Silver Alert CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 ARRESTS #29

doodles1211 · May 26, 2019

New Canaan Police are looking for a missing woman Saturday, May 25.

Jennifer Dulos, 50, was reported missing around 7:30 p.m. Friday, May 24. A sliver alert has been issued.

New Canaan Police with the assistance of the Connecticut State Police initiated a search and an investigation both of which are ongoing as of 8:45 am. Saturday..

Anyone with information related to Dulos’s whereabouts should contact Sgt. Joseph Farenga at 203-505-1332.

Sillybilly · Aug 26, 2019

ADMIN NOTE:

Was reviewing this thread for another reason and stumbled across the rudeness, personalizing, and bullying of another member in this thread. This is absolutely unacceptable.

Everyone has a right to their opinion as long as it is stated respectfully (which it has been). To be chastised for holding a different or minority opinion is just plain wrong. If everyone agreed, there would be no need for "discussion".

If you have a concern about another member's post, use the Report feature rather than resorting to snarky comments and tag-teaming against that member.

Thank you.

Midwestmom2019 · Oct 8, 2019

After skimming a thousand posts, it’s SSDD yet again.
Sad state of affairs.
I’m learning patience. But hurry up bc I don’t want to have to keep learning the same stuff every different day!!!!!

Morgan10028 · Oct 8, 2019

Outforjustice said:
Let’s hope . It was a frustrating read .

I kept thinking in my head .
Wow . Wow. Wow .

Weinstein is letting FD get away with all these vague Bull*^^* answers?

Take him to task .
Press him harder .

It Felt soft but, I wasn’t sitting in the room to hear the entire day’s worth of questioning
so, it’s not fair on me to judge... (yet ).

Trust me, I’m on Weinstein’s side, I just wanted more Pit Bull and less Poodle .

Moo

Keep in mind how heavily redacted the depo transcripts are, which is very clear when you look at the page numbers and how they jump around (in addition to the amount of space blanked out on what was published). As @pandaknows mentioned earlier...and something I had not thought of...Weinstein knew to ask the question about the cars! That alone gives me A LOT of faith that GF's side IS in fact doing a lot of investigating on their end. I really don't think that FD would've offered up anything about the cars had Weinstein not asked. I think Weinstein is all Pit Bull, IMO. But the kind of Pit Bull who can play with children and not cause harm to others, though still have the innate protective instincts of the breed. MOO

Midwestmom2019 · Oct 8, 2019

Morgan10028 said:
Keep in mind how heavily redacted the depo transcripts are, which is very clear when you look at the page numbers and how they jump around (in addition to the amount of space blanked out on what was published). As @pandaknows mentioned earlier...and something I had not thought of...Weinstein knew to ask the question about the cars! That alone gives me A LOT of faith that GF's side IS in fact doing a lot of investigating on their end. I really don't think that FD would've offered up anything about the cars had Weinstein not asked. I think Weinstein is all Pit Bull, IMO. But the kind of Pit Bull who can play with children and not cause harm to others, though still have the innate protective instincts of the breed. MOO

I love Pitties. Thank you for your perfect description of them.

Morgan10028 · Oct 8, 2019

enelram said:
It gives me lots of warm fuzzies to know that one of our own WS'ers notified the judge of
this breach of the gag order and he took notice.
Kudo's to Morgan 1008!!!!!

Awww, thanks! I imagine that I'm not the only one who reported the Greek articles, though LE's quick action on MT's insta and then the widespread coverage on the Greek interviews encourages me, and hopefully encourages us all to report to LE, SA Colangelo, and Judge Blawie. You just never know what might be important, so when in doubt, JUST DO IT!

Morgan10028 · Oct 8, 2019

citygirl said:
Barring any arrest we are looking at 10/16/19 for the files to be unsealed, right?
That's it?

So far, 10/16/19 is the running date. Does anyone else think that there's a correlation between Colangelo turning over the discovery in court on 10/4/19 and the search warrants being unsealed? It was just a feeling that this might be the "heads-up" to the attorneys of what is in those sealed docs (both MT and FD's attorneys left with similar 'discovery' packets). MOO

Morgan10028 · Oct 8, 2019

Jmoose said:
This is exactly what I meant yesterday about stuff getting caught (or not) at our ports-I think FD would absolutely take the chance! Can you spend more than one life in prison?

I had not gotten through a good portion of this thread when I replied, and I completely agree with your comments! I also think FD would take the chance...he can once again claim that he wasn't in Greece when the car was prepared and didn't know that it was packed with cash, diamonds, what have you...if found.

Also, someone made mention of the weight of the vehicles being transported and while I think it's a fair thought, I also think it's unlikely to be a factor when shipping. There are too many after-market accessories that can be added to cars ie. rims, exhaust, etc that could/would add to the original weight of a vehicle. It's unlikely that customs would inspect the vehicle to a degree that would determine the original weight and then verify the after market accessory weights with those manufacturers. Afterall, the point of air shipment is speed and the brokers handling these shipments know that a premium was paid for the sole purpose of getting the goods quickly. An extensive inspection of each vehicle would take a considerable amount of time that totally defeats the purpose of an air shipment.

Jmoose · Oct 8, 2019

This is in response to Outforjustice’s post re: why a jury trial was requested by Atty Bowman for MT:
I was wondering this myself, and just assumed that it was because the law may be clear on it, and a bench trial would convict her. That is my understanding of why you’d choose a jury trial. Usually in a high profile case where the public finds you loathsome, you would choose a bench trial, though. Maybe they’re planning to compromise one of the jurors? I can’t see Bowman being on board with that, though. They are only doing this because they think they have a better shot at an acquittal, but I can’t think why.

DetectiveFoyleWannabe · Oct 8, 2019

Jmoose said:
This is in response to Outforjustice’s post re: why a jury trial was requested by Atty Bowman for MT:
I was wondering this myself, and just assumed that it was because the law may be clear on it, and a bench trial would convict her. That is my understanding of why you’d choose a jury trial. Usually in a high profile case where the public finds you loathsome, you would choose a bench trial, though. Maybe they’re planning to compromise one of the jurors? I can’t see Bowman being on board with that, though. They are only doing this because they think they have a better shot at an acquittal, but I can’t think why.

I think it’s because the case is weak on its merits so they hope to get a sympathetic or gullible juror or jurors (see, for example, OJ jury) who they could sway with BS and condition at trial. Also most attorneys would request jury since it’s a constitutional right. Could waive at a later date but to do this early would probably be malpractice IMO.

Tink56 · Oct 8, 2019

Jmoose said:
This is in response to Outforjustice’s post re: why a jury trial was requested by Atty Bowman for MT:
I was wondering this myself, and just assumed that it was because the law may be clear on it, and a bench trial would convict her. That is my understanding of why you’d choose a jury trial. Usually in a high profile case where the public finds you loathsome, you would choose a bench trial, though. Maybe they’re planning to compromise one of the jurors? I can’t see Bowman being on board with that, though. They are only doing this because they think they have a better shot at an acquittal, but I can’t think why.

AB may have asked for a jury trial to indicate that MT is either done cooperating or she feels she has given LE everything she knows. As far as she is concerned she is "innocent" of hindering and tampering. And, she feels she has been as honest as she can be....(without further throwing her boyfriend further under the bus). Flashback to the only time AB spoke after a hearing...the second arrest warrant...he said, "she should be presumed innocent...and she is."

Sadly, I think she may recant her statements about the events of May 24 and her statement about JD's body in the Tacoma. The pressure of the state might be strong, but FD and NP has been publicly sending clear signals to her in the press about her "true" testimony at trial. In June NP wanted the charges against her dropped...he claimed she had passed a lie detector test...he has claimed he wanted to have her join FD and him in fighting the state's charges. Both NP and FD have sending messages to her in their short press conferences after hearings and in the media.

The above is where I don't understand why the gag order hasn't been implemented to a greater degree. Is MT a co-defendant or a potential witness in the possible murder charge or both?

pernickety · Oct 8, 2019

This is in reply to those who wonder about the Pattis grievance hearing. It did occur and I've heard that the Chief Disciplinary Counsel charged NP with several violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct, including RPC 8.4, subsection that deals with criminal act (2)? RPC can be found on jud.CT.gov. Click "Public" then "Rules" The grievance process is drawn out. A subcommittee hearing has then to go to full Statewide Grievance Cmte, etc. See CT General Statutes 51.90g(d), 51.90h(d). Also see SGC's own rules (some of which differ from CGS) Then an attorney is not usually suspended or reprimanded before the CDC files a case in the Superior Court. See jud.ct.gov, civil case look-up, party name - "Chief Disciplinary Counsel" An audio of the 10/3 hearing can be purchased (I think for about $20), from the court reporters. See SGC rules re hearings. This is one to watch. NP has had grievances filed against him in the past, but they've been squelched by the powers that be. He actually wrote about going before the Federal Grievance Committee, in an article in the CT Law Tribune entitled, "Let My Experience Be a Wake-up Call." Search CLT website--will show the start of the article, but it's now archived. One can either pay Lexis for it or seek out the hard copy from the printed edition at a CT law library.

afitzy · Oct 8, 2019

Morgan10028 said:
Awww, thanks! I imagine that I'm not the only one who reported the Greek articles, though LE's quick action on MT's insta and then the widespread coverage on the Greek interviews encourages me, and hopefully encourages us all to report to LE, SA Colangelo, and Judge Blawie. You just never know what might be important, so when in doubt, JUST DO IT!

I've been thinking about the no contact order and how or even IF the State is monitoring the situation.

IMO its really tough to monitor social media. It appears that Judge Blawie IS monitoring the bracelet issue but is he/State being equally vigilant about social media and other 'contact' as defined in the order? I'm not sure but I am concerned. Does Atty. B even know if MT is in compliance with no contact? Ditto for Atty. P? My guess is they are following the 'don't ask, don't tell' policy but this is just a guess on my part!

Why not have the 2 charged individuals, MT and FD, each time they come to court sign off on their compliance on the No Contact Order? Given the 2 individuals we are talking about here I have no doubt that either/both would have any issue signing their name to a document and then continuing to violate the No Contact order but at least there will be a process for LE to track back on to impose penalties once all the violations are uncovered.

I am curious though how MT ever believed that FD following her Patagonia Styles Insta wouldn't be discovered? Is Patagonia Styles a bona fide going concern or is simply a sham to move money around? I wonder how many such Patagonia Styles rugs has FD or FORE or even the Greek family purchased vs. how many 'rugs' have actually shipped? Perfect vehicle to get money from Pt A to Pt B IMO and hope LE is all over it.

Funny thing about trust in people and lying. Once you see someone lie as an ongoing way of living, IMO its virtually impossible to backtrack and give the person the benefit of the doubt. We saw FD lie on and ongoing basis in Family Court and to such an extent that the Judge called him out on it and put it into the court record. We have seen MT lie to LE for over 3 months and IMO its unlikely she is doing anything differently today. We sadly have 2 morally and ethically challenged individuals that have been charged with serious crimes and they way they operate its virtually impossible to believe anything that either one of them might ever say.

Sad situation IMO.

MOO

afitzy · Oct 8, 2019

pernickety said:
This is in reply to those who wonder about the Pattis grievance hearing. It did occur and I've heard that the Chief Disciplinary Counsel charged NP with several violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct, including RPC 8.4, subsection that deals with criminal act (2)? RPC can be found on jud.CT.gov. Click "Public" then "Rules" The grievance process is drawn out. A subcommittee hearing has then to go to full Statewide Grievance Cmte, etc. See CT General Statutes 51.90g(d), 51.90h(d). Also see SGC's own rules (some of which differ from CGS) Then an attorney is not usually suspended or reprimanded before the CDC files a case in the Superior Court. See jud.ct.gov, civil case look-up, party name - "Chief Disciplinary Counsel" An audio of the 10/3 hearing can be purchased (I think for about $20), from the court reporters. See SGC rules re hearings. This is one to watch. NP has had grievances filed against him in the past, but they've been squelched by the powers that be. He actually wrote about going before the Federal Grievance Committee, in an article in the CT Law Tribune entitled, "Let My Experience Be a Wake-up Call." Search CLT website--will show the start of the article, but it's now archived. One can either pay Lexis for it or seek out the hard copy from the printed edition at a CT law library.

@pernickety, thanks so much for this update. I think this search was above my pay grade. But now that you explained how you did the search it will be possible to continue to follow up.

The allegation against Atty. P I believe related to filing a false affidavit in the Jones case and so perhaps this is simply a bridge too far, even in the land of CT Judiciary which on a good day looks like the 'wild wild west'! I do wonder if this is why Atty. P wasn't in court the other day with FD?

I will never forget Atty. P going 'tit for tat' in a very rude manner with Judge Blawie and Atty. P making the statement that he 'gambles with his law license' every day! Perhaps Atty. P threw the dice and gambled one too many times and that this time there will be consequences for his inability to self regulate his behaviour and decision making process! I for one hope so!

MOO

Chicago54 · Oct 8, 2019

Morgan10028 said:
So far, 10/16/19 is the running date. Does anyone else think that there's a correlation between Colangelo turning over the discovery in court on 10/4/19 and the search warrants being unsealed? It was just a feeling that this might be the "heads-up" to the attorneys of what is in those sealed docs (both MT and FD's attorneys left with similar 'discovery' packets). MOO

Do you happen to know if defense attorneys were allowed to see those sealed warrants?
If they were not, why would Colangelo give them info almost two weeks in advance of unsealing? Do you know if that would be in violation of the seal? I’m ignorant of the law here, but I could see Colangelo using info to pressure MT...
I did find this article at the time the warrants were sealed, but it states they are unclear whether or not records were sealed to defense.
Search warrants remain sealed in Jennifer Dulos case

MsJosie · Oct 8, 2019

There is one difference between atty P. going before board then and now. Before atty P. was only known to lawyers and law (more locally) and could slide by for whatever reason, but now the world, and world media know of him, his actions/antics/mis truths etc. This is not just because of the FD murder case but it appears IRS regulations/laws and international laws may have been violated. People are watching more closely. He may get another slap on the wrist, he may not because everyone is watching him....people are going to ask and are asking why he is so special. I hope he is gets what he deserves if the evidence shows he did wrong which IMO he did. What a baffoon.

afitzy · Oct 8, 2019

Chicago54 said:
Do you happen to know if defense attorneys were allowed to see those sealed warrants?
If they were not, why would Colangelo give them info almost two weeks in advance of unsealing? Do you know if that would be in violation of the seal? I’m ignorant of the law here, but I could see Colangelo using info to pressure MT...
I did find this article at the time the warrants were sealed, but it states they are unclear whether or not records were sealed to defense.
Search warrants remain sealed in Jennifer Dulos case

Its an interesting question. The way the seal was described was that nobody had access to the warrant info until the seal was broken. Perhaps you are right that the discovery materials given to the defence teams this week will allow them to 'back into' some of the warrant info but my guess is that whatever was given by the State was strategic and didn't jeopardise the ongoing investigation. Pure speculation about all this on my part! MOO

pandaknows · Oct 8, 2019

Jmoose said:
This is in response to Outforjustice’s post re: why a jury trial was requested by Atty Bowman for MT:
I was wondering this myself, and just assumed that it was because the law may be clear on it, and a bench trial would convict her. That is my understanding of why you’d choose a jury trial. Usually in a high profile case where the public finds you loathsome, you would choose a bench trial, though. Maybe they’re planning to compromise one of the jurors? I can’t see Bowman being on board with that, though. They are only doing this because they think they have a better shot at an acquittal, but I can’t think why.

Pure posturing. MT believes in herself. Go ahead, make my day. MOO.

afitzy · Oct 8, 2019

pandaknows said:
Pure posturing. MT believes in herself. Go ahead, make my day. MOO.

HaHa! I think I'm going to 'steal' your fantastic line and put it in the bottom of my posts, "Go ahead, make my day! MOO". Thanks for a good laugh and putting this all into perspective! MOO

afitzy · Oct 8, 2019

Duplicate. DBM.

Silver Alert CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 *ARRESTS* #29

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Justice for Jennifer

Well-Known Member

Justice for Jennifer

Justice for Jennifer

Justice for Jennifer

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

MOO...IMO

Well-Known Member

Former Member

Former Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Former Member

Justice for Jennifer

Former Member

Former Member

DNASolves

Online statistics

Forum statistics

Silver Alert CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 ARRESTS #29