Still Missing CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 *ARRESTS* #61

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
State proffers --

PG tells Judge that FD had photos on his phone showing the various cameras on her house.

PG told FD he didn't think they were cameras but that she could have small cameras-- "she could record you, don't do anything stupid"

State isn't offering it for the truth of it, it goes to FD's concern, relative to a long planned crime.

JS: if I may respond briefly....

JS agrees that the State has to prove FD commit murder, but he's arguing that this isn't FD's crime.

JS can't cross examine the other contractor or FD....

The Court sees this as hearsay and sees an exception. Due to the nature of conspiracy.

Now JS is spouting. Court disagrees.

Jury returning.
 
PG says the discussion occurred a month or two before May 24th, in the 4JC office. FD, the contractor and PG.

FD showed the contractor photos of motion detectors. The contractor said they're not cameras. PG agreed. Tells FD that she could record him on anything. "When you go there, don't do anything stupid".
 
Jury can come back, victory for state, Judge R shoots down JS….PG can talk about FD concerns about if JFD had security cameras at Welles. One month before the murder. Audio visual specialist was there with FD, FD had photos on his phone of JD Welles house, asks if those are cameras.
PG tells FD that JD can record FD on cameras and not to do anything stupid when he goes there.
 
FD asked about cameras in New Canaan about a month before her disappearance. He says this was with an audio-visual subcontractor also present.





Prosecution states he question asked by FD is important.





JS is arguing it is irrelevant to his client and that it is hearsay.





Judge states here say and asks if there is an exception that would indicate under the code.





The judge states that the purpose is the hearsay rule is to keep out of evidence assertions that may be unreliable, but there are exceptions. The residual exception rules that the hearsay requires that the hearsay has some reliability.





JS vehemently disagrees and argues with judge. The jury is excused and the judge states that it accepts it has hearsay.





Judge finally states it is a statement by a co-conspirator in the course of furtherance of the conspiracy. JS says the law clearly states you can’t do that if no one has been convicted of conspiracy. The judge says the court disagrees and calls for jury.
 
FD had a lab, JFd had a chihuahua. The lab got hit, PG took it to the vet. Spoke to FD a day or two after. Asked him how the dog was doing. MT was present, by the garages. Beckham was ill, have to put her to sleep. "Can you believe J won't let the children say goodbye to the dog?"

PG says MT that b*tch should be buried right next to him.
 
Hmm. Discussion of the family dog, lab named Beckham. PG took dog to the vet. Beckham needs to be put to sleep. MT present.
MT says Jennifer should be buried next to the dog!
PG:“Can I use bad words”?
MT: “That b#%€# should be buried next to the dog” (referring to JFD)
 
PG says FD very hard headed, didn’t like people to say no to him. PG Did not want FD to help him build his own house. FD was too stubborn.

Now describing Greek Easter at FDs.
Everyone was invited.

State: did you feel sorry for FD, is that why you went to Greek Easter?
Objection.

Children not present at Greek Easter 2019. FD said JD won’t let kids come because MT there.

Did you consider FD to be a close friend? No.
 
I shouldn't be surprised. MT's statement about Jennifer tracks with her pre-arrest persona before her "innocent" makeover/personality overhaul post-arrest. Her prior social media presence was coarse and aggressive.

Only, she's still anything but measured and "demure" (let alone compassionate) in the way she and her flying monkeys disparage JFd and attack on Twit/X. Her obsessiveness and relentlessness are obvious. I know I'm repeating myself.

All MOO
 
Fotis told him to park the Tacoma in the garage (or grass) even that it was leaking oil? Isn’t that odd that he would want oil on the floor of his garage?
Maybe…. It is I suspect the reasoning that the driveway is asphalt. And a vehicle leaking oil on asphalt is not good, it will soften and can destroy it. (But parking on either the grass will destroy or kill the grass; in the garage is likely concrete and less susceptible to damage from leaking oil). Now parking it in a garage is also a reason the vehicle would not be in view as well…… maybe for other reasons? MOO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
119
Guests online
1,612
Total visitors
1,731

Forum statistics

Threads
606,477
Messages
18,204,500
Members
233,860
Latest member
Prairie Gurl
Back
Top