Still Missing CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 *ARRESTS* #60

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
afitzy said:
Good point.
Can you imagine calling your insurance company:
Pg: Hi, I need to go to work tomorrow but the police took my truck.
Insurance Co: sir, what were the circumstances under which you vehicle was seized?
PG: My boss and his girlfriend worked together to murder my bosses wife and my boss shaved his head and took my hoodie so that on camera it looks like me driving the truck. Police are trying to figure it all out now.
Insurance CO. Sir, so sorry this happened to you but this case sounds very complicated so I need to transfer this call to our Legal Depr.
PG but I need to get to work or I don’t get paid can you at least get me a rental?
Insurance co: I’m sorry sir but I can’t answer that question.
PG: when will i get an answer?
Insurance company: I do not know sir but it could take awhile. Thank you for being a loyal customer of xxxxxx.
Hangs up on PG.

Moo
Click to expand...
Exactly right! He still has never gotten that truck back
 
I agree. He is looking to swiss cheese enough of the evidence to distance MT from the crimes of FD. He is in an unenviable position he has to defend Fd and MT. That said, the focus on the Fd related stuff draws the eye from the MT actions/evidence, which I think he prefers. The crimes of Fd are not the crimes of MT, if you will.

There is not much forensic evidence that relates to MT. To get her out of the conspiracy--- so far he has harped/explained/badgered the point of MT not knowing Fd was gone (sleeping in daughter's room), the Hartford run (MT wanted food, she was distracted,and tossed the FEDEx envelope but had no idea what was in it). It is going to be look at Big Bad Fotis while trying to get the evidence thrown out or minimized and with a "nothing to see here" perspective in terms of his client. LE already made the case that the man was controlling and she might be in danger from him (which she eventually bought in interview 2) in the interviews so her legal team has gotten a bit of wiggle room bc if LE is feeling she is in a spot, well then, she is. Bread crumbs and sesame seeds is what he is trying to get out there. (I know the third interview will be more lies and may turn the tide but this is where we are----- it is why her family feels great about making statements to the media about her unfair treatment.)

Jmoose said:
He doesn’t like the results of the testing so he wants the jury to disregard all of the blood evidence. To do that, he has to be critical of the presumptive tests that come before the actual tests for blood. I guess he thinks that if they throw out the presumptive tests, they can throw out the blood evidence, and if they throw out the blood, they can no longer say that she’s dead by murder. And that’s “reasonable doubt”. At least that is what I think he is doing.
Click to expand...
 
afitzy said:
New TP tactic is to do a “testimonial objection” with false conclusions and facts, and is now disagreeing with Judge on the Code!

Mind blowing….
Moo
Click to expand...
Embarrassed to ask but … I know that JS is MT’s lawyer and also Audrey. But does she have another attorney? WSers often comment on TP. Who is that? I’m so confused lol. TIA everyone!
 
kaen said:
I agree. He is looking to swiss cheese enough of the evidence to distance MT from the crimes of FD. He is in an unenviable position he has to defend Fd and MT. That said, the focus on the Fd related stuff draws the eye from the MT actions/evidence, which I think he prefers. The crimes of Fd are not the crimes of MT, if you will.

There is not much forensic evidence that relates to MT. To get her out of the conspiracy--- so far he has harped/explained/badgered the point of MT not knowing Fd was gone (sleeping in daughter's room), the Hartford run (MT wanted food, she was distracted,and tossed the FEDEx envelope but had no idea what was in it). It is going to be look at Big Bad Fotis while trying to get the evidence thrown out or minimized and with a "nothing to see here" perspective in terms of his client. LE already made the case that the man was controlling and she might be in danger from him (which she eventually bought in interview 2) in the interviews so her legal team has gotten a bit of wiggle room bc if LE is feeling she is in a spot, well then, she is. Bread crumbs and sesame seeds is what he is trying to get out there. (I know the third interview will be more lies and may turn the tide but this is where we are----- it is why her family feels great about making statements to the media about her unfair treatment.)
Click to expand...
Great post.
 
sweetcaro said:
Is there a list of witnesses available? My googling didn't help me.
Click to expand...
Nope, not public it appears. Lists do seem to exist, some of the Press have published some of the names but essentially the way this trial is working is that at the end of each day the list of witnesses for the net day is announced. Frankly I'm no fan of this process but its the way it seems to have been working. Folks here have linked some of the articles written with who 'might' be called by the State, Supposedly there were nearly 200 names on their list. IDK how many will actually be called.
MOO
 
afitzy said:
No, I don't recall one for KM but I do believe one was in place with FD. But, she continued hooking up with FD despite the order until FD had brought Anna Curry and her food and bail money to 4JX. MOO
Click to expand...

After she committed a crime for FD but didn't shield him totally, he had no use for her AND she didn't have a lot, a lot of money. He needed money, mo money.
 
Baby baby Jane said:
If JS didn’t do his “idiot routine” then State would be just doing a straight narration of a lot of evidence that isn’t really controversial. He’s trying to make a case for MT & trying to fight for her. Since there no substance to his fight, it’s super boring. IMO
Click to expand...
I see this to a certain extent but am just concerned that the TP commentary is confusing, part of a larger public disinformation campaign in conjunction with the social media commentary of MT and the Troconis crew and is a harmful distraction to the jury and is putting justice in this case at risk. The 'idiot routine' is a deliberate ploy of manipulation and is far from benign imo as it contains SO much disinformation.

Further the quality of the TP arguments imo aren't usually solid, credible or provable, such as the MT sleeping in her daughter argument or what she was doing on Albany. Disinformation is false information which is deliberately intended to mislead—intentionally misstating the facts and sadly I think TP does this consistently. We saw this with the factually incorrect statement about 'junk science' but that was not strikes by Judge R. We saw this with the discredited Herman report that Judge R allowed to be bandied about for over 2 weeks without putting a stake through it as it could never be evidence and frankly should never have been discussed or brought up in court imo.

The MT alibi starting with the sleeping in her daughters room I believe will become fine swiss cheese as we move into the next phase of the trial after the Tacoma Red Truck and its role in the murder is presented by the State. IMO MT and FD moved in tandem every step of the way in the murder, including the presentation of the non alibi script in different versions by MT. The non alibi scripts of MT (and FD) AND WHAT THEY EXCLUDE will I believe tell the story of her complicity with FD and KM in the murder of JF as the first lie about why the scripts were done in the first place is exposed (Atty Pyetranker as one of the 'bad boys' imo the CT Bar I believe even went to the stand in pretrial period on this topic - gotta love attorneys who practice what they preach to their clients about lying on the stand as this is precisely what he schooled FD to do in Family Court imo).

Its all quite exhausting to watch MT and FD as every time a hole emerges in their web of lies then they come up with a new lie and I'm sure we will see a non stop "WHOPPER EXPRESS" of new such lies in the Defence presentation which started it with the MT sleeping in her daughters room which imo absolutely cannot be proven.

I do have faith that the jury will see that the MT intention was never to assist finding someone that she hated and was greatly jealous of and who she blamed for '2 years of hell' in CT. Watching clips of certain segments of the MT LE Interviews has convinced me that at NO TIME did MT care about assisting LE to find JF and each time the conversation was brought back to JF, MT got tense, defensive and angry as she was no longer on her not alibi script long rambling road testimony. Nope, MT is all about MT and all the time.

What's interesting too I think in rewatching some of the MT LE Testimony is always what she won't talk about or how she pivots away from things quickly in a very clumsy way when LE hits on something that is sensitive to her. These are the key moments I hope the Jury sees. The more I watch the LE Testimony clips the more I'm convinced that what happened to JF at the hands of FD and MT was so horrific that MT could not ever accept a deal, even if the States Atty came to a meeting and offered it to her. The reason MT couldn't assist or take a deal as the situation with the murder was brutally violent and MT knew that and couldn't speak of it because MT never seems to be accountable for any of her choices in life it seems. MT simply did what she has done her entire life which was to call Mama Troconis and Papi to save her and so they seem to have coughed up alot of cash to keep their daughter out of jail now for 4 years which was allowed imo courtesy of the inept Judiciary in the State of Corrupticut. I hope the jury is smarter than the Judiciary has been in this sorry case!

So, MT took the stand with LE and the State, "catch me if you can" as I knew nothing and did nothing. Right. I think the State is rising to this challenge issued by MT and the mountain of evidence is building. Its sad, as had MT had courage to explain her role a deal might have allowed her time to enjoy some skiing in retirement.

But, my guess is that MT doesn't have courage and never takes personal responsibility for anything in her life. But, MT aside what I find absolutely evil was first MT bringing her then 10/11 year old daughter to Farmington, exposing her daughter to the HELL of living with someone going through a horrific divorce and not removing her daughter from the situation either to her father full time or boarding school once the situation with divorce and FD melting down escalated so she wasn't scared by the situation. What kind of loving or caring mother would expose a young child to this experience and only for their own personal greed? MT did and she cared as little for her daughter as she did for the Dulos children and JF. The only words to describe such a person are unprintable on WS....but monster of a human being comes close.

Integrity in a person and similar to Trust I think in that it is a fragile and precious thing and once gone simply evaporates! I don't personally believe there is any integrity in MT as there is nothing she has done really in her life and certainly in the conduct of her affair with FD to suggest it exists. Maybe I'm wrong? IDK. Perhaps at the end of this trial presentation the jury will have to opine not only on what MT did but who she is as a person and is she trustworthy??

MOO
 
kaen said:
After she committed a crime for FD but didn't shield him totally, he had no use for her AND she didn't have a lot, a lot of money. He needed money, mo money.
Click to expand...
Yes, it was a big game of "show me the money" for FD.

But its ironic I think that in the end it seemed like he simply pimped himself out to Anna Curry and provided sex in return for money which with no coincidence was really what MT originally did for FD in their affair from Day 1?

Funny but sick coincidences don't you think?
MOO
 
afitzy said:
Nope, not public it appears. Lists do seem to exist, some of the Press have published some of the names but essentially the way this trial is working is that at the end of each day the list of witnesses for the net day is announced. Frankly I'm no fan of this process but its the way it seems to have been working. Folks here have linked some of the articles written with who 'might' be called by the State, Supposedly there were nearly 200 names on their list. IDK how many will actually be called.
MOO
Click to expand...
Hearst CT Media Group has obtained the witness list and a few references to who is on the list is in this article.
(Just because a name is on the list doesn’t necessarily mean they will appear. According to the article the list was compiled and agreed upon to help during jury selection so prospective jurors could identify if they would know any of the witnesses).
 
sleuth66 said:
Hearst CT Media Group has obtained the witness list and a few references to who is on the list is in this article.
(Just because a name is on the list doesn’t necessarily mean they will appear. According to the article the list was compiled and agreed upon to help during jury selection so prospective jurors could identify if they would know any of the witnesses).
Click to expand...
Yes, the list is supposedly quite long. Unfortunate for us watching the trial but I guess we just have to roll with it all. Thanks for reposting that article as it was better than most of the others.
 
MX27875 said:
You could at least make sense of Norm’s logic, which is respectable and not a complete time-waster.
Click to expand...
Its interesting to think about how Pattis would have defended FD or how he might have defended MT. But, my guess is that if he felt the best he could do was "Gone Girl" insanity then I think FD must have been pretty much impossible to defend and not doubt MT as well! But, he certainly would have been more interesting to listen to drone on in Court vs TP!

FWIW I'm now convinced that there is little that is logical or certainly linear possible about defending the FD/MT murder plan and non alibi script denial (which left out all the key activities that both were involved in!), and this is why the only tactic TP has to 'defend' MT consists of things that cannot be proven or are absolutely implausible.

The reason I think TP is doing what he is doing is because nothing he is putting forward about MT and what she was doing is remotely connected to the truth of the matter and this starts with the discredited Dr Herman report. In his defence plan, the truth is to be avoided at all costs as the truth is a horrific set of events that make his client out as a monster and really no different than FD. Nope, can't use the truth or anything remotely plausible and so the only thing left is concoct wild *advertiser censored* stories similar to what we saw in the MT LE Interviews or the daughter sleeping two step on the eve of the murder.

Remember when TP on the Courtroom steps said that the LE Interviews were essentially what MT would say if she ever hit the stand? Well, its now apparent that most of the LE Interviews were lies and so my guess is we will see TP presenting increasingly complex stories based on false information to present an explanation for what his client was doing? It will just emerge as a tangled web of lies that cannot be proven or disproven either. Sad, but its al they have.

Case in point is sleeping in room with daughter - simply cannot be proven no matter how many pictures of rain are shown or weather maps presented. But, the reason I think the TP tactic is doomed is that MT has no credibility and as a person that lies about lies I can't see anyone giving her the benefit of a doubt when evidence to support a story is thin on the ground. The defence was dealt a weak (very weak) hand to play in all of this and have essentially called the States bluff on presenting evidence to present an alternative timeline for MT. The MT timeline still has lots of gaps and perhaps once eyewitness testimony or video or photographs or KM! start entering the mix that there will be no room for TP nonsense of presenting stories that simply don't hold water?

Who knows? We will just have to continue watching along to see the remainder of the State's presentation and the Defence case.
MOO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 117 more.
Total: 2,922 (members: 118, guests: 2,804)

Online statistics

Members online
118
Guests online
2,804
Total visitors
2,922
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
601,288
Messages
18,122,020
Members
230,996
Latest member
unnamedTV
Back
Top