CT - Jennifer Dulos, 50, deceased/not found, New Canaan, 24 May 2019 *ARRESTS* #65

Status
Not open for further replies.
Whatever was in that report, even if it was skewed heavily toward FD, JD was not going to lose primary custody. She had a home with a witness who saw her parenting on the daily. Even if there was abuse allegations, unless there was proof of harm-- physical or psychological, she would still have those kids most of the time. At her home, they were close to school and their daily activities. She would have also been able to seek psychological support and gotten a clean report. It would not have been the sweeping damning thing that the defense claims.
 
I get what you’re saying (and yep re: Bowman!), and also struggle with this, because of the suffering and burden on her daughter she caused, even if awareness of it is buried now. Collateral damage.

How could MT not foresee this. Also a violent, egregious shattering of “girl code,” to the point of IMO conspiring to slaughter. I adored, ADORED my mother… and if I knew she was party to something like this, I’d not trust her again, ever. To love and protect me? No way.

Basic selfishness, that extended to her daughter. Not the kind of love I think of as motherly.

I know I’m projecting again.
I feel you. I just don't think that anything done that harmed N was done in any way to achieve that end. If anything, it was a very misguided attempt to help her.

MOO
 
There was a question up thread about whether KM can still testify. Generally, the State may call rebuttal witnesses after the defense rests but it’s a narrow scope. The State has the burden in the case, so they get the last word. The testimony has to relate to the D’s case. And then the D gets a sur rebuttal. And the state possibly a sur sur rebuttal.

No idea if State will indeed call rebuttal witnesses. We will see soon. The State may just want to get the case to the Jury.
 
Attorney Manning continues --

Based her evaluation of MT -- medium proficiency -- based on the videos she watches three years ago, watched things casually during the trials, based on the transcripts and information provided by JS and her 5 minute conversation.
 
This lady seems passionate about her line of work, I'll give her that
I don’t think she is a bad person, and I certainly would not put her in the same category as Dr Loftus (defense “gun for hire”); I do think that she ought to have thought twice about testifying in a case where they deliberately did not give her an appropriate access to the defendant. That may have been that the defense didn’t want to pay for the time that would have taken, or maybe they were afraid that her conclusion about MT might have been different.
 
Attorney Manning continues --

Based her evaluation of MT -- medium proficiency -- based on the videos she watches three years ago, watched things casually during the trials, based on the transcripts and information provided by JS and her 5 minute conversation.
I am not a doctor but I found this statement extremely troubling!!
 
I don’t think she is a bad person, and I certainly would not put her in the same category as Dr Loftus (defense “gun for hire”); I do think that she ought to have thought twice about testifying in a case where they deliberately did not give her an appropriate access to the defendant. That may have been that the defense didn’t want to pay for the time that would have taken, or maybe they were afraid that her conclusion about MT might have been different.
Most likely the latter… I’m sure her conclusion would have been what we all already know, MT is proficient and her use of an interpreter is just a show.
 
Attorney Manning continues

A series of

Understand a joke
Correcting misstatements
Writing in a second language, isn't proficiency.
Reciting by heart, is not a mark of proficiency
Asking questions in the second language
Communicating with a loved one, is not necessary, in theory
 
Whatever was in that report, even if it was skewed heavily toward FD, JD was not going to lose primary custody. She had a home with a witness who saw her parenting on the daily. Even if there was abuse allegations, unless there was proof of harm-- physical or psychological, she would still have those kids most of the time. At her home, they were close to school and their daily activities. She would have also been able to seek psychological support and gotten a clean report. It would not have been the sweeping damning thing that the defense claims.
all of this does make me curious about the report (maybe that is the hope- get the jury curious about what they cannot see?)- though I more or less respect that the prior judge sealed it. It could make reference to the children (minors) and with all the stress of the divorce and FD acting out, I would be surprised if JD did not have some signs of stress or depression-that would be normal. IMO. However to bring the report in now, without the actual expert and with both JD and FD dead, it seems like it would be a mess. IMO.
 
How proficient would you need to be in a sufficient language to lie?

Objection.

Judge: language doesn't determine capacity to lie.

Expert: people are more likely to be honest in their second language....
 
I have listened to her in Spanish in some of her reporting and family posts on social media.

Her Spanish presentation is smoother imo than her english but her Spanish imo is FAR from flawless and she does pause even in her 'native' language. But, even native english speakers pause to differing degrees too.

From listening to her a small amount its also somewhat odd that her language choices shift and so given that she spent time in Venezuela and Argentina and Miami my guess is that all these locations have impacted what I would call a somewhat odd variant of South American Spanish.

Just my POV from listening and having listened to her language and word choice and style vs. Spanish as spoken in Spain and NOT South America. AND I'm not a linguist, just someone that has experienced Spanish from different regions a bit but my familiarity is with Spain and not South America.
MOO
I agree with this-and she may absolutely speak a mixed bag of Spanish, anyway, since the language in each place is not absolutely the same, as you say.
 
"I'm not an expert in lying...but when people are lying, they tend to provide extra details..."

Anyone else laugh out loud at that offering that perfectly describes what the defendant did throughout those interviews?
 
The worst part about that sack of lies that constitute the “report”, is that Dr Herman clearly wrote it to fD’s specifications, and then attempted to put JFD on the hook to pay for it. Herman allegedly refused to finish testifying in family court, unless he was paid first. Both fD and JFD were obligated to pay, but only one of them paid for anything, and that was JFD. Just imagine that!
AND JF filed a motion to remove the Herman report as she disagreed with it.
MOO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
120
Guests online
3,264
Total visitors
3,384

Forum statistics

Threads
591,885
Messages
17,960,343
Members
228,624
Latest member
julandken
Back
Top