Silver Alert CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 #15 *ARRESTS*

[afitzy]

http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=17380647
http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=17379330
Motion 151
http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=16123117

@sds71 Thanks! You are the best! Need to get a larger phone just for WS activities!

 

[afitzy]

They are setting a date for a evidentiary hearing on motion 151
151 was Farber asking for a pretrial remedy of 3 Mil instead of 500,00

@sds71 and @gitana1, But I'm confused again.

Why wasn't this dealt with back when the original motion was filed in 2/19? Was it because GF was waiting for additional information which she subquently received and so is now ready to present the evidence?

Based on looking at the file its not clear that FD/FORE has provided the books and records to GF that she had requested. It did look like some bank records might have been shared by FORE but I'm not sure what GF is asking to present at the hearing?

 

[gitana1]

There were a few requests kicking around the case so far as I can tell and I cannot tell which request was being referred to here.

Possible requests that I am aware of in this case:

We had the atty's that had been representing FD wanting to be off the case.

We had the new atty (Bill Murray) coming on board as new counsel for FD.

We had GF atty filing for summary judgment after FD didn't show up for his 2nd deposition last week (FD did not attend prior requested deposition either).

We have GF atty filing that FORE/FD had not complied with prior request for financial information.

We also had new atty (Bill Murray) sending notice to the court that FD didn't attend the recent 2nd deposition because he "forgot" or some similar word.

So, alot going on but it doesn't seem to me that GF is getting much attention from the court as she has been asking for basic books and records from FORE for nearly a year and has received zero from FORE/FD.

Really need help to understand this as the requests of FORE by GF and the Court have been very clear and simple yet there has been zero compliance in evidence. It seems at a certain point the Court must decide and I am baffled how non compliance and not showing up for depositions can have no consequences for FORE/FD.

MOO

As I've explained before there are consequences. There's contempt of court. Motions for sanctions. Some of the most effective when it comes to discovery issues when a party refuses to do what they're supposed to are issue or terminating sanctions which sort of mean (without getting technical) that the party disobeying court orders will not get to present evidence as to an issue being debated and the other party will, and/or that a person's entire action will be dismissed and/or deemed a default.

All of that takes time due to the impact of the court's calendar and just how the process slowly unfolds. A year is not that long in the scheme of things in the family law arena. It's frustrating but not, again, a result of incompetence or corruption. With the exception that sneaky attorneys will drag the process out and that's easy to do.

Now, however, FD is in a sense bizarrely protected by the criminal charges. Because financial issues involving Fore Inc. may incriminate him when it comes to the criminal case. So he may not be compelled to now sit for a depo.

Everyone knows he's facing murder charges.

 

[gitana1]

The hearing topic is undefined so far as I can tell, perhaps its to discuss everything that has gone on so far as quite a bit has happened and perhaps the judge wants to discuss it all with atty's and FD present.

Also the case with GF is a civil matter and not criminal.FD is involved with a criminal case but that is for the tampering/hindering related to JD.

BBM. Oh that is irrelevant.

 

[gitana1]

They are setting a date for a evidentiary hearing on motion 151
151 was Farber asking for a pretrial remedy of 3 Mil instead of 500,00

A "remedy"? I'm unfamiliar with the terms used in CT. What was she seeking? Is it like what we call in CA monetary sanctions against someone for not doing what they were supposed to?

 

[Caroline Lago]

My fear is that there may be concrete or chemicals involved...

Last night I dreamt that they found JDs body at the bottom of a very deep septic tank. As I've said in the past, I think the metal banging at 61 Sturbridge could have been FD trying to pry the lid off the tank which can be tough to do sometimes. FD must have had a plan for the body that I too believe either involved a very deep grave, concrete or chemicals, or this nagging septic tank theory that is now haunting my dreams.

So this morning, my job had me going to North Stamford which borders JDs neighborhood in New Canaan. When I went there in May, I didn't have the nerve to drive up Welle's Lane, but I did today figuring the police were no longer present. I made the turn onto Frogpond on the end where NCCD school is and up Welles Lane which seemed much shorter to me, than what appears on Google Maps. As I turned around in front of JD's house and looked at the garage, I got such an eerie feeling. I did not see one person or car on either Frogpond or Welles, but then again school is out and it was 7:45am. One thing that is for sure, those houses are surrounded by lush, mature trees/small forests....all the better to sneak through.

I really hope LE has exhausted all possibilities. Check those septic tanks!!

 

[gitana1]

http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=17380647
http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=17379330
Motion 151
http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=16123117

Thanks for that. That says prejudgment remedy. Maybe it's a request for attorney's fees based on ability to pay and need?

 

[sds71]

@sds71 and @gitana1, But I'm confused again.
Why wasn't this dealt with back when the original motion was filed in 2/19? Was it because GF was waiting for additional information which she subquently received and so is now ready to present the evidence?
Based on looking at the file its not clear that FD/FORE has provided the books and records to GF that she had requested. It did look like some bank records might have been shared by FORE but I'm not sure what GF is asking to present at the hearing?

so I think I have this right
FD objected to the motion
http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=16176168
because the Judge ruled he should pay GF 500,000 not 1.5 mil+
http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=15447151
GF found out he was hiding assets and filed a motion to amend and increase.( I think she found out he was lying about the money he made from selling 2 houses)
http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=16188789
They both filed motions because he claimed he handed over the ForeGroup Quickbooks
GF lawyers said they never received it and FD lawyers they never received bank statements from GF
and GF did not want to testify in Ct but in NY
not sure why it took so long

 

[sds71]

Thanks for that. That says prejudgment remedy. Maybe it's a request for attorney's fees based on ability to pay and need?

This was the Judges ruling

After due hearing at which the plaintiff and the defendants appeared and were fully heard on the claims and any defenses, it is found that there is probable cause to sustain the validity of the plaintiff's claim, although in a lesser amount after considering any known defenses, counterclaims and/or set offs, and that the application should be granted. Therefore, it is hereby ordered that the plaintiff may attach, garnish and/or encumber to the value of $500,000 against the defendant, Fore, the property and/or assets of the defendant, Fore, in any real or personal property, including any money deposited in any financial institution, and such other property and/or assets of said defendant as shall be disclosed to the plaintiff in the form of an affidavit by September 30, 2018. See Practice Book § 13-13.
HHDCV186088970S 9/6/2018 Page 1 of 2

 

[gitana1]

This was the Judges ruling

After due hearing at which the plaintiff and the defendants appeared and were fully heard on the claims and any defenses, it is found that there is probable cause to sustain the validity of the plaintiff's claim, although in a lesser amount after considering any known defenses, counterclaims and/or set offs, and that the application should be granted. Therefore, it is hereby ordered that the plaintiff may attach, garnish and/or encumber to the value of $500,000 against the defendant, Fore, the property and/or assets of the defendant, Fore, in any real or personal property, including any money deposited in any financial institution, and such other property and/or assets of said defendant as shall be disclosed to the plaintiff in the form of an affidavit by September 30, 2018. See Practice Book § 13-13.
HHDCV186088970S 9/6/2018 Page 1 of 2

Thank you. I was lost! I think this must be related to the Fore Group case for money owed to the Farbers. right?

I looked it up. CT allows assets to be frozen in a certain amount prior to the actual trial to ensure that assets will be there if there is an ultimate award, using this prejudgment remedy. She is asking for that amount to be increased based on information discovered.

To get such a remedy, the "Plaintiff must merely prove the existence of probable cause for their claim. The Court has defined probable cause as “a bona fide belief in the existence of the facts essential under the law for the action and such as would warrant a man of ordinary caution, prudence and judgment, under the circumstances, in entertaining it.” Wall v. Toomey, 52 Conn. 35, 36(1884). The Court has even gone as far as to say you don’t have to prove you have a “fifty-fifty” chance of success. “Probable cause is a flexible common sense standard. It does not demand that a belief be correct or more likely true than false.” New England Land Co., Ltd. v. DeMarkey, 213 Conn. 612, 620, 569 A.2d 1098 (1990)".
What is a Prejudgment Remedy? - Russo Associates

Read the link because it has more information that is interesting when it comes to FD and what he is facing and how the process works.

Here is another link that explains exactly what it is, how it can be used and why it works:
You Need A Collection Lawyer

 

[Eli9]

This was the Judges ruling

After due hearing at which the plaintiff and the defendants appeared and were fully heard on the claims and any defenses, it is found that there is probable cause to sustain the validity of the plaintiff's claim, although in a lesser amount after considering any known defenses, counterclaims and/or set offs, and that the application should be granted. Therefore, it is hereby ordered that the plaintiff may attach, garnish and/or encumber to the value of $500,000 against the defendant, Fore, the property and/or assets of the defendant, Fore, in any real or personal property, including any money deposited in any financial institution, and such other property and/or assets of said defendant as shall be disclosed to the plaintiff in the form of an affidavit by September 30, 2018. See Practice Book § 13-13.
HHDCV186088970S 9/6/2018 Page 1 of 2

Thank you for clearing that up! I'm going to be absent for a hot second while I unscramble my brain.

 

[Tink56]

Thank you. I was lost! I think this must be related to the Fore Group case for money owed to the Farbers. right?

I looked it up. CT allows assets to be frozen in a certain amount prior to the actual trial to ensure that assets will be there if there is an ultimate award, using this prejudgment remedy. She is asking for that amount to be increased based on information discovered.

To get such a remedy, the "Plaintiff must merely prove the existence of probable cause for their claim. The Court has defined probable cause as “a bona fide belief in the existence of the facts essential under the law for the action and such as would warrant a man of ordinary caution, prudence and judgment, under the circumstances, in entertaining it.” Wall v. Toomey, 52 Conn. 35, 36(1884). The Court has even gone as far as to say you don’t have to prove you have a “fifty-fifty” chance of success. “Probable cause is a flexible common sense standard. It does not demand that a belief be correct or more likely true than false.” New England Land Co., Ltd. v. DeMarkey, 213 Conn. 612, 620, 569 A.2d 1098 (1990)".
What is a Prejudgment Remedy? - Russo Associates

Read the link because it has more information that is interesting when it comes to FD and what he is facing and how the process works.

Here is another link that explains exactly what it is, how it can be used and why it works:
You Need A Collection Lawyer

THANK YOU! Now this is starting to make sense...WHEW!

 

[Midwestmom2019]

As I've explained before there are consequences. There's contempt of court. Motions for sanctions. Some of the most effective when it comes to discovery issues when a party refuses to do what they're supposed to are issue or terminating sanctions which sort of mean (without getting technical) that the party disobeying court orders will not get to present evidence as to an issue being debated and the other party will, and/or that a person's entire action will be dismissed and/or deemed a default.

All of that takes time due to the impact of the court's calendar and just how the process slowly unfolds. A year is not that long in the scheme of things in the family law arena. It's frustrating but not, again, a result of incompetence or corruption. With the exception that sneaky attorneys will drag the process out and that's easy to do.

Now, however, FD is in a sense bizarrely protected by the criminal charges. Because financial issues involving Fore Inc. may incriminate him when it comes to the criminal case. So he may not be compelled to now sit for a depo.

Everyone knows he's facing murder charges.

Just subpoena bank records, financial companies, start from there. And of course, LE has FD computers. Let’s look in there, too.

 

[gitana1]

Just subpoena bank records, financial companies, start from there. And of course, LE has FD computers. Let’s look in there, too.

That's true. But sometimes we don't know what banks they're using. And we can't just examine their computers without asking. So we ask for their records or access.

Even then, they can fight those requests on various grounds. A big one would be carte blanche access to computers. That would likely not be allowed. We have to have narrow requests.

So they have to produce the records or information that lets us know where the record are. Then they sometimes refuse to. So we have to file a motion to compel. And it goes on and on.

 

[Laughing]

Posted by Gitana1:

Here is another link that explains exactly what it is, how it can be used and why it works:
You Need A Collection Lawyer

Oooohh, I like this! Protects Grandma & so the children's investment in all those houses!!!

(And the plushy blazer & hoverboard; lone glove, broom, & cargo shorts, but who's counting?)

JMHO YMMV

 

[JillR]

So are you saying MT is a Heathen w/ rosary?

I’m saying that MT is wearing a rosary for all to see like it is jewelry. A rosary is NOT jewelry. She apparently doesn’t know that. She could have had one in her pocket if she truly knew the meaning of it and wanted that symbol to feel Gods presence with her in court. The rosary is the physical symbol of the prayers that surround a person praying and meditating on the life of Jesus. I wonder if MT knows anything about the life of Christ. She is a crazy loon for wearing it! TOTAL NUT! NO ONE wears it like jewelry. It’s total disrespect in doing so, for what it is intended .. A persons fingers are intended to hold a bead during each prayer and she had it draped around her! This really is significant to the kind of person she is.

 

[Eli9]

Old article. Just bumping this part. BBM

“The Defendant on his financial affidavit of May 7, 2019, states that the value of assets which he claims to own (which does not include a value for the Fore Group, Inc.) is $363,228.50,” the motion said.


Also did anyone ever find out anything about this? Was the police report ever verified?

“Plaintiff/Wife has, on more than one occasion, allowed and/or permitted one of the five children to be lost without police intervention,” Fotis Dulos said in his objection to the custody application, filed June 28, 2017. “One of those occurrences took place outside the United States and a police report was filed in London, England.”

Lastly, in the past day or so someone brought up the part about FD allowing his kids to drive and suspected this was in the driveway. But it wasn't.

“He sat in the passenger’s seat, and left each child alone in the driver’s seat to operate the car, in total control of the gas, brake and steering wheel,” Jennifer Dulos said in her affidavit. “The other children were riding in the backseat while each sibling drove. My husband allowed the children to drive around the neighborhood, and even allowed our son … [to] drive on a public road that is busy, swerving and dangerous.”

Court filings show that Jennifer Dulos was renting a house on Chichester Road at the time.

Accusations of Threats, Lying, Manipulation in Missing New Canaan Woman’s Divorce Case

 

[Bulldogs2]

It hurts my heart that Jennifer's story is so common in our society where many women sacrifice their own mental health and safety to hold a traditional family together for their children.

Arrogant and entitled men demean them as they flaunt their mistresses.

How distressing that a woman of means like Jennifer couldn't escape the nightmare of a narcissist.

Imagine how it is for someone poor or middle class.

God bless them all and may Jennifer be a warning to many.

Thank you for your post

 

[afitzy]

Looks like more trouble for FORE as additional mechanics leins are filed but this time in New Canaan for the 61 Sturbridge Property. Wonder if the next atty to be hired by FD/FORE will be bankruptcy counsel? MOO

The home at 61 Sturbridge Hill Road in New Canaan that Fotis Dulos is building through his company, Fore Group Inc. Photo credit: Julia Stewart (NewCanaanite.com)

Article Link: Did You Hear … ?

Quote from article:
"Three more Connecticut companies this month placed mechanic’s liens on the New Canaan home being built by the estranged husband of a missing local mom of five. O&G Industries ($13,654.33), Peter Kupchick Heating & Cooling Inc. ($10,000) and plumber Richard Belonick ($26,250) all filed liens in state Superior Court in connection with materials and services provided at 61 Sturbridge Hill Road. Fotis Dulos’s Fore Group Inc. construction company is nearly finished building a 7,300-square-foot home there. A Meriden-based lumber company earlier this year filed a $19,000 lien."

 

[HopeForTheBest]

Yes. Although this site reminds me of Ghost Busters they have apparently worked with LE to find bodies.
How Ground Penetrating Radar Works - How Deep Can It Go - Global GPR Service

Also the NIST was working on a corpse detection system a few years back. Interesting article here New Technique Finds Buried Bodies Better

They use these sometimes to locate old abandoned underground storage tanks and voids or looser soil where a tank once was such as if they’re doing an environmental study and it seems likely or possible an old tank was there in the past. Sometimes they were pulled but soils affected by leaking petroleum products were left in place because that was how it was done then. Now, though, for bank loans on some properties especially commercial or former industrial or even farming sites, the possibility of a former tank location can lead to this. FWIW.