Attorney: Custody battle was having ‘adverse effect’ on Dulos’ relationship with Troconis
The 22nd day of the criminal trial for Michelle Troconis centered around the custody battle between Jennifer Farber Dulos and Fotis Dulos, including testimony from an attorney about how it was impacting the relationship between Dulos and Troconis. A report that was part of that custody battle became a point of controversy in court Thursday afternoon.
Attorney Michael Meehan, who was a guardian ad litem appointed to the five Dulos children in 2019, testified Thursday morning that the divorce and custody battle between Farber Dulos and Dulos was having an “adverse effect” on Dulos’ relationship with Troconis and that Dulos sounded “excited” after his wife disappeared.
Troconis is charged with allegedly conspiring with Dulos to kill his estranged wife and helping to cover up his crimes.
Meehan testified that Dulos had, for a time, been prevented from having any contact with his children. But in the months leading up to his wife’s disappearance, he was allowed supervised visits under a custody order that barred Troconis, his then-live-in girlfriend, and her daughter from being around the Dulos children.
Meehan told the jury about a conversation he had with Dulos and Troconis in March 2019 that centered around that custody order.
Reading the notes he made after that call, Meehan said Dulos was “upset” and “concerned” about the custody arrangement.
Troconis, he said, was calm but “down” about the restrictions.
“Mr. Dulos was upset because the court didn’t grant immediate access between Michelle Troconis and (her daughter) and the minor children,” Meehan wrote.
He said Dulos was questioning whether he could keep on with the litigation of their divorce and custody battle due to how it was effecting his life with Troconis.
“Mr. Dulos was concerned and didn’t know if he could continue on with the litigation, because it was having an adverse effect on his relationship with Michelle.”
Dulos asked Meehan if he could speak with Troconis directly and he agreed. The two spoke for about five minutes, he said.
“She was down as well. She was frustrated,” Meehan said. “She had expressed disappointment and really just a lack of understanding as to why the court had not allowed access between her and the children.”
Reading from his notes, Meehan said “Michelle wanted to know what she had done to cause the court to order that she not be permitted to be in contact with the children.”
He said he informed her that the court proceedings were creating “a pathway” for eventually reintroducing Troconis and her daughter to Dulos’ kids and asked if she had ever met Farber Dulos.
Troconis said she had never met her then-boyfriend’s wife, but “would be open to speaking with her or meeting her for coffee to discuss being reintroduced to the children.”
He said Troconis said that she “didn’t move here for all this” and didn’t have such a contentious relationship with her own ex-spouse. She also said she felt bad for the children.
Later Thursday, following Meehan’s testimony, Assistant Supervisory State’s Attorney Michelle Manning said that prosecutors were handed a note advising them that one of Farber Dulos’ close friends spotted what was believed to be a custody report — that has been sealed by the court — on Troconis’ laptop during court proceedings Thursday.
Judge Kevin A. Randolph said a contempt hearing might be in the future after prosecutors raised the concern.
Randolph said that “if that custody report is being disseminated, and if it’s being disseminated essentially with the involvement of the defendant,” the court would have to act.
“Because then it’s a violation of the court order and then there would have to be a contempt hearing,” he said.
The court is expected to take the issue up first thing Friday morning.
Earlier, during the cross-examination with Meehan, defense attorney Audrey Felsen asked Meehan if he was aware that Troconis might be planning to move out of state because of the divorce and custody battle.
He said yes and agreed that the situation was “disappointing” to her and she “didn’t want to be around it.”
Outside the courthouse on Thursday, Troconis’ parents declined to comment on whether Troconis was planning to leave Connecticut.
“She had us in Miami so she knew that at any time she could go there, but I don’t know that’s something that you need to ask her,” they said. Troconis, standing nearby, did not comment.
Also during cross-examination, Felsen asked if a custody report was completed in 2019.
Meehan said yes and testified that that Dulos was “upset and outraged” by the report, and so filed a motion.
That motion was heard in May 2019, and at that hearing, nothing changed in the custody order. Troconis was still not allowed to see the kids during Dulos’ limited and supervised visits with his children. Meehan said Dulos was frustrated.
But on May 25, 2019, Meehan testified that Dulos’ tone changed. He sounded “very excited” during a phone call that day, Meehan said.
Farber Dulos disappeared on May 24, 2019, and investigators allege Dulos killed his wife after she returned home from dropping their kids off that morning.
Meehan read to the jury a note he made after the May 25 call with Dulos, which was titled: “Jennifer Missing.”
“I noticed the tone in his voice to not be down or somber but to be excited,” he said.
They talked about where Dulos was the day before and Meehan asked if he had an alibi. Dulos said he was home all morning and then had meetings.
He then asked about the children and their safety and orthodontist appointments they had in New York City the day before. Farber Dulos missed those appointments, setting off alarm bells.
When talking to Meehan, Dulos allegedly said he hadn’t signed off on those dental appointments.
But Meehan said he checked a service the estranged couple used to message each other, called Our Family Wizard, and found messages that confirmed Dulos did know about the appointments.
During cross-examination, defense attorney Audrey Felsen asked Meehan: “Was it your opinion that Mr. Dulos lied an awful lot?”
“Yes,” Meehan said.
Meehan testified that he had first met Dulos and Farber Dulos around 2017.
When he first started working with the family, he said, Dulos reportedly hoped that he, Farber Dulos, their children, Troconis and Troconis’ daughter would all live together in his home at 4 Jefferson Crossing in Farmington.
Meehan testified that he spoke with Farber Dulos regularly until May 24. After that, he said, “Sadly I’ve never spoken to her again.”
Before Meehan took the stand Thursday, the jury also heard from a neighbor of Fotis Dulos, Garrison Hudkins, who lives on Jefferson Crossing.
He testified that he bought his home from Dulos and Farber Dulos. Dulos had built the luxury home.
They belonged to the same homeowner’s association, with meetings held in the office for Dulos’ business, Fore Group, at 4 Jefferson Crossing.
He said he and his wife also interacted with the couple as neighbors.
“Jennifer was a great neighbor, our kids attended the same schools,” he said.
The couples socialized occasionally, attending an Oscar’s viewing party, going to a Greek Easter celebration and having dinner together a few times in West Hartford Center.
During a cross-examination, Troconis’ defense attorney Jon Schoenhorn asked if Hudkins ever told police that Dulos “could be condescending toward women?”
Hudkins said yes, and Schoenhorn asked why that was something he pointed out.
Hudkins said “(Dulos) was really condescending toward my wife” and that he found that a little offensive.
The jury saw brief parts of surveillance video footage pulled from cameras on Hudkins’ home, and Hudkins walked jurors through an interaction he had with Dulos after Farber Dulos disappeared.
Hudkins was in front of his house walking his dog when he encountered Dulos shortly after Farber Dulos disappeared. He said he didn’t recognize him.
Dulos had shaved his head, he testified, and was riding a scooter about 8:45 a.m.
“I didn’t know who it was,” he said. But Dulos approached him “and that’s when I recognized his voice, I recognized it was Fotis.”
Dulos asked Hudkins if he had heard that Farber Dulos was missing. Hudkins said he said yes and asked how the kids were.
Hudkins said Dulos responded by asking about Hudkins’ surveillance footage and how long it was logged for.
“He asked me how long we retained our security video and to make sure it didn’t get deleted because he needed to prove he was there on Friday,” he said.
Hudkins testified that Dulos talked about his attorney’s advice to produce a chronological timeline of their whereabouts that day.
He said Dulos later called asking to review his video surveillance footage, but the timing did not work.
Toward the end of the day, a special agent for the FBI testified about how he was asked to plot cell tower activity from two cell phones belonging to Troconis and Dulos.
Special Agent Kevin Hoyland testified about how cell phone data is collected and said that data pulled in connection to their phones showed where their phones were on May 24, 2019, including on Albany Avenue in Hartford.
Speaking outside Stamford Superior Court on Thursday afternoon, Schoenhorn spoke on the fact that Dulos’ name is mentioned much more than Troconis’ in the courtroom.
“This appears to be the trial of Fotis Dulos,” said Schoenhorn outside the courthouse Thursday afternoon. “Almost nothing in this entire month that we’ve been here, more than a month now, has much if anything to do with Michelle Troconis.”
Also outside the courthouse, Troconis’ mother Marisela Arreaza said that the trial had been very long so far and agreed that it had focused on Dulos, not her daughter, whose innocence she defended.
“Of course she’s innocent, she doesn’t have anything to do with Jennifer’s disappearance and we’re here to support her,” Arreaza said.
“We hope it will end soon because it has been a tragedy for us, and I’m sure it’s a tragedy for the Farber family, too,” she said. “But we want this to end and for my daughter to be OK again and to regain our life.”
First thing Friday, the court is expected to take up the issue of whether the sealed report was pulled up on Troconis’ computer screen.
Manning said it was ” a huge concern.”
“We can’t gloss over the serious nature of her having access to the report, of her displaying it for everyone to see,” she said Thursday afternoon.
After that issue is dealt with, the jury is expected to see a video of the third interview between Troconis and investigators.
Troconis’ trial is set to resume at 10 a.m. Friday in Stamford Superior Court.
