Deceased/Not Found CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 *ARRESTS* #53

[Chicago54]

I’ve been rewatching the gutter deposit over and over. Go with me on this; assume she’s in on all and knows exactly what they’re doing.

I haven’t believed the passenger door opening was spontaneous at all . Why would MT risk showing her face ? why open the door and lean out when someone is right there?
When they pull up to the curb and park,their car blocks the view of another driver perpendicular to them who is trying to get out of the lot. After they park, they idle for a few minutes. You can see MTs head moving as if in discussion? Then FD opens his door and MT is a second behind in opening hers.
FD gets out clutching something under his right arm and in his hand. The other driver can’t see FD cuz the petite prince, is well, petite, and his shoulders barely break the top of the rear of the pickup. Adding to this MT has opening her door, further blocking FD from this drivers view.
FD goes to the garbage can and throws out, maybe a cup?, and transfers the larger white object to his left hand.
Then he walks towards MT as she finishes pretending to do something that required her to open her door- which is directly above the storm drain opening, and blocks the view of the other driver- WHO IS STILL sitting there trying to pull out.
FD drops the white package into the storm drain then lifts his head to face MT for the briefest moment and then she shuts the door. After FD is done and walking away.

I imagine the exchange in the cab of the truck to be something like this:
FD: I’ve stopped directly next to the storm drain opening. Shove these plates in there.
MT: No way. There’s someone sitting in his car right there and another guy walking around the parking lot. And I’m not getting my DNA on that.
FD: Fine, just open your door and pretend your doing something so it looks like I’m helping you.

and now let’s assume MT is “innocent” and knows nothing.
MT: Why are we stopping here
FD: I just need to throw some things in that trash can.
MT: (after the gutter deposit) Why did you put that in there? What was it?

MOO, MT was an active participant.

 

[Tink56]

MT’s mother had a translator during her trial so I wonder if it was her idea or JS
She graduated from Memphis State in 79, I’m going to assume she understands and speaks English

I see Mama T all over this. She was involved in the "interview process" for a new attorney. Am sure she was enchanted with AS's strong background in civil litigation, and the fact that he was "charmed" by the Troconis family's credentials...a medical doctor and psychologist.

The Troconis clan walks and talks with a sense of entitlement that won't resonate well with the average juror. Wonder what AS envisions as his dream juror?

Would love to know when Mama T arrived in Farmington the week after JFD's disappearance.

IMO...MOO

 

[Jmoose]

See, here's the thing:

Let's say FD was magnanimous and wanted to protect MT from incrimination. Let's say he never once expressed any disdain for Jennifer or her parents. Let's say he kept his revenge fantasies to himself, never sharing them with Michi as he had with Jennifer. Let's say he never let on that the divorced was contentious, never let on that Michi was a sticking point in those negotiations. Let's say she never knew she was the reason FD forwent his visitation for ten months.

And let's say, in the middle of a dinner party, MT thought the happy chef left his party and his guests to go get some extra brisket. Did he return with any?

But let's say too he said, "Michi, my love, my paramour, my sudsy budsy, tomorrow morning I'm going to leave real early. Alls I need you to do is answer my phone at about 8am. Talk, don't talk, just keep the connection. Then I want you to run some errands. Be sure to get a selfie with Marty."

In all that, she didn't ask once, "Why? Why do you want me to do that?"

And later that day? Bring me trash bags, hold 'em open, don't look though, 'kay? Clean a clean bathroom, hide a key, go for coffee a half hour past 37 more convenient places to get coffee....

Okay, fine, if he withheld the why, BUT THE MOMENT SHE KNEW JENNIFER WAS MISSING, a normal person would see all those fuzzy details come into focus. A normal, innocent person would say to LE, "I didn't realize the significance of those actions before now but...."

But... if a person were involved in that plan, both ahead of and after, AND had reason to lie to protect the main character, you get what we've gotten -- an accomplice, an accessory. Even if she were blinded by love or fear, he's gone. It's safe to squeal.

There were two ponchos. With copious blood. One hooded, one not, as I recall. One shaved head, one not.

I believe this much: I think they did shower together. I think MT did clean a bathroom. I just think her order of events is off. There was no morning shower. It probably happened just before E showed up for truck. Showering off evidence and cleaning all traces....

If she were innocent, she'd be telling what she knows.

I will say this, if I were her attorney, of all the things I wouldn't say, I wouldn't say my client was left holding the bag.

If however I were the prosecution, I might say exactly that. As my closing argument. While holding up the actual trash bag with MT's patagonian fingerprints on it.

JMO

Beautiful-simply beautiful!

 

[Chicago54]

See, here's the thing:

Let's say FD was magnanimous and wanted to protect MT from incrimination. Let's say he never once expressed any disdain for Jennifer or her parents. Let's say he kept his revenge fantasies to himself, never sharing them with Michi as he had with Jennifer. Let's say he never let on that the divorced was contentious, never let on that Michi was a sticking point in those negotiations. Let's say she never knew she was the reason FD forwent his visitation for ten months.

And let's say, in the middle of a dinner party, MT thought the happy chef left his party and his guests to go get some extra brisket. Did he return with any?

But let's say too he said, "Michi, my love, my paramour, my sudsy budsy, tomorrow morning I'm going to leave real early. Alls I need you to do is answer my phone at about 8am. Talk, don't talk, just keep the connection. Then I want you to run some errands. Be sure to get a selfie with Marty."

In all that, she didn't ask once, "Why? Why do you want me to do that?"

And later that day? Bring me trash bags, hold 'em open, don't look though, 'kay? Clean a clean bathroom, hide a key, go for coffee a half hour past 37 more convenient places to get coffee....

Okay, fine, if he withheld the why, BUT THE MOMENT SHE KNEW JENNIFER WAS MISSING, a normal person would see all those fuzzy details come into focus. A normal, innocent person would say to LE, "I didn't realize the significance of those actions before now but...."

But... if a person were involved in that plan, both ahead of and after, AND had reason to lie to protect the main character, you get what we've gotten -- an accomplice, an accessory. Even if she were blinded by love or fear, he's gone. It's safe to squeal.

There were two ponchos. With copious blood. One hooded, one not, as I recall. One shaved head, one not.

I believe this much: I think they did shower together. I think MT did clean a bathroom. I just think her order of events is off. There was no morning shower. It probably happened just before E showed up for truck. Showering off evidence and cleaning all traces....

If she were innocent, she'd be telling what she knows.

I will say this, if I were her attorney, of all the things I wouldn't say, I wouldn't say my client was left holding the bag.

If however I were the prosecution, I might say exactly that. As my closing argument. While holding up the actual trash bag with MT's patagonian fingerprints on it.

JMO

Love this post! I like this new hypothesis. They showered together at 80MS! Of course! What better way to check each other over for lingering evidence. They certainly didn’t shower at JXing.

 

[carolmaria]

See, here's the thing:

Let's say FD was magnanimous and wanted to protect MT from incrimination. Let's say he never once expressed any disdain for Jennifer or her parents. Let's say he kept his revenge fantasies to himself, never sharing them with Michi as he had with Jennifer. Let's say he never let on that the divorced was contentious, never let on that Michi was a sticking point in those negotiations. Let's say she never knew she was the reason FD forwent his visitation for ten months.

And let's say, in the middle of a dinner party, MT thought the happy chef left his party and his guests to go get some extra brisket. Did he return with any?

But let's say too he said, "Michi, my love, my paramour, my sudsy budsy, tomorrow morning I'm going to leave real early. Alls I need you to do is answer my phone at about 8am. Talk, don't talk, just keep the connection. Then I want you to run some errands. Be sure to get a selfie with Marty."

In all that, she didn't ask once, "Why? Why do you want me to do that?"

And later that day? Bring me trash bags, hold 'em open, don't look though, 'kay? Clean a clean bathroom, hide a key, go for coffee a half hour past 37 more convenient places to get coffee....

Okay, fine, if he withheld the why, BUT THE MOMENT SHE KNEW JENNIFER WAS MISSING, a normal person would see all those fuzzy details come into focus. A normal, innocent person would say to LE, "I didn't realize the significance of those actions before now but...."

But... if a person were involved in that plan, both ahead of and after, AND had reason to lie to protect the main character, you get what we've gotten -- an accomplice, an accessory. Even if she were blinded by love or fear, he's gone. It's safe to squeal.

There were two ponchos. With copious blood. One hooded, one not, as I recall. One shaved head, one not.

I believe this much: I think they did shower together. I think MT did clean a bathroom. I just think her order of events is off. There was no morning shower. It probably happened just before E showed up for truck. Showering off evidence and cleaning all traces....

If she were innocent, she'd be telling what she knows.

I will say this, if I were her attorney, of all the things I wouldn't say, I wouldn't say my client was left holding the bag.

If however I were the prosecution, I might say exactly that. As my closing argument. While holding up the actual trash bag with MT's patagonian fingerprints on it.

JMO

I KNOW... immediately thought the same when JS said the bag thing. Good grief! You bring things together eloquently (plus the shower location), thanks for articulating overarching themes. YES, YES, and YES! Kudos, @Megnut ~ fantastic writing and perceptiveness!

The sisters’ denial too seemed to focus on direct (hands-on) harm to herself or her daughter. Never did they say: “my sister would never knowingly do anything that would bring harm to another, especially another woman, directly or indirectly.”
These recent posts are fire! Love the lively and respectful discussion!
MOO

 

[Jmoose]

I’ve been rewatching the gutter deposit over and over. Go with me on this; assume she’s in on all and knows exactly what they’re doing.

I haven’t believed the passenger door opening was spontaneous at all . Why would MT risk showing her face ? why open the door and lean out when someone is right there?
When they pull up to the curb and park,their car blocks the view of another driver perpendicular to them who is trying to get out of the lot. After they park, they idle for a few minutes. You can see MTs head moving as if in discussion? Then FD opens his door and MT is a second behind in opening hers.
FD gets out clutching something under his right arm and in his hand. The other driver can’t see FD cuz the petite prince, is well, petite, and his shoulders barely break the top of the rear of the pickup. Adding to this MT has opening her door, further blocking FD from this drivers view.
FD goes to the garbage can and throws out, maybe a cup?, and transfers the larger white object to his left hand.
Then he walks towards MT as she finishes pretending to do something that required her to open her door- which is directly above the storm drain opening, and blocks the view of the other driver- WHO IS STILL sitting there trying to pull out.
FD drops the white package into the storm drain then lifts his head to face MT for the briefest moment and then she shuts the door. After FD is done and walking away.

I imagine the exchange in the cab of the truck to be something like this:
FD: I’ve stopped directly next to the storm drain opening. Shove these plates in there.
MT: No way. There’s someone sitting in his car right there and another guy walking around the parking lot. And I’m not getting my DNA on that.
FD: Fine, just open your door and pretend your doing something so it looks like I’m helping you.

and now let’s assume MT is “innocent” and knows nothing.
MT: Why are we stopping here
FD: I just need to throw some things in that trash can.
MT: (after the gutter deposit) Why did you put that in there? What was it?

MOO, MT was an active participant.

Wow-just like it happened in my head!

 

[Jmoose]

I see Mama T all over this. She was involved in the "interview process" for a new attorney. Am sure she was enchanted with AS's strong background in civil litigation, and the fact that he was "charmed" by the Troconis family's credentials...a medical doctor and psychologist.

The Troconis clan walks and talks with a sense of entitlement that won't resonate well with the average juror. Wonder what AS envisions as his dream juror?

Would love to know when Mama T arrived in Farmington the week after JFD's disappearance.

IMO...MOO

I know they want male jurors-but not the kind who labor for a living, because those guys despise “entitled” people.

 

[citygirl]

I Respectfully disagree.

No Doubt in my mind that Fd was prepared to abscond with the 5 children and do so Immediately.

In addition, Fd could Not guarantee that the children would Not be removed from him when he refused to return them after the holiday weekend. As He saw it, who was he supposed to return them to?

Family Court may have eventually given Fd custody at some Future date.

However, and this is a HUGE HOWEVER, Jennifer's disappearance did Not and does Not Negate the fact that Fd was under 'Supervised' Visitation.

That 'Supervised' Visitation Does Not immediately become null and void just because Jennifer is missing.

The Family Court Judge did Not impose Supervised Visitation on a whim. According to the Judge, FD had serious issues that had to be addressed and those issues did not become null and void just because Jennifer is missing.

The ONLY Action by Fd that could Guarantee his complete custody of the children at that particular point in time, was to Immediately Abscond with them.

Yes, the children's American Passports were submitted to the Court at the beginning of the Divorce and Custody case.

However, According to FC, Fd had began the process of applying for Greek Passports for the Children. The FC Judge instructed Fd that he was Restricted from completing those applications.

Throughout the Divorce and Child Custody Case, Fd treated ALL Instructions by the Judge as 'Optional'.

As Fd Testified in Civil Court, Fd 'Respectfully Disagreed' with the FC Judge and that is Why he Lost All Contact with the 5 children for 10 MONTHS.

Did Fd 'Respectfully Disagree' with the FC Judge about those Greek Passports for the Children?

When Jennifer Farber dulos was Brutally Murdered, Fd had Just Recently received 'Supervised' Visitation after 10 Months of No Contact and Only After he began completing the Judge's Requirements for the reinstatement of 'Supervised' Visitation.

The FC Judge giving Fd 'Supervised' Visitation, SAYS IT ALL.

The FC Judge did Not Trust Fd.

So, Why would the FC Judge Immediately Give Fd Full Physical Custody of the 5 Motherless Children, Just Because their mother was missing?

IMO, Fd had no choice but to abscond with the children, Immediately.

As part of the FC Record, Fd Did Threaten to take the children to where everyone wore snow skiing attire for the entire year. Venezuela, perhaps?

Greece Does have an Extradition Treaty with the US. However, this is for the Criminal Fugitive and the Criminal Fugitive ONLY and ONLY IF Greece Followed Through with Their Commitment to the Treaty.

Yes, That is Correct. A Treaty Country could and sometimes do, Refuse to Extradite the Fugitive.

Regardless, the Treaty Does Not cover the innocent Children and They would NOT be Returned to the US regardless of Fd's extradition.

The way I see it, Fd, MT and All 6 children could hop on a Commercial flight at Bradley International with those newly printed Greek passports.

Or, Private plane to Venezuela and then take a commercial flight to Greece.

Of Course, the Private Plane could go directly to Greece, but refueling concerns may come in to play depending on the aircraft, whereas several refueling options outside the US for a flight to Venezuela.

IMO, Fd expected the Nanny to be clueless and just bring the children to him that Saturday morning and GAL Meehan be none the wiser in regards to a visitation supervisor. Thus Allowing Fd the Unsupervised opportunity to Immediately Abscond with the Children. Any Reasonable person would expect visitation be cancelled, under the circumstances, and IMO Meehan was also under this impression. But, Fd is Not Reasonable.

We Know, that Fd arrived at Dr.GF's building in NYC Without the Court Ordered Supervisor that weekend. NYPD was called to the location when Security refused entry to Fd. NYPD in turn, contacted CT and learned that Fd was Not Allowed Unsupervised Visitation and was subsequently sent on his way by NYPD. Had Fd arrived With the Supervisor, they may have needed to allow him some form of visitation.

In previous threads, we discussed Fd/MT Need for another Large vehicle. They in fact Rented a Vehicle with at least 5 working vehicles at their disposal. Fd's Ford F150, Chevy Suburban, Jeep Cherokee, the BMW, and an older Toyota Truck. (Not EE's Toyota truck)

So, Why do 2 drivers Need a 6th vehicle? Even if MamaA were to need a vehicle, 5 vehicles are enough for 3 drivers.

IMO, With JFd out of the picture Fd Needed a higher occupancy vehicle for when he expected to receive the children. In Fd's mind, with JFd out of the picture, MT and child would not be forced to remove themselves from 4JC. Fd and his 5 children with MT and her 1 child, makes 8 people. Fd's 2015 Suburban only seated 7 people.

IMO, the Yukon vehicle Fd Rented, seated 8.

Would anyone arriving at 4JC notice ALL 5 of Fd's vehicles in the windowed doors to the garages and Not Suspect that he Absconded with the children in a Rented vehicle?

Would anyone seeing the highly tinted windows of a rented Yukon on the road, Suspect that it carried Fd and All 8 of the people in question and that these 8 were Absconding?

On another aspect. Fd's house of financial cards were collapsing. Had Fd stayed in the US, it would have been beyond detrimental to him. Who knows if or when he could begin receiving JFd's annual trust fund income and who knows if or when the children's education trust fund income would continue. The children's education trust fund Could continue, for the fund manager already paid the expenses directly to the educational entities and the money Never went through Fd or even JFd.

However, IMO, HF protected JFd's trust fund and Fd would have Never received the income or at the very least, have any control over the income. I believe that This information is what MT was sent to find at the Probate Court in Manhattan. No such luck. Trusts are not filed in Probate. Even IF Fd received JFd's income, it was paid in 4 quarterly installments per year of just under $100,000.00 per quarter. When you are literally drowning in MASSIVE Debt, the money cannot come fast enough and in Fd's case, it Definitely would Not have come fast enough before he lost it ALL, Even IF he would receive any of JFd's trust income after a lengthy legal battle with Dr.GF.

In conclusion, IMO, Fd had money stashed in Greece and we know that he had 2 vehicles stashed in Greece, and we know the creditors were knocking down his front door while he was headed out the back door and in Fd's mind, With the 5 motherless children, headed to Greece.

Fd could still continue the fight for the trust income, while the children were already safely tucked away in Greece.

IMO.

WOW!

 

[Cloudydiamond]

I Respectfully disagree.

No Doubt in my mind that Fd was prepared to abscond with the 5 children and do so Immediately.

In addition, Fd could Not guarantee that the children would Not be removed from him when he refused to return them after the holiday weekend. As He saw it, who was he supposed to return them to?

Family Court may have eventually given Fd custody at some Future date.

However, and this is a HUGE HOWEVER, Jennifer's disappearance did Not and does Not Negate the fact that Fd was under 'Supervised' Visitation.

That 'Supervised' Visitation Does Not immediately become null and void just because Jennifer is missing.

The Family Court Judge did Not impose Supervised Visitation on a whim. According to the Judge, FD had serious issues that had to be addressed and those issues did not become null and void just because Jennifer is missing.

The ONLY Action by Fd that could Guarantee his complete custody of the children at that particular point in time, was to Immediately Abscond with them.

Yes, the children's American Passports were submitted to the Court at the beginning of the Divorce and Custody case.

However, According to FC, Fd had began the process of applying for Greek Passports for the Children. The FC Judge instructed Fd that he was Restricted from completing those applications.

Throughout the Divorce and Child Custody Case, Fd treated ALL Instructions by the Judge as 'Optional'.

As Fd Testified in Civil Court, Fd 'Respectfully Disagreed' with the FC Judge and that is Why he Lost All Contact with the 5 children for 10 MONTHS.

Did Fd 'Respectfully Disagree' with the FC Judge about those Greek Passports for the Children?

When Jennifer Farber dulos was Brutally Murdered, Fd had Just Recently received 'Supervised' Visitation after 10 Months of No Contact and Only After he began completing the Judge's Requirements for the reinstatement of 'Supervised' Visitation.

The FC Judge giving Fd 'Supervised' Visitation, SAYS IT ALL.

The FC Judge did Not Trust Fd.

So, Why would the FC Judge Immediately Give Fd Full Physical Custody of the 5 Motherless Children, Just Because their mother was missing?

IMO, Fd had no choice but to abscond with the children, Immediately.

As part of the FC Record, Fd Did Threaten to take the children to where everyone wore snow skiing attire for the entire year. Venezuela, perhaps?

Greece Does have an Extradition Treaty with the US. However, this is for the Criminal Fugitive and the Criminal Fugitive ONLY and ONLY IF Greece Followed Through with Their Commitment to the Treaty.

Yes, That is Correct. A Treaty Country could and sometimes do, Refuse to Extradite the Fugitive.

Regardless, the Treaty Does Not cover the innocent Children and They would NOT be Returned to the US regardless of Fd's extradition.

The way I see it, Fd, MT and All 6 children could hop on a Commercial flight at Bradley International with those newly printed Greek passports.

Or, Private plane to Venezuela and then take a commercial flight to Greece.

Of Course, the Private Plane could go directly to Greece, but refueling concerns may come in to play depending on the aircraft, whereas several refueling options outside the US for a flight to Venezuela.

IMO, Fd expected the Nanny to be clueless and just bring the children to him that Saturday morning and GAL Meehan be none the wiser in regards to a visitation supervisor. Thus Allowing Fd the Unsupervised opportunity to Immediately Abscond with the Children. Any Reasonable person would expect visitation be cancelled, under the circumstances, and IMO Meehan was also under this impression. But, Fd is Not Reasonable.

We Know, that Fd arrived at Dr.GF's building in NYC Without the Court Ordered Supervisor that weekend. NYPD was called to the location when Security refused entry to Fd. NYPD in turn, contacted CT and learned that Fd was Not Allowed Unsupervised Visitation and was subsequently sent on his way by NYPD. Had Fd arrived With the Supervisor, they may have needed to allow him some form of visitation.

In previous threads, we discussed Fd/MT Need for another Large vehicle. They in fact Rented a Vehicle with at least 5 working vehicles at their disposal. Fd's Ford F150, Chevy Suburban, Jeep Cherokee, the BMW, and an older Toyota Truck. (Not EE's Toyota truck)

So, Why do 2 drivers Need a 6th vehicle? Even if MamaA were to need a vehicle, 5 vehicles are enough for 3 drivers.

IMO, With JFd out of the picture Fd Needed a higher occupancy vehicle for when he expected to receive the children. In Fd's mind, with JFd out of the picture, MT and child would not be forced to remove themselves from 4JC. Fd and his 5 children with MT and her 1 child, makes 8 people. Fd's 2015 Suburban only seated 7 people.

IMO, the Yukon vehicle Fd Rented, seated 8.

Would anyone arriving at 4JC notice ALL 5 of Fd's vehicles in the windowed doors to the garages and Not Suspect that he Absconded with the children in a Rented vehicle?

Would anyone seeing the highly tinted windows of a rented Yukon on the road, Suspect that it carried Fd and All 8 of the people in question and that these 8 were Absconding?

On another aspect. Fd's house of financial cards were collapsing. Had Fd stayed in the US, it would have been beyond detrimental to him. Who knows if or when he could begin receiving JFd's annual trust fund income and who knows if or when the children's education trust fund income would continue. The children's education trust fund Could continue, for the fund manager already paid the expenses directly to the educational entities and the money Never went through Fd or even JFd.

However, IMO, HF protected JFd's trust fund and Fd would have Never received the income or at the very least, have any control over the income. I believe that This information is what MT was sent to find at the Probate Court in Manhattan. No such luck. Trusts are not filed in Probate. Even IF Fd received JFd's income, it was paid in 4 quarterly installments per year of just under $100,000.00 per quarter. When you are literally drowning in MASSIVE Debt, the money cannot come fast enough and in Fd's case, it Definitely would Not have come fast enough before he lost it ALL, Even IF he would receive any of JFd's trust income after a lengthy legal battle with Dr.GF.

In conclusion, IMO, Fd had money stashed in Greece and we know that he had 2 vehicles stashed in Greece, and we know the creditors were knocking down his front door while he was headed out the back door and in Fd's mind, With the 5 motherless children, headed to Greece.

Fd could still continue the fight for the trust income, while the children were already safely tucked away in Greece.

IMO.

Holy Smokes...this is like a BINGO moment!

 

[Southernsnooper]

JS said MT had no idea what was in those bags.
She only knew that she was going to a Starbucks! Well, she “may” have not known what was in the garbage bags they they drove out of their way to disperse them in multiple bins on a Friday night in a seedy part of town and FD was wearing gloves. Don’t tell me she didn’t notice him stopping at Milagros and taking out a large weather tech floor mat and propping it up on the side of the building in perfect view of the passenger’s side or stuffing a FedEx envelope down a storm drain!

Did she not think anything strange. Are we expected to believe she didn’t see these activities?

She said (we saw the police interrogations) that she was not protecting Fotis and if she were innocent, then why did she not share these rather unusual events with police on the first day that they questioned her? Or better yet, when she found out Jennifer was missing!!!!

If you were innocent then would you not immediately dial 911 and share ALL of the suspicious things that happened that day and night! Well she did not call them and she did not return their multiple calls! Why???? She lied instead! Lied and changed stories. If she was not protecting Fotis, then WHY did she lie and change stories?!! Oh, maybe because she lied about not protecting Fotis. Such a web of lies that I’m afraid she feels she cannot escape.

Specifically the spilled “coffee” claim!
So he told her he spilled coffee and we know she said it did not smell of coffee. What about the color? Since Fotis was able to wipe it up I am going to assume it had not dried fully. If it were wet, coffee is not red. I did an experiment. We don’t know if LE found coffee stains on the seat but we do know they found blood. Jennifer’s blood! So if you saw something that could resemble blood as the coffee implication was questionable and you’re boyfriend spent a long time cleaning it, one would think you might mention this to police! One would think you would add up the day’s and night’s events and run, not walk to the police!

It is a shame that one would not want to be truthful in this tragic case when they have so much to share.

Moo

 

[imstilla.grandma]

CBS’ Saturday edition of “48 Hours” devoted its entire program to the Dulos story, starting from the beginning, when Jennifer met her husband, Fotis Dulos, and ending with last week’s released video that showed Dulos’ former girlfriend, Michelle Troconis, being questioned by police.

It served the national audience well. However, for state viewers however, who have been following the case from the beginning, there was little new information presented.

Perhaps the only new material involved Troconis’ family, who were interviewed on camera for the first time.

Troconis’ sisters told CBS’ Erin Moriarty that her sister was incapable of doing what she is charged with. We kind of suspected they would say that.

It was interesting that this case has drawn the attention of major networks. The national audience, however, didn’t learn anything that the local audience didn't already know.
Jennifer Dulos missing person case gets ‘48 Hours’ attention

 

[imstilla.grandma]

See, here's the thing:

Let's say FD was magnanimous and wanted to protect MT from incrimination. Let's say he never once expressed any disdain for Jennifer or her parents. Let's say he kept his revenge fantasies to himself, never sharing them with Michi as he had with Jennifer. Let's say he never let on that the divorce was contentious, never let on that Michi was a sticking point in those negotiations. Let's say she never knew she was the reason FD forwent his visitation for ten months.

And let's say, in the middle of a dinner party, MT thought the happy chef left his party and his guests to go get some extra brisket. Did he return with any?

But let's say too he said, "Michi, my love, my paramour, my sudsy budsy, tomorrow morning I'm going to leave real early. Alls I need you to do is answer my phone at about 8am. Talk, don't talk, just keep the connection. Then I want you to run some errands. Be sure to get a selfie with Marty."

In all that, she didn't ask once, "Why? Why do you want me to do that?"

And later that day? Bring me trash bags, hold 'em open, don't look though, 'kay? Clean a clean bathroom, hide a key, go for coffee a half hour past 37 more convenient places to get coffee....

Okay, fine, if he withheld the why, BUT THE MOMENT SHE KNEW JENNIFER WAS MISSING, a normal person would see all those fuzzy details come into focus. A normal, innocent person would say to LE, "I didn't realize the significance of those actions before now but...."

But... if a person were involved in that plan, both ahead of and after, AND had reason to lie to protect the main character, you get what we've gotten -- an accomplice, an accessory. Even if she were blinded by love or fear, he's gone. It's safe to squeal.

There were two ponchos. With copious blood. One hooded, one not, as I recall. One shaved head, one not.

I believe this much: I think they did shower together. I think MT did clean a bathroom. I just think her order of events is off. There was no morning shower. It probably happened just before E showed up for truck. Showering off evidence and cleaning all traces....

If she were innocent, she'd be telling what she knows.

I will say this, if I were her attorney, of all the things I wouldn't say, I wouldn't say my client was left holding the bag.

If however I were the prosecution, I might say exactly that. As my closing argument. While holding up the actual trash bag with MT's patagonian fingerprints on it.

JMO

A stellar post! Thank you @Megnut you are awesome..

 

[Southernsnooper]

A stellar post! Thank you @Megnut you are awesome..

THIS POST is ALL THAT and more!!! @Megnut nailed it!!!

 

[Morgan10028]

I’ve been rewatching the gutter deposit over and over. Go with me on this; assume she’s in on all and knows exactly what they’re doing.

I haven’t believed the passenger door opening was spontaneous at all . Why would MT risk showing her face ? why open the door and lean out when someone is right there?
When they pull up to the curb and park,their car blocks the view of another driver perpendicular to them who is trying to get out of the lot. After they park, they idle for a few minutes. You can see MTs head moving as if in discussion? Then FD opens his door and MT is a second behind in opening hers.
FD gets out clutching something under his right arm and in his hand. The other driver can’t see FD cuz the petite prince, is well, petite, and his shoulders barely break the top of the rear of the pickup. Adding to this MT has opening her door, further blocking FD from this drivers view.
FD goes to the garbage can and throws out, maybe a cup?, and transfers the larger white object to his left hand.
Then he walks towards MT as she finishes pretending to do something that required her to open her door- which is directly above the storm drain opening, and blocks the view of the other driver- WHO IS STILL sitting there trying to pull out.
FD drops the white package into the storm drain then lifts his head to face MT for the briefest moment and then she shuts the door. After FD is done and walking away.

I imagine the exchange in the cab of the truck to be something like this:
FD: I’ve stopped directly next to the storm drain opening. Shove these plates in there.
MT: No way. There’s someone sitting in his car right there and another guy walking around the parking lot. And I’m not getting my DNA on that.
FD: Fine, just open your door and pretend your doing something so it looks like I’m helping you.

and now let’s assume MT is “innocent” and knows nothing.
MT: Why are we stopping here
FD: I just need to throw some things in that trash can.
MT: (after the gutter deposit) Why did you put that in there? What was it?

MOO, MT was an active participant.

GREAT post! Just last night I watched and re-watched the same thing and had many similar observances, especially the one about the car not being able to see beyond the raptor to pull out, and neither of them noticing or wanting to be noticed enough to give the driver the 'ok' to go.

What I've also always wondered is why MT would want to get out of the car to wipe her hands in what she described as a 'creepy area' to begin with. There wasn't a napkin or receipt or ANYTHING in that car to wipe her gum on? Not even wiping it on the object that FD was throwing in the trash bin? The very LAST place I could ever imagine wiping my hand is on the ground in a creepy area. I would rather wait for Starbucks if I had to before even thinking of repeatedly wiping my hands on the ground. Her purpose was to open the door and block the view of the storm drain, and she did her job.

Echoing, MT was an active participant. MOO

 

[Morgan10028]

I know they want male jurors-but not the kind who labor for a living, because those guys despise “entitled” people.

Have you noticed how many male voices are all over social media condemning MT? They came out in abundance! I've seen only 1 male and 2 older women that I can recall giving her an inch.

 

[Jmoose]

Have you noticed how many male voices are all over social media condemning MT? They came out in abundance! I've seen only 1 male and 2 older women that I can recall giving her an inch.

I noticed that. I suspect they are still counting on her sex appeal, though. I think MT has gone through life offering it up in times of trouble

 

[Chicago54]

Saw this on IG:

 

[Jmoose]

Saw this on IG:

lol!

 

[Lilypad13]

Wow you all are on a roll this morning! I have been thinking all along that Jennifer’s murder was about revenge and getting full custody of the children and their trust funds. Now after reading some of these posts this morning my mind is open to another possibility. Were FD & MT planning to flee the country immediately with the children?! Were their bags packed and FD thought he would simply be able to get the children without supervision in the initial chaos & confusion during the search for Jennifer?

Did he go to JD’s mother’s apartment that night to see the kids because he was planning to suggest that it would be the best thing for them if he just went ahead and took them home with him that night? Their mother is missing...they need their father right now etc. JD’s mom not letting him in and calling the police might have ruined their initial escape plan. Is that why FD was texting the nanny and telling her not to be late in bringing the children in the morning? Was the escape plan on hold until they got there? I’m not clear what happened that day or if a supervisor or LE came to the house or if the nanny was instructed not to take the children to FD’s house. Was LE already suspecting FD at this point? Did FD & MT miss their window of opportunity to get away? I’m not sure when LE took FD’s phone which led to the pings on Albany Avenue and the trash bags etc. but it was pretty quick considering they recovered some of the bags. FD really screwed up handing over his cell phone!

Did LE find evidence that FD had actually completed the Greek passport applications for the children and had received their passports? And that airline tickets were purchased or a private plane was on standby...did LE discover evidence of a bank account in Greece in FD’s name or in another country in MT’s name...remember the question asking MT if she transferred any of FD’s assets into her name?! Maybe they were planning to take off right after the deed was done and that’s why they were so careless with disposing of the evidence. If they were caught on video in Hartford FD thought they would be long gone by the time LE figured that out and the garbage would be long gone too. Did FD drain the line of credit and not pay the huge mortgages because he was putting all of that money into a secret overseas account? I didn’t know FD rented a Yukon that seats 8 people either...why would he need that? Did FD quickly realize their original plan was not going to succeed and they were scrambling to come up with a Plan B? I wonder if there were any discussions between FD & MT about fleeing the country and leaving the children behind?

If FD really loved MT when he realized he couldn’t get away wouldn’t he have told her to leave the country? I don’t think he did truly love MT, I think he liked her and admired her athletic skills, and using her was not unpleasant for him. But it’s hard to believe he had long term plans of combining their families and having a future life together in another country. Was he using her to get his assets situated overseas and he was planning to break up with her later? Afterall if he involved her in the planning and/or coverup of JD’s murder then he wouldn’t have to worry about her turning him in.

But this speculation they were going to flee the country with the children leads me to question if FD took the children out of the country then how would he gain access to their trust funds? Maybe it wasn’t about getting his hands on that money at all because he already had enough set aside. Could it just have been about getting the children and starting over? Did FD actually love his children even if he was a sociopath? Are they capable of real love? Maybe if the children are part of him. Could he rationalize loving his children while hurting them by taking away their mother? It isn’t hard to believe he was just that selfish. But if it wasn’t about money or revenge then why kill JD at all? There would have been much easier ways to get kidnap the children. They could have subdued the supervisor during a visit and took off. Or maybe FD didn’t even plan to kill JD that morning. What if he was just going to abduct her, zip tie her and hide her somewhere to get her out of the way so when she didn’t pick the kids up from school they would call him and he could pick them up by himself and take off. But what if JD fought him too hard and he ended up killing her and everything went sideways from there? If JD didn’t pick up the children who would the school have called? FD? No time to arrange for a supervised visit then if the school was about to close. Would they have called JD’s mother? I wonder who was listed as the emergency contact? Surely not the nanny. It would make sense that it would be their father unless JD had changed it. But it sounds like the nanny had already planned to pick up the children after school that day because JD was supposed to meet them in NYC later that afternoon. Did FD not know about this? JD didn’t have to tell FD her day to day plans unless it involved his time with their kids. Did the nanny always pick up the kids after school or did JD usually drop them off AND pick them up and different arrangements were made that day due to JD’s appointment in the city?

My mind is going in two different directions right now because I still think the most likely reason JD was murdered was FD’s sick revenge fantasy and getting his hands on the children's trust fund money. But some things I have read this morning have opened my mind to the possibility that FD & MT might have been planning to flee the country with the children right after the murder. FD was almost broke and had large bills coming due. And didn’t he owe Jennifer’s mother 2.5 million dollars?! He had to know she would fight him re the custody of the children and their trusts. He couldn’t collect any life insurance for JD (if he was still a beneficiary) while she was still missing and without a body. It could take years until she was declared deceased. How was he planning to live in the meantime? It could take many years and many thousands of dollars he didn’t have for the legal fees before he could ever reap any benefits. Plus the investigation would be ongoing and there might be a possibility of Jennifer’s remains being found. Could he carry on living his life there with all of this hanging over his head - and the possibility of KM or MT turning on him? And if he was a suspect his reputation would be ruined and his business was already failing anyway. It’s a ton of risk for a reward that might never come. It almost makes more sense if they were planning to flee. MOO

Edit: I didn’t realize this was so long. Guess I was on a roll too sorry!

 

[Southernsnooper]

GREAT post! Just last night I watched and re-watched the same thing and had many similar observances, especially the one about the car not being able to see beyond the raptor to pull out, and neither of them noticing or wanting to be noticed enough to give the driver the 'ok' to go.

What I've also always wondered is why MT would want to get out of the car to wipe her hands in what she described as a 'creepy area' to begin with. There wasn't a napkin or receipt or ANYTHING in that car to wipe her gum on? Not even wiping it on the object that FD was throwing in the trash bin? The very LAST place I could ever imagine wiping my hand is on the ground in a creepy area. I would rather wait for Starbucks if I had to before even thinking of repeatedly wiping my hands on the ground. Her purpose was to open the door and block the view of the storm drain, and she did her job.

Echoing, MT was an active participant. MOO

Just too many coincidences!!!

Also, I’ve been thinking more about the morning when KM arrived at 4jx and FD was already in route to nc, how did Kent get in the house?

MT said she greeted him by saying “hi”
IN the Fore office which I believe it way upstairs in that mansion!

Did Kent just let himself in? I doubt it!

So if Fotis wasn’t there to let him in than MT did. So she knew he was there and when he arrived. Then you’d think she’d call out to Fotis saying Kent’s here for your meeting! No answer. If the house was so big and she couldn’t find him then would she call him?!!! No phone record of that! Also, she greeted Kent upstairs so she said, not at the front door.

How strange for Kent to be there for a meeting with Fotis and Fotis is not there! Why would he then come in and go up to the office if Fotis was not there.

Not strange at all. Not strange that FD’s phone was left at home! Kent said he never saw MT.
So let’s play that he did let himself in and went up to the office, not strange that Kent was there and Fotis was not as we know he was in NC. MT said she heard Kent talking. Really if Fotis wasn’t there and we know he wasn’t, them to whom was he talking to?

What kind of meeting did Kent have with FD, without FD?!!!

My hand’s up! Pick me! A meeting to establish an alibi? Good answer! I wonder if KM typically met at his own office for his client’s divorce meetings or did he customarily make house calls?!!!

Why did he stay and witness AT’s call. Why did he ask MT to answer FD’s phone? Was it his place to ask someone else to answer another person’s call? When you’re purposely establishing an alibi, that’s when! Wow! Two for two! On a roll!

Did MT not find it weird for KM to be there in the Fore office without FD? Just hanging out! Not weird enough to share with LE initially since she claimed innocence and has nothing to hide! Not weird as it was all planned and she was in on the plan! 3 for 3! Moo