Judge to consider double jeopardy claim in Michelle Troconis case, denies acquittal and new trial

A judge Wednesday denied motions for a new trial and an acquittal in Michelle Troconis’ case but said he will consider a double jeopardy claim concerning two of the six counts she was found guilty of.

Wednesday’s hearing marked Troconis’ second time in court since she was convicted last month on all six counts she faced in the conspiracy to murder New Canaan mother Jennifer Farber Dulos.

Troconis was brought into the courtroom in handcuffs, smiling and motioning kisses toward her family about 10:30 a.m. Her father and sister spoke on her behalf outside the courthouse after the judge’s rulings, again maintaining her innocence.

“Her only remorse is to (fall) in love with the wrong man at the wrong time at the wrong place,” said her father, Dr. Carlos Troconis.

Standing with the family outside the courthouse, Troconis’ attorney, Jon Schoenhorn, called Wednesday’s arguments the first step in a long appeal process.

He said if Judge Kevin A. Randolph decides to vacate either count of conspiracy to tamper with physical evidence — which he will rule on at the start of her sentencing hearing in May — “those are one or two less issues I have to worry about in the appeal.”

Schoenhorn argued Wednesday that the two counts of conspiring to tamper with evidence that Troconis was convicted of could be deemed double jeopardy — meaning she was prosecuted twice for the same crime.

Schoenhorn said the two counts — which pertain to separate events in Hartford and Avon on different days — should be considered under the same umbrella of conspiracy because according to the state, the goal of both was to destroy evidence connected to Farber Dulos’ murder.

Prosecutors allege Farber Dulos was killed by her estranged husband Fotis Dulos, whom Troconis was dating, in May 2019. Dulos died after attempting suicide in 2020.

Prosecutor Sean McGuinness argued that, under state law, Troconis’ actions could be charged as separate conspiracies.

For one of the counts in question, prosecutors alleged at trial that Troconis helped Dulos shuttle a Toyota Tacoma pickup truck to a car wash in Avon on May 29 in order to destroy evidence. Investigators believe Dulos used that truck to move Farber Dulos’ body.

Schoenhorn said Wednesday that the state did not submit evidence that she provided transportation to Delos but rather that video evidence showed Dulos entering the car wash, paying for services alone and filling out paperwork alone. He called the state’s claim that she was involved in that car wash trip a “made up argument.”

The other count of conspiracy to tamper with evidence pertains to a trip Troconis and Dulos took to Albany Avenue in Hartford on May 24, the day Farber Dulos vanished. There, Delos dumped evidence of his wife’s murder in various trash cans.

Prosecutor Sean McGuinness said that although the two events involved “the same conspirators in the conspiracies” there was no overlap in time. The two conspiracies, he said, took place at different times, on different dates, in different places and therefore did not constitute double jeopardy.

After hearing both sides, Randolph said that the central purpose of both actions was to destroy or conceal evidence in the same crime, and said that Schoenhorn’s claim was “colorable” enough for him to consider.

Randolph, however, denied Schoenhorn’s motions for a judgement of acquittal and a new trial.

In arguing those motions, Schoenhorn laid out several things he felt were unlawful, improper or unfair over the course of the trial — zeroing in on closing arguments delivered by McGuinness.

As court proceedings went on for about three hours Monday, Troconis became visibly emotional, wiping away tears and looking back toward her family.

Schoenhorn argued that McGuinness, who delivered an impassioned portion of the state’s closing arguments, appealed to the jurors’ emotions and sympathy by stating that the case was “about every mother’s worst nightmare.”

McGuinness, in that statement, named all five children Dulos and Farber Dulos shared, reminding the jury that they never saw their mother after May 24, 2019. As he made these remarks, the Dulos children sat in the courtroom not far from the jury.

Schoenhorn said that the childrens’ presence, and McGuinness’ mention of them and their loss, was an example of the prosecutor “going for the sentimentality, going for the emotional reaction,” rather than sticking to the evidence.

“He cannot possibly state that the jurors did not have a clear view of the children as they were sitting there,” Schoenhorn said.

McGuinness countered that Schoenhorn made no objection to his closing argument at the time.

The attorneys also went back and forth about whether the defense suggested that Farber Dulos was not dead at all. The mother of five was declared legally dead in October 2023, though her body has never been found.

Schoenhorn argued that he never made claims that Farber Dulos was alive, while McGuinness said  “the stench that Jennifer Dulos was still alive was permeating from the defense’s side.”

Schoenhorn also spent time Wednesday re-reading other parts of the state’s closing arguments, noting that prosecutors repeatedly claimed Troconis lied to investigators.

“There’s a distinction between having different recollections” and lying, he said.

He said he counted that the state used the term “lie” in their closing argument “at least a dozen times.”

McGuinness said that video of Troconis’ interviews with investigators that were shown to the jury at trial “were eight hours of inconsistencies as to material issues.”

“They want to argue that those weren’t lies, then so be it,” he said. “The entire record shows that the state could reasonably infer that she was lying.”

Outside the courthouse, Troconis’ sister Claudia Troconis said, “It’s simply unfair that my sister is paying for someone else’s crimes and that being with the wrong guy made her a criminal.

“They keep claiming today that she lied during her interrogations,” she added. “Those were not lies. And I hope the public knows those are not lies.”

On Wednesday, Schoenhorn pointed to many other parts of the trial he took issue with, including that testimony from the Dulos children’s nanny was prejudicial, that the case’s lead detective “narrated” video evidence to the jury and that the long length of time between jury selection and the start of the trial violated Troconis’ constitutional right to a speedy trial.

McGuinness at one point accused the defense of “playing games.” He suggested that the defense was making a last ditch effort to point a finger at the prosecutors following the guilty verdict.

Randolph denied the motion for acquittal, saying prosecutors did set forth sufficient evidence to go to the jury.

The judge said ordering a new trial meant essentially setting aside the guilty verdict, which the court could do if they found the verdict was reached out of passion or prejudice. He said he did not find that to be the case.

The jury’s verdict, he said, was not “against the law or weight of evidence.”

Troconis is set to be sentenced on May 31. She faces up to 50 years in prison if the judge orders her prison terms to be served consecutively.