Still Missing CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 *ARRESTS* #59

[Megnut]

State asks why the witness seized it.

JS objects.

Judge explains that he seized it for evidentiary value. Overruled.

JS objects before State finished next question.

Judge says he doesn't want discussion of the content of the item.

State withdraws question.

Lunch recess until 2pm.

 

[Megnut]

MOO

Did I hear that right? The State plans to have the witness read the timeline into the record?

Wow.

MOO

 

[BUF]

MOO

Did I hear that right? The State plans to have the witness read the timeline into the record?

Wow.

MOO

That’s what I thought I heard too

…..and it would be lengthly, so wait till after lunch break

 

[Love Never Fails]

I know. An innocent person would have covered her eyes thinking "I was involved in this, what the heck?"

But she’s not innocent. Perhaps she has seen the clothing before, while she was helping FD?

 

[Megnut]

MOO

Been so long since we learned about these alipapertimeline scripts, I can't recall -- did the defendant highlight her sexy time that day?

Is the jury about to be indoctrinated?

It would be bad enough to have to learn about her sordid gymnastics if they actually occurred, but that she made them up, makes it so exponentially worse. Just ewwwwww.

MOO

 

[Jmoose]

dbm

You’re back!

 

[Megnut]

MOO

That was a loooooooooooong morning. Made unnecessarily loooooooonger by the Defense for no reason at all other than to draw it out, best I can tell.

I didn't hear a single fresh objection or much that was sustained. Is it possible the judge himself insisted on the photos being offered by the book? So tedious, so much repetition. The Defense, it seems to me, could've stipulated to all of photos, and we'd have been done for the day two hours ago.

I'm eager to see the photo of the item recovered from the kitchen.

MOO

 

[Jmoose]

I wonder why MT is sitting between the attorneys this morning instead of to the side like she has been.

She needs to be handled, in my opinion.

 

[Diddian]

JS on Closing Arguments/Court TV last night saying MT was talking to her daughter and her mother (NOT Petu) while FD was driving around dumping evidence. He also states that none of that evidence will be linked to MT!

CT v. Michelle Troconis: Missing Mom Conspiracy Trial

UPDATE: Michelle Troconis was sentenced on Friday after a jury found her guilty on all counts in the disappearance of Jennifer Dulos.

www.courttv.com

If there are any attorneys reading/posting here, I have a question I've asked before but still haven't had answered:

LE obtained a search warrant for MT's cellphone records on 5/27/2019. I'll attach a copy of that at the end of my post.

That search warrant covered all cellphone records relating to that cellphone from 3/20/2019 through the date of the warrant (and extending 14 days).

Detectives seized MT's cellphone at a later date, in June during search of 4JC. They did not obtain a warrant prior to that seizure and/or logical extraction from that device.

Prior to trial, the defense made a motion to exclude the evidence from the seizure of MT's phone since it was not subject to search warrant and the Court approved the motion, finding that circumstances were not exigent (LE had sufficient time to get a warrant prior to the seizure).

I assume that the State CAN bring in evidence legally obtained under warrant (i.e., the cellphone records from 3/20/19 through 5/27/19 + 14 days), but cannot bring in evidence obtained directly from the cellphone seized in June. So records of calls made or received, including telephone numbers, dates, times, and locations can come in provided they were received from the cellphone records. IS THIS CORRECT?

So, the information that JAS communicated on a crime reporting television show yesterday (that MT was talking on her cellphone to her mother and sister while traveling down Albany Ave, RATHER than to her friend, Petu as she had told LE) can - if testified to in Court - possibly be proven false by reference to the legally obtained cellphone records. Correct?

Here's the legally obtained search warrant for MT's cellphone records from 3/20/19 to the warrant date. The SW was released by authorities sometime in 2021 I believe:

 

[pernickety]

MOOMOOMOOMOO

Today's testimony reminds me how limited LE is by search and seizure laws.

I would have wanted them to seize and test everything. Yes, including sammiches. But we're learning that's not how it works. They need probable cause.

But gosh, paper towels and firece power tools? When paired with other paper towels and bloody ponchos?

I wonder if any of that contractor gear was seized later, by a different LEO. Perhaps that which didn't immediately appear relevant gained relevancy.

MOOMOOMOOMOO

What about contents of vacuum cleaners?

 

[Jmoose]

The White Jeep was owned by FORE but was MT PRIMARY VEHICLE. Not relevant? It is highly relevant. So glad the State stayed the course and battled this ridiculous interpretation of "Relevancy" in this case.

Glad Judge cited code and explained it to the Jury so as to take this ongoing time waster and improper objection from Defence off the table for future debate. I'm waiting for the Judge to answer back, "asked and answered counsel"!

Just wanted to ask the question about the White Jeep that the AA I posted earlier listed this vehicle as having a CT license plate but we had seen prior comments about FL licence plate. Does anyone understand where the FL license plate on this vehicle first entered the discussion? I'm confused.

MOO

Reasonably sure FD bought it for her-what year is the jeep?

 

[nodamselindistress]

Not sure of the year of the Jeep but pretty certain I heard recently that the Jeep was purchased in Miami. So my guess is he bought it for her and she drove up to CT in it. 2016? 2017?

 

[Alkali13]

JS just objected to a sandwich.

I'm catching up on this morning's comments (two hour snow delay for the kids earned me a late start), but I laughed at this and genuinely was like EW when the actual sandwich appeared.

 

[Diddian]

I had unavoidable errands this morning, so missed an hour or so of the trial and am catching up now.

So disappointed to learn that the Jeep wasn't swabbed like the other vehicles were. Given that JFD was still missing and it was unknown how long the time period was involving the likely disposal of her body (so any person's alibi would have to extend at least to the timing of the Albany Ave trip), WHY would LE have overlooked swabbing that vehicle in the typical key locations (door handles, gear shift, seat adjustment, etc).

 

[Alkali13]

Next State's is asking about the 585 Deercliff property in Avon. Went on June 4th with a search warrant. Found it in disrepair, vacant. He was evidence officer, multiple LEOs and canine.

Looking for JFd or any evidence related to her disappearance.

No objection from JS, all 14 photos admitted.

Just saying, based on the look of the property and color of the door knobs, wouldn't be remotely surprised if the Baldwin keys belong to Deercliff.

 

[Alkali13]

Judge response: There is always cross examination available Counsel!

Classic.

See? You may dislike his process and management, but the man definitely pulls out some zingers and is clearly getting more and more annoyed by JS.

 

[afitzy]

Reasonably sure FD bought it for her-what year is the jeep?

Do you mean there are 2 white jeeps? One with fl plates and another with ct plates?

 

[afitzy]

See? You may dislike his process and management, but the man definitely pulls out some zingers and is clearly getting more and more annoyed by JS.

He is growing on me….very very very slowly……

 

[Alkali13]

Does JS overall seem a little more subdued and defeated today? Like he knows it's futile, he knows his constant objections are tiresome, and he knows the judge is getting sick of his shenanigans?

 

[Alkali13]

He is growing on me….very very very slowly……

I think we're getting close to him reigning this in like you want, but we'll see!