Dog-Mauling Victim Dies
| Jun 28, 2016 8:29 am
(46) Comments | Commenting has been closed | E-mail the Author
Posted to: Legal Writes
Jocelyn Winfrey died at Yale-New Haven Hospital Monday morning with her mother beside her bed one week after two dogs ripped apart her body.
Doctors stopped life support for Winfrey, who was in a medically induced coma, according to Assistant Police Chief Anthony Campbell.
The attack on Winfrey took place last Monday evening at a home on Ella Grasso Boulevard owned by a 37-year-old Yale psychiatric intern.
Winfrey — who was 53 years old, grew up at the Church Street South housing complex, and attended Lee High School — was accompanying the man in his car. They were smoking crack, according to police.
They arrived home. The man opened the door to his house. His two dogs set upon Winfrey, ripping apart her leg, her face, and her arms. Neighborhood kids rushed over and climbed a fence to throw large rocks and a trash can to try to get the dogs away. The homeowner tried to fend off the dogs, but they bit him, too. For days the vicious attack would haunt emergency workers and police officers who saw it.
By the time an ambulance crew arrived, the main attacking dog retreated. Winfrey stopped breathing twice on the way to Yale-New Haven Hospital. Doctors operated on her for days, amputating a leg. She had lost her eyes and skin all over her body. She spent the week in a coma until the decision was made to end life support.
Doctors described the injuries as even worse than those of a Stamford woman who was attacked by a chimpanzee in 2009.
Police charged the man with misdemeanor offenses. He hired one of the city’s top criminal defense attorneys, Willie Dow. But it appears Dow won’t need to defend him against any more serious criminal charges.
Assistant Chief Campbell said that after reviewing the case with the state’s attorney’s office, police don’t see a basis for further charges.
“It’s not like the man used the dogs as weapons,” Campbell said. “It was a tragic accident.”
Police initially described the dogs as pit bulls. It turns out they are American bulldog mixes, according to city Animal Control Officer Joseph Maganiello. The dogs were licensed and were up to date on their shots, he said. The owner had bought them in Florida and then moved to New Haven with them.
Manganiello has been keeping the two dogs in quarantine at the animal shelter on Fournier Street. He said Monday evening that the dogs’ owner has signed over custody of them to the city. The plan is to euthanize (kill) them on July 6, following a two-week quarantine period.
The city has to wait for that quarantine period to end to make sure the dogs didn’t have rabies. Government policy is to keep a dog that bites a person in quarantine that long to see if it had rabies; dogs die within two weeks if they are infected, Manganiello explained.
What set off the dogs?
“My take on on it is, dogs are generally more aggressive when they’re protecting their own property,” Manganiello said. “To that degree, it’s kind of crazy. But I would believe they were protecting their own property.”
Post a Comment
- Commenting has closed for this entry
posted by: THREEFIFTHS on June 27, 2016 10:47pm
Now what you Pit bull apologist’s.Again these pit bulls and other Dangerous dogs must be ban!!!!!
posted by: EPDP on June 27, 2016 11:16pm
Inquiring minds want to know why Paul Bass has refused to publish the name of the Yale doctor / owner of the pit bull? I found the name of the man, and his picture, in other Connecticut news sites. Yet Paul Bass engages in blatant CENSORSHIP!!! Whatever happened to the FIRST AMENDMENT?? I wonder what Bill Saunders thinks about this….
I would also like to know whether the pit bull was tested for crack. Sometimes these owners give the pit bulls drugs to make them more violent.
[Paul: He’s accused of a crime. And not a public figure. Our policy is to leave out his name for now unless we get his side of the story.]
posted by: Bill Saunders on June 27, 2016 11:19pm
Kill the dogs now!
posted by: Bill Saunders on June 27, 2016 11:30pm
My comment was not meant as a retort, we just got posted blindly, back to back.
but to answer your question…...
Maybe the ‘cloak of Ivy’ has something to do with the lack of forthcoming news reporting coming from NHI.
It really makes no sense to shield the accused here—someone is dead, the death by creatures he is responsible for….
A charge of Involuntary Manslaughter is warranted here in the least…..
Smoking crack with some Yale Med School intern should not be a death sentence.
If this happened in East Rock, the response, the outcry, and the reporting would be different.
posted by: lavidaloca on June 28, 2016 12:01am
This is so tragic and preventable. May this woman rest in peace.
posted by: Pitskilledmypet on June 28, 2016 12:06am
For four years since I was affected by pit bull attack, I have researched dog attacks, met dog attack victims, traveled across country to events to bring awareness of dog attack maulings by breed.
American bull dogs are pit breed dogs. They are classified as pit bulls in every pit bull advocate group everywhere from pet store magazines to blogs to Facebook pages.
The only time American bull dogs are not identified as pit bulls is when they kill someone….like now. Or when someone wants to bring them into a city where breed specific laws are protecting its citizens from pit bull attack.
Jocelyn Winfrey died a gruesome, grisly, grotesque, horrific, painfully tortuous death that she lived while her eyes were eaten along with her face, ears, arms, legs. She was killed in the manner that pit breed dogs are genetically created to kill.
Worse yet, today on the day Jocelyn was finally released from her tortured existence, another pit bull mix killed A THREE DAY OLD INFANT. Three day old girl, umbilical cord still attached, killed by shar pei-pit bull mix when mother walked to another room.
Non fighting breed dogs don’t kill children when parents pee.
posted by: Wikus van de Merwe on June 28, 2016 4:58am
Sad story all around.
These dogs were probably purchased from a backyard breeder. These folks use whatever animal they can get their hands on, and since their is so much breeding for fighting, these lines can be very aggressive/skittish. And then this guy clearly didn’t socialize the dogs or care for them well enough. It’s sad they weren’t taught the right way to act and now will die for it.
Banning pitbulls isn’t going to do anything because animal control still would be the ones doing the enforcement and New Haven animal control doesn’t do ANY enforcement unless the dog is loose and attacks someone. Last time I checked they had like 100+ pitbulls in their shelter. If you’ve got loose dogs or people letting cats out of their house (illegal in New Haven, FYI. Up to $130+ fine per animal per instance), they won’t do anything about it. We need laws at the state and federal level to rigorously regulate all cat/dog breeders. All dogs and cats sold to non-breeders need to be spayed/neutered before the sale, or a voucher put in place and a follow-up done by the state to ensure it’s been done on time, and if it hasn’t, take the animal and slap a giant ($1000) fine on the owner. Make all dog owners get insurance that is severely reduced if the dog gets formal training, or passes a state administered test for aggression/socialization.
And then a 37 y.o. smoking crack with their 53 y.o. “friend” in the middle of the day. This guy goes to Harvard then Yale and throws it away with this nonsense.
It’s sad the woman died, but given her injuries it’s probably for the better. Her life would have been a living hell.
posted by: BoydJones on June 28, 2016 6:13am
This has been a consistent approach by the NHI. Your conspiracy theories put you in a league with Donald Trump. Maybe you should craft yourself a Make America Great Again tinfoil hat.
posted by: robn on June 28, 2016 7:13am
The NHPD is irresponsibly in breach of duty if they don’t do exams and toxology on the dogs to determine if they’ve been abused either physically or exposed to crack or other drug smoke. They need to be put down but no exam is just Ridiculous!
posted by: Bradley on June 28, 2016 7:13am
Bill, the dogs will be killed in a couple of days. The reason they have not been killed already is to determine whether they are rabid. If they are rabid, the city will need to locate any dogs that they have infected.
posted by: BetweenTwoRocks on June 28, 2016 9:09am
I find the reporting on the crack sort of interesting. “Well, they were smoking crack.” Does it matter? If they were doing powder cocaine (aka the upper class version of the same drug), would it still be relevant? If the dogs themselves were not found to be affected, then it sort of strikes me as a way to lazily blame the owner for the attacks. “Well, they did smoke crack, so it’s sort of their fault.”
We don’t even know if it’s relevant to the attack, but it’s just hanging out there, preventing us from sympathizing from the owner, and putting the idea in our head that he MUST have been an irresponsible dog owner, even though we don’t really know that.
I find it interesting, from a journalistic standpoint. Not saying it shouldn’t be mentioned. But it certainly frames the story in a way that I find, if nothing else, worth thinking about.
posted by: robn on June 28, 2016 9:29am
Not including the anti-pit bull serial internet trolls, does anyone who’s actually from New Haven find it at all slightly strange that this guy, who has now been confirmed to be a crack smoker, and who is a medical intern with little time to train his dogs; is the only person in the neighborhood with an 8 foot stockade fence all the way along his property line? It looks pretty apparent to me that he set up a security perimeter expecting the dogs to defend his house.
posted by: EPDP on June 28, 2016 9:54am
Mr. Bill / Mr. Bass: I did some research, and read that many media sites have a policy not to publish the name of someone accused of a crime. No Paul Bass conspiracy, sorry Mr. Bill. But the recent trend in the media is to publish names rather than not to publish, especially with smaller news sites. The Internet genie is already out of the bottle, very hard to put it back in. Courts are restrained by the First Amendment to force a news site to take stuff down, even after a guy is exonerated. See: http://www.wnd.com/2010/07/175649/#! I think Paul Bass is behind the times by not naming names. Paul has always been on the conservative side. I question his credibility in the progressive community. If there is a conspiracy here, I think Paul is conspiring with Donald Trump. Recently when I was at the office of the NHI, I noticed that Paul was building a giant wall divider in his office to separate himself from La Voz.
posted by: robn on June 28, 2016 10:18am
This isn’t a culture war about sentencing. As one other commenter noted, second hand crack smoke could very likely have affected these animals.
posted by: BetweenTwoRocks on June 28, 2016 10:49am
Sure, it COULD have affected the dogs. Or maybe the dog owner didn’t smoke crack near his dogs. We don’t know. But the article is written as if it matters and people are commenting as if it’s a known fact that it must’ve, but at this point, it’s just an assumption. We don’t really know at this point, right?
posted by: Bill Saunders on June 28, 2016 10:54am
I never said it was a conspiracy, but poor policy. Naming a name is nothing but reporting the news.
posted by: concerned_neighbor on June 28, 2016 10:55am
Naming names and publishing the incident address are matters of public service. We need to know where to be on guard or where to avoid, especially with these deadly dogs. While I am appreciative of NHI’s hard work, sometimes the “policies” are a bit too cute or philosophical. But Bass is the Editor and when you are the Editor you get to make your own rules. We are all still reading NHI so we are willing to accept Bass’ idiosyncracies to get better news.
posted by: Adelaide on June 28, 2016 11:05am
The article says the animals were up to date on their shots so why do they have to wait to kill them?
Why isn’t this horrible owner of the dogs charged with manslaughter?? I can understand if he lived in W’Ville or E.Rock, he would definitely get a pass but on the Blvd., I would expect him to be drawn and quartered!
How is this an accident? U own 2 killer dogs that have a looonnnggggg history of violent and vicious attacks and then claim it is an accident when they violently and viciously attack???
posted by: AverageTaxpayer on June 28, 2016 11:11am
Maybe they ate the victim to get high? Or the dogs crack-addled brains provoked them to violence?
Honestly, that line of reasoning is pretty ludicrous in the wake of this fatal mauling.
The pit bulls did what they were bred to do,—fight, maim and kill. What set them off is debatable. But what they did should be ascribed to their genetics.
These dogs are killers by nature.
posted by: Flyby on June 28, 2016 11:29am
What’s the deal with PSAP Paul? Place to Secure Additional Pay. From previous articles, don’t the 911 Operators read from a set of scripted cards which are standard protocol? What did the card for an animal bite prompt the Operator to ask the callers? Was it followed in this case?
posted by: robn on June 28, 2016 11:31am
Its not unfair to judge someone who has taken his vast priviledge afforded by an incredible education and thrown it away with wildly irresponsible behavior. The behavior is readily evident; the stockade fence just adds color to the story.
posted by: Bill Saunders on June 28, 2016 11:43am
Where the hell are some real charges????
A deadly dog attack warrants something other than a ‘drug possession’ charge.
(which alone should dismiss this guy from the Medical Profession)
If the victim didn’t die, would the only course of redress be a ‘civil suit’, or is that option left to the surviving elder mother.
If the dogs killed a kid, would the charges be different????
If this guy didn’t flaunt his ‘affiliation’ (as was reported elsewhere), would he have been treated differently???
Really Gross on many levels. I don’t understand the kit gloves.
posted by: DrJay on June 28, 2016 11:49am
I had not thought much about banning specific dog breeds before this story, so I did a little research. I recommend the Wikipedia article - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breed-specific_legislation as a good overview. Seems like fatal attacks are often caused by pitbulls and rottweillers, but most non-fatal bites are caused by other breeds.
Here’s a quote from the Wikipedia article- “A study by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in 2000 concluded that while fatal attacks on humans appeared to be a breed-specific problem (pit bull-type dogs and Rottweilers), other breeds may bite and cause fatalities at higher rates, and that since fatal attacks represent a small proportion of dog bite injuries to humans, there are better alternatives for prevention of dog bites than breed-specific ordinances”
I don’t think the science is clear as to the effectiveness of such bans where they are enforced, such as in military housing. In New Haven, where most dogs are not even licensed, I doubt any ban could be effectively enforced.
posted by: brownetowne on June 28, 2016 12:08pm
Any new legislation regarding dog breeds here in New Haven would be a complete joke. You’re right that most dogs aren’t even registered. Current public safety ordinances aren’t enforced anyway: red light running, speeding, dumping mattresses all over the city curbs, gangs of youths riding off-road motorcycles down the streets.
posted by: Frank Columbo on June 28, 2016 3:48pm
Remember when the Michael Vick dog fighting ring scandal broke? The Humane Society declared the dogs could never be rehabilitated and demanded euthanizing all the Vick dogs.
The Best Friends Animal Sanctuary proved them wrong, taking 22 of the fighting dogs and placed them in their Forever Homes many with children, some eventually used as therapy dogs with no incidents of violence.
See the December 23, 2008 Sports Illustrated issue with former Vick fight dog “Sweet Jasmine” rescue on the cover. Writer Jim Gorant expanded on his report in his book: Lost Dogs-Michael Vick’s Dogs and their tale of Rescue and Redemption.
I understand that the Vick dogs never killed a human, but at least please test Pirate and Nomad for the presence of Crack residue in their blood and bill the owner.
Humans are at fault here. The Dogs are not inherently evil.
posted by: THREEFIFTHS on June 28, 2016 4:03pm
Give me a break with this B.S. on pit bulls and crack.Here are the only pit bulls on crack. Enjoy.
Again Pit bull apologist’s. these pit bulls and other Dangerous dogs must be ban!!!!!
posted by: William Kurtz on June 28, 2016 4:47pm
Good grief, ‘Pirate and Nomad’? Now I’m getting a little queasy. If experts think it’s likely that exposure to narcotics, either direct or indirect, might have played a role then it’s probably a good idea to test them before they’re euthanized but please no more talk about ‘Forever Homes’.
For what it’s worth, I agree that these dogs aren’t ‘inherently evil’ but they still need to be put down.
posted by: gram14 on June 28, 2016 5:13pm
So now there is a “Go Fund Me” page set up for funeral expenses? Yes, that may be a kind thing to do. However, why should the “average Joe or Jane” taxpayer have to donate to this? I feel it should be “her doctor friend” who should have the moral obligation to at least take care of those expenses. Probably the State of Connecticut taxpayer will be paying the gigantic bill for Yale New Haven Hospital services. Let him use the money he spends on crack and his good pay-check as a doctor (if he still has a job) to take care of this funeral expense!!!
posted by: zipper on June 28, 2016 7:49pm
The 37yr old Yale Psychiatric intern hires New Haven’s top criminal defense attorney, William Dow. William Dow is no longer needed, that 37 yr old nameless man should help or be able to pay for the victim’s funeral. That’s the least he should do….......
posted by: Puller9 on June 28, 2016 9:25pm
What a heartbreaking story. My experience has been that many people shouldn’t own dogs. There are good dogs of ‘bad breeds’ and bad dogs of ‘good breeds’. Some of this is related to lack of training, but most of the horrific stories one reads is directly related to their owners inability to even read their own dog. There are many pieces missing from this story. It appears Winfrey liked dogs and was comfortable with them. Was this her first meeting with these dogs? We don’t know. Did they have an aggressive history? We don’t know. It is apparent that these dogs should be euthanized as they have committed the ultimate sin against humans by killing one. Why? We may never know.
In the 70’s Great Danes, German Shepherds and Dobermans were vilified for committing the majority of attacks and deaths on children. In the 80’s it was St. Bernards and Dalmatians. In the 90’s Akitas, Rottweilers and Golden Retrievers. Children have been bitten and or killed by many breeds and mixes from Dachsunds and Springer Spaniels to Labradors. As I am fond of telling people who want to pet my dogs, ‘Do they bite?’ All dogs have teeth. All dogs are capable of biting.
posted by: Mark Oppenheimer on June 28, 2016 11:03pm
This is unbelievably sad, and my heart goes out to the victim and her family. That said, there is simply no good evidence that anyone can even /identify/ what is a “pit bull” and what isn’t, and even less evidence that it’s a uniquely dangerous breed. Often, when dogs are dangerous and mid-size, with blocky heads, people just call them “pit bulls” because we have been primed to think of that as the most dangerous dog. When my parents were little, Rottweilers and Dobermans were the dogs everyone thought were bred to be irredeemably evil—but we never hear that anymore. This stuff is very much media-driven. Here is one good resource, which links to some scholarly research:
posted by: superjt on June 28, 2016 11:48pm
Part of a future update *must* include the sex of the dogs and if either were spay or neutered. This is a part of the vicious dog debate. My guess is, since the dogs were registered that the owner DID spay/neuter. If you look closely at the many photos published today it seems like the male was the smaller dog (all white) and the female was the larger and primary attacker! As for the folks bashing Blass for not publishing the owner’s name, I know there are many newspapers that have a policy of not naming anyone charged with a misdemeanor—they only name people charged of a felony crime.
Also, I am in strong agreement that the doctor should provide funds for the victim’s burial. Despite the no criminal charges, the victim’s family might be able to pursue a wrongful death claim BECAUSE it happened “on the doctor’s property” and he was unable to stop the attack. I hope her family is talking to a good civil attorney. Mr. dog owner is “hardly” out of the loop just because he evaded criminal charges related to the death of Winfrey.
posted by: EllaT on June 29, 2016 7:56am
Wikus van de Merwe,
You write: “Banning pitbulls isn’t going to do anything because animal control still would be the ones doing the enforcement and New Haven animal control doesn’t do ANY enforcement unless the dog is loose and attacks someone. ”
Not quite! My family has been attacked *twice* by off-leash unregistered dogs in New Haven. Even after finding the dogs and their owners following these attacks—one which required a hospital visit—the New Haven police did nothing other than slap these folks on the wrist. The result is that we no longer walk in New Haven parks; there is simply too much to lose.
posted by: elmcityresident on June 29, 2016 9:28am
Let’s wait and see what happens to the owner of the dog who killed the 3 day old we’ll see the difference .. that’s horrible as well I’m going through the same thing with a german shepard who gets loose all the time on my culdesac street he jump the fence I’ve called the cops and the officer was fully aware of this constantly happening because she also told me she’s scared of him too BUT she said nothing to the owner. So I guess something like this has to happen on my street before somethings done. smh
posted by: SparkJames on June 29, 2016 10:33am
I agree with ROBN.
These dogs should be tested.
Is it possible these dogs would test positive
For crack cocaine even even if they are tranquilized for the procedure?
I’ve heard that crack is whack, and
Permeates the pores of the user…
What if the dogs were fiending for more crack???
This story is super-awful.
posted by: bikyst on June 29, 2016 11:02am
I hope the Winfrey family gets millions from the homeowner. He’s got money and will continue to make money. Send him to rehab and then let him work. The linear feet of stockade fencing around his house had to cost him $10K to $15K to keep his dogs away from people.
He should have spent that money on obedience school to teach him how to be a smart dog owner. He should have spent some money on neutering those dogs. Too late now.
Let the Doctor work and the Doctor can pay for Ms. Winfrey’s hospital bill(I’m sure 6-7 figure bill), funeral, and help support Ms. Winfrey’s son who sounds young. Make him work and garnish it. At least this will be a reminder for his incompetence instead of going to prison.
posted by: JoeBunn on June 29, 2016 7:35pm
I have just a few thoughts on this tragic situation. I have read that the dogs are both large unneutered males. Any reputable rescue requires that pets be spayed or neutered bfore being adopted out, which clearly did not happen in FL, where these dogs were “bought”. Many of the dogs of this type that I see for sale on CL are bred by ignorant fools to be as huge and aggressive as possible. Many are sold as early as three weeks instead of the eight weeks that vets recommend.
It is possible to ascertain the exact lineage of the dogs through DNA tesing. But to what end?
I heard in one news report that the dogs had been noted as being aggressive when taken to their vet. That constitutes conctructive notice of their dangerousness. Bringing a social invitee to a home where two loose American bulldogs previously deemed aggressive by a vet are running the property is playing with fire. I would not want to be Dr Hicks’ umbrella carrier.
My last thoughts pertain to the people entrusted into Dr Hicks care. Mental illness is hard enough to deal with without having to wonder if your psychiatrist is sober or not. It is my opinion that anyone fortunate enough to be in a residency program at Yale is at best of questionable judgement to risk everything for drugs. Dr Hicks should have enough knowledge and life experiences to take his responsibilities and obligations more seriously than to ever be found smoking crack cocaine. The survival of people with psychiatric illness is at times balanced on the head of a pin and they are deserving of a doctor who takes their life-threatening and life-altering problems seriously enough to remain clean. I am less than impressed with this man’s understanding of the seriousness facing his patients if he thought smoking crack during his psychiatric residency was good practice. It smacks of condescension and arrogance and a total disregard for the welfare of sick people under his care, perhaps at a time when they cannot care for themselves.
posted by: HewNaven on June 29, 2016 10:17pm
What no one seems to realize is that pitbulls read NHI, and since they’re genetically wired to kill things, it’s only a matter of time before the whole internet is dead. #sciencefacts
posted by: jpsIII on June 30, 2016 10:47am
Re: “It’s not like the man used the dogs as weapons,” Campbell said. “It was a tragic accident.”
The point is…the breed(s) are indeed “weapons” when housed/used/treated improperly. A target rifle, of any type, is not a “weapon” when you’re target shooting. But there are strict, common-sense rules and laws about access to, and control of, loaded firearms to ensure safety. A pit-bull-type dog is like a loaded firearm…but far less predictable!
posted by: HewNaven on June 30, 2016 11:46am
Yes. Guns were specifically designed to kill and should be outlawed immediately. There’s really no use to own a gun, unless you intend to kill something. Great point!
posted by: Frank Columbo on June 30, 2016 7:39pm
Mr. Kurtz: your comments are indicative poor reading comprehension. Nowhere in my comments do I advocate for permitting the dogs to live. They took a human life, unlike the dogs of Football hero Michael Vick, whose dogs were starved,tortured and trained to kill other canines.
Yet the truth is even those dogs were successfully rehabilitated by the No Kill animal sanctuary Best Friends. You would have agreed with National Humane Society Director Wayne Pacelle, that the Vick dogs should be condemned to death.
Nowhere in my comments do I plead for the lives of the homicidal dogs. Mr. Kurtz why are you offended by rescue organizations jargon of “Forever Home”? Do you know what it even means?
posted by: Fred's owner on July 5, 2016 12:11pm
This is a very sad situation and I send my prayers to Ms. Winfrey’s friends and family. I do not understand why the man who owns the dogs is not charged with a more serious crime, for example possession and use of an illegal substance (crack). It just doesn’t seem right to me that an individual in a position of responsibility for others’ well-being as a psychiatric intern can engage in behavior that results even indirectly in another individuals’ death and not be held responsible for Ms. Winfrey’s awful suffering and death.
posted by: NHInsider on July 6, 2016 3:40pm
I honestly cannot believe how this became a victim blame game regarding alleged drug use in these comments. This was someones daughter, sister, aunt, etc. who was TORN APART by two dogs. She didn’t need a few stitches, she endured days of surgery, had no skin left, completely lost an eye, limbs torn to the point of amputation, and died. Imagine the pain and sheer terror this poor woman endured as these vicious beasts with the only help coming in the form of rocks and trash being thrown toward the dogs. The doctors described her injuries as ‘worse than Charla Nash’-think of what her family felt when they got to the hospital when they saw her and were told the severity of the injuries. Yes, there is a huge Pit Bull issue in New Haven-mostly due to bad owners-but let’s have some respect for this horrifying loss of life.
posted by: Fred's owner on July 6, 2016 4:30pm
I agree that this is a terrible tragedy and we can share the grief felt by the victim’s family and friends. I am very sorry for their loss.
posted by: EPDP on July 6, 2016 4:44pm
NH Insider you are no “Insider”
Nobody is trying to blame the victim. People are trying to figure out what happened, and the relationship between this doctor and the victim.
Just a few days before the attack the victim was evicted from her apartment, see: http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/CaseDetail PublicCaseDetail.aspx?DocketNo=NHHCV166001414S
Just six months before the attack the victim sold her home, where she had lived for many years, see:
I know the guy who purchased her home, and he said she didn’t have much left on the mortgage to pay off, so she must have had a lot of money after the sale. The question is why was she being evicted only six months after she sold her house. And what was going on between her and the doctor at this time. Was he trying to help or harm her?
posted by: NHInsider on July 6, 2016 7:02pm
EPDP- My username is ‘Insider’ for a reason, but it also maintains my anonymity so that I may comment without the New Haven ‘heavy hitters’ knowing it is me (as is the reason you are not using your real name either). I also alter the style of my writing. More importantly, prior to you going and making judgements about me I would like to inform you that I know Jocelyns family-they are as close to me as my own family. As I stated previously, I am disgusted at the focus on the surrounding circumstances (such as was she doing drugs, who was the doctor, what was their relationship, why did she sell her house, etc.). IT IS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS. Unless you were there or were directly impacted by what happened to Jocelyn, there is no need for you to have any more information than what is information has already been reported.