Propaganda will always exist in a society run by tyrants. No need for the truth, just need to ‘spin’ things to confuse the populace. The family court of Connecticut recently executed Jen Dulos by dragging her through 705 days of tortuous and pointless litigation for the sole purpose of enriching her lawyer, Reuben Midler. Now, Judge Elizabeth Bozzuto tries to throw up a smoke screen of ‘domestic violence’ as the failure of the court and introduces a new scam to victimize more families before the most corrupt bench in the land.
Lisa Backus pens an artificial article about Jen’s demise quoting the State’s most stupidly dykish judge, the infamous Elizabeth Bozzuto, past head of the evil family court. Bozzuto feigns that a new ‘model’ will be applied to the family court, which would have saved Jen Dulos from death and dismemberment by hubby Fotis and his lawyer pal Kent Mawhinney. No one is believin’ her shit.
In an attempt to hide the jewish game of family court, Lisa Backus does not mention that Jen’s jew lawyer took over $1.5M while dragging out litigation over 705 days, where jew Judge Heller never issued a trial management order, set a trial date or even scheduled a ‘mediation’ effort. Backus is a puppet journalist used by the jews under the guise of the ‘free press’ to spin cover stories for what is a straight up jewish game of fleecing the rich in family court.
The blog famous dyke on the byke Bozzuto, wants the feeble minded to believe that domestic violence is the root cause of the consequences of Heller’s extended litigation. Backus quotes the deranged Karen Jarmoc, a self-proclaimed expert in violence of humans who scams government grant programs to pontificate about labels. Jarmoc sez that Jen’s divorce should have been labeled ‘high conflict’, a jewish term used by the AFCC mafia to identify cases which can generate significant revenue for court vultures. Poor people are not ‘high conflict’. Note that Backus is not writing about Baby Aaden’s case, because poor brown people don’t make money for jews like Reuben Midler and Donna Heller. Poor brown people who also speak Spanish can’t pay Michael Meehan $175k to be a GAL either. Backus won’t write about why jew Judge Elliot Solomon did not take on Jen’s case in his ‘mediation’ center. Or why the case was not sent to the infamous Regional Family Trial Docket under Judge Leo Diana for prompt disposition. The court system cornered Jen so that her wallet could be fleeced, and it was.
Remember folks, the state does not give a shit about your marriage or your kids. It is a no-fault divorce. So why is Lisa Backus not asking why Jen was tied up in court for 705 days with no end in sight?? Where is the story that the State of Connecticut ‘forced’ Jen to remain married to the adulterous Fotis? Because Backus is playing the jew tune. Connecticut Family Court is all about money for the lawyers and the judges. Yes, judges get bonuses from Patrick Carroll and kickbacks from the lawyers they help to enrich.
Backus makes bullshit reporting about bringing forth a family court ‘bench book’ to provide family court judges with necessary information in issuing divorces. Newsflash: There is a Connecticut Family Court Bench Book. It is even listed in the Library of Congress and copyrighted by Connecticut, but you will never find it and if you ask Judge Patrick Carroll he will tell you it is SECRET, not to be shared with four-legged-goyim.
Backus seeks to confuse her readers by mixing terms ‘complex’ with ‘high conflict’ and ‘domestic violence’. There are no ‘complex’ no-fault divorces … more time and effort is required in making a good lasagna and picking out a nice chianti than what is necessary to dissolve a goy’s marriage. In Jen’s case, Judge Heller fanned the flames of conflict, as directed by Reuben Midler. Needless to say, Heller was making money off the case, otherwise she would have dumped it to Judge Diana at RFTD or to Judge Solomon at the mediation center or ordered a special masters session. Nope, she was milking it for personal and jewish gain.
Backus is so pathetic that she quotes Jarmoc talking about Family Services of the court. These clowns are just state parasites who resolve nothing. They are not supervised by anyone of expertise and depend on judges for their performance evaluations, bonuses, and promotions. They are total scum and represent an inherit internal conflict of interest in the judiciary. Most are retarded liberals who can find no other employment, but find purpose in pretending they can help you … like they helped Jen!
Let’s all thank Stamford Family Services supervisor Dorye Jackson. Dumb nigger cunt was supposed to help Jen? In reality, she did nothing, but cashed her state paycheck … ‘this too shall pass’.
Backus notes that no one in the judicial branch will talk to her … like they would tell the truth about what Judge Heller did to Jen? Backus quotes Bozzuto as stating that the court is transitioning to a ‘less adversarial system’, which is total bullshit. The Connecticut Bar will not allow it. The shitiest, most fucked-up lawyers on the planet are family court lawyers in Connecticut. Fucking up families like Jen’s is their bread and butter. More jewish propaganda being heaped on ‘we the people’ by the dyke on the byke herself.
Lisa Backus is such a crappy reporter that she quotes Bozzuto citing the ‘National Center for State Court’s Family Justice Initiative‘, but fails to disclose that Judge Heller is on this initiative and is the proximate cause of Jen’s death! Just believe Bozzuto’s claim that the ‘new model’ will be better. Oi vey, the jews never quit! This National Center is just a bunch of jews working together to fuck over the goyim … as an initiative. Family Court was created and designed by jews, it is working just the way they want it.
Read the propaganda by Lisa Backus below. Look out for the jewish word salad of ‘new system’, ‘high conflict’,’nuances’, ‘complex’, ‘multi-disciplinary’ and the promises that a confused cunt named Bozzuto is going to do something to change the system that killed Jen Dulos.
STAMFORD — Jennifer Dulos hesitated at times as she described to a family court judge the series of events that led to her flight with her five children from the Farmington home she shared with her husband in June 2017.
But there was one defining moment that was clear to her. It occurred a few weeks before she filed for divorce when her husband, Fotis Dulos, threatened to take their children and “disappear,” according to court transcripts of the first hearing in what became an acrimonious divorce that spanned two years and included more than 400 filings leading up to her disappearance last May 24.
“I knew in that moment when he made that threat, I knew I had to get us out of there,” she testified of a tense scene overheard by the family nanny in their Farmington kitchen on May 30, 2017. “And I knew I needed a safe place for my children and I needed to find an attorney.”
Jennifer Dulos is now presumed dead by police based on the blood splatter and blood found in the garage of the New Canaan home she rented since filing for divorce.
But the outcome could have been different, according to a domestic violence advocate, if the divorce case was classified differently.
Domestic violence advocates say court officials failed to recognize Fotis Dulos’ alleged abusive behavior and designated the case as “high conflict” instead of domestic violence.
“It should have been handled differently,” said Karen Jarmoc, executive director for the Connecticut Coalition Against Domestic Violence. “There should be a better understanding by judges around offender behaviors. There should be repercussions for violating court orders. If anything, the family court is empowering the offender.”
CCADV is now seeking legislation that would require drafting a “benchbook” that would be used as a guide for judges, court officials and attorneys to identify the nuances, including controlling and harassing behaviors that differentiate “high conflict” and domestic violence divorces and ways to handle them based on best practices. Judges and other court staff would also be required to attend training under the bill, which is slated to soon be presented to the Judiciary Committee.
“These very complex cases have traditionally been defined as ‘high conflict’ when in fact they are domestic violence,” Jarmoc said.
The benchbook would give judges a “better understanding” of the nuances between the two, she said.
“Family Services has to be impartial, but clearly these behaviors are so evident,” Jarmoc said. “This is not new. There is a very blanket refusal by the Judicial Branch to shift or change their practices and people are dying because of it.”
Jarmoc contends that Judicial Branch officials are opposed to the idea and will likely buck any attempt to utilize the proposed benchbook, which would be drafted by a multi-disciplinary committee.
“Judicial has informed us that they would be completely opposed,” Jarmoc said.
Judicial Branch officials, including judges who handle family cases or court administrative matters, have declined to discuss any aspect of the Dulos case, citing the pending criminal charges against Fotis Dulos, his former girlfriend Michelle Troconis and his former civil attorney Kent Mawhinney, and also the gag order barring case participants from discussing evidence or the character of victims and witnesses.
The branch has been working on a transition to a less adversarial model for dealing with “high conflict” or “complex” divorces since 2017, Deputy Chief Court Administrator Judge Elizabeth Bozzuto said. Facets of the plan were presented to CCADV members last week, she said.
The plan would include providing a domestic violence advocate for all cases determined to be “high conflict” or “complex” regardless if the case was deemed related to domestic violence, Bozzuto said.
Judges already have access to an electronic binder that is considered the benchbook for all types of domestic violence-related proceedings, including criminal, civil and divorce and custody matters, the judge said.
Judges and other court staff also have annual training in domestic violence by “nationally recognized” leaders in the field, Bozzuto said.
The new system, based on the National Center for State Court’s Family Justice Initiative, will identify complex cases quickly and make them more judge-driven rather than steered by a litigant or attorney, Bozzuto said.
“We want to get better at this,” the judge said. “People are getting lost in the system. In this new model, that wouldn’t happen.”
‘He didn’t care what the neighbors heard’
In the Dulos case, the issue of potential domestic violence surfaced almost immediately.
According to transcripts from the hearing on Jennifer Dulos’ custody and abuse request in June 2017, the New Canaan mother told the judge several times that she was afraid of her husband. She said they discussed separating for months leading up to her decision to flee with the children and file for divorce and a restraining order, according to the court transcripts.
Jennifer Dulos told the judge her husband presented her on May 30, 2017 with a custody schedule that indicated he wanted the children throughout the summer, including weekends “except that I could have one weekend a month” and two full weeks, according to the transcript.
“I said this is too much, I don’t think I can agree to all this and we moved into the living room and he became enraged with me, that I wasn’t just going to agree to all of this,” she testified.
Fotis Dulos threatened to take the children “and disappear” while yelling about six inches from her face, she testified. Jennifer Dulos ran out of the house and down the street with him chasing her, and saying “he didn’t care what the neighbors heard,” she testified.
When they returned home, Fotis Dulos fished the pieces of the agreement that he had ripped up out of the garbage and told her to tape them together, Jennifer Dulos testified. It was in that moment, Jennifer Dulos testified, that she knew she had to escape and hire an attorney. The couple’s longtime nanny, Lauren Almeida, testified during the hearing that she overheard the incident.
In July 2017, Stamford family court Judge Thomas Colin denied Jennifer Dulos’ request for emergency custody and relief from abuse after considering the hours of testimony that included her estranged husband’s attorney, Alan Rome, asking if his client ever hit her. She said he didn’t. Colin also denied Jennifer Dulos’ request to require her husband to undergo a psychological evaluation.
“She was clearly voicing fear in court and it fell on deaf ears,” Jarmoc said. “It was the argument, ‘well she’s emotional, she’s using this.’ That’s what these types of attorneys use in these cases.”
According to Rome, Stamford Family Services based its risk assessment report on the restraining order on “about five minutes” of discussion with his client.
The judge acknowledged in his July 25, 2017 order that emotions were raw between the couple and that Jennifer Dulos perceived her husband to be “controlling and aggressive.” Colin said arguments between the couple occurred when Fotis Dulos felt he could “no longer control the situation and unilaterally dictate its outcome.”
Colin denied Jennifer Dulos’ request for an emergency order of custody, saying she hadn’t proved “that there is an immediate and present risk of physical danger or psychological harm to the parties’ children.”
He encouraged the couple to work together through their attorneys to resolve the custody issues.
“The court is hopeful that once things settle down and cooler heads prevail, these extremely well educated and accomplished parents will be able to reach an agreement” on custody and child-rearing issues, Colin said.
‘They didn’t stop it’
But that didn’t happen, according to court transcripts and dozens of motions filed by both parties in the months that followed. The couple briefly agreed on a parenting plan with few restrictions in November 2017. But a few weeks later, on the advice of her new attorney, Jennifer Dulos filed for the temporary parenting plan to be thrown out because she felt she had been “sold a bill of goods” that the agreement was “a good deal.”
The legal maneuvering led to requests for required therapy for Fotis Dulos and court-ordered supervised visitation with his children based on a separate judge’s findings that he had repeatedly defied court orders and encouraged the children to lie about their contact with Troconis and her daughter.
More than eight months had passed by the time a second judge — a total of five presided at some point over the case — ordered the family evaluated and receive services to help move their lives forward while maintaining two separate households.
Detailed notes of each visit made with the court-ordered supervisor indicated the children frequently asked their father for more time together and about Troconis and her daughter whom they had spent time with before he was ordered to stop the practice. Each time, the monitor ordered Fotis Dulos to redirect their attention to avoid discussing the pending divorce and custody arrangements.
The notes reveal the children would often vie for the honor of sitting next to their father while at restaurants, requiring a shift every 15 minutes so each could get a chance. They often embraced in a group hug when the supervised meetings occurred about once a month, even as the underlying tension and the motions for contempt between their parents continued.
The vicious cycle of repeated court filings and lack of acknowledgment that the litigation could be a red flag for domestic violence is a problem that hundreds of victims face annually, Jarmoc said.
“The Dulos case is a very real example of the challenges faced by victims and court staff when dealing with the nuances of domestic violence during custody and divorce,” she said.
The difference between the Dulos case and others is that the participants had access to money, which fueled attorneys on both sides to repeatedly file contentious motions that kept the case going far too long, Jarmoc said. By the time Jennifer Dulos disappeared in 2019, custody and children support issues still hadn’t been resolved, court records show.
“The court didn’t put their foot down and say, ‘enough is enough,’ they didn’t do that,” Jarmoc said. “Family court definitely played a role in this, they didn’t stop it.”