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

[Jmoose]

Do you think the prosecutor even knows about that?

Maybe someone should tell him-need a volunteer?

 

[pseudo_hum]

Did MT ever ask FD if he hasn't paid his refuse collection company. Why did he need to deliver his trash to Albany Avenue? So sly that FD.

 

[Jmoose]

Did MT ever ask FD if he hasn't paid his refuse collection company. Why did he need to deliver his trash to Albany Avenue? So sly that FD.

Actually, I think a lot of people do that kind of thing. My husband knew a guy who regularly tossed stuff in dumpsters (but nothing ever had his ex-wife’s blood on it), and one day a neighbor texted me to ask if we had put 12 bags of trash out at the end of our driveway-turns out that another neighbor wasn’t paying to remove trash, and thought it was appropriate to leave it for our guys (but it didn’t contain anything bearing the blood of someone who had been murdered)

 

[Tink56]

Was there anything in the state's arrest warrants re MT going to the NY Probate Court to try to read info on HF trust? Or did that info come to light only in the Farber civil case against FD? I'd think it'd be good evidence to support the conspiracy to commit murder charge. Most of JS's arguments/evidence seem to relate to the obstruction charges.

Here's a "golden-oldie" new article that talks about Bowman's fears:
November 2019
"The attorney representing Michelle Troconis advised her to plead the Fifth Amendment to every question during a recent deposition in a civil lawsuit because he fears she could be charged with conspiracy or homicide in the disappearance or death of missing New Canaan mother Jennifer Farber Dulos.

The lawyer, Andrew Bowman, said in court documents filed Wednesday that Troconis asserting her Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination is an obvious safeguard given “a continuing investigation which may or may not result in a homicide charge or in a conspiracy charge.”

“Ms. Troconis is in the very difficult position of not only being charged with certain serious crimes but also runs a risk that she could be charged with additional crimes as a result of law enforcement’s continuing investigation,” Bowman wrote.

“Even acknowledging knowing Fotis Dulos is incriminating.”

Michelle Troconis’ lawyer fears homicide charge may be coming in disappearance or death of missing mother Jennifer Farber Dulos

 

[pernickety]

Maybe someone should tell him-need a volunteer?

Are you volunteering?

 

[pernickety]

Here's a "golden-oldie" new article that talks about Bowman's fears:
November 2019
"The attorney representing Michelle Troconis advised her to plead the Fifth Amendment to every question during a recent deposition in a civil lawsuit because he fears she could be charged with conspiracy or homicide in the disappearance or death of missing New Canaan mother Jennifer Farber Dulos.

The lawyer, Andrew Bowman, said in court documents filed Wednesday that Troconis asserting her Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination is an obvious safeguard given “a continuing investigation which may or may not result in a homicide charge or in a conspiracy charge.”

“Ms. Troconis is in the very difficult position of not only being charged with certain serious crimes but also runs a risk that she could be charged with additional crimes as a result of law enforcement’s continuing investigation,” Bowman wrote.

“Even acknowledging knowing Fotis Dulos is incriminating.”

Michelle Troconis’ lawyer fears homicide charge may be coming in disappearance or death of missing mother Jennifer Farber Dulos

I'd assume--though one can't assume anything --that the state would have read the MT depo and followed up on the NY PC revelation. Contacted RW, asked if someone from the PC told the trustee or GF about it. Gone to NY PC to see if MT signed anything when she asked for file, etc. If JS makes an issue of the alibi scripts not being in MT's handwriting, but FD's--then state can bring up MT's going to the NY PC to snoop into the trusts. Both would show premeditation and conspiracy, IMO.

 

[CTGrammy]

I'd assume--though one can't assume anything --that the state would have read the MT depo and followed up on the NY PC revelation. Contacted RW, asked if someone from the PC told the trustee or GF about it. Gone to NY PC to see if MT signed anything when she asked for file, etc. If JS makes an issue of the alibi scripts not being in MT's handwriting, but FD's--then state can bring up MT's going to the NY PC to snoop into the trusts. Both would show premeditation and conspiracy, IMO.

Not really your point, but MT could only see the Will of HF.

Trusts are Not filed in Probate Court.

So basically, the trip was For Not, since the Will did not have a tremendous amount of info.

I am shocked that Fd did not know that Trusts are Not filed in Probate Court.

Fd had a degree from Brown and a Masters in Finance at Columbia.

Surely his double Ivy League education in Finance included information on Trusts, Right?

This Conspired outing by Fd/MT Absolutely PROVES Pre-Meditation for the Murder of JFd.

With the Complete and Willing Involvement of MT.

I have Absolutely No Doubt that LE is all over this information.

Weinstein would have Absolutely Informed LE.

IMO.

 

[pernickety]

Not really your point, but MT could only see the Will of HF.

Trusts are Not filed in Probate Court.

So basically, the trip was For Not, since the Will did not have a tremendous amount of info.

I am shocked that Fd did not know that Trusts are Not filed in Probate Court.

Fd had a degree from Brown and a Masters in Finance at Columbia.

Surely his double Ivy League education in Finance included information on Trusts, Right?

This Conspired outing by Fd/MT Absolutely PROVES Pre-Meditation for the Murder of JFd.

With the Complete and Willing Involvement of MT.

I have Absolutely No Doubt that LE is all over this information.

Weinstein would have Absolutely Informed LE.

IMO.

So we'll see if it comes up at a hearing--maybe this one.

 

[Seattle1]

Do you think the prosecutor even knows about that?

Are you asking for the purpose of compliance with the ankle monitor? MT had to appear as she was under subpoena for to be deposed -- which she failed miserably.

 

[Laughing]

Long ago she would have been charged for breaking up the marriage.

JMHO YMMV LRR

 

[Jmoose]

Are you volunteering?

Yes I am

 

[Tink56]

Attorney Schoenhorn's arrogance in the repeated and constant demands on behalf of his client could well backfire for him.

I don't think I'm hearing impaired. I distinctly heard Judge White state in the bail restrictions that MT could meet with her doctor in his OFFICE...her lawyer in his OFFICE. Maybe Schoenhorn is like the Lincoln lawyer and he doesn't have an office, but driving around and being in places other than his office don't seem to be following the bail restrictions.

Judge White also gave MT some restrictions of what work would be. Her probation check in should include verification that indeed she is/was following those instructions to meet with clients and show proof of those visits.

In the following article, AS claims that probation is doing something unwarranted, perhaps not legal, and needs to stop. HUH?
From the article:
"The probation officer has required weekly in-person meetings, which are now conducted remotely, and questioned “the reason for legal meetings that take place outside my office,” Schoenhorn said.

“I witnessed his call come in last month while she and I were meeting in Farmington, and he asked her what we were doing,” Schoenhorn said. “If he incorrectly believes that he is acting in accordance with the law, I ask you to put a stop to this practice.”
Attorney's complaint: Probation officer conducting 'unlawful' interrogations in Jennifer Dulos case

 

[Seattle1]

Attorney Schoenhorn's arrogance in the repeated and constant demands on behalf of his client could well backfire for him.

I don't think I'm hearing impaired. I distinctly heard Judge White state in the bail restrictions that MT could meet with her doctor in his OFFICE...her lawyer in his OFFICE. Maybe Schoenhorn is like the Lincoln lawyer and he doesn't have an office, but driving around and being in places other than his office don't seem to be following the bail restrictions.

Judge White also gave MT some restrictions of what work would be. Her probation check in should include verification that indeed she is/was following those instructions to meet with clients and show proof of those visits.

In the following article, AS claims that probation is doing something unwarranted, perhaps not legal, and needs to stop. HUH?
From the article:
"The probation officer has required weekly in-person meetings, which are now conducted remotely, and questioned “the reason for legal meetings that take place outside my office,” Schoenhorn said.

“I witnessed his call come in last month while she and I were meeting in Farmington, and he asked her what we were doing,” Schoenhorn said. “If he incorrectly believes that he is acting in accordance with the law, I ask you to put a stop to this practice.”
Attorney's complaint: Probation officer conducting 'unlawful' interrogations in Jennifer Dulos case

I never thought I'd say this but I think even NP would call AS out here! Complete disrespect for the spirit of law that means what it says and says what it means.

It's not complicated to understand "house arrest."

MOO

 

[ivegotthemic]

Attorney Schoenhorn's arrogance in the repeated and constant demands on behalf of his client could well backfire for him.
rsbm
Attorney's complaint: Probation officer conducting 'unlawful' interrogations in Jennifer Dulos case

I dont know if anyone else read the brief in full, but his attorney is BOLD. For some context the legal community is generally pretty small, everyone knows everyone and reputation is really important. Even if you dont agree with another professional, as a general rule of conduct its expected those involved handle the situation professionally. In this brief the attorney goes as far as to say judges knowingly acted improper and had no evidence to support their actions. Additionally she specifically names a LE officer that worked on the case and explicitly states (multiple times) that he intentionally manufactured evidence and lied to the court. Im not trying to see peoples mistakes are ignored, but the way its generally discussed in legal documents submitted to the court and available to the pubic, is much more respect and accusatory. Additionally I dont think the indexes submitted with the motion provide enough evidence to make these kind of claims. IMO if your going to write a brief like this you should be able to back it up. Furthermore shes submitting motions for bond modifications for issues the judge was already ruled on. Giving him a new brief that includes the attorneys beliefs the judge isnt performing their job ethically is really unlike to convince he judge to change his mind. I dont understand the approach and the attorney could be burning bridges with several other professional in the field that she is very likely to encounter again

IME the court is in no way concerned with how inconvenient the terms of someones bond are. They have heard every complaint and lie from people trying to get modifications in a personal incontinence doesn't warrant a change. Bond isnt a constitutional right and if he GPS tracker is so uncomfortable im sure the judge would send her to prison. Furthermore there are hundreds of other people in state using the same gps model and somehow theyve managed to figure it out, I dont know why she cant. Its not the courts job to figure out how to makes someones bond easier on them. IMO this will not go well and will only piss all parties involved off. Its a waste of the courts time and resources. I would laugh alot if bail got revoked. This seems like a very ill advised strategy to be implementing... cant wait to see how it plays out

 

[HopeForTheBest]

Actually, I think a lot of people do that kind of thing. My husband knew a guy who regularly tossed stuff in dumpsters (but nothing ever had his ex-wife’s blood on it), and one day a neighbor texted me to ask if we had put 12 bags of trash out at the end of our driveway-turns out that another neighbor wasn’t paying to remove trash, and thought it was appropriate to leave it for our guys (but it didn’t contain anything bearing the blood of someone who had been murdered)

FD, though, didn’t go to that area much and based on what we’ve seen and heard about him on job sites, etc., I doubt he ever dealt with that chore at home (I cannot say the words related to JD. She was NOT trash or garbage!). MOO.

 

[Tink56]

I dont know if anyone else read the brief in full, but his attorney is BOLD. For some context the legal community is generally pretty small, everyone knows everyone and reputation is really important. Even if you dont agree with another professional, as a general rule of conduct its expected those involved handle the situation professionally. In this brief the attorney goes as far as to say judges knowingly acted improper and had no evidence to support their actions. Additionally she specifically names a LE officer that worked on the case and explicitly states (multiple times) that he intentionally manufactured evidence and lied to the court. Im not trying to see peoples mistakes are ignored, but the way its generally discussed in legal documents submitted to the court and available to the pubic, is much more respect and accusatory. Additionally I dont think the indexes submitted with the motion provide enough evidence to make these kind of claims. IMO if your going to write a brief like this you should be able to back it up. Furthermore shes submitting motions for bond modifications for issues the judge was already ruled on. Giving him a new brief that includes the attorneys beliefs the judge isnt performing their job ethically is really unlike to convince he judge to change his mind. I dont understand the approach and the attorney could be burning bridges with several other professional in the field that she is very likely to encounter again

IME the court is in no way concerned with how inconvenient the terms of someones bond are. They have heard every complaint and lie from people trying to get modifications in a personal incontinence doesn't warrant a change. Bond isnt a constitutional right and if he GPS tracker is so uncomfortable im sure the judge would send her to prison. Furthermore there are hundreds of other people in state using the same gps model and somehow theyve managed to figure it out, I dont know why she cant. Its not the courts job to figure out how to makes someones bond easier on them. IMO this will not go well and will only piss all parties involved off. Its a waste of the courts time and resources. I would laugh alot if bail got revoked. This seems like a very ill advised strategy to be implementing... cant wait to see how it plays out

Excellent analysis ivegotthemic!

ITA....Attorney Schoenhorn is gambling that his "uber preparation" is going to win the day, but IMO, it's pretty weak. He's cherry picking evidence, attacking the probation and other court officials. He may just be trying to set up an appeal to a higher court.

It will be interesting to see how it plays out. Hope Michi is prepared for a bail revocation.

 

[Jmoose]

Excellent analysis ivegotthemic!

ITA....Attorney Schoenhorn is gambling that his "uber preparation" is going to win the day, but IMO, it's pretty weak. He's cherry picking evidence, attacking the probation and other court officials. He may just be trying to set up an appeal to a higher court.

It will be interesting to see how it plays out. Hope Michi is prepared for a bail revocation.

I would really like for the judge to tell MT and JS-“you can abide by the existing conditions, or you can have your ankle monitor removed and return to jail-what’s your pleasure, Ms. Troconis?”

 

[ivegotthemic]

I would really like for the judge to tell MT and JS-“you can abide by the exhisting conditions, or you can have your ankle monitor removed and return to jail-what’s your pleasure, Ms. Troconis?”

absolutely. if is such a problem lets just eliminate it

 

[muppethead]

I would really like for the judge to tell MT and JS-“you can abide by the existing conditions, or you can have your ankle monitor removed and return to jail-what’s your pleasure, Ms. Troconis?”

I am at the point where the court needs to say clear and outright that if they ask about this one more time it is straight to the slammer. Period. The End.

 

[Jmoose]

I am at the point where the court needs to say clear and outright that if they ask about this one more time it is straight to the slammer. Period. The End.

You are so right-I really hope the judge does this. Will it be Judge Blawie, Judge White, or some other judge this time around?