistently brought up the 'money issue' is I'm not sure if the rules set forth in Judge Heller's court for the marital assets has been followed by Fd OR whether Judge Heller did anything to insure compliance by Fd?

From the time JFd went missing, I'm not sure what ability Judge Heller had to freeze assets or protect the marital assets of JFd but its not clear she did anything to safeguard anything belonging to JFd. Given that the parties were separated and living apart, its unclear what other assets might be involved or if Fd had access to any assets belonging to the children. IDK, I hope Judge Heller knows and the only reason I continue to bring it up is to possibly jog someone's brain that just because someone is missing that its not open field day on ransacking their assets and belongings.

Atty Weinstein was very clear that any collections from the Civil Trial and the 4Jx Foreclosure action would be placed into Trust for the 5 children. Since this was GF's and Atty Weinstein's goal, I respected their goal and felt that anything that belonged to JFd that would have been part of the divorce settlement would belong to her 5 children. We don't know if Fd honoured the rules of the Family Court but my suspicion is that he did not based on his prior behaviour IMO.

I do question whether anyone (including her Attorney, Atty Midler) that had the ability to do something did in fact do anything to safeguard her assets after she went missing and this leaves me feeling very unsettled and lacking confidence in the Family Court process and JFd's attorney.

Do missing people lose their rights just because they aren't here to speak legally for themselves?

MOO

Bringing this over from another post I made:
» Connecticut General Statutes 45a-478 – Appointment of trustee when person has disappeared. Trustee’s rights and duties. Procedure if person reappearsLawServer
2018 CT Statutes regarding a missing person:
(a) When any person having property has disappeared so that after diligent search his whereabouts cannot be ascertained, the court of probate in the district in which he resided or had his domicile at the time of his disappearance or, if such person resided outside of this state, then in the district in which any of his property is situated, upon the application of the spouse, or a relative, creditor or other person interested in the property of such person, or the selectmen of the town where such person last resided, or in which such property is situated, shall, after public notice and a hearing thereon, appoint a trustee of the property of such person.

(c) Such trustee, upon giving a probate bond, shall have charge of such property, and he shall have the same powers, duties and obligations as a conservator of the estate of an incapable person. With the approval of the court of probate, such trustee may use any portion of the income or principal of such property for the support of the spouse and minor children of such person.

GF is trustee for JD. I don't know what legal action can be brought as far as motions to freeze assets, etc. I am sure Weinstein would be doing this if permissible. Weinstein, having seen everything he could find in the civil suit and looking at how underwater the houses most likely are, may have come to the conclusion that there is nothing there that is discoverable or worth anything.

Hitting on your points:
1. Understand your concern about the other missing people and safeguarding their interests. People of lesser means are not even going to be able to afford the atty costs. My default divorce, which only had a single court date and no discovery, cost close to $5000. CT nor any state is not going to do anything to help people. It's sad but a person either has to hire an atty or figure out how to do pro se. Pro Se only goes so far. You get to a point where it gets very complex and you HAVE to hire an atty.

2. LE is not going to do anything about the ransacking of assets. It is a civil matter. The courts are not going to do anything unless asked. Even then, there might not be alot that can be done.

3. Perjury is taken lightly overall. FD said under oath that he has no income. Courts have rendered oaths meaningless for the most part because they don't vigorously prosecute. I also believe, I could be wrong, that courts have already ruled that the source of FD payments to lawyers is protected info. Yes, there is plenty of hidden money. He lied to JD for years about money that was coming in/not coming in. Don't ask me how I know.

4. Heller was not going to protect or freeze any assets. It has to be asked for. AGAIN, Midler! What did he do? He is supposed to be a premier divorce atty? Sorry, I wouldn't hire him for free! What about the houses besides 4JC? Even if they are owned by FORE, they are still marital property. Why no liens asked for by Midler to protect JD interest? At the very beginning.

All IMO.

 

[Jmoose]

You're so right he has taken everything. Or at least trying to take the last bits for his selfish gain. But as this story continues to unfold, with the cast of characters growing, I think this is a WAY wider matter than rich girl marries boy who is a wolf in disguise. CT courts not acting. Real estate/banking/money laundering. Cars. Childhood friends from Greece in high places. The plot just continues to thicken. Are any federal agencies involved in the other criminal areas and not just her disappearance and presumed death? Who’s in charge, here? Or am I dropping off into a conspiracy mind set without all the pieces? Do any of you think this is all somehow related and JFD was in way over her head?

I do-this is what I am thinking now...at the beginning I thought we were assigning too much credit to Fd as a criminal mastermind (except for the date Night Odyssey of stupidity), and thought that the situation was much less complicated than it now appears to be, with all kinds of crimes intersecting at Jennifer’s murder by Fd, with assistance of MT. I do think that Jennifer was killed because the assortment of bad guys didn’t want what she knew, to become known by the authorities.

 

[BellaVita]

I'm not so sure that the 11 days Fd spent in jail was unnecessary. Given what we have learned in Family Court about Fd/FORE and 'his assets' and 'his personal financial statement', it appears that Fd worked LONG AND HARD to hide any/all assets that could possibly have come into the financial disclosure process in Family Court.

My suspicion based on the fact that the Fd acct used was a 401K and that this type of acct was referenced in Court by Atty. P. and Judge Blawie, is that Fd had long ago socked any and all cash/assets etc. away from CT and JFd in anticipation of the divorce case.

My guess is that wherever Fd socked away his cash/investments it took him awhile to gain access and if he did gain access we didn't see it as he was forced to use an acct that he probably couldn't liquidate previously due to penalties etc.

MOO

RSBM:
Agreed. FD only wanted to access funds which were already admitted to. I think the 11 days was most likely necessary.

 

[Jmoose]

Super informative about bail in CT:
Bail bondsmen are key parts of Connecticut court system
The fees are set by law, said Dan Venditto, an owner of Statewide Bail Bonds. His company has offices in Norwich and New London. Fees are 10 percent for bonds of $5,000 or less. Fees are 7 percent for any amount above that, Venditto said.

In addition, bail bondsmen don’t have to require defendants pay the entire fee. They can accept down payments of 35 percent of the fee, Venditto said, and let the defendant pay the rest later. There is a time limit of 15 months to pay the entire fee, though, he said.

“If it’s not paid in full, we’re required to bring them to civil court,” Venditto said. The lawsuit is filed when the defendant gets 75 days late in making payments, he said.

But bail bondsmen don’t pay bonds based only on a defendant’s finances, Venditto said. “We have to have cosigners on these bonds,” he said. The cosigners, such as parents or other family members, must have good jobs or property to back up their signatures.

HA! Who was the cosigner? If he indeed used a bondsman.

Is it known if FD used a bondsman? I'm guessing the answer is yes otherwise he would have had to post one million dollars in cash personally or someone would have had to post it FOR him. By using a bondsman, he would just have to come up with a small percentage, still a ton of money, and the fee paid to the bondsman is not refundable. The bondsman would post a surety bond guaranteeing the appearance in court. I don't think the court would be informed of the source of the money. The fees paid to the bondsman would be close to $70,000, 35% of that payable immediately. Non-refundable. Wow.

If FD paid cash, then the court would definitely have a record of where it came from. I suppose a bondsman could be subpoenaed by IRS/Federal prosecutors. I think the divorce action is pretty much done. If JD attorney can't consult with her, there is no going forward.

I am surprised but not surprised that there doesn't seem to have been any freezing of assets during the divorce. What about all the FD/FORE properties? No matter how they are titled, they are still marital property and subject to division. Maybe if they are listed as owned by FORE, a new owner can get clear title? I wouldn't touch these properties no matter how they are titled. If it is possible to get clear title without JD signature, it seems like her atty should have attempted to get liens in place. IDK. All JMO.

I still don’t understand why Fd was allowed to put up less than the 10% that MT was required to put up. They both had a bail amt of $500,000, and 10% is $50,000. This is what MT paid, but for some reason Fd’s was discounted to, I think, $37,500. What was the reason for this?

 

[Alathea]

<<BellaVita said: ↑» Connecticut General Statutes 45a-186 – Appeals from probate. Venue. Service of process. Referral to special assignment probate judgeLawServer
(2) an appeal in a matter concerning removal of a parent as guardian, termination of parental rights or adoption shall be filed in any superior court for juvenile matters having jurisdiction over matters arising in any town within such probate district. I believe Juvenile Court is the proper venue. IMO.>>

Thanks for this. Under the following statute, CGS 45a-187, FD possibly waived his right to appeal if he didn't appear at the hearing, if he had notice of the hearing. It's also a statute of limitations as to time to file.

This is major information, Pernickety.
AFAIK, he didn't bother to show up at that hearing -- anyone else care to confirm this?

 

[Alathea]

Guilty as charged and here is why I've continued to mention this issue. What about cases where money is very much an issue and to the extent that someone goes missing and the STBX or partner takes everything and leaves nothing for the children? I've not seen any safeguard to protect the assets of missing people in CT and that has me quite concerned. I'm concerned not just for JFd (who had significant assets) but for people of lesser means where the money possibly taken would mean the difference between children going to school and not!

Totally agree that these 5 Dulos children are financially blessed and so don't have to worry about such details as paying for school and keeping a roof over their heads. No dispute on any of this but that isn't why I continue to bring up this issue of 'money' and Fd.

We have seen in many other missing cases where the assets/belongings etc. are routinely ransacked and taken by family and friends with no intervention from LE or the Courts. I do strongly believe that a strong possibility exists that this is precisely what Fd has been allowed to do in this sad case and neither the Family Court nor the State have done anything that I can see to protect the assets of JFd (or those of the 5 children) that Fd might have had access to at the time of the disappearance.

In the Dulos case, there was an ongoing Family Court case with specific guidelines as to the status of marital assets. We saw recently that JFd Atty Midler ask for payment of his fees while at the same time raising the question of the disposition of martial assets by Fd. Has Judge Heller done anything to address or investigate this issue raised by Atty Midler? We sadly don't know.

NOW, we see GAL Michael "Maserati" Meehan filing a motion on Thursday this past week to collect the $43,000 he believes he is owed by Fd and he is also seeking to 'clarify' his role in the Dulos v Dulos case. Mmmmm.

Link: Attorney for Jennifer Dulos’ kids wants to get paid and his role defined in custody battle

I've been quite consistent in commenting on any situation where it appears possible that money/assets is not being used as provided by the Court (Family Court situation is an example) and the Civil Case (many examples of Fd spending habits were presented in depositions by Atty Weinstein and also information he presented in evidence during the Civil Trial). My assumption is that anything belonging to JFd (not part of settlement in the divorce) would go to her 5 children.

We have also seen Fd continuing to pay an entire legal team while at the same time admitting under oath that he has had 'no income' for 2 years? Is Fd using his possibly 'hidden' funds to pay his team or has he been able to access money/funds/assets of JFd or possibly funds that had been earmarked by the couple in happier days for the children? Sadly, we don't know but the Fd Pattisville atty crew continues to grow! What was done in Family Court to make sure that this wasn't possible? Sadly, we don't know.

The reason I've consistently brought up the 'money issue' is I'm not sure if the rules set forth in Judge Heller's court for the marital assets has been followed by Fd OR whether Judge Heller did anything to insure compliance by Fd?

From the time JFd went missing, I'm not sure what ability Judge Heller had to freeze assets or protect the marital assets of JFd but its not clear she did anything to safeguard anything belonging to JFd. Given that the parties were separated and living apart, its unclear what other assets might be involved or if Fd had access to any assets belonging to the children. IDK, I hope Judge Heller knows and the only reason I continue to bring it up is to possibly jog someone's brain that just because someone is missing that its not open field day on ransacking their assets and belongings.

Atty Weinstein was very clear that any collections from the Civil Trial and the 4Jx Foreclosure action would be placed into Trust for the 5 children. Since this was GF's and Atty Weinstein's goal, I respected their goal and felt that anything that belonged to JFd that would have been part of the divorce settlement would belong to her 5 children. We don't know if Fd honoured the rules of the Family Court but my suspicion is that he did not based on his prior behaviour IMO.

I do question whether anyone (including her Attorney, Atty Midler) that had the ability to do something did in fact do anything to safeguard her assets after she went missing and this leaves me feeling very unsettled and lacking confidence in the Family Court process and JFd's attorney.

Do missing people lose their rights just because they aren't here to speak legally for themselves?

MOO

<<I do question whether anyone (including her Attorney, Atty Midler) that had the ability to do something did in fact do anything to safeguard her assets after she went missing and this leaves me feeling very unsettled and lacking confidence in the Family Court process and JFd's attorney.

Do missing people lose their rights just because they aren't here to speak legally for themselves?>>

Great points.

Important, too, IMO, when one considers that the actual motive for murder of Jennifer may well have been the money itself.

He manages to prove daily that it was and is a huge factor for him.

 

[BellaVita]

I still don’t understand why Fd was allowed to put up less than the 10% that MT was required to put up. They both had a bail amt of $500,000, and 10% is $50,000. This is what MT paid, but for some reason Fd’s was discounted to, I think, $37,500. What was the reason for this?

According to article I posted, it's 7% for bonds over $5K and there is a $150 court fee. Sorry, don't have link but I read an article today that stated FD bond was $35,150. So calculations align. I have not researched what MT paid.

 

[BellaVita]

<<BellaVita said: ↑» Connecticut General Statutes 45a-186 – Appeals from probate. Venue. Service of process. Referral to special assignment probate judgeLawServer
(2) an appeal in a matter concerning removal of a parent as guardian, termination of parental rights or adoption shall be filed in any superior court for juvenile matters having jurisdiction over matters arising in any town within such probate district. I believe Juvenile Court is the proper venue. IMO.>>


This is major information, Pernickety.
AFAIK, he didn't bother to show up at that hearing -- anyone else care to confirm this?

» Connecticut General Statutes 45a-187 – Time of taking appealsLawServer
(a) An appeal by persons of the age of majority who are present or who have legal notice to be present, or who have been given notice of their right to request a hearing or have filed a written waiver of their right to a hearing, shall be taken within the time provided in section 45a-186, except as otherwise provided in this section. If such persons have no notice to be present and are not present, or have not been given notice of their right to request a hearing, such appeal shall be taken within twelve months, except for appeals by such persons from an order of termination of parental rights, other than an order of termination of parental rights based on consent, or a decree of adoption, in which case appeal shall be taken within ninety days. An appeal from an order of termination of parental rights based on consent, which order is issued on or after October 1, 2004, shall be taken within twenty days.

As long as a written waiver was submitted, FD is covered. IMO. He wouldn't have needed to attend.

 

[Jmoose]

According to article I posted, it's 7% for bonds over $5K and there is a $150 court fee. Sorry, don't have link but I read an article today that stated FD bond was $35,150. So calculations align. I have not researched what MT paid.

Thanks