Deceased/Not Found CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 *ARRESTS* #47

[BellaVita]

in your opinion?

It's a belief. Just as an example: One poster came here(no longer with us)after FD suicide and didn't even know he had actually been charged with murder.

 

[BellaVita]

For what purpose would they be used though? To me, the ponchos would be something I would keep in my car boot (trunk) in case of unexpected rainfall when out walking the dog. I would have thought if something was to be used in the commission of a bloody crime overalls would have been a better choice. I guess we will find out one day!

They would be used to protect against blood spatter/DNA transfer. There could have been coveralls that weren't recovered. Who knows what FD was thinking. He thought it a good idea to go down Albany with his cell phone.

 

[Nikynoo]

I have been meaning to ask these questions to extend the same interest and courtesy as you have here with this case so here I go: So have the Brits adopted the term attorney now? How has that affected their standing reputation-wise, do you think? Do they have public defenders? Are they appointed by the court? Is there a surplus of attorneys there now? What do you think the most useful legal specialization is in the UK now? Thank you for taking the time and making the effort to engage us here; it is quite remarkable given the workload for the attorneys I know from my family and my work. I’m going to take them to task about this as they could volunteer here, too. They love to debate, however, so it might be counterproductive. MOO.

1. No, but there is more generalised use of 'lawyer' which can hide a multitude of sins
2. see above
3. yes. All accused of a crime have access to free representation. You can also chose your lawyer and they will represent you IF they accept legal aid (where the state pays their fees);. NOTE - I do not specialise in criminal law and haven't had a need for representation, so am not sure whether any means testing is carried out (e.g. if you have the money/assets to pay for your own representation). No, they are not appointed by the court. There is usually a pool of appropriate qualified lawyers at the police station and at courts.
4. Commercial Law and probably Taxation Law;
5. Yes, workload is heavy - but it has peaks and troughs. Luckily, I am on holiday (vacation) this week as it is the school holidays.
6. You didn't ask, but I LOVE my job.
7. You didn't ask this either, but before starting my law degree and associated training, I wanted to work for the Crown Prosecution Service (this is the enitity in the UK that prosecutes crimes). I soon found out that people do very horrible things to other people and I dont think that I could take home that horridness every day and it not have some negative impact on me and mine, so I chose a different area of law to practice. I did however, choose criminal law for my honours thesis. For me, its best viewed at a distance,

 

[Nikynoo]

They would be used to protect against blood spatter/DNA transfer. There could have been coveralls that weren't recovered. Who knows what FD was thinking. He thought it a good idea to go down Albany with his cell phone.

I do not think ponchos would have been a good choice for that, but like you said, who knows?

 

[Nikynoo]

It's a belief. Just as an example: One poster came here(no longer with us)after FD suicide and didn't even know he had actually been charged with murder.

and I also remember a poster that didnt even know he was dead. Bizarro

 

[RoosterRock]

IDK, just tossing this out there as others previously had put forward the idea that the Suburban was left in a state to invite its being stolen from Lapham.

If the older iPhones were in plain view then perhaps they were left to draw a possible thief into the vehicle and then the thief might realise that the keys were still in the Suburban and take the Suburban for a joy ride or head to the nearest chop shop?

Stolen electronic items and smash and grab thefts (usually don't even have to smash as people leave their cars open with wallets and electronic gear in plain sight!) in NC are probably one of the top crimes. What better way to invite a car theft than to spread out a few phones as 'bait'!

Just a random thought as it would seem to make more sense to take all the phones and destroy them rather than leave them in plain sight.....


MOO

IMO
I agree, FD planned too lose a plan for a random thief to be around at the exact time he was leaving the Suburban at Waveny to get a possible abduction. I think NP came up with the Gone Girl scenario later on.
FD was not dumb, his original plan would not have included that as JD loved her kids too much and there was plenty of proof of that, they were her whole life and she fought for 2 years in the divorce to keep him away from the kids.
He wanted it stolen and then found in NYC or Norwalk, then it would look like she was taken....he did not plan on it being found by LE.
I have said this before on WS:
He must not have frequented public parks with trails. Runners, dog walkers and bikers are all friends, they watch out for each other, he lucked out that none of them called LE earlier. I would have alerted the police if I saw a Suburban running with no owner in sight, and would have asked others what they thought.....

 

[Nikynoo]

I'm not missing your point. She wasn't looking for it. Attempts were made to clean up. The blood was largely confined to a single side of the Rover. She wasn't inspecting the Rover, the east wall or the garage door or the garbage cans. LE went there and inspected it. It was apparent to the naked eye. Does it matter that LA did not see it? Do you think JD was killed after LA took the children to NYC?

But you said that the blood was obvious. I am just trying to ascertain how obvious? The AWs give the impression that it was obvious , so why didn't she see it? The alarm could have been raised earlier if so.

 

[Nikynoo]

It wasn't in the Rover. SW confirms that. Again, what difference does it make how the kids got to NYC? It doesn't solve anything.

Nevermind. I'm obviously not being clear with my questions.

 

[RoosterRock]

FROM SW:
Apple iCloud account ID: jenniferdulos@mac.com, associated with subscriber Jennifer Dulos, of 69 Welles Lane, New
Canaan, CT, 06840, telephone number 929-499-7661 . Additional subscriber information to include account name, email
address, any telephone numbers, IP logs for primary and secondary accounts

It appears from a closer read that LE covered bases for all phones with a single warrant thus leaving open more of a possibility for 2 phones in the Suburban. However, SW also says:
An analysis of data gleaned from Jennifer's cellphone records
indicated her cellular device arrived in the area of 200 Lapham Road in New Canaan at approximately
10:38 AM and remained in the area until 11 :09 AM, at which time the device was no longer on the network.

This tells me, IMO, that it WAS JD phone found in the Suburban. JD number was provided to LE on 5/24 and LE was able to confirm the 11:09 info on the spot with Verizon. Then FD was seen a few minutes later at 11:12 on the Merritt. Of course, FD could have taken it into the truck with him and then switched it off shortly afterwards and ditched it at that point or kept it. Again leaving open the possibility of 2 phones.

So, it took 13 minutes from WL to Lapham. Close to google maps estimate of 8-9 minutes. There is only one route that passes by Thurton. I don't think there was very much time to do a body transfer before arriving at WP so I'm going with JD still in Suburban at that point. MOO.

34 minute window between arrival at WP and being seen on the Merritt. JD taken to MS or transferred during that window? IDK. Just thinking about Jennifer at 3AM. All MOO.
ETA: Due to time frame and JD blood found on passenger seat, I do believe she was in the truck at some point. So likely to me that when FD left WP, JD was with him.

It is curios what did FD do for 34 Minutes? Waveny is right next to the Merritt Parkway?? That is why they were searching the nearby pond....
We know he loved dumpster dumping maybe he started there with a nearby dumpster and that stuff was long gone?
Just not sure as he spent so much time running around up in Farmington between properties.
Still not sure if he had help from someone other than KM and MT back at the house or elsewhere - transfer at some woodsy location - he met them and they took the body.....or he dumped her at a pre-dug grave somewhere???
Still thinking he used the stone walls to bury her in a pre-dug grave and covered back up...
So frustrating that we cannot figure this out!
Where the heck is she?
I hope LE is still as curious as we are with FD gone.......?
Maybe they should enlist a psychic to help???
All options on the table to find her.....

 

[BellaVita]

Nevermind. I'm obviously not being clear with my questions.

You've been asking how LA took the kids to NYC. FD atty tried to pin her down in the civil trial with that question. It had nothing to do with the civil trial. The atty just wanted to make her look bad. She likely did what she had to do to get them to NYC even if the vehicle she was driving wasn't suitable to hold all of them. It has nothing to do with the murder though. IMO.

 

[Ruminations]

Here is the article and link:

I Like Fire and Brimstone

I Like Fire and Brimstone


News that the Supreme Court reversed the conviction of a former client of mine was a delightful surprise. He was convicted of sexually abusing a young child. At trial, we won acquittals of the most serious charges, but the jury convicted on two counts, enough to yield a six-year sentence on judgment day.

At trial, I objected to everything save the sight of my own shadow. My adversary, Danbury’s sharmese Hodge, and I went toe-to-toe on the tender years exception to the hearsay rule, the scope of the constancy of accusation doctrine, the extent to which there is such a thing as expertise in incremental and delayed disclosure -- all familiar bugbears in cases of this sort. I was hoping that the Supreme Court would reverse on one of these grounds.

Instead, the Court reversed on an issue I never raised -- prosecutorial misconduct. Sharmese called me a liar during her rebuttal case. She claimed I favored child abuse. She accused me of using smoke and mirrors in my cross-examination of the child. I recall listening to her the day she huffed and puffed with thoughts of strangling her.

But I figured she was just doing her job. I mean, it’s closing argument, right? Isn’t that where we’re supposed to pin our ears back and let ‘er rip?

I gave a closing argument the other day in Middletown. My adversary was Pete McShane. When I accused him of using parlor tricks to prove his case, he looked as though I had kicked him in the groin, he seemed genuinely hurt. Sharmese wouldn’t have minded a verbal dust-up.

I didn’t take the appeal in the case Charmese and I tried together. Richard Emanuel did. Rich is one of my favorite people in the state. Having him read a trial transcript of mine is like a trip to a benevolent principal’s office. Indeed, I often call him in the midst of trial when I am trying to transform some ornery intuition into something resembling a legal principle.
It was Rich who spotted and framed the prosecutorial misconduct claim against Sharmese.

I’m always a little troubled when I see an appellate tribunal reverse a conviction on the grounds of rhetorical excess during closing argument. I worry that these rulings will chill good advocacy. I don’t want get geared up for the verbal combat that is trial with a judge’s bootblack on my lips. Prosecutorial misconduct rulings filter down to the trial court and encourage a broad use of discretion by judges when it comes to stifling defense counsel. Not long ago I had a New Haven trial judge sustain the state’s objection to my use of a common allegory to end an argument: I can understand a little stupidity and venality among the prosecutorial class; I expect better of judges.

I am delighted my client got a new trial, but I can’t help but feel bad for Sharmese. I’ve watched her emerge in the past few years to be a top-flight trial lawyer. She is tough, determined, quick on her feet, and relentless. Slapping her down just when she starts to take flight seems almost cruel.

I don’t know whether the state will try my client again. Neither do I know whether the client will return to me if the state brings on round two. But I’d like the chance to go toe-to-toe with Sharmese again in this case. I wouldn’t even complain if she called me a few names, and harrumphed her way around the courtroom like a mad-hatter in search of a hat rack. God knows, I’ll have a few choices words of my own for her.

I suspect the re-trial will be more tame, however. She’ll be looking over her shoulder, lest the Supremes take notice. That’s a shame really. Please, let’s not neuter trial lawyers, too. There’s got to me some place left for verbal gunslingers, the sort of people who object first, and ask questions later.



Related topics: Connecticut Law Tribune Columns

“With thoughts of strangling her?”

That man is sick. He doesn’t spell his fantasy victims name right, but he can spell “strangling.”

 

[Nikynoo]

It is curios what did FD do for 34 Minutes? Waveny is right next to the Merritt Parkway?? That is why they were searching the nearby pond....
We know he loved dumpster dumping maybe he started there with a nearby dumpster and that stuff was long gone?
Just not sure as he spent so much time running around up in Farmington between properties.
Still not sure if he had help from someone other than KM and MT back at the house or elsewhere - transfer at some woodsy location - he met them and they took the body.....or he dumped her at a pre-dug grave somewhere???
Still thinking he used the stone walls to bury her in a pre-dug grave and covered back up...
So frustrating that we cannot figure this out!
Where the heck is she?
I hope LE is still as curious as we are with FD gone.......?
Maybe they should enlist a psychic to help???
All options on the table to find her.....

I agree with this. I'm going back to the two plus hours at Welles Lane. Why so long? If you take out the travel time, its almost three hours.

 

[Nikynoo]

You've been asking how LA took the kids to NYC. FD atty tried to pin her down in the civil trial with that question. It had nothing to do with the civil trial. The atty just wanted to make her look bad. She likely did what she had to do to get them to NYC even if the vehicle she was driving wasn't suitable to hold all of them. It has nothing to do with the murder though. IMO.

I asked two questions.
1. I was clearly wondering whether her (LA) vehicle could have transported all the children to NYC and why she didn't use the LR? Clearly this is just my idle curiosity and nothing more.
2. If the blood in the garage was obvious. Why didn't LA see it? Now, to me, this is a valid question.

 

[BellaVita]

But you said that the blood was obvious. I am just trying to ascertain how obvious? The AWs give the impression that it was obvious , so why didn't she see it? The alarm could have been raised earlier if so.

She wasn't looking for it. Some of it could depend on where she parked.

Regular LE officers, not CSU saw the evidence. They were looking for it. It was obvious enough that they called in the crime van. LA was not inspecting anything. She had no reason to raise an alarm at that time. Yes, some things were odd but she did not go around looking for blood.

 

[spaz1959]

I’ve asked this before and I’m asking it again because what is going on (and on and ON) here is time-wasting and illogical at best and purposefully diversionary at worst: WHY now that Fotis is dead and the spotlights are (rightfully! Read the AW’s, people!) more brightly on Michelle Troconis and KM are so many people suddenly flocking to this forum and constantly diverting discussion away from Websleuthing the two people—MT and KM—especially Michelle Troconis—who have been named in arrest warrants in this case? Websleuths isn’t about—or isn’t SUPPOSED to be about—derailing serious efforts to assist in finding FACTs and information that LE can use to bring justice to victims. Some of the best Internet sleuthers in the world (YES) are here devoting their time, talents, and expertise to uncovering hidden details that already have helped in this case and the constant flow of repeated questioning and doubting about well-established facts in the case is wasting time and brainpower as the super sleuthers feel compelled to refute over and over disingenuous posts and “theories” all with a common focus that experienced sleuthers can see as clearly as the very detailed FACTs and findings are listed in the AWs: For no reason based on the known facts (read the AWs; read the entire collection of threads and evidence), some of the new posters here keep trying to minimize the FACTs that tie MT and KM to the murder of Jennifer Farber Dulos, a mother who loved her five kids and who was loved by them, a mother who put her kids first, a person who by all accounts was kind and caring, a person who has not been linked to the murder of anyone unlike MT and KM. The known FACTs do not support their innocence so have the posters continually pushing these flat-earth theories just not bothered to read the evidence-based information or are they actually here not to help find FACTs to help bring justice to a murdered mother but instead to try to provide some kind of cover for people such as MT and KM who have been linked by FACTs as in the AWs? Please; none of the authentic sleuthers here is fooled by these tactics or those employed so embarrassingly poorly by MT and KM. If your interest is indeed genuinely motivated by the desire for justice, you need to start at the beginning and read the documented evidence. If you’re unwilling to do that, you’re impeding progress—and justice for a murdered mother of five little kids. My opinion only (MOO)? Sure—and one gained through years of experience watching these incredibly successful and dedicated Internet sleuthers carefully research and put pieces together to bring justice to people like murdered Jennifer Farber Dulos. I don’t have to have their skills to appreciate them—and to do my part by learning from the FACTs and by not making their work harder by making them repeat and refute things already established many times over and obstructing their progress through a litany of logical fallacies like, you know, feigned righteous indignation or frenzied complaining of ill treatment when the truth, like an ankle monitor, is a little uncomfortable. MOO.

On the subject of MT and KM. Will these two be tried together?

 

[BellaVita]

I agree with this. I'm going back to the two plus hours at Welles Lane. Why so long? If you take out the travel time, its almost three hours.

2 hours 20 minutes.

 

[Nikynoo]

She wasn't looking for it. Some of it could depend on where she parked.
View attachment 233541
Regular LE officers, not CSU saw the evidence. They were looking for it. It was obvious enough that they called in the crime van. LA was not inspecting anything. She had no reason to raise an alarm at that time. Yes, some things were odd but she did not go around looking for blood.

So, not so obvious then. Not a messy crime scene. Thanks.

 

[Nikynoo]

2 hours 20 minutes.

2 hours 20 at Welles and another 40 at Lapham = 3 hours

 

[Ruminations]

FROM SW:
Apple iCloud account ID: jenniferdulos@mac.com, associated with subscriber Jennifer Dulos, of 69 Welles Lane, New
Canaan, CT, 06840, telephone number 929-499-7661 . Additional subscriber information to include account name, email
address, any telephone numbers, IP logs for primary and secondary accounts

It appears from a closer read that LE covered bases for all phones with a single warrant thus leaving open more of a possibility for 2 phones in the Suburban. However, SW also says:
An analysis of data gleaned from Jennifer's cellphone records
indicated her cellular device arrived in the area of 200 Lapham Road in New Canaan at approximately
10:38 AM and remained in the area until 11 :09 AM, at which time the device was no longer on the network.

This tells me, IMO, that it WAS JD phone found in the Suburban. JD number was provided to LE on 5/24 and LE was able to confirm the 11:09 info on the spot with Verizon. Then FD was seen a few minutes later at 11:12 on the Merritt. Of course, FD could have taken it into the truck with him and then switched it off shortly afterwards and ditched it at that point or kept it. Again leaving open the possibility of 2 phones.

So, it took 13 minutes from WL to Lapham. Close to google maps estimate of 8-9 minutes. There is only one route that passes by Thurton. I don't think there was very much time to do a body transfer before arriving at WP so I'm going with JD still in Suburban at that point. MOO.

34 minute window between arrival at WP and being seen on the Merritt. JD taken to MS or transferred during that window? IDK. Just thinking about Jennifer at 3AM. All MOO.
ETA: Due to time frame and JD blood found on passenger seat, I do believe she was in the truck at some point. So likely to me that when FD left WP, JD was with him.

Good point. My childrens’ cell phones are technically mine.

As noted, kids are not allowed to bring all devices to all schools at all ages. Vehicles are packed with nooks and crannies. It is always and adventure to explore back and way back seats. If it is missing, it is probably in a compartment of the minivan you didn’t know existed.

I am not as flush with cash nor do I have as many children. But even in my children’s case, a phone lived for an entire summer in the pocket of a winter coat, and an i pod lived in a compartment in the third row of a van for weeks.

 

[BellaVita]

I asked two questions.
1. I was clearly wondering whether her (LA) vehicle could have transported all the children to NYC and why she didn't use the LR? Clearly this is just my idle curiosity and nothing more.
2. If the blood in the garage was obvious. Why didn't LA see it? Now, to me, this is a valid question.

1. IDK. Maybe she didn't have the keys?
2. I already posted it was clearly visible to LE and the reasons LA may not have noticed. Do you think that JD was murdered after LA took the kids to NYC?