Still Missing CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 *ARRESTS* #58

[Weki]

I’m a little behind. Watching the nanny testimony and I don’t know why but I’m getting weird vibes from her. Her lack of emotion is a major reason. As the prosecutor took her through the day Jennifer disappeared she doesn’t cry or appear close to getting emotional. She has a detached affect. I expected she would be more emotional and give that spark of life testimony. To bring Jennifer’s loss more in focus…and we got nothing from her! JMO

 

[afitzy]

MOO

Small win for the defense keeping the Tacoma testimony at bay until next week.

But it's coming. The jury will be all fresh and rested when they see MT in the passenger seat... and wipeswipewiping her grimy paw on the by-comparison pristine city sidewall.

Didn't look like she was talking on her phone last time I viewed it.... so.... what did she think FD was doing in that moment?

JMO

Did you see gum chewing today? Wanted to update the gum tracker as I'm so disappointed in how this is being allowed to play out in court.

 

[citygirl]

If you are interested in the history on this check out the Hartford Courant articles and look for reference to homeless person named "Fudge". Perhaps this case will provide credible evidence to support the existence of this story? We don't have a witness list as the public so we don't even know if the "Reporter" from the Hartford Courant is on the list to testify.

To my knowledge we have never seen any photo or video of Fudge (or photo or video of person that gave up Fudge either for that matter) or mention of Fudge from law enforcement. Given the extensive video capabilities on Albany imo to the extent this person existed then the footage from Hartford Command would exist to support it. I also don't believe the original article contained any photographs by the "Reporter" of the person interviewed (no sourcing provided iirc) and at the time the article sourcing iirc was questioned and never supported by the "Reporter" and rumours existed that the source of the article might have been Atty Pattis or a member of firm.

Could the story as reported been true? I don't think we can know unless evidence exists to support it imo.

Here is a link to one of the "Fudge" stories that to me seemed like nothing more than a series of stories describing a 'snipe hunt'. If you know you know about snipe hunts.....


HC Fudge Article September

All I know is that I loved all the people that were on Albany Ave. Street people. Poor residents.
Didn't we have a poster at one time that lived there?
MOO

 

[citygirl]

Did you see gum chewing today? Wanted to update the gum tracker as I'm so disappointed in how this is being allowed to play out in court.

Not in the morning but in the afternoon.

 

[afitzy]

I think it's because to prove there was a conspiracy to commit murder and evidence tampering, you first have to prove the murder. Without proving a murder happened, MT is much less likely to be found guilty.

Yes, we are effectively watching a murder trial that isn't a murder trial with the added bonus of a conspiracy trial. Its complex and a challenge to jurors imo and its why seeing what has been happening the courtroom have a disruptive effect on witnesses as well as the State is quite disappointing as its absolutely avoidable imo.

 

[afitzy]

All I know is that I loved all the people that were on Albany Ave. Street people. Poor residents.
Didn't we have a poster at one time that lived there?
MOO

Yes, she picked her family up and moved to have a better life for her children. She was absolutely wonderful and had amazing insights and we sadly haven't heard from her in a very long time.

 

[afitzy]

Not in the morning but in the afternoon.

Day 6 Trial Gum Tracker - Yes, reported in the afternoon

 

[shotgun09]

I’m a little behind. Watching the nanny testimony and I don’t know why but I’m getting weird vibes from her. Her lack of emotion is a major reason. As the prosecutor took her through the day Jennifer disappeared she doesn’t cry or appear close to getting emotional. She has a detached affect. I expected she would be more emotional and give that spark of life testimony. To bring Jennifer’s loss more in focus…and we got nothing from her! JMO

I get what you are suggesting, but in defense of Lauren A, I believe she held up well. The defense ( and the court) has allowed Jennifer Fotus Dulous , THE VICTIM to be reduced to a toothbrush, when describing her DNA. I am sure there was much pre-discussion/debate on just what exactly LA could say or portray on the stand.

There would be no other way, for me anyway, to defend her other than to be strong, determined and mama bear like. Just as I viewed her testimony. No need for tears or blubbering, this was Wolverine time. She held up well, and the family should be proud as hell of her.

MOO and Peace

 

[afitzy]

Not in the morning but in the afternoon.

MT gum chewing in trial day 6 - reported in afternoon session

 

[Gardenista]

Most judges are very precise when telling jurors not to consume media about the case or talk to anyone about it. Many have a sheet they read from in the morning, for every break and at the end of the court day.

Many also tell jurors that if they see attorneys outside of the courtroom that they will be avoided and tell them not to be offended if that happens.

This judge is very lackadaisical about juror instructions, so I'm not surprised there have been issues.

 

[Megnut]

Yes, issue of contention seemed to be vehicles 'related' to FD but not registered to him. File this issue away for Monday!

DID MT have a vehicle registered in her own name or what other worker cars might have been available to MT and FD? This is a VERY interesting line of question imo and HOPE it continues.

It is beyond frustrating to have the State walking on eggshells around potential issues rather than simply putting on their case. I'm just watching and this method and process are making me anxious and stressed (not really but you get my point as the poor witness is feeling this all but 10x as much given the stress of the situation) and so this leads me to be quite concerned about the Jury to say nothing about the witnesses who are losing their train of thought? Why is this being allowed to play out this way by the Judge? Shameful and wrong.

You can hear the hesitancy in the State's voice as she is questioning the witness and its almost as if they are using 'code words' to tip toe around some larger word that cannot for whatever reason be spoken by either party. WHAT IS GOING ON? How can a case be put forward on this basis that the Jury has any hope of understanding? I feel like I've entered a different dimension of procedure and IDK how any of this works to convey information accurately and coherently to the Jurors.

From the witnesses perspective its also highly detrimental to train of thought and focus and that is why TP is undertaking these tactics which so far as I can tell the Judge is not stopping even though they have been overruled. The TP tactic of objecting loudly before the witness statement is even uttered is absolutely verboten in most courts as TP even though he might think he is a mind reader IS NOT.

Witnesses need to finish and State needs to finish and then the objection can occur so far as I am aware.

Its as if TP is playing a video game and trying to stop someone from shooting him and he proactively lobs a bomb or shoots random in hope that he will be saved or avert disaster. This is pure insanity imo and I'm frankly not sure what we are watching play out is fair either to jurors or witnesses and its certainly imo not in the best interests of justice. Why are we seeing zero admonishment from the Judge to TP?

Judge imo is appropriately rephrasing for the record because the questions are just plain awfully structured. She is structuring questions to dance around whatever issues she is fearful of an objection of rather than proceeding ahead so the jury has a hope in hell of understanding what is going on. This imo is hard to watch. I know why its being done as does the Prosecution but Judge is doing nothing to stop the situation with TP. Its a tough situation as mistrial risk is real as is appeal risk. But, what most Judges do is make clear what they will and won't tolerate so as to maintain trial flow or call a sidebar to discuss the issue. For some reason this Judge doesn't seem to like sidebars which I don't understand as this trial imo needs sidebars. I'm simply not understanding this process.

Quickly if I could, I'd like to offer my theory on the awkwardness of the Prosecution's wording and the Defense's trigger happy pre-objecting.

One tedious aspect of all criminal trials IMO is the introduction of the evidence. It has to be entered so it can be referenced, and it has to be introduced by the person who encountered, processed, investigated, reached a conclusion about it.

The State is doing this. Methodically and chronologically. This witness developed the lead for LE but he's not the one who followed up on it. So the State is trying to rein his answers to only what he knew at that point in time, not what was developed or revealed soon after.

The next witness will have reviewed all that footage and it will then be entered into evidence and shown to the jury.

It's painstaking but we'll get there.

Next week will be very ugly for MT.

FD may be dead, but MT has JFd's on her hands.

JMO

 

[Alkali13]

Judge imo is appropriately rephrasing for the record because the questions are just plain awfully structured. She is structuring questions to dance around whatever issues she is fearful of an objection of rather than proceeding ahead so the jury has a hope in hell of understanding what is going on. This imo is hard to watch. I know why its being done as does the Prosecution but Judge is doing nothing to stop the situation with TP. Its a tough situation as mistrial risk is real as is appeal risk. But, what most Judges do is make clear what they will and won't tolerate so as to maintain trial flow or call a sidebar to discuss the issue. For some reason this Judge doesn't seem to like sidebars which I don't understand as this trial imo needs sidebars. I'm simply not understanding this process.

I think and appeal here is inevitable and JS is spending more time laying the foundation for that than really casting REASONABLE doubt. I do like this judge, but, to put it differently, his "classroom management" could use some skills. There's been a long leash so far and I am curious what next week will bring.

 

[carolmaria]

I’m a little behind. Watching the nanny testimony and I don’t know why but I’m getting weird vibes from her. Her lack of emotion is a major reason. As the prosecutor took her through the day Jennifer disappeared she doesn’t cry or appear close to getting emotional. She has a detached affect. I expected she would be more emotional and give that spark of life testimony. To bring Jennifer’s loss more in focus…and we got nothing from her! JMO

I get what you mean… here’s a thought, not meant as generalization. My niece is the practically the same age and demographic as LA, and a NICU nurse. Often I notice in her cohort more of a stoic demeanor than I’m used to. To me, LA’s presentation was subtle but powerful—her micro expressions gave the most away. LA was and is under tremendous pressure (and loved). And called her own mother, devastated, when in NYC she couldn’t reach JFd.

 

[citygirl]

I get what you are suggesting, but in defense of Lauren A, I believe she held up well. The defense ( and the court) has allowed Jennifer Fotus Dulous , THE VICTIM to be reduced to a toothbrush, when describing her DNA. I am sure there was much pre-discussion/debate on just what exactly LA could say or portray on the stand.

There would be no other way, for me anyway, to defend her other than to be strong, determined and mama bear like. Just as I viewed her testimony. No need for tears or blubbering, this was Wolverine time. She held up well, and the family should be proud as hell of her.

MOO and Peace

She did have times when she looked very sad and ready to burst into tears, IMO.

 

[Alkali13]

Very good question that I think was never resolved.
Do you recall another man that saw a bloody pillow and said what ever happened to them was bad? There was much discussion back in the day about the street people that saw different things.I never once doubted their observations but many people did. Because of their station in life they appeared to be considered incredible witnesses. Yet they were well known by the locals.
JMO.

I grew up in New Haven (an hour away and similar to Hartford) and live right outside of Hartford now, and as someone who has lived in CT my whole life, none of this surprises me. People who need and aren't getting assistance have to do what they can and have a lot more info on the local day-to-day than those outside of the community. The haves cast such judgment and aspersions on the have-nots, and I think that is part of the reason FD chose Albany Ave to dump stuff. I also think he's an idiot for not realizing high crime areas and Hartford in general have LOTS of cameras.

 

[Alkali13]

Horrific. I wonder if he wore lifts. Here’s another one… can’t see full length. This is really hard to look at.
View attachment 475991

I think they were very similar heights... They're likely to be barefoot or wearing sandals in this picture.

 

[citygirl]

Quickly if I could, I'd like to offer my theory on the awkwardness or the Prosecution's wording and the Defense's trigger happy pre-objecting.

One tedious aspect of all criminal trials IMO is the introduction of the evidence. It has to be entered so it can be referenced, and it has to be introduced by the person who encountered, processed, investigated, reached a conclusion about it.

The State is doing this. Methodically and chronologically. This witness developed the lead for LE but he's not the one who followed up on it. So the State is trying to rein his answers to only what he knew at that point in time, not what was developed or revealed soon after.

The next witness will have reviewed all that footage and it will then be entered into evidence and shown to the jury.

Quickly if I could, I'd like to offer my theory on the awkwardness or the Prosecution's wording and the Defense's trigger happy pre-objecting.

One tedious aspect of all criminal trials IMO is the introduction of the evidence. It has to be entered so it can be referenced, and it has to be introduced by the person who encountered, processed, investigated, reached a conclusion about it.

The State is doing this. Methodically and chronologically. This witness developed the lead for LE but he's not the one who followed up on it. So the State is trying to rein his answers to only what he knew at that point in time, not what was developed or revealed soon after.

The next witness will have reviewed all that footage and it will then be entered into evidence and shown to the jury.

It's painstaking but we'll get there.

Next week will be very ugly for MT.

FD may be dead, but MT has JFd's on her hands.

JMO

Thanks for this clear, concise explanation.

 

[afitzy]

Not surprising the "Gone Girl" coverage is all the Press seems to be discussing:

NBC CT Gone Girl

 

[Weki]

I don’t think I can keep up with this trial mainly due to this judge. Classroom management is a very generous way of putting it. But my God! I have never seen anything like this. It’s like a law class within a criminal trial. Every time there’s an objection there’s a lecture. I can’t take it!

 

[waldojabba]

Very good question that I think was never resolved.
Do you recall another man that saw a bloody pillow and said what ever happened to them was bad? There was much discussion back in the day about the street people that saw different things.I never once doubted their observations but many people did. Because of their station in life they appeared to be considered incredible witnesses. Yet they were well known by the locals.
JMO.

IIRC the tailgate liner ( yes not cheap - I use contractor garbage bags in my tailgate instead lol)) was put by Fotis, standing end to end up againt the outside wall of a small grocery/bakery on the west bound side of Albany Ave (Scotts Jamaican Bakery?). We heard on the news from either the owner of that small store or an employee about it. It was after his trash dumping or during the process.
In my mind I see it happening - so was it caught on film ? I cannot remember.
At that time I was spenidng alot of time in Hartford and I remember driving by there. There is a MacDonald's south on the other side of Albany Rd/ rt44 a bit. And maybe a Walgreens in the area then also. The homeless guy who found the pillow and sold the knife or traded it for something, was "Fudge".
This area has many decent people trying to just get by - maybe immigrants without papers etc - as well as homeless/drug dealers etc. I have never felt unsafe driving that road in the daytime.
JMOI