RICH COHEN'S "DOLLHOUSE" ABOUT JENNIFER DULOS FULL OF ERROR!

I was in my favorite place--Barnes & Noble--and saw a table display of "Murder in the Dollhouse: The Jennifer Dulos Story" by Rich Cohen.  Naturally, this interested me for the blog since the Jennifer Dulos story is the paradigm for all the criticisms that I've had about the Family Court System which have been discussed on the 1800 or more blogs on this website. So--what do I think of this book.  I think it is beautifully written in some remarkable ways--its language can be absolutely rhapsodic.  It explains Jennifer Dulos' family, Jewish background, and fabulously wealthy New York upbringing with remarkable insight and detail. 

More specifically, it delineates exactly the nature of Jennifer's husband, Fotis Dulos, abuse and how he became capable of murder in deft literary strokes that catapult you towards the dramatic finish seemingly without effort.  On the other hand, Rich Cohen, who says he lives in Connecticut, doesn't seem to know Connecticut, and gets substantial details wrong when he talks about it.  As a result, as you read this book and see major factual errors, you can't help wondering--what else might be incorrect?

What do I mean by this?  Well, let's take a look at three pages--pages 88, 89, and 90.  Let's start with page 88.  Here Rich Cohen gives a description of Canton, CT where Jennifer Dulos went after she married Fotis Dulos, moving into 10 Sunrise Drive.  As luck would have it, that's not very far from where I used to live for 26 years so I'm quite familiar with the territory. I know exactly when Mr. Cohen gets his facts wrong.  First, he calls Canton "poor" which is simply not true.  Canton is just small, but has an equivalent range of social classes and opportunities as the surrounding towns of Avon, Farmington, Burlington and Simsbury. He states that Canton "is filled with people who dreamed of living...in Farmington, ten miles southeast." Perhaps, but for a much simpler, unexpected reason than he might have thought of. Lots of people in Canton, Avon, and Simsbury want to live in Farmington, because it charges half the taxes of the surrounding towns due to its strong business base. Surrounding towns have a tax base which is largely residential.  Out of all these towns, Simsbury is the one with the most social cache, if that's what Rich Cohen is trying to imply.  

But let's not stop here. There are more inaccuracies.

Rich Cohen says that, "there were neither playwrights nor theatrical productions in Canton in 2004."  This simply isn't true.  There is a theater right in the downtown area of nearby Collinsville and local theater people have put on performances there for years.  A quick internet search provides the following information, "While a comprehensive list of every production isn't available, the Farmington Valley Community Theatre (FVCT) a community theater group that services Canton and Surrounding towns, performed several shows in 2004, including the musical "Anything Goes" and the play "The Curious Savage."  

Over and above that, there are numerous opportunities in the area for those interested in theater, musicals, and even Opera.  There is the Simsbury light Opera Company nearby.  Local adults and children are free to audition for parts in any of their productions.  Furthermore, one of the reasons that I moved to Canton, CT, as opposed to the other towns I've mentioned, is because it is well known as a town that attracts artists and writers. It has a bit of a Greenwich Village funky feel to it.  For instance, there is the Gallery on the Green in the center of town that regularly features local artists.  In addition, at the time when Jennifer lived there (it no longer exists now) there was a Writer's Collective in town that regularly published books including the work of local authors and sponsored public readings. I myself led a few writer's groups while I lived in the town. So to characterize Canton or even the local area as uncultured is simply untrue.  But let's not stop here.  There are more inaccuracies.

Rich Cohen speaks about the Canton High School Cougars high school football team.  There has never been a Canton High School football team called the Cougars.  The Canton High School Football team was called the Warriors until 2022 when it was decided the name was an insult to Native Americans and the team name was changed to the Cobras.  So I'm not sure where Rich got his information from.  

Further, Canton is a small town with a combined middle/high school which means that for decades its graduating high school class was somewhere around 100 more or less.  This means that for the better part it hasn't had enough students to put together a football team.  A google search provides me with the following information, "Canton High School in Connecticut had a football program from 1900 to 1963, then reintroduced it in the 2007 season, nearly 40 years after it was first dropped due to lack of players.  The decision to restore the team was made in the fall of 2006 with the first game played in September of that year.  Even if the game was restored in 2006, it took years to build the team so that it could actually be even a minimal contender on the field.  Meanwhile, as I recall, since I lived there and had three kids, it wasn't football that enjoyed the focus of high school parents and children, it was soccer.  Soccer was big.  How did Rich Cohen not find this out?  All he had to do was ask!

Moving on to page 89, Mr. Cohen seems to have entirely overlooked the fact that Canton is made up of two separate towns combined under one government--i.e. Canton and Collinsville.  As an aside, Canton and Collinsville also share some aspects of town services with Avon, CT.  It's complicated.  Be that as it may, what Rich Cohen proceeds to do is to provide a description of the architecture of Canton as well as its history which is actually that of Collinsville and not that of Canton.  It may surprise Rich Cohen to hear this, but Collinsville has not been subsumed under the name of Canton and is very much its own place as any townsperson could tell him.  All he has to do is pick up the phone to find out.  So when he says Main Street is the road at the center of the town of Canton, he is wrong.  Main Street is the road that goes through the center of town in Collinsville.  Route 44 or Albany Avenue goes through the center of town in Canton.  When Mr. Cohen says, "Canton was once a manufacturing town known for mass-producing axes..." he is wrong.  Collinsville has the axe factory.  Again, a quick phone call or a google search would clarify that point.

On page 90, we again have more distortions and misinformation.  He describes the home where Jennifer Dulos lived with Fotis Dulos--10 Sunrise Drive--as "perched on the lip of a ravine.  One wrong step and it's goodbye."  I drove by that house pretty much every day for that last 26 years and just between you and me that house isn't going anywhere.  It's right at the bottom of the hill and you have to drive downwards to get to it. Further, Mr. Cohen describes the surrounding neighborhood as infested with houses which are "dilapidated" and "ramshackle".  This is simply ludicrous.  I'd really like to see a $400,000 house that is dilapidated and ramshackle.  The hills on Lovely Street which lead up to the Dulos home, the development further up the hill on Queens Peak and leading over to Kingswood in Avon are just about the highest end homes that the Farmington offers.  Far from being lived in by "misanthropes, nature lovers, and criminals on the lam", this area, and again I lived there, consists of corporate executives, judges, lawyer, doctors, successful business people and politicians.  Rich Cohen's comments about the area are just plain wrong

I don't want to keep on going here.  It seems as though my review is only touching upon a mere three pages of this book.  But what a three pages--riddled with error!  There are other inaccuracies I picked out in the book as well which I won't go into, but the one that troubled me the most was the mischaracterization of Hartford as a city overridden by drug gangs and criminals.  His last phrase describing Hartford says it looked "dark and smoky in the distance."  I don't know what day Mr. Cohen was driving around, but I've lived in the Hartford area for over 35 years and I've rarely found it anything but clear and metropolitan looking, except when you have a day of extreme weather which happens in a New England state.  Sure, Hartford has its struggles with poverty and homelessness.  At the same time, it is the insurance capitol of the world with a thriving nightlife.  So what is he honestly talking about?  I don't get it, or maybe I do and the issue of racism is not one I want to get into right now.  

Finally, Rich Cohen pretty much skips the entire family court reform movement which was extremely active in the years prior to Jennifer Dulos death.  There had been several hearings at the CT State Legislative Office building in Hartford where dozens of victims of family court injustice came to testify about the kinds of damaging and destructive processes were in play in family court.  Representative Minnie Gonzalez led the charge in advocating for the reform of the judicial system, starting with more rigorously vetting family court judges, and suggesting the elimination of the controversial Guardian ad Litem (GAL) system which Jennifer Dulos encountered.  

Why doesn't Mr. Cohen mention any of this in any way whatsoever?  

Jennifer Dulos death was culmination of many atrocities which had been committed in family court system immediately prior.  Mr. Cohen talks about the law protecting women from the kind of coersive control Jennifer Dulos faced which was passed in the years after her death.  But again here he gets it wrong, referring to it as Jennifer's Law.  In fact, it was actually called Jennifers' law--the apostrophe after the "s"--because there was another Jennifer--Jennifer Magnano--who was also murdered by her ex-husband in cold blood when she tried to protect her children from his sexual abuse.  The family court system was in massive disarray before Jennifer Dulos arrived to face it, and it still is.  The fact that Rich Cohen doesn't make a single mention of this is simply remarkable.

I'm not saying don't read this book, because there are sections regarding Jennifer Dulos family, her life in New York, and the complex relationship she had with Fotis Dulos which I found extremely informative.  Anyone who wants to be expert on this subject matter definitely needs to read it.  I'd just say double check anything you read with other sources.

DIAGNOSING JENNIFER DULOS!

What does justice for Jennifer mean?  Historically, if we could rewind the clock, I think it would mean handling the Dulos divorce more equitably and not allowing it to become money driven. It would certainly mean providing Jennifer with more legal protections. In the present, I believe it means preserving Jennifer Dulos character and reputation.  This has not been done, and to the extent that it has not been done, the murderer wins.

From the start of the Dulos divorce case, Fotis Dulos tried to smear Jennifer Farber-Dulos reputation by calling her crazy.  In a "Hartford Courant" article of May 30, 2019, less than a week after her death, reporters stated, "Dulos made serious allegations against his wife saying she was an unfit mother because she was taking medications and had been treated for mental illness and had a relative that committed suicide."  Fotis Dulos made this statement because he felt it would give him traction in Family Court where accusations of mental illness, in violation of ADA law, can still be fatal to a mother's attempt to retain custody of her children. Also, having relatives with mental illness, remarkably, can reduce your chances of getting custody.  It is as if mental illness of any kind is a form of modern day leprosy. 

Under the ADA signed by President Bush in 1990, discrimination against people based upon disability is prohibited by law.  Yet discrimination is alive and well in the family courts of Connecticut at the present time.  If we were to talk about justice for Jennifer, to give her justice posthumously, it would be to absolutely prohibit statements in Court such as the one Dulos made equating having a mental illness or anyone in the family with a mental illness to being an unfit mother.  How disgraceful that the Court allowed it then.  How disgraceful that they continue to allow it now.

The other thing I would like to point out is that Judge Nelson-Heller sealed the Dulos custody report and Dr. Stephen Herman's testimony in regard to that report.  This was followed by the effort on the part of Michelle Troconis defense team to unseal the report, an effort which failed miserably.  Still determined to get information out there, on February 15, 2024 during her criminal trial, Michelle Troconis posted the sealed custody report on her computer screen for all to see. That day, the Farber family spokesperson, Carrie Luft, noticed the custody report on Michelle's computer screen and reported her. This led to Michelle being charged with contempt.  On March 6, 2024, journalist Taylor Hartz reported this incident in The Hartford Courant as follows:  "Apparently, the page Michelle was looking at included part of the psychological report of Jennifer Dulos.  It referenced the name of a particular doctor and the words Borderline Personality Disorder." This information, including the diagnosis of Borderline Personality Disorder for Jennifer Dulos, was placed on the warrant for Michelle Troconis' arrest for contempt of court.  

Subsequently, the report that Jennifer Dulos had been diagnosed with Borderline Personality Disorder was stated repeatedly in other Hartford Courant articles. Why? I thought the content of the custody report was sealed.  It was entirely possible for Carrie Luft to report on the incident without mentioning the diagnosis which was part of Jennifer Dulos' private medical information.  The same goes for the arrest warrant and the later Hartford Courant reports.  By disclosing the diagnosis, Carrie Luft, the warrant, the newspaper were all acting in contempt of the Court order sealing the contents of the custody report, just the same as Michelle was.  They should all be charged.

Why do I care about that?  Applying this diagnosis to Jennifer Dulos is simply defamatory.  Find me a mother whom Family Court has demonized, and she will be diagnosed with Borderline Personality Disorder.  BPD is the diagnosis given to any troublesome woman who dares to stand up for herself.  Its sexist political history and implications are extensive and decades long. Meanwhile, Fotis Dulos, the killer, supposedly had no psychopathology.  It certainly makes you wonder how psychiatry is weaponized and distorted within the family court system.  Only in family court could a killer walk around diagnosis free while his victim is labeled with a damning one.

Ultimately, l consider the BPD diagnosis for Jennifer to be completely bogus.  Across the board, friends of Jennifer have talked about what a great person she was. This is completely contrary to a diagnosis of borderline personality disorder.  Here is one person's description of Jennifer, "She was lovely, kind, and shy and a little funny and very private and very quiet."  And another, "She was a person who had many friends and worked well with teachers and administrators at the school where her kids got their education."  Suffice it to say, a person with a Borderline Personality Disorder is not capable of such positive social interactions with others. Again, another friend said, "her insatiable curiosity about the world, the delightful way she could find the humor in anything and laugh at the absurdity of everyday life, and the fierce way she protected those she loved was typical of Jennifer." Finally, her Mom, Gloria Farber, said "My daughter left behind a legacy of love for her children.  Her patience, empathy, discipline and loyalty stay with them."  

Justice for Jennifer would have meant not allowing that false diagnosis to make it into public view. It is patently false from the perspective of everyone who knew her. I am asking how it did become public, given that it is information from a sealed custody report. I'm also asking how Jennifer was labeled with a complete inaccurate diagnosis.  Was there in fact a custody switching scheme in the works to label Jennifer crazy and put all the children in Fotis Dulos sole custody and keep Jennifer paying forever to get them back.  Did her murder interrupt that scheme? 

Every once in a while, I drive back and forth over Avon Mountain and I see the shrine for Jennifer Dulos.  It is a very touching demonstration of love and caring for the memory of Jennifer Dulos.  But it isn't enough.  If we want Justice for Jennifer and for others just like Jennifer, we have to go further.  

We have to hold the Judicial System accountable for their mistakes and we need to demand that the same things that happened to Jennifer don't happen to the next person. Whoever is responsible for disseminating the information regarding Jennifer's purported diagnosis should be censored and it should be removed from the public record. That's what Justice for Jennifer actually means.

WHAT DOES JUSTICE FOR JENNIFER ACTUALLY MEAN?

In a Court filing requesting a restraining order against her ex-husband, Fotis Dulos, Jennifer Farber-Dulos stated, "I am afraid of my husband.  He is dangerous and ruthless when he believes that he has been wronged.  During the course of our marriage, he has told me about sickening revenge fantasies and plans to cause physical harm to those who have wronged him."  Judge Nelson-Heller denied the request for a restraining order, and in retrospect we all wish she hadn't.  Of course, with a man intent upon murder, it's not very likely a restraining order will stop him.  Still...

When I reviewed the Dulos case, primarily through reading articles published by The Hartford Courant, I investigated whether there was anything about Fotis Dulos which could have warned people in advance what he was capable of. In doing so, I realized we certainly weren't going to get any information from Dr. Stephen Humphrey who was Fotis Dulos' therapist.  Dr. Humphrey did a psychological examination of Fotis Dulos on behalf of the Court and determined that he "had no psychopathology" and presents "as gregarious and confident."  After what happened to Jennifer, we'd all like to know how he could be so far wrong.  

As it turns out, the reason why is that Dr. Humphrey solely used one test--the PAI test (Personality Assessment Inventory) along with meeting him for 20 hours.  According to google, the PAI can test for Somatic Complaints, Anxiety, Anxiety-Related Disorders, Depression, Mania, Paranoia, Schizophrenia, Borderline Features, Antisocial Features, Alcohol Problems, and Drug Problems. It is a self report inventory with 344 items that are answered on a four point scale. This is a problem because, as "Scientific American" reports, self inventory personality tests are not as accurate as others. Not only that, from my understanding, a psychological evaluation consists of numerous tests, not just one--some of them self report and others not.  

To be certain of this, I did a quick search of the internet and this is what I got from Psychology Today, "Psychological testing and evaluation consists of a series of tests that help determine the cause of mental health symptoms and disorders, to determine the correct diagnosis and follow up with the appropriate course of treatment."  In other words, "a series of tests", not just one.  When I had my last psychological evaluation for family court, I took five different tests.  How is it that Dr. Humphreys just used one?  Did he take one look at the charming Fotis Dulos and say why bother and then spent the rest of the 20 hours having nice chats?  Isn't that typical of how narcissists hoodwink not only mental health professionals and court personnel as well?  I'd say it is pretty classic.  

Were there any other indications that Fotis Dulos was capable of murder? For one thing, just before the divorce he purchased an unregistered gun in Florida without a permit.  Jennifer brought this to the Court's attention in one of her filings.  In it she wrote, "I am fearful of my and my children's safety, especially because he has a handgun in the house."  And further she stated, "I asked my husband to immediately remove the gun from the house, and he insisted that he was keeping the gun for protection."  Once the divorce was filed, Fotis Dulos turned the gun over to the Farmington police and subsequently never picked it back up because he didn't have a permit for it.  You have to wonder why he was running around with a gun just before the divorce.

In another incident Jennifer reported that Fotis Dulos threatened to run her over with a car.  These kinds of incidents are hard to prove because without a witness, they are he said, she said.  However, if that actually happened, it would have far worse implications than in most situations. This is because, in September 2010, Jennifer's mother-in-law was accidentally actually struck and killed by a car the nanny was driving in the driveway of the family home.  It's striking that this kind of scenario rose again within the context of the divorce.  In fact, knowing what we know now, it takes on an ominous tone.

Otherwise, in reading the Courant, I can't say there was anything else that indicated what Fotis Dulos was capable of.  I do think one incident alerts me to the fact that Fotis Dulos was a total jerk. Specifically, at one point, Fotis had all his kids baptized as Christians against Jennifer's wishes.  This is particularly offensive since Jennifer was Jewish and by Jewish law, since it goes by the matriarchal line, the children were also considered Jewish.  In addition, before Hilliard Farber died, Fotis Dulos told his father-in-law that if he didn't keep giving money to him, Fotis would take the kids to Greece and never come back. This is the "congenial" guy which Dr. Humphreys was talking about.  

The record shows that Jennifer Farber-Dulos absolutely outgunned Fotis Dulos financially.  She clearly felt the need to defend herself to the fullest extent she was capable.  While he spent $45,000 in a year on the divorce, sometimes filing his own motions, she spent $69,000 per month.  She had enough clout to get the Court to limit Fotis' access to the children and require that he have supervised visitation.  How?  She pointed out that he had allowed the kids to have contact with his mistress, Michelle Troconis, against Court orders, and then told the kids to lie about it.  For the rest of us who don't have that kind of money and status to help deal with our abusers, no way could we cut off our kid's other parent by making claims like that.  Ordinarily, the Court couldn't care less. We are told we should just move on and get over it. In my case, for six years my ex refused to adhere to medical guidelines for my disabled children's care and the Court didn't do anything about it.  

With all the Court processes, Fotis Dulos was staring financial ruin right in the face. This makes me question what Jennifer Dulos' attorneys were doing.  I mean, you may have the ability to grind someone down, but is it wise under the circumstances to do so.  Was it at all possible to arrive at a financial agreement which would have allowed Fotis Dulos to transition his business to a state of independence from his former in-laws without bankrupting him?  Was all out assault necessary?  

When it comes to custody, I was really struck by how clueless both Fotis Dulos and Michelle Troconis were.  Michelle made the comment at one point during the custody battle that she would love to get together with Jennifer and chat over a cup of coffee.  Was she kidding?  Then there was Fotis peculiar idea that he could have himself, Michelle and her daughter, plus Jennifer and the five kids all living together in the same house.  He thought his kids would make friends with Michelle's daughter and ultimately go to the same school together.  That is so pie in the sky only a totally insensitive fool would think of it.  But apparently, Fotis had concrete plans for that scenario.  This is where Jennifer's kids arrived at the conclusion that Michelle was trying to erase Jennifer and take her place which, to be honest, seems entirely plausible.  

If Jennifer felt she was going to lose her primary role as mother in the lives of her children, no wonder she fought with such vigor.  However, this is not a situation new to family court.  This is why Court orders are regularly put into place stating that romantic partners must be kept separate from the children.  If people violate those orders, they can be warned, held in contempt of Court, fined, or lose privileges in many ways.  However denying the offending parent access to the children or putting them on supervised visitation for that kind of offense is rather excessive. It might have made sense for Fotis' sessions with Dr. Stephen Humphrey to include some discussions about arriving at more realistic expectations for custody post divorce.  But it seems like the attorneys, GALs, and custody evaluators were more interested in keeping the conflict going instead of arriving at common sense solutions.

Bottom line, divorce is a vulnerable and unstable time for most people.  It is not the time for extreme accusations or extreme custody orders--at least not without a solid basis. It is not an opportunity to drive people into bankruptcy or for calling parents crazy.  Why try to push people over the edge? But if the legal team involved in the Farber-Dulos case were going to act so unwisely, thank God for the supervised visitation with the children. If Fotis Dulos was willing to kill Jennifer in cold blood, had he not been restricted by supervised visitation, what might he have done to the children?  It is chilling to speculate.

Justice for Jennifer would have meant that the judicial system and the legal professionals involved handled the Dulos divorce with wisdom and common sense.  Instead, they used it as an opportunity to churn the case and seize as much money as possible from both Jennifer and Fotis.  I suspect that the attorneys in the case were poised to carry out a custody switch from Jennifer to Fotis Dulos prior to her death.  This is why Fotis was cleared of any mental health pathology while the custody evaluator, Dr. Steven Herman, labeled Jennifer with a serious mental health condition which she could not possibly have had.  There were massive sums of money involved, and the kids came along with multi-million dollar trust funds. 

If we were truly invested in Justice for Jennifer, this kind of nonsense would stop.  The judicial branch and family court professionals would open themselves up for scrutiny and self criticism, and put a halt to the greed and corruption which has dominated the system for so long. It would end the news media blackout and allow newspapers and broadcast journalism to report on the judicial system fairly and honestly. Jennifer paid the ultimate price as a result of the CT Family Court's miserable failures.  It is about time that the State of CT did something about it.