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

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Midwestmom2019 said:
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.
Click to expand...

Not sure about that either.

However, the Cat is Already Out of the Bag.

What is the point in trying to put it back in?

I wonder if this indicates that Attorney Bowmen will try and get MT's prior statements to LE, thrown out?

I do not know how, since He was sitting next to MT, when she answered those questions.

IMO.
 
CTGrammy said:
Not sure about that either.

However, the Cat is Already Out of the Bag.

What is the point in trying to put it back in?

I wonder if this indicates that Attorney Bowmen will try and get MT's prior statements to LE, thrown out?

I do not know how, since He was sitting next to MT, when she answered those questions.

IMO.
Click to expand...

I keep watching Bowman and wondering if he has lost a step. Then, I wonder about Mama A. and her wrath if he fails to block the entire deposition. She is used to getting her way, IMO.

The charge for conspiracy to commit murder in CT...carries a minimum required sentence, but I am not sure I can figure out the length of time from the linked chart.
From the site:

By law, attempt or conspiracy to commit a crime “are crimes of the same grade and degree as the most serious offense which is attempted or is an object of the conspiracy, except that an attempt or conspiracy to commit a class A felony is a class B felony” (CGC § 53a-51). Thus, if someone is convicted of attempt or conspiracy to commit a crime that carries a mandatory minimum sentence other than a class A felony, the offender would be subject to that mandatory minimum sentence (see State v. Moran, 264 Conn. 593 (2003)).

It also appears that someone who is an accomplice in committing a crime that is punishable by a mandatory minimum sentence would be subject to that mandatory minimum. By law, someone is criminally liable for the acts of another if he or she acts with the mental state required to commit a crime and solicits, requests, commands, or intentionally aids another to engage in criminal conduct. These offenders can be prosecuted and punished as if they were the principal offenders (CGS § 53a-8).

https://www.cga.ct.gov/2008/rpt/2008-R-0619.htm

May I hope for 25 years for conspiracy to commit murder or is 5-10 years the minimum sentence? Fingers crossed...
 
Tink56 said:
I keep watching Bowman and wondering if he has lost a step. Then, I wonder about Mama A. and her wrath if he fails to block the entire deposition. She is used to getting her way, IMO.

The charge for conspiracy to commit murder in CT...carries a minimum required sentence, but I am not sure I can figure out the length of time from the linked chart.
From the site:

By law, attempt or conspiracy to commit a crime “are crimes of the same grade and degree as the most serious offense which is attempted or is an object of the conspiracy, except that an attempt or conspiracy to commit a class A felony is a class B felony” (CGC § 53a-51). Thus, if someone is convicted of attempt or conspiracy to commit a crime that carries a mandatory minimum sentence other than a class A felony, the offender would be subject to that mandatory minimum sentence (see State v. Moran, 264 Conn. 593 (2003)).

It also appears that someone who is an accomplice in committing a crime that is punishable by a mandatory minimum sentence would be subject to that mandatory minimum. By law, someone is criminally liable for the acts of another if he or she acts with the mental state required to commit a crime and solicits, requests, commands, or intentionally aids another to engage in criminal conduct. These offenders can be prosecuted and punished as if they were the principal offenders (CGS § 53a-8).

https://www.cga.ct.gov/2008/rpt/2008-R-0619.htm

May I hope for 25 years for conspiracy to commit murder or is 5-10 years the minimum sentence? Fingers crossed...
Click to expand...

I believe in CT, the accessory to murder is tried the exact same as the actual murderer and subject to the exact same conviction and subsequent penalty as if they committed the entire crime by themselves.

IMO.
 
CTGrammy said:
I believe in CT, the accessory to murder is tried the exact same as the actual murderer and subject to the exact same conviction and subsequent penalty as if they committed the entire crime by themselves.

IMO.
Click to expand...
I believe you are 100% correct. And I wonder if that was what AB actually meant when mentioning conspiracy. I also wonder though about the calls here to "stack the charges". In CT, AFAIK, judges have authority to run sentences concurrent or consecutive. In practice though, how often are charges arising from the same underlying crime actually sentenced as consecutive? I know I've seen it in cases where there is an actual murder conviction but evidence tampering and hindering an investigation......????? JMO.
 
Tink56 said:
I keep watching Bowman and wondering if he has lost a step. Then, I wonder about Mama A. and her wrath if he fails to block the entire deposition. She is used to getting her way, IMO.

The charge for conspiracy to commit murder in CT...carries a minimum required sentence, but I am not sure I can figure out the length of time from the linked chart.
From the site:

By law, attempt or conspiracy to commit a crime “are crimes of the same grade and degree as the most serious offense which is attempted or is an object of the conspiracy, except that an attempt or conspiracy to commit a class A felony is a class B felony” (CGC § 53a-51). Thus, if someone is convicted of attempt or conspiracy to commit a crime that carries a mandatory minimum sentence other than a class A felony, the offender would be subject to that mandatory minimum sentence (see State v. Moran, 264 Conn. 593 (2003)).

It also appears that someone who is an accomplice in committing a crime that is punishable by a mandatory minimum sentence would be subject to that mandatory minimum. By law, someone is criminally liable for the acts of another if he or she acts with the mental state required to commit a crime and solicits, requests, commands, or intentionally aids another to engage in criminal conduct. These offenders can be prosecuted and punished as if they were the principal offenders (CGS § 53a-8).

https://www.cga.ct.gov/2008/rpt/2008-R-0619.htm

May I hope for 25 years for conspiracy to commit murder or is 5-10 years the minimum sentence? Fingers crossed...
Click to expand...
Found something more recent:
https://www.cga.ct.gov/2017/rpt/pdf/2017-R-0134.pdf
It also appears that someone who is an accomplice in committing a crime that is punishable by a mandatory minimum sentence would be subject to that mandatory minimum. By law, someone is criminally liable for the acts of another if he or she acts with the mental state required to commit a crime and solicits, requests, commands, or intentionally aids another to engage in criminal conduct. These offenders can be prosecuted and punished as if they were the principal offenders (CGS § 53a-8).

https://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/chap_952.htm#sec_53a-54b
I believe 25 years is minimum for murder. If special circumstances such as home invasion, kidnapping, sexual assault are proven, then capital offense and life sentence.

Wonder if NP and AB told that to their clients yet.
 
BellaVita said:
Found something more recent:
https://www.cga.ct.gov/2017/rpt/pdf/2017-R-0134.pdf
It also appears that someone who is an accomplice in committing a crime that is punishable by a mandatory minimum sentence would be subject to that mandatory minimum. By law, someone is criminally liable for the acts of another if he or she acts with the mental state required to commit a crime and solicits, requests, commands, or intentionally aids another to engage in criminal conduct. These offenders can be prosecuted and punished as if they were the principal offenders (CGS § 53a-8).

https://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/chap_952.htm#sec_53a-54b
I believe 25 years is minimum for murder. If special circumstances such as home invasion, kidnapping, sexual assault are proven, then capital offense and life sentence.

Wonder if NP and AB told that to their clients yet.
Click to expand...

Good find and it's much more recent....We can hope, eh?
 
afitzy said:
bamboozled by any such blanket 5th Amendment assertions by MT absent a complete and thorough investigation of the matter by the court.
Click to expand...
@afitzy I think you put this very diplomatically. IMO Atty Bowman is milking whatever he has left of his reputation to get MT's highly irregular blanket 5th and scripted depo accepted by Judge Noble. Would love a civil litigation attorney to weigh in here. Does it smell like Atty Bowman is calling in a huge favor from his cronies to the detriment of the entire system of civil litigation? MOO.

A true adversarial depo has many interruptions and off the record breaks to call the judge (or his clerk) to rule on objections to the exact wording of a question or answer. No such objections or interruptions here. It couldn't have been a more calm and soothing read. Despite the well-researched questions of Atty Weinstein, he was, IMO, ham-strung as far as gathering material for cross-examination and impeachment. Well nevermind. It is obvi that MT will not be allowed to take the stand to perjure herself because she is that guilty. MOO.

IMO, the affidavit of Atty Bowman stands for [REDACTED]. How can Atty Bowman know precisely how answering or not answering a question as benign as citizenship will affect MT's right against self-incrimination unless Atty Bowman is swearing to the fact that MT is guilty as [REDACTED] of every crime conceivable under the circumstances, that any truthful answer would be an admission of guilt and guilt is as easily proven as a simple "yes" or "no" to questions 1, 2 and 3? Bring on the independently verified facts at trial. MT can just go sit in a corner. Atty Weinstein doesn't need her testimony to prove his case. MOO.
 
pandaknows said:
@afitzy I think you put this very diplomatically. IMO Atty Bowman is milking whatever he has left of his reputation to get MT's highly irregular blanket 5th and scripted depo accepted by Judge Noble. Would love a civil litigation attorney to weigh in here. Does it smell like Atty Bowman is calling in a huge favor from his cronies to the detriment of the entire system of civil litigation? MOO.

A true adversarial depo has many interruptions and off the record breaks to call the judge (or his clerk) to rule on objections to the exact wording of a question or answer. No such objections or interruptions here. It couldn't have been a more calm and soothing read. Despite the well-researched questions of Atty Weinstein, he was, IMO, ham-strung as far as gathering material for cross-examination and impeachment. Well nevermind. It is obvi that MT will not be allowed to take the stand to perjure herself because she is that guilty. MOO.

IMO, the affidavit of Atty Bowman stands for [REDACTED]. How can Atty Bowman know precisely how answering or not answering a question as benign as citizenship will affect MT's right against self-incrimination unless Atty Bowman is swearing to the fact that MT is guilty as [REDACTED] of every crime conceivable under the circumstances, that any truthful answer would be an admission of guilt and guilt is as easily proven as a simple "yes" or "no" to questions 1, 2 and 3? Bring on the independently verified facts at trial. MT can just go sit in a corner. Atty Weinstein doesn't need her testimony to prove his case. MOO.
Click to expand...
There was really a single instance in the depo where AB appeared to be off guard. Starting at the end of page 34. The question was whether MT had discussed with FD the fact that HF estate would be on the hook for 4 JC mortgage. MT asserted her 5th amendment privelege and then AB asked for question to be read again. Just odd. AB already knew every question would be answered by taking the 5th and that all would be transcribed. Just odd.
 
Midwestmom2019 said:
Did MT apply for a real estate license?
Or for that matter, did FD apply for one to get a commission when his houses sold?
Click to expand...
I don’t think she applied for it. But she probably failed the prerequisite classes. You need to pass them before applying to take the real estate license at least where I live. Not sure about CT. MOO
 
kimch33kim said:
I don’t think she applied for it. But she probably failed the prerequisite classes. You need to pass them before applying to take the real estate license at least where I live. Not sure about CT. MOO
Click to expand...
In CT, a mandatory 60 hour, Principle and Practices of Real Estate course needs to be completed. There is one test at the end of the course in class that you need to pass before you can take the licencing exam. She probably passed the class, but failed the licencing exam. You can attempt the licencing exam 4 times in one year. If you don't pass, you have to wait another year before trying again.
 
246.00 11/08/2019 C MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON MOTION
Document.gif
new.gif

re: motions to seal #s 223, 226
RESULT: Order 11/8/2019 HON CESAR NOBLE
Last Updated: Additional Description - 11/15/2019
 
pandaknows said:
@afitzy I think you put this very diplomatically. IMO Atty Bowman is milking whatever he has left of his reputation to get MT's highly irregular blanket 5th and scripted depo accepted by Judge Noble. Would love a civil litigation attorney to weigh in here. Does it smell like Atty Bowman is calling in a huge favor from his cronies to the detriment of the entire system of civil litigation? MOO.

A true adversarial depo has many interruptions and off the record breaks to call the judge (or his clerk) to rule on objections to the exact wording of a question or answer. No such objections or interruptions here. It couldn't have been a more calm and soothing read. Despite the well-researched questions of Atty Weinstein, he was, IMO, ham-strung as far as gathering material for cross-examination and impeachment. Well nevermind. It is obvi that MT will not be allowed to take the stand to perjure herself because she is that guilty. MOO.

IMO, the affidavit of Atty Bowman stands for [REDACTED]. How can Atty Bowman know precisely how answering or not answering a question as benign as citizenship will affect MT's right against self-incrimination unless Atty Bowman is swearing to the fact that MT is guilty as [REDACTED] of every crime conceivable under the circumstances, that any truthful answer would be an admission of guilt and guilt is as easily proven as a simple "yes" or "no" to questions 1, 2 and 3? Bring on the independently verified facts at trial. MT can just go sit in a corner. Atty Weinstein doesn't need her testimony to prove his case. MOO.
Click to expand...

Whether he secures her testimony or not, he’ll call her again at the time of the trial. She’ll have to repeat taking the 5th for the jury. For each question. And don’t you know the jury will be asking themselves why?
Never mind FD saying the same.

So, when is the judge going to force FD to show up with his financial records?

I hope by now Mr. Weinstein has subpoenaed IRS returns that have been filed, bank records, other sub contractor records, accountant records. He’ll have to piece together the financial picture.
Didn’t LE take FD computers with search warrants? And not return them? I’ll bet there are ways for information stored on them to be pulled for use in the civil case.
Why can’t this be pushed along? Especially if there is a good chance that the civil litigation is stalling/hindering the LE case?
Is everyone in on this delay, delay, delay mode?
 
BellaVita said:
There was really a single instance in the depo where AB appeared to be off guard. Starting at the end of page 34. The question was whether MT had discussed with FD the fact that HF estate would be on the hook for 4 JC mortgage. MT asserted her 5th amendment privelege and then AB asked for question to be read again. Just odd. AB already knew every question would be answered by taking the 5th and that all would be transcribed. Just odd.
Click to expand...
This in some ways is a big question....Rob Guffria said in an interview with Weinstein that FD really believed he didn't have to pay the mortgage anymore. Perhaps, RG was questioning whether or not FD could sell the property.
Was that after MT went to NY and read whatever will/trust documents she read? IMO, this is issue is of real concern for MT and her many "slightly" illegal issues in AB's mind.
 
Cloudydiamond said:
In CT, a mandatory 60 hour, Principle and Practices of Real Estate course needs to be completed. There is one test at the end of the course in class that you need to pass before you can take the licencing exam. She probably passed the class, but failed the licencing exam. You can attempt the licencing exam 4 times in one year. If you don't pass, you have to wait another year before trying again.
Click to expand...
Thanks for that information. So in a sense you can't just "apply for a real estate license". It's more time consuming in my state you need to complete a certain amount of units in a list of required classes but the classes are high school level. The information you provided just screams "epic fail" to me on MT's part. MOO
 
Midwestmom2019 said:
Whether he secures her testimony or not, he’ll call her again at the time of the trial. She’ll have to repeat taking the 5th for the jury. For each question. And don’t you know the jury will be asking themselves why?
Never mind FD saying the same.

So, when is the judge going to force FD to show up with his financial records?

I hope by now Mr. Weinstein has subpoenaed IRS returns that have been filed, bank records, other sub contractor records, accountant records. He’ll have to piece together the financial picture.
Didn’t LE take FD computers with search warrants? And not return them? I’ll bet there are ways for information stored on them to be pulled for use in the civil case.
Why can’t this be pushed along? Especially if there is a good chance that the civil litigation is stalling/hindering the LE case?
Is everyone in on this delay, delay, delay mode?
Click to expand...
FD quikbooks have been subpoenaed since 2018 ( ibelieve) but he did not comply.
 
sds71 said:
246.00 11/08/2019 C MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON MOTION
Document.gif
new.gif

re: motions to seal #s 223, 226
RESULT: Order 11/8/2019 HON CESAR NOBLE
Last Updated: Additional Description - 11/15/2019
Click to expand...

So Judge Noble directed that the Motion to Compel to be refiled with the deposition transcript attached as an exhibit. Not sealed.
It’s coming along.
 
kimch33kim said:
FD quikbooks have been subpoenaed since 2018 ( ibelieve) but he did not comply.
Click to expand...

Motion to Compel. Plead for jail punishment if not complied. Set a hearing ordering him to appear. And answer why he’s never produced them. Then personally serve him. If he doesn’t show up, have him picked up. He can fight records, but not showing up will land him in jail. If I’m correct, he will fight records on 5th Amendment grounds.
This ENTIRE mess probably could have been avoided if the family court had forced the record production in the very beginning. 400 plus filings didn’t accomplish anything except Jennifer’s disappearance and presumed death.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 200 more.
Total: 4,402 (members: 201, guests: 4,201)

Online statistics

Members online
201
Guests online
4,201
Total visitors
4,402
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,311
Messages
17,967,169
Members
228,740
Latest member
zorba347
Back
Top