Judge continues contempt case against Michelle Troconis without ruling on motion to dismiss
The criminal contempt case against Michelle Troconis — tied to the trial in Jennifer Farber Dulos' death — has been continued without a ruling on her attorney's motion to dismiss the matter.
Troconis, 50, appeared Monday in Stamford Superior Court where her matter was continued to June 18, according to the clerk's office. The continuance came without a ruling on a motion filed by Troconis' attorney, Stamford-based lawyer Darnell D. Crosland.
Troconis was charged with contempt of court after authorities said she showed a sealed custody report on a computer screen while she stood trial on charges related to the death of Farber Dulos, who disappeared in May 2019.
Sealed custody report viewed on Michelle Troconis' laptop during trial, contempt warrant alleges
Crosland, who did not represent Troconis in the criminal trial, argued in his motion that the display of the report was not deliberate and was inadvertent 'at best.' He also argued that media members who photographed the trial and took video were warned not to capture certain things and that a cameraman zoomed in closely on the defense table at one point, which showed the report on Troconis' screen.
During the trial, Carrie Luft, a friend of Farber Dulos and spokesperson for the Farber family, allegedly saw the sealed report and notified prosecutors.
A jury found Troconis guilty of conspiracy to commit murder, conspiracy to commit tampering with evidence, second-degree hindering prosecution and two counts of tampering with evidence. She was sentenced in May 2024 to 14½ years in prison, followed by five years of probation.
Michelle Troconis sentenced to 14 1/2 years in prison in disappearance, death of Jennifer Farber Dulos
In his motion to dismiss, Crosland argued that prosecutors are trying to tack on six more months of prison time and are unfairly punishing Troconis based on the high-profile nature of the case.
Prosecutors are expected to issue a response to the motion to dismiss and multiple other motions filed by Crosland.
Authorities believe Fotis Dulos killed Farber Dulos, a mother of five, after lying in wait for her at her New Canaan home. At the time, the two were involved in contentious divorce proceedings and a custody battle. Dulos was dating Troconis at the time and the two were living in his Farmington mansion.
During the trial, prosecutors showed videos of the multiple interviews Troconis had with law enforcement and accused her of being untruthful about Farber Dulos' disappearance.
Dulos died in January 2020 after attempting suicide in his Farmington home. He had been charged with murder at the time of his death.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
MoneyGram settles with New York over money transfers after US CFPB quits case
By Jonathan Stempel NEW YORK (Reuters) -MoneyGram agreed to pay a $250,000 fine to settle a New York state lawsuit over its remittance transfers, two months after the U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau withdrew from the civil case. The accord announced on Monday by New York Attorney General Letitia James resolves claims that MoneyGram repeatedly violated a 2013 federal rule designed to make it easier for people to send money to friends and family outside the country. Remittance transfers let people in the United States send money electronically to people in other countries. In the April 2022 lawsuit, James said MoneyGram repeatedly let recipients wait too long for their money, kept senders in the dark about when transfers would be made, and failed to properly address complaints. MoneyGram did not admit or deny wrongdoing in agreeing to the settlement, which was filed in federal court in Manhattan. The settlement also requires clear disclosures about how MoneyGram investigates errors and that customers are not liable. Dallas-based MoneyGram was purchased in 2023 by private equity firm Madison Dearborn Partners. 'We are pleased to bring full closure to this legacy matter, which dates back years and involved no harm to consumers," MoneyGram general counsel Cory Feinberg said in a statement. In announcing its April 7 withdrawal from the case, the CFPB said its new leadership "provided the direction" and that its decision was supported by "principles of justice and fairness." The CFPB since January has abandoned much of its enforcement activity as the Trump administration tries to gut the agency, including by firing most employees. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Trump Admin Accused of 'Grievous Harm' to Groups Fighting Abuse of Women
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A national group of 17 state domestic violence and sexual assault coalitions today sued the Trump administration today, accusing it of causing "grievous harm" by imposing unlawful restrictions on grants issued by the Department of Justice (DOJ). Newsweek reached out to the DOJ for comment. Why It Matters President Donald Trump successfully ran for office in part on social and cultural issues like reducing diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives across the federal government and in areas like education. Following his first successful election victory in 2017, Trump and federal officials weighed "dramatic cuts" in funding for initiatives to end sexual and domestic violence against women. What To Know The 80-page lawsuit filed Monday in U.S. District Court in Rhode Island is backed by 17 plaintiffs from domestic violence and sexual assault coalitions in the following states: Rhode Island, California, Colorado, Wisconsin, Idaho, Iowa, Massachusetts, Kansas, Montana, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Virginia and Wisconsin. "Plaintiffs file this action to enjoin Defendants' unlawful actions that are causing Plaintiffs' grievous harm," the lawsuit states. "The new OVW (Office on Violence Against Women) funding conditions violate the Constitution. Congress has the power of the purse, and the Executive Branch may not place conditions on funding that Congress did not authorize, nor can it impose conditions that run contrary to those Congress directly imposed." The Department of Justice (DOJ) building headquarters in Washington, D.C. The Department of Justice (DOJ) building headquarters in Washington, D.C. Getty Images The defendants in the suit are U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi and Ginger Baran Lyons, acting director of the OVW. The OVW is under the guise of DOJ. The suit was filed by local attorneys representing the American Civil Liberties Union of Rhode Island, the Lawyers' Committee for Rhode Island, Democracy Forward, Jacobson Lawyers Group, and the National Women's Law Center. Newsweek reached out to plaintiffs for comment. "The Trump administration now demands loyalty oaths to its destructive and discriminatory policies," Sandra Henriquez, CEO of the California-based nonprofit ValorUS, told Newsweek on Monday. "We will not be complicit in our government's ongoing terror inflicted on survivors. Let's be clear: VALOR's loyalty lies with survivors and communities working to end sexual violence." Plaintiffs challenge that funding conditions violate due process and the First Amendment "in leveraging federal funds to force grantees to voice the Administration's views on gender and in attempting to prohibit grantees from promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion even when not using federal funds." "The conditions exceed Defendants' statutory authority and in many cases outright conflict with statutory commands—OVW's decision to implement these conditions is arbitrary and capricious in virtually every way that an agency action can be arbitrary and capricious. OVW's imposing of these funding conditions is clearly unlawful, and it must be brought to an immediate end," the suit says. Fears expressed by plaintiffs are that the administration's new requirements place them in a precarious and "impossible" situation, between attaining funding necessary to provide services and fulfill missions while accepting and certifying compliance with conditions that are in tension with their statutory duties, unlawfully vague, restrictive of speech, in violation of other constitutional and statutory requirements, and at odds with their values and missions. Grant requirements put forward by the administration bar organizational plaintiffs from promoting "gender ideology" or any diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs "that do not advance the policy of equal dignity and respect." The organizations are also barred from engaging in "activities that frame domestic violence or sexual assault as systemic social justice issues rather than criminal offenses" and from "promoting" the "violation of federal immigration law." There were 880 grants awarded by OVW in fiscal year 2024, totaling $684 million in funding. In May, 34 Democratic Women's Caucus members penned a letter to Bondi, criticizing the administration's attacks on survivors of domestic violence through the rolling back of gun policies aimed at preventing abusers from legally possessing firearms. OVW administers grant programs authorized by the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) of 1994 and subsequent legislation. What People Are Saying Lucy Rios, executive director of the Rhode Island Coalition Against Domestic Violence (RICADV), in a statement: "The frameworks that inform our mission and the knowledge and research from our field are also at risk. Domestic violence is unequivocally a public health and social justice issue. We refuse to renounce this understanding that is central to our work." Krista Colón, executive director of the California Partnership to End Domestic Violence, in a statement: "Instead of discriminating against survivors for their gender identity and immigration status, OVW grants should open the way to safety, healing and services for every one of the millions of Californians looking for help during the most dangerous and traumatic times of their lives." Brie Franklin, executive director of the Colorado Coalition Against Sexual Assault, in a statement: "Since there is no regular state funding for victim services, programs in Colorado have no choice but to sign the certifications and risk unintentionally violating them due to the vague language and conflicts with the VAWA statute. Without federal funds, vital services for victims of sexual assault and domestic violence will cease to exist in our state." What Happens Next The lawsuit seeks relief and to declare the DOJ's funding mechanisms as "unlawful" and aims to vacate the defendants' policy of including "out-of-scope" funding conditions and anti-DEI certification requirements in the general terms and conditions in OVW grants and notices of funding opportunities.
Fox Sports
2 hours ago
- Fox Sports
Inquiries say social media fueled violence after a Maccabi-Ajax soccer match
Associated Press THE HAGUE, Netherlands (AP) — Social media posts coupled with a lack of official information fueled the violence that followed a Maccabi Tel Aviv soccer match in Amsterdam last year, two inquiries into the events said in reports Monday. Dozens were arrested and five people were treated in hospital in a series of violent overnight incidents following a November match between the Dutch team Ajax and Maccabi Tel Aviv. 'The events have left their mark on the city and led to fear, anger and sadness,' Amsterdam Mayor Femke Halsema wrote in a letter to the city council presenting one of the reports. Ahead of the game, pro-Palestinian demonstrators were banned by local authorities from gathering outside the stadium, and video showed a large crowd of Israeli fans chanting anti-Arab slogans on their way to the game. Afterward, youths on scooters and on foot crisscrossed the city in search of Israeli fans, punching and kicking them and then fleeing quickly to evade police. The Rotterdam-based Institute for Safety and Crisis Management, tasked by the Amsterdam government to investigate the response to the violence, said the lack of official communication from the city allowed rumors on social media to flourish. It noted that there was little to no official communication during the early hours of Nov. 8, in part because the situation was so unclear. In a separate report, the inspectorate for the Justice Ministry concluded that the police were prepared for large-scale demonstrations, not the 'flash attacks' perpetrated across the city and sparked by social media. 'Calls and images spread rapidly, reinforce existing tensions and can lead to group formation and confrontations on the street within a short period of time,' the 57-page report found. Both reports cautioned that even with improved communication, the authorities still could not have fully controlled the rapidly spreading violence. The Justice Ministry's report noted that "incidents, such as the removal of a Palestinian flag by Maccabi supporters, were shared, interpreted and magnified within minutes." More than a dozen people have been charged in connection with the violence and several have already been convicted. Over the weekend, the public prosecution service announced it had dropped investigations into several Maccabi supporters because the city's tram company GVB had deleted footage which could have been used as evidence. The company replaced recording equipment at two metro stations in Amsterdam after the attacks and footage from the night was lost. On Sunday, tens of thousands of demonstrators in the Netherlands donned red clothing and marched through The Hague, demanding that the Dutch government do more to oppose Israel's policies in Gaza. Dutch public support for the Israeli military campaign has dropped in recent months. in this topic
