Farber - Reply To Motion For Psychological Evaluation
Farber - Reply To Motion For Psychological Evaluation
VS. : AT STAMFORD
DULOS’, Motion for Psychological Evaluation, dated August 29, 2019. In support thereof, Mrs.
Hartford, CT 06103-3702
90 State House Square
1. On or about June 20, 2017, the plaintiff, Jennifer Dulos, initiated the above-
2. The parties have five minor children, ranging in age from eight to thirteen years
old. The children resided primarily with the plaintiff since the initiation of the dissolution action,
in New Canaan, Connecticut, until the plaintiff’s disappearance on May 24, 2019. Since that
time, they have resided with Mrs. Farber, their maternal grandmother, who was granted
temporary custodianship of the children and permitted to intervene in the instant dissolution
proceeding.
3. On August 29, 2019 the defendant filed a Motion for Psychological Evaluation of
Mrs. Farber. To be clear, Mrs. Farber has no objection to the Court ordering her to undergo a
psychological evaluation if the Court deems it appropriate. Any such order should be reciprocal
such that the defendant should likewise be evaluated, and the costs of the same should be
again demonstrates his capacity for cruelty, inability to abide by Court orders and his efforts to
publicly shame Mrs. Farber as he did to his wife in the context of the earlier divorce proceedings.
Pullman & Comley, LLC
Hartford, CT 06103-3702
Mrs. Farber is the person upon whom the defendant relied to support his wife and children
90 State House Square
during the pendency of their divorce, prior to his wife’s violent disappearance. Mr. and Mrs.
Farber financed the defendant’s business and kept it afloat during the marriage. He now lives in a
home and neglects to pay the mortgage to the Farber estate. Most importantly, Mrs. Farber has
steadfastly demonstrated her devotion to her grandchildren and competence to provide for them
financially, physically and emotionally especially since their mother, whose demise is greatly
5. Probable cause has been found to implicate the defendant in the violent
entitled in the criminal proceeding against him, cannot be used to shield him in the civil court as
it does in the criminal court. The presumption does not deprive the Court in this matter from
2
taking notice of the facts underscoring the finding of probable cause against him and from
drawing adverse inferences, as it has already done, from the defendant’s invocation of the 5th
amendment.
6. Mrs. Farber is not going to publicly respond to the defendant’s allegations about
her in a substantive manner, other than to state that the defendant is making a distorted, self-
serving reference to a private, health-related issue that was resolved many years ago, as the
defendant is well aware. His effort to not only publicly shame Mrs. Farber, but in essence shame
Pullman & Comley, LLC
Hartford, CT 06103-3702
any person that has appropriately addressed a mental health issue, sends a poor message to his
90 State House Square
children. It is Mrs. Farber who has competently managed their care since the dreadful events of
7. The defendant’s nuanced references to the report by Dr. Herman, which has been
previously discredited and on which the Court has not relied in entering orders in this matter,
violates this Court’s repeated orders that the defendant not discuss the report or its findings in
any manner. The fact that he continues to violate such orders, and his misuse and
mischaracterization of Dr. Herman’s report which was completed prior to the facts of May 24,
2019 and the defendant’s arrest and implication in the disappearance of his wife, demonstrates
that the Court should use significant caution in entering any further orders that allow the
defendant access to psychological or other medical information pertaining to Mrs. Farber and the
3
children. The defendant clearly cannot be trusted to care about the impact of such information
becoming public, when he has used it with abandon to deflect attention away from his
involvement in the violent disappearance of his wife and mother of his children.
the Court deems it appropriate and requests that the Court enter specific, cautionary orders as to
how the results of the evaluation should be reported and protected from future distorted and self-
Hartford, CT 06103-3702
90 State House Square
INTERVENOR,
GLORIA FARBER
By: ______________________
Anne C. Dranginis
Kelly A. Scott
Pullman & Comley, LLC
90 State House Square
Hartford, CT 06103-3702
Juris No. 409177
Telephone: 203-330-2000
Facsimile: 860-424-4370
Email: [email protected]
Her Attorneys
4
CERTIFICATION
I certify that a copy of the above will immediately be mailed or delivered electronically
on August 31, 2019, to all counsel and self-represented parties of record and that written consent
for electronic delivery was received from all counsel and self-represented parties of record who
were or will immediately be electronically served.
Hartford, CT 06103-3702
90 State House Square
______________________________
Anne C. Dranginis
Commissioner of the Superior Court
ACTIVE/80778.1/KSCOTT/8369901v1
5