Silver Alert CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 *ARRESTS* #31

[afitzy]

Bowman wants the transcript sealed bc it looks like MT is hiding behind her 5th Amendment rights = guilt.
I’m not sure this MSM article is correct that Weinstein wants the transcript sealed as well.
As to the Motion to Compel Answers, (by MT to deposition questions,) Bowman may want it sealed bc the Motion tracks the questions Weinstein wanted answered. I’m sure all of Weinstein’s depo questions are reasonable and relate directly to discoverable information to assist the case resolution. The public would see what she’s trying to hide.
If Weinstein wants both transcript non- responses and his motion sealed, I’d have to give it more thought.

Going back a bit in history on this case, IMO there was a period of time where Attys Weinstein and Bowman seemed to have a working arrangement and were going down a path to figure out how to get the MT deposition completed. For this reason I believe Atty Weinstein was open to the idea of sealing the depo. Then, IMO for whatever reason Atty Bowman retraded whatever the original working deal with Atty Weinstein was and went down this path of the only option for MT was total silence. This total silence defense seems to be playing out in the motions Atty Bowman filed today which I haven't had a chance to fully read.

I also find the Atty Bowman statement that 'he knows everything the State has' in terms of evidence to be more than a bit implausible but I am sure he knows more than we know and as such is quite concerned that his client is in deep legal trouble.

It is so hard to assess the merit of the Atty Bowman claims as we clearly don't know what all the State has in terms of evidence against MT and FD. My guess though is that the evidence is significant and compelling and could put both of them in prison for most of their remaining lives.

I am concerned however that Atty Bowman is simply gaming the seemingly weak CT Judiciary to play games on behalf of his client. For this reason I do think the Judge in Civil Court just might have to have a conversation with the States Atty and evaluate fully the merit of the Atty Bowman claims to see if they perhaps for lack of a better word simply be legal "BS" on behalf of his client.

I'm not sure in the normal course that I would expect legal "BS" from Atty Bowman but in my mind the presence of Mama A (and her own IMO sorry legal history in FL) and potentially some assistance from some of her 'legally aggressive' atty's from FL in the background on this MT defense team have me quite concerned on so many levels that I think the Judge has to do some real work here to make sure that he is not being conned as could very well be the case IMO unfortunately. So far as I know if there are any other attys involved in 'advising' MT or Mama A they wouldn't have to declare themselves in the case as Atty Bowman is the atty of record. We don't know if any such people exist but given the history of Mama A, it wouldn't surprise me if they do. I would just hate for the State and Atty Weinstein to be bamboozled by any such blanket 5th Amendment assertions by MT absent a complete and thorough investigation of the matter by the court. At this point I don't know that it is sufficient to simply 'trust' that what Atty Bowman is submitting to the court on behalf of his client is necessarily truthful and IMO deserves a full look by a 3rd party from the Judge. Unfortunately this will delay the trial I believe but I also believe it is the only way to preserve any integrity in this sorry process where IMO abuse of the CT Judiciary has been the name of the game. Bottom line is I am for whatever reason quite suspicious of any blanket claim of 5th amendment privilege by MT and I believe the Judge will be too which was why his prior ruling was what it was IMO.

I'm not sure we here on WS know who all is involved on the MT legal team and I do hope Atty Weinstein knows precisely who he is dealing with as seeing Atty Bowman back off his original working arrangement as it relates to the MT deposition has me quite concerned about the overall integrity of the situation unfortunately. Could be something or could be nothing but its why I believe that 'trust but verify' should rule the day with this touchy but vitally important deponent.

Big MOO

 

[Chicago54]

The issue though is that trial date is set for 12/3. I agree that rules are rules and so in line with that I simply don't see the 12/3 date happening absent some miracle at this point unfortunately.
MOO

I believe in miracles.

One. Little. Miracle. In JFs, the 5 innocents, and GFs favor. Anything to knock the undeserving off their holiday plans.

 

[afitzy]

"Ms. Troconis is in the very difficult position of not only being charged with certain serious crimes but also runs a risk that she could be charged with additional crimes as a result of law enforcement's continuing investigation."

Isn't that the risk all criminals take when they decide to commit crimes?

Haha!

Yes, people with nothing to hide rarely need to invoke their 5th amendment rights!

Buckle up IMO as this will be interesting to see how Judge Noble resolves the situation. Atty Bowman seems to be hiding behind decision to use blanket invocation of 5th Amendment for MT. Might also be trying to pressure the State to offer a deal too, IDK. Games being played on multiple levels here and its hard as outsiders to know the behind the scenes games happening.

I just keep trying to put myself in the shoes of the State and if they have the video that I think they have with FD and MT then I'm scratching my head as to what other evidence MT could possibly provide that could justify a deal? IDK. Early on I said MT producing a JF body might prompt a deal offer from the State, but at this point that doesn't seem to have happened and doesn't also appear to be in the cards if the body is no longer intact. IMO MT could have just passed her 'sell by date' as a candidate for a deal with the State and if even 1/2 of what I think she might have done comes to pass them I'm totally ok with no deal. It might also just be too early to tell on any deal with the State too, IDK.

Just have to wait this out as the investigation still appears to be ongoing which makes total sense IMO given the overall complexity and the fact that this might have gone overseas and so involve other authorities and Interpol IMO too.

MOO

 

[dlharris2712]

I just can't figure out what Judge Cesar Noble is thinking...??? Where did he come from? What is his background? I'm going to dig around. moo

So - I am not a lawyer nor do I have much (if any) experience with the judicial system, etc. Is it possible, that since Judge Noble's experience is mostly in the areas listed below; he doesn't "understand" the brevity of a missing person/murder case...? Thoughts, comments, bashes - welcome. lol!

Cases his firm specialized in:

• Trial Of Motor Vehicle
• Premises Liability
• Product Liability
• Drug And Medical Device Litigation
• Malpractice Actions

Noble earned his undergraduate degree from Wesleyan University. He earned a J.D. from the University of Connecticut, School of Law.[2]

Career Experience:

• 2014-2022: Judge, Hartford District Superior Court
• 1994-2014: President/managing partner, Noble, Spector & O’Connor, LLC[2]

• Member, Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities[2]
• Appointed by a Dan Malloy, a Democrat of CT

And...
The appointment of a Hartford lawyer to a Superior Court judgeship has led to his firm dissolving and its lawyers joining forces with a Simsbury firm. Cesar A. Noble, who had been president and managing partner of Noble, Spector & O'Connor, was recently confirmed by the legislature.

 

[Alathea]

Haha!

Yes, people with nothing to hide rarely need to invoke their 5th amendment rights!

Buckle up IMO as this will be interesting to see how Judge Noble resolves the situation. Atty Bowman seems to be hiding behind decision to use blanket invocation of 5th Amendment for MT. Might also be trying to pressure the State to offer a deal too, IDK. Games being played on multiple levels here and its hard as outsiders to know the behind the scenes games happening.

I just keep trying to put myself in the shoes of the State and if they have the video that I think they have with FD and MT then I'm scratching my head as to what other evidence MT could possibly provide that could justify a deal? IDK. Early on I said MT producing a JF body might prompt a deal offer from the State, but at this point that doesn't seem to have happened and doesn't also appear to be in the cards if the body is no longer intact. IMO MT could have just passed her 'sell by date' as a candidate for a deal with the State and if even 1/2 of what I think she might have done comes to pass them I'm totally ok with no deal. It might also just be too early to tell on any deal with the State too, IDK.

Just have to wait this out as the investigation still appears to be ongoing which makes total sense IMO given the overall complexity and the fact that this might have gone overseas and so involve other authorities and Interpol IMO too.

MOO

BBM. Exactly what I've been thinking for the past couple of weeks. I think the more they've looked, the more they keep finding, and it takes time to untangle what else these two criminals have been up to - and not just in CT or just in the US.

 

[CTGrammy]

Michelle Troconis was asked over 170 questions during a deposition in September. She answered one - what's your name. Her attorney told her to plead the 5th because he doesn't want her to answer any questions about her relationship with Fotis Dulos
In a motion filed late Wednesday, Bowman elaborated on why he told Troconis to invoke her Fifth Amendment right to every question. He said that in effect Weinstein was acting as a prosecutor asking questions that will be asked of her in the criminal case.

“Every factor including the duration, nature, scope and depth of the deponent’s knowledge of Fotis Dulos could be used against her or could lead to other evidence that might be so used by law enforcement in their pending hindering and tampering prosecutions and continuing investigation," Bwoman said.

“In light of the Hindering charge and the possibility of a conspiracy charge or worse in the future, any defendant subject to such charges and ongoing investigation would have an absolute Fifth Amendment right to deny even knowing the person she is alleged to have assisted or conspired with.”

Earlier this week Weinstein filed a motion asking a judge to compel Troconis to answer some of the questions. Even though the deposition is supposed to be sealed he attached the 39-page document to that motion as an exhibit.

Michelle Troconis’ lawyer fears homicide charge may be coming in disappearance or death of missing mother Jennifer Farber Dulos

MT has Already Incriminated Herself in All cases, in her Arrest Interviews by LE and Attorney Bowman was sitting right beside her.

Now, he is trying to backtrack when it is Already On Record that MT has not only Verified her residence of record, but she has actually placed herself IN the physical company of FD on MANY Occasions.

1. She has stated on the record and Identified FD & Herself on CCTV footage, on their Trash Bin Odyssey of Stupidity Date Night along the more than 4 mile stretch of Albany Avenue in the Hartford Area on the night of Jennifer's dissaperance date of Friday, May 24, 2019.

2. She has stated on the record and identified FD & Herself on CCTV in the same vehicle when FD withdrew cash from an ATM to pay the Car Wash that detailed EE's red truck, Without EE's permission.

3. She has stated on the record, that she was indeed in the same vehicle when FD drove MT to meet with Attorney Bowman, the Same day EE's red truck was detailed, Without EE's permission.

4. MT has stated on the record as Identifying herself and FD on 4JC neighbor's video cam driving 2 vehicles to the Avon car wash to drop off EE's red truck, Without EE's permission.

5. She has stated on the record that she herself received a phone call from the Avon car wash when EE's red truck was detailed Without EE's permission. She also stated that she did not expect to receive the call, since FD went inside and filled out the paperwork for the car wash.

6. She has stated on the record, that she caught a flying rag, with 'Not a smell of coffee' stains, from FD at 8oMS cleanup on Friday, May 24, 2019.

7. She has stated on the record, that she Brought trash bags to FD at 80MS on Friday, May 24, 2019.

8. She has stated on the record, that she played 'Hide & Seek' with EE's red truck keys at 80MS on Friday, May 24, 2019.

9. She has stated on the record, that She & FD were in the the shower Together at 4JC on the morning of Friday, May 24, 2019.

10. She then Retracted that shower statement on the record, and then stated that FD left their communal bed at 4JC Prior to herself getting up, instead of the shower party story.

11. MT Was Present with FD, at 4JC on Friday, May 31, 2019 when a search warrant was served at 4JC, as noted in AW1 and by Media Photos.

12. MT Was Present with FD in a vehicle leaving 4JC on Friday, May 31, 2019 to follow LE to a facility for DNA Testing as noted in AW 1 and by Media Photos.

13. MT Was Present with FD when they Both were arrested at the Avon Marriott Residence Inn on Saturday, June 1, 2019.

14. MT and her Daughter are both in photos on the FORE Group website.

15. MT and Daughter are 'friends' with Dulos family members on several social media platforms and vice versa with the Troconis family members along with Many photos documenting the relationship.

16. MT Admitted to LE that several items on the 'Alibi Scripts' were untrue and that she, along with FD wrote the 'Alibi Scripts' as a tool to Remember their 'alibis' for Friday, May 24, 2019.

Do I Really, need to continue?

In regards to the Questions Asked of MT by Attorney Weinstein:

In a past deposition of FD in the Civil Case, we see that Attorney Weinstein gets a little frustrated with FD and his answers, or lack of, as noted in the court transcripts.

With MT, Attorney Weinstein is Exacting and Deliberate in his questioning and does Not seem to show Any frustration with her continued blanket use of the 5th Amendment. He just calmly goes on to the next question without trying to refrase the question.

I wonder If Attorney Weinstein Expected that MT would give a 'Blanket' response on Every Single Question, except her name?

Just the Very Questions Attorney Weinstein asked of MT were Absolutely 'Telling' about information in regards to the Civil Case.

We have learned a lot, by these non answered Questions.

I am not able to check right now, but when did Attorney Weinstein file for MT's civil case deposition to be sealed. Was this Prior to the depo or after? If Prior, Attorney Bowman may have made that a stipulation in the agreement for MT's deposition.

I am just glad that the Judge Denied, Denied, Denied.

IMO.

 

[kimch33kim]

Deposition was 9/25/ he filed on 9/26 and Bowman on 10/10 if you read Weinstein's motion to seal the last part he says how Bowman and Murray are all in agreement that it be sealed.

 

[afitzy]

So - I am not a lawyer nor do I have much (if any) experience with the judicial system, etc. Is it possible, that since Judge Noble's experience is mostly in the areas listed below; he doesn't "understand" the brevity of a missing person/murder case...? Thoughts, comments, bashes - welcome. lol!

Cases his firm specialized in:

• Trial Of Motor Vehicle
• Premises Liability
• Product Liability
• Drug And Medical Device Litigation
• Malpractice Actions

Noble earned his undergraduate degree from Wesleyan University. He earned a J.D. from the University of Connecticut, School of Law.[2]

Career Experience:

• 2014-2022: Judge, Hartford District Superior Court
• 1994-2014: President/managing partner, Noble, Spector & O’Connor, LLC[2]

• Member, Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities[2]
• Appointed by a Dan Malloy, a Democrat of CT

And...
The appointment of a Hartford lawyer to a Superior Court judgeship has led to his firm dissolving and its lawyers joining forces with a Simsbury firm. Cesar A. Noble, who had been president and managing partner of Noble, Spector & O'Connor, was recently confirmed by the legislature.

Oh boy. A Malloy appointee AND no criminal experience. No words. Almost on par IMO with Judge Heller and extensive commercial litigation experience now sitting in Family Court and dealing with DV and financial fraud issues in divorce case.

Will just pray that the States Atty is deeply involved with this situation or Judge Noble is seeking out guidance from other colleagues with deep criminal court expertise or we could have a potentially messy situation here.

Will just have to watch this play out.

Thanks for posting this very helpful information.

MOO

 

[CTGrammy]

Deposition was 9/25/ he filed on 9/26 and Bowman on 10/10 if you read Weinstein's motion to seal the last part he says how Bowman and Murray are all in agreement that it be sealed.

Thanks.

 

[BellaVita]

MT has Already Incriminated Herself in All cases, in her Arrest Interviews by LE and Attorney Bowman was sitting right beside her.

Now, he is trying to backtrack when it is Already On Record that MT has not only Verified her residence of record, but she has actually placed herself IN the physical company of FD on MANY Occasions.

1. She has stated on the record and Identified FD & Herself on CCTV footage, on their Trash Bin Odyssey of Stupidity Date Night along the more than 4 mile stretch of Albany Avenue in the Hartford Area on the night of Jennifer's dissaperance date of Friday, May 24, 2019.

2. She has stated on the record and identified FD & Herself on CCTV in the same vehicle when FD withdrew cash from an ATM to pay the Car Wash that detailed EE's red truck, Without EE's permission.

3. She has stated on the record, that she was indeed in the same vehicle when FD drove MT to meet with Attorney Bowman, the Same day EE's red truck was detailed, Without EE's permission.

4. MT has stated on the record as Identifying herself and FD on 4JC neighbor's video cam driving 2 vehicles to the Avon car wash to drop off EE's red truck, Without EE's permission.

5. She has stated on the record that she herself received a phone call from the Avon car wash when EE's red truck was detailed Without EE's permission. She also stated that she did not expect to receive the call, since FD went inside and filled out the paperwork for the car wash.

6. She has stated on the record, that she caught a flying rag, with 'Not a smell of coffee' stains, from FD at 8oMS cleanup on Friday, May 24, 2019.

7. She has stated on the record, that she Brought trash bags to FD at 80MS on Friday, May 24, 2019.

8. She has stated on the record, that she played 'Hide & Seek' with EE's red truck keys at 80MS on Friday, May 24, 2019.

9. She has stated on the record, that She & FD were in the the shower Together at 4JC on the morning of Friday, May 24, 2019.

10. She then Retracted that shower statement on the record, and then stated that FD left their communal bed at 4JC Prior to herself getting up, instead of the shower party story.

11. MT Was Present with FD, at 4JC on Friday, May 31, 2019 when a search warrant was served at 4JC, as noted in AW1 and by Media Photos.

12. MT Was Present with FD in a vehicle leaving 4JC on Friday, May 31, 2019 to follow LE to a facility for DNA Testing as noted in AW 1 and by Media Photos.

13. MT Was Present with FD when they Both were arrested at the Avon Marriott Residence Inn on Saturday, June 1, 2019.

14. MT and her Daughter are both in photos on the FORE Group website.

15. MT and Daughter are 'friends' with Dulos family members on several social media platforms and vice versa with the Troconis family members along with Many photos documenting the relationship.

16. MT Admitted to LE that several items on the 'Alibi Scripts' were untrue and that she, along with FD wrote the 'Alibi Scripts' as a tool to Remember their 'alibis' for Friday, May 24, 2019.

Do I Really, need to continue?

In regards to the Questions Asked of MT by Attorney Weinstein:

In a past deposition of FD in the Civil Case, we see that Attorney Weinstein gets a little frustrated with FD and his answers, or lack of, as noted in the court transcripts.

With MT, Attorney Weinstein is Exacting and Deliberate in his questioning and does Not seem to show Any frustration with her continued blanket use of the 5th Amendment. He just calmly goes on to the next question without trying to refrase the question.

I wonder If Attorney Weinstein Expected that MT would give a 'Blanket' response on Every Single Question, except her name?

Just the Very Questions Attorney Weinstein asked of MT were Absolutely 'Telling' about information in regards to the Civil Case.

We have learned a lot, by these non answered Questions.

I am not able to check right now, but when did Attorney Weinstein file for MT's civil case deposition to be sealed. Was this Prior to the depo or after? If Prior, Attorney Bowman may have made that a stipulation in the agreement for MT's deposition.

I am just glad that the Judge Denied, Denied, Denied.

IMO.

It is like when a lawyer asks a question at trial and there is an objection which has been sustained. The jury still heard the question even though there wasn't an answer. All these questions she refused to answer, the answers to them will still be introduced in court via LE testimony. Her cooperation is really not needed. The answers are already independently verified. JMO.

 

[Jmoose]

Not surprising for someone who cannot even obtain a simple Real Estate License. She can only answer what her name is and where she lives. MOO

For some reason, that cracked me up

 

[Jmoose]

So - I am not a lawyer nor do I have much (if any) experience with the judicial system, etc. Is it possible, that since Judge Noble's experience is mostly in the areas listed below; he doesn't "understand" the brevity of a missing person/murder case...? Thoughts, comments, bashes - welcome. lol!

Cases his firm specialized in:

• Trial Of Motor Vehicle
• Premises Liability
• Product Liability
• Drug And Medical Device Litigation
• Malpractice Actions

Noble earned his undergraduate degree from Wesleyan University. He earned a J.D. from the University of Connecticut, School of Law.[2]

Career Experience:

• 2014-2022: Judge, Hartford District Superior Court
• 1994-2014: President/managing partner, Noble, Spector & O’Connor, LLC[2]

• Member, Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities[2]
• Appointed by a Dan Malloy, a Democrat of CT

And...
The appointment of a Hartford lawyer to a Superior Court judgeship has led to his firm dissolving and its lawyers joining forces with a Simsbury firm. Cesar A. Noble, who had been president and managing partner of Noble, Spector & O'Connor, was recently confirmed by the legislature.

I see where you are going here, with Noble’s general experience, so you are correct to be concerned whether or not he gets the gravity of the situation. Well, he did his undergraduate degree at Wesleyan, meaning he is much smarter than the average bear, so there’s that...but like you, I am concerned that he will miss some of the more subtle issues that are likely to be “co-morbid” with the assumed murder. There are sooo many layers here, that we likely haven’t even considered all of it; but it seems to me that what the judge has foremost in his mind is his legal responsibilities as each of the motions are made from the respective parties. We won’t like all of the decisions that he makes, but we have no choice except to trust that Weinstein will present all of the important issues to him and hope it’s enough.

 

[BellaVita]

I see where you are going here, with Noble’s general experience, so you are correct to be concerned whether or not he gets the gravity of the situation. Well, he did his undergraduate degree at Wesleyan, meaning he is much smarter than the average bear, so there’s that...but like you, I am concerned that he will miss some of the more subtle issues that are likely to be “co-morbid” with the assumed murder. There are sooo many layers here, that we likely haven’t even considered all of it; but it seems to me that what the judge has foremost in his mind is his legal responsibilities as each of the motions are made from the respective parties. We won’t like all of the decisions that he makes, but we have no choice except to trust that Weinstein will present all of the important issues to him and hope it’s enough.

IME, no matter how intelligent an attorney is, or what he/she specializes in, there is always going to come along a case that is unprecedented. A case so unbelievable with so many WT[REDACTED] players and scenarios that you never dreamed things would come to this. Judges don't want to be overturned. I can't imagine Weinstein nor the judge has seen anything quite like this. I believe it is the attorney job to win over the judge with solid case law and intimate knowledge of the case. The attorney has to be totally invested in the client and the outcome. I believe Weinstein is totally invested. IMO. IME.

 

[Midwestmom2019]

"Ms. Troconis is in the very difficult position of not only being charged with certain serious crimes but also runs a risk that she could be charged with additional crimes as a result of law enforcement's continuing investigation."

Isn't that the risk all criminals take when they decide to commit crimes?

If you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime.

 

[Midwestmom2019]

MT has Already Incriminated Herself in All cases, in her Arrest Interviews by LE and Attorney Bowman was sitting right beside her.

Now, he is trying to backtrack when it is Already On Record that MT has not only Verified her residence of record, but she has actually placed herself IN the physical company of FD on MANY Occasions.

1. She has stated on the record and Identified FD & Herself on CCTV footage, on their Trash Bin Odyssey of Stupidity Date Night along the more than 4 mile stretch of Albany Avenue in the Hartford Area on the night of Jennifer's dissaperance date of Friday, May 24, 2019.

2. She has stated on the record and identified FD & Herself on CCTV in the same vehicle when FD withdrew cash from an ATM to pay the Car Wash that detailed EE's red truck, Without EE's permission.

3. She has stated on the record, that she was indeed in the same vehicle when FD drove MT to meet with Attorney Bowman, the Same day EE's red truck was detailed, Without EE's permission.

4. MT has stated on the record as Identifying herself and FD on 4JC neighbor's video cam driving 2 vehicles to the Avon car wash to drop off EE's red truck, Without EE's permission.

5. She has stated on the record that she herself received a phone call from the Avon car wash when EE's red truck was detailed Without EE's permission. She also stated that she did not expect to receive the call, since FD went inside and filled out the paperwork for the car wash.

6. She has stated on the record, that she caught a flying rag, with 'Not a smell of coffee' stains, from FD at 8oMS cleanup on Friday, May 24, 2019.

7. She has stated on the record, that she Brought trash bags to FD at 80MS on Friday, May 24, 2019.

8. She has stated on the record, that she played 'Hide & Seek' with EE's red truck keys at 80MS on Friday, May 24, 2019.

9. She has stated on the record, that She & FD were in the the shower Together at 4JC on the morning of Friday, May 24, 2019.

10. She then Retracted that shower statement on the record, and then stated that FD left their communal bed at 4JC Prior to herself getting up, instead of the shower party story.

11. MT Was Present with FD, at 4JC on Friday, May 31, 2019 when a search warrant was served at 4JC, as noted in AW1 and by Media Photos.

12. MT Was Present with FD in a vehicle leaving 4JC on Friday, May 31, 2019 to follow LE to a facility for DNA Testing as noted in AW 1 and by Media Photos.

13. MT Was Present with FD when they Both were arrested at the Avon Marriott Residence Inn on Saturday, June 1, 2019.

14. MT and her Daughter are both in photos on the FORE Group website.

15. MT and Daughter are 'friends' with Dulos family members on several social media platforms and vice versa with the Troconis family members along with Many photos documenting the relationship.

16. MT Admitted to LE that several items on the 'Alibi Scripts' were untrue and that she, along with FD wrote the 'Alibi Scripts' as a tool to Remember their 'alibis' for Friday, May 24, 2019.

Do I Really, need to continue?

In regards to the Questions Asked of MT by Attorney Weinstein:

In a past deposition of FD in the Civil Case, we see that Attorney Weinstein gets a little frustrated with FD and his answers, or lack of, as noted in the court transcripts.

With MT, Attorney Weinstein is Exacting and Deliberate in his questioning and does Not seem to show Any frustration with her continued blanket use of the 5th Amendment. He just calmly goes on to the next question without trying to refrase the question.

I wonder If Attorney Weinstein Expected that MT would give a 'Blanket' response on Every Single Question, except her name?

Just the Very Questions Attorney Weinstein asked of MT were Absolutely 'Telling' about information in regards to the Civil Case.

We have learned a lot, by these non answered Questions.

I am not able to check right now, but when did Attorney Weinstein file for MT's civil case deposition to be sealed. Was this Prior to the depo or after? If Prior, Attorney Bowman may have made that a stipulation in the agreement for MT's deposition.

I am just glad that the Judge Denied, Denied, Denied.

IMO.

Maybe MT waived her right to invoke 5th Amendment by answering all kinds of questions on prior occasions. I don’t know that answer. It’s constitutional law. Once waived, can you then invoke it? I don’t know.
Hhmmm.

 

[afitzy]

He’s thinking of the prison in Florida

Wonder if that was a Freudian slip on the part of Atty Bowman!
MOO

 

[afitzy]

Maybe MT waived her right to invoke 5th Amendment by answering all kinds of questions on prior occasions. I don’t know that answer. It’s constitutional law. Once waived, can you then invoke it? I don’t know.
Hhmmm.

Atty Bowman addressed this issue in his motion and I believe when accused Atty Weinstein of 'ignorance' of Fifth Amendment law' - Things that make you go Mmmmm. When you have nothing else to say is the best choice to attack and be rude in a motion?
Statement by Atty Bowman: Ms. Troconis never abused the invocation of the Fifth Amendment privilege, and to argue that she did demonstrates a complete ignorance of Fifth Amendment law.

Statement from Motion:

"Ms. Troconis never abused the invocation of the Fifth Amendment privilege, and to argue that she did demonstrates a complete ignorance of Fifth Amendment law. If the law is clear that a defendant who speaks to the police forever waives his or her constitutional right to assert the Fifth Amendment privilege, then the mere fact of an interview would mean that the prosecution could (1) then call the defendant as a witness at his or her trial, or (2) compel a defendant to come back again and again for subsequent interviews or (3) could utilize a private party (like plaintiff) to compel information from a criminal defendant which could then be used in the prosecution of the defendant's criminal case".

Here is the entire motion again:
http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=18130433

 

[BellaVita]

Atty Bowman addressed this issue in his motion and I believe when accused Atty Weinstein of 'ignorance' of Fifth Amendment law' - Things that make you go Mmmmm. When you have nothing else to say is the best choice to attack and be rude in a motion?
Statement by Atty Bowman: Ms. Troconis never abused the invocation of the Fifth Amendment privilege, and to argue that she did demonstrates a complete ignorance of Fifth Amendment law.

Law can be twisted like a pretzel. Going with Weinstein on this one. I think he's the smartest one in the room. JMO.

 

[Midwestmom2019]

Atty Bowman addressed this issue in his motion and I believe when accused Atty Weinstein of 'ignorance' of Fifth Amendment law' - Things that make you go Mmmmm. When you have nothing else to say is the best choice to attack and be rude in a motion?
Statement by Atty Bowman: Ms. Troconis never abused the invocation of the Fifth Amendment privilege, and to argue that she did demonstrates a complete ignorance of Fifth Amendment law.

Statement from Motion:

"Ms. Troconis never abused the invocation of the Fifth Amendment privilege, and to argue that she did demonstrates a complete ignorance of Fifth Amendment law. If the law is clear that a defendant who speaks to the police forever waives his or her constitutional right to assert the Fifth Amendment privilege, then the mere fact of an interview would mean that the prosecution could (1) then call the defendant as a witness at his or her trial, or (2) compel a defendant to come back again and again for subsequent interviews or (3) could utilize a private party (like plaintiff) to compel information from a criminal defendant which could then be used in the prosecution of the defendant's criminal case".

Here is the entire motion again:
http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=18130433

Answers:
As to 1. Defendant does not have to take the witness stand in his defense at time of trial. Different than getting up and pleading the 5th.
As to no. 2: LE can try to compel interview after interview until defendant lawyers up and chooses to be silent.
As to no. 3: Colunga not utilizing a private party. Weinstein doing his own deal. It’s not at the request of the prosecution.

So, Mr. B, better think of something better.
His spin leads me to believe once she admits some things, she cannot hide under 5th Amendment with regard to the same admitted matters.
She can certainly use the 5th as to previously undisclosed facts.
IMHO only.

 

[Midwestmom2019]

Sorry. My reply got rolled into the quote.