Deceased/Not Found CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 *ARRESTS* #38

[CTGrammy]

@Tink56, do you think he should have his own WS thread so we can track this?

I am still a bit stunned about the $1,000 bond for this offence.

What could he possibly have been thinking here? MOO

Does the Professional Surety indicate that Habib did not have to put up any money at all?

 

[Boxer]

I don’t think that is necessarily what anybody’s saying-although I suppose it could be possible. I think some think that it may have been used to dismember Jennifer. It’s just kind of an interesting thing for him to have borrowed from someone, since he is anything but the log splitting type (in other words, nobody’s ever known him to do it-he didn’t even have an axe; he had to borrow and then never return it)

Axe or hatchet?
The evidence package size I saw troopers handing it off in the news photo looked midsize.

I am not optimistic that the hatchet will end up being anything important; I know Fd’s been stupid in some respects, but it would surprise me to know that he held onto a hatchet bearing forensic evidence shows this implement had any contact with Jennifer. But of course, I am hopeful that they can connect it to Jennifer!

Maybe no DNA on the axe if he cleaned up. But maybe the wood fibers might match.

 

[CTGrammy]

Seems odd that the police would release a firearm to someone other than the owner?

Unless that person is an Attorney.

IMO.

 

[Niner]

If NP waive probable cause hearing - will there still be a hearing tomorrow for Fd?

TIA!

 

[sds71]

If NP waive probable cause hearing - will there still be a hearing tomorrow for Fd?

TIA!

Fotis Dulos wants a hearing to determine whether police had probable cause to arrest him for the murder of his estranged wife Jennifer. Attorney Norm Pattis says Dulos will be in court 1/22 to make that request.
@News12CT

Fotis Dulos attorney Norm Pattis has reversed course. Now says he will WAIVE a probable cause hearing rather than request one. Pattis now says he’ll be in court Thursday to do so.
@News12CT

im not sure if Pattis has his days or dates mixed up or if its now Thursday 1/23

 

[MassGuy]

Well I looked at the Norm Pattis clip on the courthouse steps.

MOO He layed out his case strategy as well as invoking a case he intends to emulate, Lizzie Borden. A case with bodies but no murder weapon.

1. No one knows what exactly happened, so you the jury don't know who is culpable so you can't convict.
2. The nanny is not a credible witness. So disregard her statements. Listen to FDs family instead.
3. FD was in the 69 Welles home getting something from the sink on 5/22.
4. FD doesn't have to prove he was not the killer, so prove he was the one on the bike on Weed St. In the Tacoma Etc.
5. FORE moves vehicles around all the time, nothing atypical was going on.
6. FD was into the bags and gloves etc. prior to whoever was using them for crime scene disposal.
7. Hartford trip and Albany video----cross that bridge when we get there.
9. Because some parts of the crime can't be detailed without direct witness testimony (and no one is providing that) and because my client is super handsome you must find him innocent.

Keeping MT and KM in line must be a principle part of the strategy.

Your last line is the most important: “Keeping MT and KM in line must be a principle part of the strategy.”

Fortunately, the ball is not in Norm’s court here. They have their own representation, lawyers who are looking out solely for their respective client. That means minimizing their legal exposure.

Both MT and KM have the ability to blow FD’s chance of acquittal out of the water (I’d argue that the ship has already sailed). Not only do I not expect both of them to tote the company line, but I expect one or both to cut a deal.

Poor Norm doesn’t know what’s about to hit him.

 

[enelram]

Seems odd that the police would release a firearm to someone other than the owner?

unless it's Mayberry, er, Farmington PD.

 

[NameisNobody]

Who's on first, What's on second and I don't know is on third--

Is KM on first?
NAH, just got moved to new prison....oh my what did he say?

Is your Greek money on second going to pay for probable cause hearing still?
NAH, running out of money....let's work on alibi's instead

Is MT on third still target of our 3rd party culpability?
Ummm unclear. What did KM say on first?


IMO

Still having a good laugh about this 180 turn from Pattisville (it more like a 27o maybe with the detour for Grand Jury or maybe its just a double 180 from his comments at bail hearing? IDK)! How to keep track of the 'Wild World of Pattisville'. OR, wonder what perhaps Fd might have told Atty. P. that could be 'new news' in Pattisville?

I do wonder which person/s in or evidence particular from the State's list of evidence THUS FAR (more is coming!) might have resulted in this about face from Atty. P.? Atty. P. is quite amusing to watch because no matter how loud and wildly he screams for 'more evidence and discovery' he really doesn't want to talk about it or hear others talk about on the record!

More and more options for the defense were summarily removed via AW3 and the SWs as everyone here has been busy pointing out in great detail.

Atty. P. seems to be hanging his silly FB interns' cowboy hat on "no body" and 'not dead'?

Mmmm.

My guess is that no-body on the jury will believe that line of defence given the growing mountain of evidence to the contrary.

MOO

 

[LittleBitty]

I confess to being disappointed. I am disappointed that NP has done a 180 on the Probable Cause hearing. Largely, because the article that @afitzy posted explained that while the State would not put on much more evidence at the PC hearing, CSME Gill would likely be called by the State to prove that JFd is actually dead and was murdered in her garage.

I am aware his words are in the AW3 of MT and FD and in KM AW.

NP desperately does not want that narrative to be left with the potential jury pool. Especially with a gag order (that he continually skirts around with no contempt charges). He will control the narrative in the press on waiving the PC hearing by saying that in skipping it he ensures that his client will get that speedy trial that FD so desperately wants. Ya, a PC hearing is really gonna delay that speedy trial. Poppycock!

NP wants to keep the GG bullcrud story out there for as long as he can.

But where does this put the co-conspirators? A plea deal? Will both of them waive the PC as well? Let's face it, Gill will get up there and graphically go over the ample blood evidence and there will not be much in the way of countering it until trial for any of the defendants.

So while it is fun to watch NP abruptly turn course, it is a let down for me. We all want Justice for Jennifer. I was hoping that the State could control the narrative that she is indeed deceased by a homicide of violence. Not allow a scintilla of the GG stench to permeate the air anymore. It would also, imo, allow for a vigil and a chance for the public to mourn in a sense without a funeral. Gill merely stating his expert opinion in a document (AW) is not as powerful as having his words on the stand during a PC hearing while FD is sitting in court be repeated by the print and television news media.

So while I admit, NP is indeed aware that JFd is dead I am still very much bummed that the PC hearing will not be taking place for FD.

So what will KM and MT do? Probably waive the PC as well unless they can strike a plea deal.

 

[Alathea]

I confess to being disappointed. I am disappointed that NP has done a 180 on the Probable Cause hearing. Largely, because the article that @afitzy posted explained that while the State would not put on much more evidence at the PC hearing, CSME Gill would likely be called by the State to prove that JFd is actually dead and was murdered in her garage.

I am aware his words are in the AW3 of MT and FD and in KM AW.

NP desperately does not want that narrative to be left with the potential jury pool. Especially with a gag order (that he continually skirts around with no contempt charges). He will control the narrative in the press on waiving the PC hearing by saying that in skipping it he ensures that his client will get that speedy trial that FD so desperately wants. Ya, a PC hearing is really gonna delay that speedy trial. Poppycock!

NP wants to keep the GG bullcrud story out there for as long as he can.

But where does this put the co-conspirators? A plea deal? Will both of them waive the PC as well? Let's face it, Gill will get up there and graphically go over the ample blood evidence and there will not be much in the way of countering it until trial for any of the defendants.

So while it is fun to watch NP abruptly turn course, it is a let down for me. We all want Justice for Jennifer. I was hoping that the State could control the narrative that she is indeed deceased by a homicide of violence. Not allow a scintilla of the GG stench to permeate the air anymore. It would also, imo, allow for a vigil and a chance for the public to mourn in a sense without a funeral. Gill merely stating his expert opinion in a document (AW) is not as powerful as having his words on the stand during a PC hearing while FD is sitting in court be repeated by the print and television news media.

So while I admit, NP is indeed aware that JFd is dead I am still very much bummed that the PC hearing will not be taking place for FD.

So what will KM and MT do? Probably waive the PC as well unless they can strike a plea deal.

Yeah, I seriously doubt NP will want all that info out in the public right now. To him, the case is all a publicity stunt, and such a hearing would make his client - and him - look r-e-a-l-l-y bad! It would destroy all of his inane theories.

 

[oceancalling]

Here's the latest on the criminal:
HABIB MICHAEL J 1986 Waterbury GA 4 Awaiting Plea 02/10/2020 10:00 AM U04W-CR19-0487056-S
1

Mmm, he is "awaiting plea" but MT is "plea hearing." I wonder why the language of the two notices is different.

 

[Annicade]

I am still wondering about this-was the gun registered or not-have heard it described both ways. If unregistered, why would they let anyone retrieve it? But I think you’re right about KM retrieving it; why wouldn’t LE give it to an “officer of the court”, such as he is?

I'm thinking along the same lines...did he uave permit originally?! And/or did KM advise him he would take it in his possession? Normally, any attorney wouldn't do this, but here, we are talking about KM. and a local police dept. Some of the local depts. Don't have as strict of code as state. It it stated there for a particular reason...imo

 

[oceancalling]

defense attorney Norm Pattis does a 180 - will WAIVE right to probable cause hearing reports
@WFSBnews

I KNEW it! Dulos doesn't want to be anywhere NEAR a courtroom because once the evidence starts to come out publicly in court, his web of lies falls apart, and he is headed for the Big House. That probable cause hearing was going to be the beginning of the end for Mr. Dulos.

All the lying to the press, beating his chest about his innocence boils down to this one simple reality. He AND his attorney know he is guilty. He isn't going to get away with this murder. No way.

 

[sds71]

Mmm, he is "awaiting plea" but MT is "plea hearing." I wonder why the language of the two notices is different.

is because she hasn't entered a plea for the conspiracy charges yet

Steps in a Criminal Case
Basic Criminal Case Steps

Step 1: Arraignment

The first step in a criminal case is a court appearance called an arraignment, in which the charges against the defendant are read before a judge. At an arraignment, a lawyer is appointed if the defendant cannot afford one, and the defendant's plea (guilty, not guilty, no contest) is entered. Bail may also be set at the arraignment.

Step 2: Preliminary Hearing

The arraignment is followed by a preliminary hearing, in which a prosecutor presents evidence to a judge in an attempt to show that there is strong suspicion that a person committed a crime. If the judge is convinced that a strong suspicion exists, the defendant is 'held to answer,' and the prosecution proceeds to the trial court level. If the judge does not agree that the prosecution has demonstrated 'strong suspicion,' the charges are dropped.

Step 3: 2nd Arraignment (Superior Court)

Fourteen days after the defendant is 'held to answer,' he is arraigned in the trial level court of the Superior court. This hearing is the same procedure is the first arraignment.

Step 4: Pretrial Hearing & Motions

A motion is a request asking a judge to issue a ruling order on a legal matter. The pretrial is a hearing to resolve outstanding issues and it is often an appropriate time to attempt to settle or 'plea bargain' the case.

Step 5: Jury Trial

 

[oceancalling]

I don’t think that is necessarily what anybody’s saying-although I suppose it could be possible. I think some think that it may have been used to dismember Jennifer. It’s just kind of an interesting thing for him to have borrowed from someone, since he is anything but the log splitting type (in other words, nobody’s ever known him to do it-he didn’t even have an axe; he had to borrow and then never return it)

He could have used it at 80 MS, believing that it would not be tied to him. Do I believe he is arrogant/stupid enough to put it in his garage after the search warrants were executed? Based on his prior conduct, absolutely. Nothing will surprise me about this man.

 

[Topppps]

What makes you think that?

I read his power got turned off, his company isn't making money as he is the only employee now, you can't afford power you're probably not going to afford to fight this. He has his house for sale for $4.8M probably going to need that cash to pay his legal team.

 

[oceancalling]

Exactly. KM could walk into an LE office and say that he is the attorney on record and he will take the firearm and keep it safe until which time the owner is in a position to take legal possession. Does LE do a background check on KM to ensure that He does not have any charges of DV or other aspects that would preclude him from taking possession? More than likely, NOT.

Sure Mr. KM, you are a CT Attorney and yes, Mr. KM we will be happy to give you possession of said firearm because Surely your respectable position as an Attorney would preclude LE from doing our due diligence to ensure that you are eligible to take possession of someone else's firearm.

It is Absolutely possible that LE in JFd's investigation Knows Who took possession of the gun and either that person is not telling what they did with the gun or LE has been unable to find the gun and corroborate the story if that person did tell them what they did with it.

IMO.

LE definitely does a background check every time a firearm is returned, no ifs, ands, or buts. I don't care if you are the Buddha, a background check is happening because the feds do not look too kindly to LE returning a weapon to someone statutorily prohibited from possessing it.

If KM had already been charged with a felony, that would also legally bar its return it to him. If he took possession of a gun when he wasn't legally permitted to possess it, he could be charged with a federal offense, so I do not think KM got that gun--unless there is something I am missing. The feds really, really take gun cases seriously, at least in my neck of the woods.

 

[oceancalling]

Your last line is the most important: “Keeping MT and KM in line must be a principle part of the strategy.”

Fortunately, the ball is not in Norm’s court here. They have their own representation, lawyers who are looking out solely for their respective client. That means minimizing their legal exposure.

Both MT and KM have the ability to blow FD’s chance of acquittal out of the water (I’d argue that the ship has already sailed). Not only do I not expect both of them to tote the company line, but I expect one or both to cut a deal.

Poor Norm doesn’t know what’s about to hit him.

100% agree, especially KM. I bet he is already singing.

 

[oceancalling]

I confess to being disappointed. I am disappointed that NP has done a 180 on the Probable Cause hearing. Largely, because the article that @afitzy posted explained that while the State would not put on much more evidence at the PC hearing, CSME Gill would likely be called by the State to prove that JFd is actually dead and was murdered in her garage.

I am aware his words are in the AW3 of MT and FD and in KM AW.

NP desperately does not want that narrative to be left with the potential jury pool. Especially with a gag order (that he continually skirts around with no contempt charges). He will control the narrative in the press on waiving the PC hearing by saying that in skipping it he ensures that his client will get that speedy trial that FD so desperately wants. Ya, a PC hearing is really gonna delay that speedy trial. Poppycock!

NP wants to keep the GG bullcrud story out there for as long as he can.

But where does this put the co-conspirators? A plea deal? Will both of them waive the PC as well? Let's face it, Gill will get up there and graphically go over the ample blood evidence and there will not be much in the way of countering it until trial for any of the defendants.

So while it is fun to watch NP abruptly turn course, it is a let down for me. We all want Justice for Jennifer. I was hoping that the State could control the narrative that she is indeed deceased by a homicide of violence. Not allow a scintilla of the GG stench to permeate the air anymore. It would also, imo, allow for a vigil and a chance for the public to mourn in a sense without a funeral. Gill merely stating his expert opinion in a document (AW) is not as powerful as having his words on the stand during a PC hearing while FD is sitting in court be repeated by the print and television news media.

So while I admit, NP is indeed aware that JFd is dead I am still very much bummed that the PC hearing will not be taking place for FD.

So what will KM and MT do? Probably waive the PC as well unless they can strike a plea deal.

A good card player never shows their hand too soon. While we may be disappointed, IMO it is better that the PC was waived. Why give NP two opportunities to cross-examine LE witnesses? As for NP's continual pronouncements? Traffic noise, that will fall away when the trial begins.

 

[Topppps]

or Pattis read the article that said Fudge might not show up for the trial

Why would Fudge be that important? All he did was sell a knife a homeless guy George traded to him.