Undercover Mama: New York Mother Assumes New Identity to Seduce and Entrap Juror in Son’s Murder Case

img_0An incredible story has emerged out of New York. Doreen Giuliano, 46, has admitted to assuming a fake identity to seduce Jason Allo, a contractor who lived in Bensonhurst, Brooklyn who was a juror on her son’s murder trial. Three years ago, John Giuca from Brooklyn was convicted with another man in the 2003 killing of Mark Fisher, a college student from New Jersey who was found beaten and shot five times.

This is truly an extraordinary tale. Not satisfied with her website defending her son, Giuliano went to extraordinary lengths of dying her hair blond, working out, going to a tanning salon, and even renting an apartment for the seduction of Allo.

She assumed the role of a 30-year-old research analyst from California with six-inch heels and push-up bras to attract the younger man. (The stories below have her before and after shots). Her husband was reportedly aware of the private sting operation and she insists that, while she had Allo up to her apartment, the relationship remained flirtatious only.

She recorded many of their conversations allegedly including admissions from Allo that he knew people who appeared on the trial witness list and that they “used to abuse” his brother. She is quoted as saying ““He said, ‘I was the first one to come in with guilty and they were all debating,’ ” she said. “He says — he shouts — ‘I shouldn’t have ever been on that jury.’ ”

The tape recordings are now part of motion for a new hearing. This is a very reckless act. Had she done this during the trial, she would have been charged with witness tampering and obstruction. Two individuals were previously arrested for menacing witnesses, here. She may still be sued for privacy violations in torts and misrepresentation. The possible tort action is intriguing. Intrusion upon seclusion is a possibility based on misrepresentation. However, she is revealing his statements about a non-private matter. Also, statements made in court are privileged. Then there is public disclosure of embarrassing private facts, but there is an exception for matters of public concern and these facts might not be viewed as private. She can argue that this is merely the danger of a “false friend” and not a tort. There is also the question of consensual surveillance, which may have been legal in New York but differs from state to state.

For the full story, click here and here.

8 thoughts on “Undercover Mama: New York Mother Assumes New Identity to Seduce and Entrap Juror in Son’s Murder Case”

  1. “Alas, lamented lefty pundit Rachel Maddow of Air America Radio and MSNBC, President-elect Obama may not pursue a 9/11 commission-type inquiry into alleged crimes of the Bush administration.”

    Cool, so this means we’ll be able to read through the first chapter without having to stop because it’s completely absurd?

    ‘Uno absurdo dato, infinita sequuntur.’ — One absurdity being allowed, an infinity follow.

  2. Doreen should be ashamed of herself for her whoreish deception. She may have screwed and blew Jason’s brains out but the bottom line is her son is a murderer. Mark Fisher wont be coming home someday, his parents would be happy to have him back in 25 years. I really feel bad for her husband as his foolish wife was used and abused as a sex toy for months and got no useful information. Unfortunately the stuff she found out happens everyday, where someone heard of someone on the witness list. She needs to show the trial court that something was done which would have affected the outcome. The bottom line is this lady should grieve for her son being locked up and grieve for the Fishers who lost a son. Instead she spread her legs in an effort to coax someone into saying what she wanted to hear. She needs a psychiatrist, I actually feel sorry for her.

  3. Malo,
    Once again you are repeating your mantras. It really is time to stick to the topic of the posting or go elsewhere with your fellow trolls.


    Interrogating the Survivor

    November 29, 2008

    Apparently only one of the Islamic terrorists who attacked Mumbai survived. He is now being interrogated by Indian authorities, and information about the attack is starting to emerge.

    The survivor is a Pakistani named Mohammad Ajmal Mohammad Amin Kasab. Kasab claims to be the person who murdered Anti-Terrorism Squad chief Hemant Karkare and other policemen. Evidently there were only ten terrorists involved in the attack, which seems like a low number for the mayhem they caused and the time it took to kill them. Kasab says that five teams with two members each attacked a series of targets, to which they took taxis. I’m not really a gun guy, but I can’t help thinking that a few armed men here and there–citizens, if not security guards–would have been helpful.

  5. Of those Americans that rated terrorism as the most important issue facing us today, 86% of them voted for JOHN MCCAIN.

    Interesting fact is that if the attack in India had happened 25 days ago John McCain would be President Elect………………and the left would be screaming that BUSH stole the election by faking a terrorist attack in India!

  6. Rachel Maddow Wants Show Trials for “Criminal” Bush Officials While Extending Presumption of Innocence to Terrorists

    November 28, 2008 – 18:50 ET

    Alas, lamented lefty pundit Rachel Maddow of Air America Radio and MSNBC, President-elect Obama may not pursue a 9/11 commission-type inquiry into alleged crimes of the Bush administration.

    Maddow also demonstrated her odd predilection toward condemning Bush officials as guilty who’ve yet been charged with anything, much less convicted, while wringing her hands over the fate of horribly misunderstood terrorists such as Salim Hamdan, bin Laden’s “driver.”

    Here’s what Maddow said on her radio show Monday, initially referring to the death of a high-level al Qaeda operative in Pakistan —

    And hey, remember the other war? No, no, no, not the other war, the other-other war, the one that we’re supposedly not fighting in Pakistan? On Saturday the US military announced that another unarmed, uh, unmanned drone attack killed the guy who you can blame for having to carry three-ounce bottles of liquid only on, in your carry-on luggage, the guy who was implicated in the supposed transatlantic airliner plot.

    Got that? For the “supposed” plot in August 2006. “Supposed” in the sense that, heck, for all we know, it was just another ruse cooked up in Crawford to keep us crouched in fear.

    Minutes later, Maddow referred to “criminal” behavior of Bush officials —

    One question that I have been thinking about and increasingly worrying about with the new administration is the question of what can be done about the established precedents from the Bush administration of criminal behavior by the government. This has come to the fore in the first instance in the case of torture and illegal detention and interrogation practices. Should the Obama administration prosecute members of the Bush administration for that, because there is an important legal implication to whether or not those precedents are allowed to stand. Is that politically possible? Is it a moral or legal imperative? And what do they see as their options heading forward? And how can I make them do more than they might otherwise want to do? (laughing at end, bizarrely given context)

    One of Maddow’s guests that day, Newsweek reporter Michael Isikoff, proceeded to undercut her assertion by pointing out that these are allegations, not indisputable fact. Isikoff told Maddow of Obama leaning toward a 9/11-commission approach rather than criminal prosecution but if the latter should occur, it may result from what Obama officials find in records and documents from the preceding administration —

    Their judgments based on, you know, those reports and what’s in the files, may be that there’s grounds to launch a criminal investigation. It’s hard to say without knowing exactly, none of this has ever been made public, we can only surmise what’s in them.

    Maddow’s tendency to dismiss the actions of al Qaeda terrorists as inconsequential was on egregious display in August after Hamdan was tried by military commission (Hamdan was reportedly transferred from Guantanamo Bay on Wednesday to serve out the remainder of his sentence in Yemen).

    YUP, Maddow’s as looney as everybody at MSNBC.

  7. Wow! This sounds almost exactly how Obama won the election, pretending to be someone who actually had experience and was qualified to be POTUS!

  8. After reading the stories, I came to one conclusion. This 46 year old does not look 30 years old. So all of her efforts to look younger were unsuccessful. This is an unusual story about an unusual woman. I am not too confident that her efforts will lead to a new trial. However, her disception may lead to a civil trial.

Comments are closed.