Deceased/Not Found CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 *ARRESTS* #47

[Niner]

Adam Davenport is tomorrow at 10AM @ New Haven Superior Court pattis n smith harasser

Do you all want me to have this hearing also as to my notes?? I hope not.... getting a bit too much! I would like to just stick with the murder case.

 

[BellaVita]

If it was not JDs phone, wouldn’t there be a search warrant for its contents, as that could show where the Suburban had been? Whether it had been driven anywhere else during the 40 minute gap?
In that case in a search warrant it would likely be listed as a second number owned by JD since kids phones are usually in the parents name when they are young, all kids were 13 or younger so likely were on a family plan with JD and all kid numbers in her name. (Could also be FD plan but very unlikely she would allow that). Alternatively the SW would have spelled out that it was a phone belonging to one of the kids.
It just seems like LE would issue warrant for the phone found In The Suburban as it could give up important info about a possible location of the body.
MOO

FROM SW:
Apple iCloud account ID: jenniferdulos@mac.com, associated with subscriber Jennifer Dulos, of 69 Welles Lane, New
Canaan, CT, 06840, telephone number 929-499-7661 . Additional subscriber information to include account name, email
address, any telephone numbers, IP logs for primary and secondary accounts

It appears from a closer read that LE covered bases for all phones with a single warrant thus leaving open more of a possibility for 2 phones in the Suburban. However, SW also says:
An analysis of data gleaned from Jennifer's cellphone records
indicated her cellular device arrived in the area of 200 Lapham Road in New Canaan at approximately
10:38 AM and remained in the area until 11 :09 AM, at which time the device was no longer on the network.

This tells me, IMO, that it WAS JD phone found in the Suburban. JD number was provided to LE on 5/24 and LE was able to confirm the 11:09 info on the spot with Verizon. Then FD was seen a few minutes later at 11:12 on the Merritt. Of course, FD could have taken it into the truck with him and then switched it off shortly afterwards and ditched it at that point or kept it. Again leaving open the possibility of 2 phones.

So, it took 13 minutes from WL to Lapham. Close to google maps estimate of 8-9 minutes. There is only one route that passes by Thurton. I don't think there was very much time to do a body transfer before arriving at WP so I'm going with JD still in Suburban at that point. MOO.

34 minute window between arrival at WP and being seen on the Merritt. JD taken to MS or transferred during that window? IDK. Just thinking about Jennifer at 3AM. All MOO.
ETA: Due to time frame and JD blood found on passenger seat, I do believe she was in the truck at some point. So likely to me that when FD left WP, JD was with him.

 

[HopeForTheBest]

It is possible that the phone was not seen by Fd, especially if the child was sitting in the middle or 3rd row.

IMO.

Anyone here ever lost a phone to the depths or seats of a car even when it was just right there? Especially in a large vehicle like a Suburban, it is only too easy. MOO.

 

[BellaVita]

Well, Lonely is the Night and I've looked at AW, SW and news articles for hours now and I'm more inclined to believe that perhaps JD phone was not in Suburban. LE application for Verizon was on 5/25. Application for Apple SW was 6/5. I've seen other articles posted but this one I found resonated:
Dogs hunt for cell phone at Waveny Park in New Canaan
Article published Tuesday 6/4.
Two specially trained police dogs searched Waveny Park in New Canaan late Monday for a cell phone in connection with the disappearance of Jennifer Dulos.

AND

When another handler was asked if the dogs are searching for Dulos’s cell phone he said “I will leave it up to your imagination.”
The dogs searched an area near the bridge that carries Lapham Road over the Merritt Parkway shortly after it was scoured by an FBI Evidence Response Team.
Officers with dogs were also seen late Monday afternoon searching on the other side of the Merritt Parkway from the park in a six-acre area the town is considering selling.

I think y'all have convinced me that the phone in JD Suburban was not hers. I'm not 100% but I think it's definite possibility.

 

[MDATCA]

IMO the OP was going down IMO was the SAME path we saw Fd and Atty BM take with LA when she was deposed in the Civil Case.

Fd was obsessed with figuring out how LA got the children into NY and badgered LA IMO endlessly and even though Atty Weinstein told her to not answer any questions it was clear that this path of questioning was being put in place to possibly blame LA or legally threaten her with not taking adequate care of the children and for her and JFd not complying with the rule that the Court had to approve any trips out of CT.

IMO it was a bullying tactic used to intimidate a witness (in this case LA) who did the best she could in very trying circumstances to get the children from A to B. LA did the best she could to follow the schedule in place for 5/24/19 given that the Suburban was NOT in the garage at the time she returned to 69/71 Welles.

We don't know for sure which vehicle LA used to transport the children. Its possible to assume a vehicle IMO given the limited options but its entirely possible she called car service too and they had a larger vehicle to take the 5 of them into the city. We don't know how all this transpired but it was raised by Fd and Atty BM to place doubt on the motives of LA and even her boyfriend and to take the eyeball of suspicion OFF of Fd/MT and KM and this is IMO what the OP was attempting to do and was doing it no differently than Atty BM and Fd did previously when they deposed LA in December, 2019 in the Civil Case.

MOO

Land rovers have seating for 5 with some models having the option for 7 seats. I am going to guess that JDs seated 5 and Fo knew that. He tried to play an intimidating card and no one played along.

IMO he did not know about the NYC appointments for the kids and figured LE would have just had the kids at the house. He knew JD had one and was hoping LE would assume JD got delayed in the city. Maybe a casual person walking through the garage that there wasn't anything that stood out to indicate murder. He thought he cleaned it up. Then he planned to get the kids early from LE in NC, Her taking them to NYC really put a wrench in his plans.

 

[HopeForTheBest]

IMO the OP was going down IMO was the SAME path we saw Fd and Atty BM take with LA when she was deposed in the Civil Case.

Fd was obsessed with figuring out how LA got the children into NY and badgered LA IMO endlessly and even though Atty Weinstein told her to not answer any questions it was clear that this path of questioning was being put in place to possibly blame LA or legally threaten her with not taking adequate care of the children and for her and JFd not complying with the rule that the Court had to approve any trips out of CT.

IMO it was a bullying tactic used to intimidate a witness (in this case LA) who did the best she could in very trying circumstances to get the children from A to B. LA did the best she could to follow the schedule in place for 5/24/19 given that the Suburban was NOT in the garage at the time she returned to 69/71 Welles.

We don't know for sure which vehicle LA used to transport the children. Its possible to assume a vehicle IMO given the limited options but its entirely possible she called car service too and they had a larger vehicle to take the 5 of them into the city. We don't know how all this transpired but it was raised by Fd and Atty BM to place doubt on the motives of LA and even her boyfriend and to take the eyeball of suspicion OFF of Fd/MT and KM and this is IMO what the OP was attempting to do and was doing it no differently than Atty BM and Fd did previously when they deposed LA in December, 2019 in the Civil Case.

MOO

I’ve asked this before and I’m asking it again because what is going on (and on and ON) here is time-wasting and illogical at best and purposefully diversionary at worst: WHY now that Fotis is dead and the spotlights are (rightfully! Read the AW’s, people!) more brightly on Michelle Troconis and KM are so many people suddenly flocking to this forum and constantly diverting discussion away from Websleuthing the two people—MT and KM—especially Michelle Troconis—who have been named in arrest warrants in this case? Websleuths isn’t about—or isn’t SUPPOSED to be about—derailing serious efforts to assist in finding FACTs and information that LE can use to bring justice to victims. Some of the best Internet sleuthers in the world (YES) are here devoting their time, talents, and expertise to uncovering hidden details that already have helped in this case and the constant flow of repeated questioning and doubting about well-established facts in the case is wasting time and brainpower as the super sleuthers feel compelled to refute over and over disingenuous posts and “theories” all with a common focus that experienced sleuthers can see as clearly as the very detailed FACTs and findings are listed in the AWs: For no reason based on the known facts (read the AWs; read the entire collection of threads and evidence), some of the new posters here keep trying to minimize the FACTs that tie MT and KM to the murder of Jennifer Farber Dulos, a mother who loved her five kids and who was loved by them, a mother who put her kids first, a person who by all accounts was kind and caring, a person who has not been linked to the murder of anyone unlike MT and KM. The known FACTs do not support their innocence so have the posters continually pushing these flat-earth theories just not bothered to read the evidence-based information or are they actually here not to help find FACTs to help bring justice to a murdered mother but instead to try to provide some kind of cover for people such as MT and KM who have been linked by FACTs as in the AWs? Please; none of the authentic sleuthers here is fooled by these tactics or those employed so embarrassingly poorly by MT and KM. If your interest is indeed genuinely motivated by the desire for justice, you need to start at the beginning and read the documented evidence. If you’re unwilling to do that, you’re impeding progress—and justice for a murdered mother of five little kids. My opinion only (MOO)? Sure—and one gained through years of experience watching these incredibly successful and dedicated Internet sleuthers carefully research and put pieces together to bring justice to people like murdered Jennifer Farber Dulos. I don’t have to have their skills to appreciate them—and to do my part by learning from the FACTs and by not making their work harder by making them repeat and refute things already established many times over and obstructing their progress through a litany of logical fallacies like, you know, feigned righteous indignation or frenzied complaining of ill treatment when the truth, like an ankle monitor, is a little uncomfortable. MOO.

 

[Nikynoo]

Respectfully asking how you know this?

I'm not quite sure which part of my post you are querying, so will try and address each point.
I thought KM looked better in this appearance compared to his previous appearances in court by comparing online news reports of yesterdays apperance with those of previous appearance.

Lee Gold has represented KM before, see below quote:
Lee Gold, who represented Mawhinney in the 2019 cases, told NBC Connecticut he expects to represent him on any new charges.
https://nypost.com/2020/01/07/fotis...nt-mawhinney-arrested-in-jennifer-dulos-case/

I believe that you cannot chose a public defender and that they are appointed by the court.

 

[Nikynoo]

Just

Just wondering why this is important in the whole scheme of things?
What does it have to do with Jennifer's disappearance?

Apologies, its the way my brain works! I posted earlier wondering if the Nanny entered the house via the garage. There are reports (can't find it right now) that the Nanny did not enter the garage. We know that she opened the garage door as she knew that the surburban was not there.

If the nanny entered the house via the garage, was the 'clean up' obvious? Anything out of place? I guess not?

 

[Nikynoo]

I’ve asked this before and I’m asking it again because what is going on (and on and ON) here is time-wasting and illogical at best and purposefully diversionary at worst: WHY now that Fotis is dead and the spotlights are (rightfully! Read the AW’s, people!) more brightly on Michelle Troconis and KM are so many people suddenly flocking to this forum and constantly diverting discussion away from Websleuthing the two people—MT and KM—especially Michelle Troconis—who have been named in arrest warrants in this case? Websleuths isn’t about—or isn’t SUPPOSED to be about—derailing serious efforts to assist in finding FACTs and information that LE can use to bring justice to victims. Some of the best Internet sleuthers in the world (YES) are here devoting their time, talents, and expertise to uncovering hidden details that already have helped in this case and the constant flow of repeated questioning and doubting about well-established facts in the case is wasting time and brainpower as the super sleuthers feel compelled to refute over and over disingenuous posts and “theories” all with a common focus that experienced sleuthers can see as clearly as the very detailed FACTs and findings are listed in the AWs: For no reason based on the known facts (read the AWs; read the entire collection of threads and evidence), some of the new posters here keep trying to minimize the FACTs that tie MT and KM to the murder of Jennifer Farber Dulos, a mother who loved her five kids and who was loved by them, a mother who put her kids first, a person who by all accounts was kind and caring, a person who has not been linked to the murder of anyone unlike MT and KM. The known FACTs do not support their innocence so have the posters continually pushing these flat-earth theories just not bothered to read the evidence-based information or are they actually here not to help find FACTs to help bring justice to a murdered mother but instead to try to provide some kind of cover for people such as MT and KM who have been linked by FACTs as in the AWs? Please; none of the authentic sleuthers here is fooled by these tactics or those employed so embarrassingly poorly by MT and KM. If your interest is indeed genuinely motivated by the desire for justice, you need to start at the beginning and read the documented evidence. If you’re unwilling to do that, you’re impeding progress—and justice for a murdered mother of five little kids. My opinion only (MOO)? Sure—and one gained through years of experience watching these incredibly successful and dedicated Internet sleuthers carefully research and put pieces together to bring justice to people like murdered Jennifer Farber Dulos. I don’t have to have their skills to appreciate them—and to do my part by learning from the FACTs and by not making their work harder by making them repeat and refute things already established many times over and obstructing their progress through a litany of logical fallacies like, you know, feigned righteous indignation or frenzied complaining of ill treatment when the truth, like an ankle monitor, is a little uncomfortable. MOO.

I appreciate your post (and your obvious frustration), but what IMO posters are doing is testing the evidence objectively. IMO WS does a good job of this.

 

[BellaVita]

Apologies, its the way my brain works! I posted earlier wondering if the Nanny entered the house via the garage. There are reports (can't find it right now) that the Nanny did not enter the garage. We know that she opened the garage door as she knew that the surburban was not there.

If the nanny entered the house via the garage, was the 'clean up' obvious? Anything out of place? I guess not?

If you read the SW you will know that LA did not take the Rover to NYC. LA was not looking for blood. It was obvious immediately to LE.

 

[Nikynoo]

The poncho business still bothers me, though, since that indicates the anticipation of a messy situation. I presume those were used later, in the disposal process, somehow, and not at 69/71 WL.

BBM. Agreed. Since it doesn't appear they planned for so much blood in the garage at WL (paper towels prove that - plus it would not have fit with their GG theory), it makes more sense they planned to use - and perhaps had at-the-ready - the ponchos at 80MS where cleanup and possible preparation for disposal was done. It's quite possible it was very messy.

(It's also possible this happened elsewhere; we don't know, but they did have time @80MS.)

Not sure if MT's sisters business sells ponchos, but they do sell similar gear.

Since MT probably planned a lot of this, it makes sense she'd think of something like the ponchos.

For what purpose would they be used though? To me, the ponchos would be something I would keep in my car boot (trunk) in case of unexpected rainfall when out walking the dog. I would have thought if something was to be used in the commission of a bloody crime overalls would have been a better choice. I guess we will find out one day!

 

[Nikynoo]

If you read the SW you will know that LA did not take the Rover to NYC. LA was not looking for blood. It was obvious immediately to LE.

I think you are missing my point. If the blood was obvious, why did LA not spot it?

 

[Nikynoo]

I expect they have and we just do not know about it yet. Not all search warrants have been released yet.

I am unable to look right now, but were the search warrants of all the devices found at 69/71WL released or just the fact that the devices were found and taken in to evidence?

IMO.

just the fact that they (and other electronic devices) were taken into evidence.

 

[BellaVita]

There has been too much testing of the evidence without having thoroughly reviewed it.

 

[MsJosie]

Do you all want me to have this hearing also as to my notes?? I hope not.... getting a bit too much! I would like to just stick with the murder case.

you do what you need to. I appreciate all you hard work Niner.....a big BIG Thank You. You are awesome!

 

[Nikynoo]

There has been too much testing of the evidence without having thoroughly reviewed it.

in your opinion?

 

[HopeForTheBest]

I'm not quite sure which part of my post you are querying, so will try and address each point.
I thought KM looked better in this appearance compared to his previous appearances in court by comparing online news reports of yesterdays apperance with those of previous appearance.

Lee Gold has represented KM before, see below quote:
Lee Gold, who represented Mawhinney in the 2019 cases, told NBC Connecticut he expects to represent him on any new charges.
https://nypost.com/2020/01/07/fotis...nt-mawhinney-arrested-in-jennifer-dulos-case/

I believe that you cannot chose a public defender and that they are appointed by the court.

I have been meaning to ask these questions to extend the same interest and courtesy as you have here with this case so here I go: So have the Brits adopted the term attorney now? How has that affected their standing reputation-wise, do you think? Do they have public defenders? Are they appointed by the court? Is there a surplus of attorneys there now? What do you think the most useful legal specialization is in the UK now? Thank you for taking the time and making the effort to engage us here; it is quite remarkable given the workload for the attorneys I know from my family and my work. I’m going to take them to task about this as they could volunteer here, too. They love to debate, however, so it might be counterproductive. MOO.

 

[Nikynoo]

If you read the SW you will know that LA did not take the Rover to NYC. LA was not looking for blood. It was obvious immediately to LE.

Also wanted to say that if you had read my previous posts, I had also asked how LA transported the children to NYC seeing as the surburban was at Lapham Road and the LR in the garage.

 

[BellaVita]

I think you are missing my point. If the blood was obvious, why did LA not spot it?

I'm not missing your point. She wasn't looking for it. Attempts were made to clean up. The blood was largely confined to a single side of the Rover. She wasn't inspecting the Rover, the east wall or the garage door or the garbage cans. LE went there and inspected it. It was apparent to the naked eye. Does it matter that LA did not see it? Do you think JD was killed after LA took the children to NYC?

 

[BellaVita]

Also wanted to say that if you had read my previous posts, I had also asked how LA transported the children to NYC seeing as the surburban was at Lapham Road and the LR in the garage.

It wasn't in the Rover. SW confirms that. Again, what difference does it make how the kids got to NYC? It doesn't solve anything.