Still Missing CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 *ARRESTS* #56

[simplex99]

Jacob Pytranker, I remember that attorney's unusual name from years ago. Didn't Pytranker accompany Dulos to the police station lobby where the police officer asked for Dulos' iPhone (the one Dulos had in his hand) and asked to Dulos to unlock it which Dulos did willingly? While Pytranker was preoccupied talking to another attorney on his cell, possibly asking another criminal attorney (wonder who) for advice? Who was Pytranker talking to? Why didn't that person show up in person with Dulos at the police station?

Yaay for the Prosecutor. She is quick. Here is the quote from CT News12:

Michelle Troconis’ mother testifies at hearing about police search in Jennifer Dulos case

Marisela Arreaza was called as a witness by the defense as attorneys for both sides argued whether a police search was legally executed at the Farmington home where Troconis lived with Fotis Dulos when his estranged wife vanished on May 24, 2019.

connecticut.news12.com

"Schoenhorn said that was one example of how police were unreasonable in their search. He also pointed to documents recovered from Fotis Dulos' home office, some of which Schoenhorn said were privileged communications with Fotis Dulos' divorce attorney at the time, Jacob Pytranker. That included what police have termed "alibi scripts," handwritten timelines of where Fotis Dulos and Michelle Troconis allegedly were on the day Jennifer Dulos disappeared.
Pytranker also took the stand Thursday and said he believes he told his client to write down his activities on the day in question, which Schoenhorn argued makes it document “created for the purposes of litigation” and beyond what the warrant allowed.
But Supervisory State’s Attorney Michelle Manning countered that police had no way of knowing if anything in the officer fell under attorney/client privilege.
“Did you at any point call law enforcement or have any communication with them and inform them there may be communications or privileged communications inside the home of 4 Jefferson,” Manning asked Pytranker on cross examination. He answered no."

 

[Diddian]

Jacob Pytranker, I remember that attorney's unusual name from years ago. Didn't Pytranker accompany Dulos to the police station lobby where the police officer asked for Dulos' iPhone (the one Dulos had in his hand) and asked to Dulos to unlock it which Dulos did willingly? While Pytranker was preoccupied talking to another attorney on his cell, possibly asking another criminal attorney (wonder who) for advice? Who was Pytranker talking to? Why didn't that person show up in person with Dulos at the police station?

Yaay for the Prosecutor. She is quick. Here is the quote from CT News12:

Michelle Troconis’ mother testifies at hearing about police search in Jennifer Dulos case

Marisela Arreaza was called as a witness by the defense as attorneys for both sides argued whether a police search was legally executed at the Farmington home where Troconis lived with Fotis Dulos when his estranged wife vanished on May 24, 2019.

connecticut.news12.com

"Schoenhorn said that was one example of how police were unreasonable in their search. He also pointed to documents recovered from Fotis Dulos' home office, some of which Schoenhorn said were privileged communications with Fotis Dulos' divorce attorney at the time, Jacob Pytranker. That included what police have termed "alibi scripts," handwritten timelines of where Fotis Dulos and Michelle Troconis allegedly were on the day Jennifer Dulos disappeared.
Pytranker also took the stand Thursday and said he believes he told his client to write down his activities on the day in question, which Schoenhorn argued makes it document “created for the purposes of litigation” and beyond what the warrant allowed.
But Supervisory State’s Attorney Michelle Manning countered that police had no way of knowing if anything in the officer fell under attorney/client privilege.
“Did you at any point call law enforcement or have any communication with them and inform them there may be communications or privileged communications inside the home of 4 Jefferson,” Manning asked Pytranker on cross examination. He answered no."

Weren't there photocopies of the alibi scripts as well as the originals (I believe I have a vague memory of reading that.). If so, I wonder if there is a way - in this plugged-in, digital age AND at this late date - to determine when the copies were produced on whatever machine produced the copies.

Yes, I found the part in the AW addressing photocopies:
ETA: Middle of point #18: "The original, handwritten Alibi Script was recovered from a trash bin in the Fore Group office and photocopies were in a briefcase." (Also edited to replace "attachment" with copy of screenshot.)

 

[Jmoose]

Weren't there photocopies of the alibi scripts as well as the originals (I believe I have a vague memory of reading that.). If so, I wonder if there is a way - in this plugged-in, digital age AND at this late date - to determine when the copies were produced on whatever machine produced the copies.

Yes, I found the part in the AW addressing photocopies:
ETA: Middle of point #18: "The original, handwritten Alibi Script was recovered from a trash bin in the Fore Group office and photocopies were in a briefcase." (Also edited to replace "attachment" with copy of screenshot.)

View attachment 445695

Is stuff in a trashbin to be considered “privileged correspondence”? Serious question!

 

[Jmoose]

I wonder if GF is in court again today?

 

[Seattle1]

Jacob Pytranker, I remember that attorney's unusual name from years ago. Didn't Pytranker accompany Dulos to the police station lobby where the police officer asked for Dulos' iPhone (the one Dulos had in his hand) and asked to Dulos to unlock it which Dulos did willingly? While Pytranker was preoccupied talking to another attorney on his cell, possibly asking another criminal attorney (wonder who) for advice? Who was Pytranker talking to? Why didn't that person show up in person with Dulos at the police station?

Yaay for the Prosecutor. She is quick. Here is the quote from CT News12:

Michelle Troconis’ mother testifies at hearing about police search in Jennifer Dulos case

Marisela Arreaza was called as a witness by the defense as attorneys for both sides argued whether a police search was legally executed at the Farmington home where Troconis lived with Fotis Dulos when his estranged wife vanished on May 24, 2019.

connecticut.news12.com

"Schoenhorn said that was one example of how police were unreasonable in their search. He also pointed to documents recovered from Fotis Dulos' home office, some of which Schoenhorn said were privileged communications with Fotis Dulos' divorce attorney at the time, Jacob Pytranker. That included what police have termed "alibi scripts," handwritten timelines of where Fotis Dulos and Michelle Troconis allegedly were on the day Jennifer Dulos disappeared.
Pytranker also took the stand Thursday and said he believes he told his client to write down his activities on the day in question, which Schoenhorn argued makes it document “created for the purposes of litigation” and beyond what the warrant allowed.
But Supervisory State’s Attorney Michelle Manning countered that police had no way of knowing if anything in the officer fell under attorney/client privilege.
“Did you at any point call law enforcement or have any communication with them and inform them there may be communications or privileged communications inside the home of 4 Jefferson,” Manning asked Pytranker on cross examination. He answered no."

Privileged communications?

Aren't these the alibi scripts that MT recounted nearly verbatim to investigators, including the false statement about the hour they started their day and how they were together in the shower which was a lie?

Keep twisting the facts, JLS.

 

[Jmoose]

Privileged communications?

Aren't these the alibi scripts that MT recounted nearly verbatim to investigators, including the false statement about the hour they started their day and how they were together in the shower which was a lie?

Keep twisting the facts, JLS.

They were found in the trash-hard to imagine that anyone official could consider something like this “privileged”!

 

[Seattle1]

They were found in the trash-hard to imagine that anyone official could consider something like this “privileged”!

As with all of JLS's Motions, there's the truth and then there's the defense's spin on the facts. We know the defense previously struck out when requesting the Court throw out evidence on the grounds the evidence was obtained via an "overly broad" search warrant.

Moving to plan B -- we have the defense trying to toss evidence that was discarded in the trash bin as "privileged communication," is laughable!

As Judge Randolph ruled earlier, the police affidavit provided probable cause for the search warrant. Any suggestion there is an expectation of privacy for one's trash bin or that it is commonplace to toss privileged communication in the bin is quite a stretch -- even for JLS.

 

[LosAngeles]

09/08/2023

This notification is brought to you by the Connecticut Statewide Automated Victim Information and Notification (SAVIN) Program.

This email is to inform you that MICHELLE TROCONIS, with docket number FST CR200241178T, has an upcoming court event.

A/An Hearing has been scheduled for 09/13/2023. This will take place in Stamford-Norwalk JD Courthouse located at the following address: 123 Hoyt Street, Stamford, CT.

Please be aware that there is often more than one case scheduled for a particular date in this court. Please visit www.jud.ct.gov to check for any updates that may be available on this case.

For more information, contact the Office of Victim Services at 1-800-822-8428. For updates about this case or for driving directions to the courthouse, you can visit www.jud.ct.gov.

 

[Jmoose]

09/08/2023

This notification is brought to you by the Connecticut Statewide Automated Victim Information and Notification (SAVIN) Program.

This email is to inform you that MICHELLE TROCONIS, with docket number FST CR200241178T, has an upcoming court event.

A/An Hearing has been scheduled for 09/13/2023. This will take place in Stamford-Norwalk JD Courthouse located at the following address: 123 Hoyt Street, Stamford, CT.

Please be aware that there is often more than one case scheduled for a particular date in this court. Please visit www.jud.ct.gov to check for any updates that may be available on this case.

For more information, contact the Office of Victim Services at 1-800-822-8428. For updates about this case or for driving directions to the courthouse, you can visit www.jud.ct.gov.

What’s happening in the next court date?

 

[Niner]

What’s happening in the next court date?

And I am wondering what happened on Friday's...

 

[Tink56]

And I am wondering what happened on Friday's...

This following article lacks clarity. of what was happening when, but it's a start:

Michelle Troconis, attorney file motion to suppress evidence in trial

STAMFORD, Conn. (WTNH) — Michelle Troncois, the former girlfriend of a Connecticut man accused of killing his estranged wife, appeared on Wednesday in Stamford Superior Court. A judge heard h…

www.wtnh.com

Since we're already "in September" it's unclear what the judge will address, but the article refers to debating the phone drops this past week and says the Sept. 16 hearing will address moving the trial to Hartford.

 

[Tink56]

I can't open and read the Stamford Advocate article, but the following Fox News Article has more detail about the discussion about the search warrants and the next trial date:

Defense for Michelle Troconis calls the search warrant of Dulos home a 'fishing expedition'

Schoenhorn claims warrant for search of home was too broad, along with the cell phone tower info used in the case for the presumed murder of Jennifer Dulos.

www.fox61.com

From the article:
When it comes to the cell tower data, Schoenhorn argues that it should be suppressed. He especially wants all AT&T data to be inadmissible since that’s Troconis’s carrier. He believes that evidence is also “overly broad”.
“When the police are trying to investigate a disappearance, sure, they’re entitled to get whatever data they can through the issuance of a search warrant. But you can’t use a wet sponge for the bullseye when a dart with a pinpoint will suffice,” Schoenhorn said.

 

[Jmoose]

MT is still tweeting away, over on X. Still claiming that the search of 4JX was “illegal”, and that they were all removed from their home “illegally”, for the search. Didn’t the judge deal with that issue on Thursday, saying that there was nothing improper about either the search warrant, or the search itself?

 

[Tink56]

MT is still tweeting away, over on X. Still claiming that the search of 4JX was “illegal”, and that they were all removed from their home “illegally”, for the search. Didn’t the judge deal with that issue on Thursday, saying that there was nothing improper about either the search warrant, or the search itself?

This is a good video with Marissa Alter reporting:

Michelle Troconis’ mother testifies at hearing about police search in Jennifer Dulos case

Marisela Arreaza was called as a witness by the defense as attorneys for both sides argued whether a police search was legally executed at the Farmington home where Troconis lived

www.kilgorenewsherald.com

The judge ruled that the warrant was not overly broad, but JS is arguing now that the search warrant was improperly executed. UGH!

MT leaves out in her numerous tweets things like Pyrantker "believes" (doesn't state as fact) that he told FD to write down day's events, etc. More UGHS

 

[Niner]

This following article lacks clarity. of what was happening when, but it's a start:

Michelle Troconis, attorney file motion to suppress evidence in trial

STAMFORD, Conn. (WTNH) — Michelle Troncois, the former girlfriend of a Connecticut man accused of killing his estranged wife, appeared on Wednesday in Stamford Superior Court. A judge heard h…

www.wtnh.com

Since we're already "in September" it's unclear what the judge will address, but the article refers to debating the phone drops this past week and says the Sept. 16 hearing will address moving the trial to Hartford.

With that link I am getting an August article??

The other two article links I can not access over here.

I see you have posted that 9/16 is the next hearing or what was posted earlier - 9/13/23??

 

[Jmoose]

This is a good video with Marissa Alter reporting:

Michelle Troconis’ mother testifies at hearing about police search in Jennifer Dulos case

Marisela Arreaza was called as a witness by the defense as attorneys for both sides argued whether a police search was legally executed at the Farmington home where Troconis lived

www.kilgorenewsherald.com

The judge ruled that the warrant was not overly broad, but JS is arguing now that the search warrant was improperly executed. UGH!

MT leaves out in her numerous tweets things like Pyrantker "believes" (doesn't state as fact) that he told FD to write down day's events, etc. More UGHS

Interestingly, MT never states that she was also told to do the same, yet she did it anyway. Why would a person who was totally uninvolved, and completely ignorant of what went on that morning, think she had to do this, especially if nobody who is knowledgeable in the law, suggested that it would be a good idea? The answer is, they would not think they needed to do this. The lawyer may or may not have told fD to do it, but I doubt that he told MT to.

 

[Diddian]

I can't open and read the Stamford Advocate article, but the following Fox News Article has more detail about the discussion about the search warrants and the next trial date:

Defense for Michelle Troconis calls the search warrant of Dulos home a 'fishing expedition'

Schoenhorn claims warrant for search of home was too broad, along with the cell phone tower info used in the case for the presumed murder of Jennifer Dulos.

www.fox61.com

From the article:
When it comes to the cell tower data, Schoenhorn argues that it should be suppressed. He especially wants all AT&T data to be inadmissible since that’s Troconis’s carrier. He believes that evidence is also “overly broad”.
“When the police are trying to investigate a disappearance, sure, they’re entitled to get whatever data they can through the issuance of a search warrant. But you can’t use a wet sponge for the bullseye when a dart with a pinpoint will suffice,” Schoenhorn said.

Those cellphone tower searches WERE a dart with a pinpoint. They were very specific as to time and place and those specifics were driven by prior evidence. Seems JS must have just skimmed the arrest and search warrants, because it is all there.

All that time spent around horses seems to have left MT with the capacity to toss a stable-full of manure with ease (and the skill apparently extends to her lawyer).

MT is not a skilled and convincing liar; she's just a practiced one and there IS a difference. The only thing missing when JS is conveying MT's lies rather than her telling them directly is the references to sex in the hope of temporarily blinding the audience to the lies.

So, I guess in the end, I'm glad they're coming through JS.

 

[Jmoose]

Those cellphone tower searches WERE a dart with a pinpoint. They were very specific as to time and place and those specifics were driven by prior evidence. Seems JS must have just skimmed the arrest and search warrants, because it is all there.

All that time spent around horses seems to have left MT with the capacity to toss a stable-full of manure with ease (and the skill apparently extends to her lawyer).

MT is not a skilled and convincing liar; she's just a practiced one and there IS a difference. The only thing missing when JS is conveying MT's lies rather than her telling them directly is the references to sex in the hope of temporarily blinding the audience to the lies.

So, I guess in the end, I'm glad they're coming through JS.

The defense keeps repeating that the police removed what would be considered “privileged communications” between fD and his divorce lawyer. But-what do the alibi scripts have to do with fD’s divorce? If they have nothing to do with his divorce, how can they be privileged communications? And how does that protect MT? She wasn’t a party to the divorce (even if her presence activated it), and she wasn’t a client of fD’s divorce attorney.

 

[Tink56]

According to the Ct Court Case Lookup the next hearing is September 13th.

The 16th is obviously a journalistic typo or reporting error. Thanks for your "catch."

With that link I am getting an August article??

The other two article links I can not access over here.

I see you have posted that 9/16 is the next hearing or what was posted earlier - 9/13/23?

 

[Niner]

According to the Ct Court Case Lookup the next hearing is September 13th.

The 16th is obviously a journalistic typo or reporting error. Thanks for your "catch."

Okay - I shall leave it on the 13th. Thanks!