Thursday, November 29, 2007

Brent Criticizes the Critics


Moving from debating about (and yachting with) Roy Coen back to Kocis-related matters, Brent has a new blog post up. It's an interesting one...a shotgun blast at various online and print media that have mentioned him in recent months.

GayVN news comes under fire for having a subtle pay-to-link policy in it's news stories (and thus not linking to him), and using older Falcon photos of him (I guess the real offense here is that they lack the BCI web address watermark?).

Next in his gun sites is JC Adams and his Gay Porn Times. More unhappiness with a perceived pro-Falcon slant to the story, and correcting some errors...one of which is unquestionably a huge and insulting one to Brent (or any civilized human, for that matter): "He’s been laying low since getting caught in the backdraft of the Bryan Kocis/Cobra Video murder, for which his former costar Harlow Cuadra, and boyfriend-partner Joseph Kerekes, are standing trial."


LOL, OK this complaint is legit, IMO; I too would be a tad upset at being falsely accused of co-starring with Harlow! And for the record, THIS does not count as co-starring. ------->

Brent's reply to this malignant slur:

"While there was initial interest in collaborative film work between Brent Corrigan and Harlow Cuadra, BoyBatter’s misunderstanding of the circumstances (namely our settlement with Cobra Video) at hand made it unlikely. Then the unthinkable occurred and the mere prospect of a collaborative effort became utterly impossible, and certainly unattractive to Brent Corrigan INC. We were not EVER costars."

This is somewhat interesting, as it addresses the whole motive question. Note that Brent makes clear a misunderstanding on the part of BoyBatter occurred...which is pretty close to what I originally theorized happened at that Vegas dinner, months ago when we first read the affidavit report on it.

Then Brent (BTW, as you can all see...I now hyperlink to BCI at every mention of Brent, and I will try to use only the freshest pics of him from his site, and TRY not to mention Falc...a certain studio...I must avoid the WRATH of BRENT! Don't hurt me, pleeeeeeze...!) says nice things about Just Us Boys and Angel Benton, and lukewarm things about Jason Sechrest.

Then he talks about Rolling Stone...ah, now things get interesting!

"The press is without a doubt, a necessary evil in our lives. I’m not proud and in no way endorse Peter Wilkinson’s portrayal of Brent Corrigan and Cobra Video in his article written for Rolling Stone. The clues to that aren’t in skewed facts, but Wilkinson’s defiance and disdain for me in writing his article. It’s in the details he deemed necessary to include, and his decision not to include others. An author like Wilkinson doesn’t have to lie to sway his readers’ opinion. Instead, they choose carefully which facts to include and which facts to leave out in order to steer the reader’s perception.

I cringe when I meet someone and they proclaim they read the Rolling Stone article. An overwhelming urge to set the record straight about everything to that individual washes over me each time I hear those words. This being particularly ironic to me because that’s what I was under the impression Rolling Stone was doing when they invited me to participate in the article. But silly me, I didn’t take into account the individual agenda of the journalist writing the piece. Furthermore, next time I’ll trust my gut instinct. I should not have ignored Wilkinson’s tinge of disdain that lightly emanated from him upon our first meeting."

Hmmm, interesting. And then, the Out article:

"OUT Magazine practically ignored the bigger picture at hand, which makes me feel less agitated than I do about Rolling Stone and Peter Wilkinson. Particularly, I can’t ignore what Out does for our community, and for that I thank them. I have an immense amount of respect for Out. Although Michael Joseph Gross didn’t get it all wrong, many of the facts he included in that article are in fact, inaccurate. For instance, my first shoot date for Cobra Video was February 3rd, 2004 and not September 2004. The article also states that my second shoot was in Florida, when it was actually filmed here in La Jolla, north of San Diego but close enough to still be considered local for me. Michael Joseph Gross also mixes up references to money and repeatedly mixes facts about the two different summers I spent in Dallas, Pennsylvania. Furthermore, the order of events and his perception of my last few months at Cobra appear to be mistaken."

Hmmm. I'm not sure what he considers "the bigger picture at hand" here, but the time and place corrections above are useful and appreciated.

Humbly, as always, at your service...jim

Update: A response from Jason Sechrest.

Update 2: Brent is nominated by fans for not one but two Cybersocket Web Awards; for Best New Adult Site and Best Porn Star Site.

Update 3: Angel Benton at Just Us Boys returns the love.

Update 4: J.C. Adams replies.

Update 5: In a new blog post, Brent flies to sunny Florida, meets his cast, and also runs into a couple fellow porn stars cast as cameos for Another Gay Sequel. The handshakes are chilly, as one of these porn cameos once had "taken the liberty of posting written, multi paragraph notices to the industry urging fans, viewers, journalists, studios, and producers not to buy my work, support my cause, or hire me for adult projects."

Hehe, well of course, we have NO idea who this mystery porn star/producer is, but Brent reports that he does not hold a grudge, and will not let a little antipathy interfere with the general sense of la dolce vita he is experiencing on the set in SoFla.

113 comments:

Rob said...

Jim--

Perhaps this is a sign that Sean is looking for the right outlet to tell all of this story, in his own way and in his own time.

The real truth and facts would probably give us all some sleepless nights.

jim said...

Something curious I notice too about his comment on Rolling Stone...he is unhappy with the way "Cobra Video" was portrayed, as well as himself.

And his analysis of the RS article is spot on, IMO...there was obviously a lot omitted in that article in order to create an impression of "disdain" for everyone involved.

The best example of this? The article BARELY mentioned the whole underage scandal (and subsequent warfare over)! It got a half-sentence passing mention; as if it were an unimportant footnote to the story.

That's like saying plutonium is a relatively unimportant component in a nuclear bomb! LOL...

Example: I quoted Benjamin Nicholas' view of the case in the earlier thread; if you notice, he got his info on the case from Rolling Stone. And you can see how factually f@#$%d up he is in his overall understanding of the case (ie, Brent was "caught" being underage).

So, I can easily see why Brent cringes from RS readers.

I'm still stumped, though, as to what Brent refers to as the "the bigger picture at hand" in the Out article.

n.c. said...

"I’m not proud and in no way endorse Peter Wilkinson’s portrayal of Brent Corrigan and Cobra Video in his article written for Rolling Stone."

Yes it seems rather odd.
Maybe I'm wrong but I guess it could be read as "Brent Corrigan and his problems/relations/whatever with Cobra Video.."

n.c. said...

Brent's words are quite powerful :-) Apparently, some corrections have been made...

But what about that "supporting turn"? No changes?! :-)
http://www.gayporntimes.com/hardnews/2007/11/26/brent-corrigan-in-another-gay-sequel/

elmysterio said...

The bigger picture Jim is what a certain party is trying to suppress with regards to this case.

The Rolling Stone article was infact quite biased with regards to this case. The Outarticle was more so accurate but it omitted certain information that they were aware of.

The bigger pictureis in regards to the black helicopter theory that I have been accused of creating. The facts are it does exist and that information is being kept quiet for reasons that will most likely never be told.

This whole case is a black mark on the face of the porn industry. Something that they turned a blind eye to and it is for this reason that they are not "giving" Sean Lockhart or as some seem to want to call him "Brent Corrigan" his rightful due as a porn actor.

So as you can see I am still saying what I have said all along and my thoughts on this case have not changed.

As much as you would like me to come over to your side of thinking I can not do so for good reason.

That reason is that the truth is being supressed and I do not agree with the reasons why.

DeWayne In San Diego said...

From a different perspective than Elm I still agree not Black Helicopters BUT Michael Gross interviewed OTHER underage Cobra Bois and has gone along with the plan to suppress this.

We are all getting a little tired of the NON ACTION taken by the US govt toward Cobra video.

And the Complicit silence by members of the Press,,including Michael Gross,,(he is certainly no Eisenberg thats for sure)

A company I might add I made my FIRST complaint about to DOJ in 2003.

That I knew a model was underage,,
since he was local

duly reported it and

it was ignored bu DOJ just as EVERY complaint about Bryan Kocis was ignored!

2 years BEFORE Brent Corrigan went public!

Nothing

So I'll say it again

The US Federal govt allows the production of Gay porn involving 15,16 & 17yo males despite being proscribed by law.

This is a tacit policy.
def; understood without being openly expressed,,silent; saying nothing,,unvoiced or unspoken

How do we know this?
Bryan was never arrested and Cobra continues to sell video NOW featuring underage youth.

Those are the facts.
I would dearly love to be proven wrong but I can still go on Cobra Video and order DVD's Today.

From a company operating as a criminal enterprise (they are in violation of numerous 2257 regulations separate from underage porn)

DeWayne In San Diego said...

Good post Jim I might add to clarify the "big picture" Brent was alluding too he expected Michael Gross to delve into Cobra video more throughly (since Gross interviewed models)and Bryan Kocis's methods at Cobra Video.

It is very obvious that the "complicity of silence" about underage porn in this country extends to our mute national & gay press.

It is this contemptuous attitude toward gay youth that allowed Bryan Kocis to thrive and allows his contemporaries to flourish today.

When you are judgmental and are filled with sneering disdain for young gay boys who are in porn, you really could care less if they are abused and disposed of.

After all it validates their "worldview" that the boys are Trash!

And yes I include Michael Gross, he was ultimately just as contemptuous of Sean as Wilkinson he was just better at "masking" his derision!

I would point out gay intellectuals are the worst offenders when it comes to their specious "Value judgments"

Lord save us from the Michael Gross's of this world I'll take an openly hostile Peter Wilkinson any day,, at least you know where they stand and the proper response.

A good swift kick in the Nuts!

Rob said...

Dewayne & Jim--

This is why Sean needs to tell his story about what happened and why in his own words. It would be the ultimate irony that in doing so, his words on these events would most likely spark action to be taken.

jim said...

I've been under the logical assumption Brent would eventually write a book about the whole past 5 years, perhaps in collaberation with an established writer.

He'd be nutz not to, IMO. It would easily be a gay best seller, if done right. Perhaps we'll hear something of such a project, after the case is resolved?

Grant said...

DeWayne,

You hit the nail right on the head with your presumption. I glad you figured it out before either Brent or I had to clarify the statement. He was more pleased with the OUT article because rather than leave out glaring details in regards to the Cobra situation, he didn't really discuss it at all. Whereas Wilkinson included certain details whenever he felt it would get the best affect for he and his personal friend, BB... *%/! oh, uh.. I meant Robert Wagner, aka Aaron Phelps!

Oh, and you are right on about Cobra Video's continued illegal operation! I know personally of at least two of the models who are still featured in their current catalog that were under 18 at time of production! All of which now is a moot point, since they have no records for any of their current content anyway!

Later boys, (and girls)

Grant

elmysterio said...

In regards to the black helicopter theory I do not mean to say that there is some secret plot to keep this info under raps.

What I am saying is that the Federal government is not taking the accusations of Sean lockhart as seriouly as one would think they should.

It would appear that they have they're reasons for doing so and that is what they Don't want you to know about.

That being said the rest is pretty easy to figure out.

Anonymous said...

Brent looks very handsome with his hair growing longer.

jim said...

"Update 2: Brent is nominated by fans for not one but two Cybersocket Web Awards; for Best New Adult Site and Best Porn Star Site."

Boybatter appears not to have won any nominations, oddly enough. :-)

elmysterio said...

Jim kissing twink ass is not pretty. I have plenty of love for Brent but you are getting just a little ridiculous.

You appear to be trying to make up for something that you said about him or did to him.

quickysrt said...

Sean/Brent's Story Vol. 1 could fetch him a couple of bucks I'm sure. And with his experience (hard knocks actually) I'm sure he will get it "done right" in due time. The story is not complete without the chapter that has the end of the H/J trial or plea deal.

I think his blog post is good, and it shows how much he has learned about the press thus far. 21 years old and already way up on the one-sided slanted biased s#i# that tries to pass it's self off as entertainment and news.

I mean last month it was how awful he was treated at some club (no respect from management/promoter, and this month goes off on these others. I mean tell us how you really feel Sean?

I love his fearlessness, and his own (it seams) acknowledgment that he has no bridges to burn, because he never had any real bridges to begin with. He ain't afraid of nothing at this point, and has no where to go but up. And if his performances are any good in the mainstream indie films he is lining up, his 15 minutes has not yet even begun.

I the main thing I got was that he just wanted everyone to know that he has felt pressure over the past year and continues to, and would have liked some sensitivity and consideration, and now knows it ain't gonna happen, and so being an independent in the adult world has advantages.

quickysrt said...

elmysterio said...
In regards to the black helicopter theory I do not mean to say that there is some secret plot to keep this info under raps.

What I am saying is that the Federal government is not taking the accusations of Sean lockhart as seriouly as one would think they should.

It would appear that they have they're reasons for doing so and that is what they Don't want you to know about.
-----------------------
We don't know, I would expect that there needs to be a conviction of H/J before they want to stir up the hornet's nest anymore. It might not be as "on the back burner" as it looks to be. We know that the DA does not want BK's history to be introduced at trial. So it would make sense for them to keep that other issue (underage) under wraps at the moment.

jim said...

"elmysterio said...
Jim kissing twink ass is not pretty. I have plenty of love for Brent but you are getting just a little ridiculous.

You appear to be trying to make up for something that you said about him or did to him."

I mentioned the Cybersocket nominations because they made an interesting juxtaposition amidst his complaints of getting nothing but bad press.

The timing of both post and nominations occuring simultaneously is certainly interesting!

A couple more "bad" stories written about him, and maybe he'll win one or both of those awards! :-)

jim said...

"I love his fearlessness, and his own (it seams) acknowledgment that he has no bridges to burn, because he never had any real bridges to begin with."

I'm not sure I'd agree that he never had bridges, but yeah, he certainly acts in accord with the belief that those bridges aren't worth preserving.

We always known he has a rabidly loyal fan base. This Cybersocket thingy prooves it is a fairly large one as well.

When you know you have wings like that, bridges seem expendible I suppose. HOWEVER...Brent would be wise to heed the story of Icarus, I think.

elmysterio said...

You might want to take a look at BB latest blog post. Interesting summation on the recent comments of Sean Lockahrt.

jim said...

I've seen it. I'm not sure what he's getting at, though.

BB said...

"I've seen it. I'm not sure what he's getting at, though."

Bryan was murdered due to a MISUNDERSTANDING.

That claimed misunderstanding came from Sean and his CobraKiller according to Sean.

How would Sean know there was a misunderstanding on the part of Joe and Harlow?

jim said...

Well, the Rolling Stone article pretty well laid out the whole nature of the "misunderstanding" pretty well.

If you refer to RS, it tells about Joe calling Brent up after Vegas but before the murder, and getting all pissy about there being no BCO blog post about the exciting new Boybatter partnership.

Then Grant gets on the line, tells Joe he misunderstands; everything is on hold until after the settlement in finalized. Joe gets pissy at Grant, and then Grant tells Joe where to stick it.

This misunderstanding is old news, already well described in the RS article. I'm not sure what you're making a fuss over.

Albert said...

Who you calling rabidly loyal? The foam on my mouth is from beer, nothing else, really.

BB said...

"Joe gets pissy at Grant, and then Grant tells Joe where to stick it."

If that were true I do not think that is reason enough for murdering a stranger. I do not buy it.

"I'm not sure what you're making a fuss over."

It is not a fuss, it is an observation.

jim said...

"If that were true I do not think that is reason enough for murdering a stranger. I do not buy it."

Be that as it may, we have Justin Hensley testifying that that is precisely what the apparant reason was.

Shrug. We weren't there. Justin Hensley was there. Like I keep telling Elm, Justin Hensley's eyes and ears trump our own uninformed opinions.

Rob said...

Elm--

You sound like you missed your dose of prune juice today. Get used to the idea of Harlow and Joe behind bars where they both belong.

Rob said...

Hey BB--

Ask RW about getting pissy, catty, and downright snotty. He went off in a putt and a toot, turning on his heel at Krave on witnessing the gesture of reconciliation between Kocis and Sean. RW was red hot with anger and white with envy.

RW had a whole week alone in Kocis' PA home--a whole week alone to carefully consider revenge against the insult he felt that Kocis dealt him at Krave. Then, RW is the last known person to have Kocis in life.

RW shouldn't be so quick to throw stones at others. RW could end up on the receiving end of boulders in return.

DeWayne In San Diego said...

Just an observation,,,

Seriously Joe and Harlow were classic Grifters which means they study their
"marks" before initiating the con.

We know J & H investigated Bryan before the murder, I think we can assume they did the same with S & G.

It is my Theory that Joe took note of Grants statement at La Cirque that he would be suspected first if Bryan turned up dead,,same as Bryan would be if Sean turned up dead.

I believe when Grant told Joe to "Stuff it" Joe Angry, decided to KILL Bryan AND incriminate Grant since he already KNEW Grant had to be eliminated if His real plan's for Sean was to be realized,,

Joe's real need for Sean was not videos at BoyBatter he wanted Sean as his Marquee Escort at Norfolk Escorts!

The only way in hell THAT was going to happen was if Grant was out of the picture,,or so Joe thought.

J & H don't know Sean very well OR the support network he has in So Cal,,that was never going to happen,,,

FYI Joe did go on Jason's and Elms blog in February making accusations toward Grant as an Anon,,confirmed by Law enforcement review of IP's

What most of us have failed to realize (I think you knew it Jim)
ALL the ip's of everyone who posted at Jasons,Elms & Julians back in February were investigated by Police.

They knew who everyone was and we are not talking "stat counter" folks I am talking about direct from the ISP's, info, names addresses,identity's thus the reasons for the personal agendas on the Blog's.

There is NO ANONYMITY on the Internet during a murder investigation!

So Joe slamming & incriminating Grant on the Blogs at the same time saying in Public he wanted to work with Sean was highly suspicious to investigators,, it revealed HIS Hidden Agenda.

For two men who spent a lot of time online J & H were truly "Clueless" as to how transparent their actions were during a murder investigation.

IMO Joe and Harlows Actions since Jan 24th have PROVEN their guilt more than any evidence recovered from the scene of the crime.

jim said...

"What most of us have failed to realize (I think you knew it Jim)
ALL the ip's of everyone who posted at Jasons,Elms & Julians back in February were investigated by Police."

I didn't know it, but it's another reason why I'm in favor of this whole thing going to trial.

Yes I'll be revealed, but it be worth it to see who has been posting what as who. :-)

BB said...

"ALL the ip's of everyone who posted at Jasons,Elms & Julians back in February were investigated by Police."

This was not done by the police. It was done by another agency.

The identity of all bloggers were investigated, including myself.

I expect this is true of the newer bloggers too.

The blogs are closely monitored at all times.

BB said...

"Yes I'll be revealed, but it be worth it to see who has been posting what as who. :-)"

You'll only be revealed if your a direct player in this saga.

Are you a player involved in this saga ;-) ?

jim said...

Well, if the police are monitoring my blog, the least they can do is post an entry into my "Deal or No Deal" sweepstakes!

jim said...

"Are you a player involved in this saga ;-)"

No thank gawd! :-D

Geoff Harvard said...

I wonder if we're wearing the cops out with St. Augustine, Socrates, and Roy Cohn.

Rob said...

Geoff--

No. Discussions concerning Augustine, Socrates, and Roy Cohen are fascinating exercises in critical thinking skills.

DeWayne In San Diego said...

Well yes BB it was the FBI but some seem to want to deny Federal involvement in this investigation despite the fact J & H crossed state lines which initiated Fed jurisdiction.

It had to be a Federal Agency in order to keep it out of a Formal subpoena. As revealed recently in the press the FBI has requested and received thousands of Cell & ISP records WITHOUT a search warrant since 9-11. A warrant is only needed IF you expect to use it as evidence.

Your right only an Active player is going to be outed so Jim is safe,,

Jim "Sighs" ;-)

DeWayne In San Diego said...

Better yet back in early February Albert and I would go into long winded 2 or 3 hour Philosophical and Political discussions. One night as we said goodnight I mentioned "Albert the FBI listening in on our calls do not get PAID ENOUGH to listen to our Prattle!

I felt sorry for the poor G-Men

BB said...

"No thank gawd! :-D"

amen to that.

Jared J said...

We thank you for your concern and understanding.
And your cooperation.

Anonymous said...

geoff says,
"I wonder if we are wearing the cops out"
One more for them.
Andrew Crispo - High profile N.Y. Art Dealer should never have gotten away with the murder of model Eigil Dag Vesti. The details are disgusting, and he was in it up to his eyeballs.

DeWayne In San Diego said...

VJ Wow thanks for digging this up about Crispo I had nearly forgotten this high profile case from the 80's,,and his connection to Cohn!

Good research!

Love the title of the NYT article,,
"There Was Something Creepy About the Gallery" wow S&M in the art world why thats right up my gallery,,I mean alley ,,,and Robert Wagner's! ;-)

Now now I can NEVER hold THAT against Robert,,that would be me the Pot calling the kettle Black and covered in fine top grain cowhide with matching accessories!
Robert your not the only one who would love to make his exit forgetting the safe word!
-------------------------------------

Oops never checked Jared's profile till now,,,,,,,I feel strangely compelled to say,,,

"We are all thankful such wonderful men and women are "on the job" ;-)

Serious Jared good to see their is ongoing professional interest in the ONLINE discussion.

I became aware sometime ago that the interested legal officers in this case receive a daily summary of the KocisSpehere Blogs.

You know Jim they say a story has been around awhile when the reporters start interviewing each other! ;-)

So Jim do you write a post with the thought "hmm I wonder if Melnick or Lupas" will read my latest brilliant deduction about Joe or Harlow?" ;-)

Rob said...

I certainly concur with Jared.

BB said...

"Your right only an Active player is going to be outed"

Are you willing to tell who that blogger is?

quickysrt said...

I would think the attorneys for the defense have assistants that log all the more active blogs, and any monitoring is basically to get an idea what folks like us think about the case. They know some serious research has already been done, and they want to tap into it.

So these threads are fresh running commentary, of course they would be interested in what we say. Too bad (for them) it is not a pretty picture at all that we paint here.

It must be weird to be an FBI agent, or an attorney and have to look at Sean's latest ramblings and cock shots. I hope that they got someone who enjoys it a little bit anyway. ;)

jim said...

I'd imagine the main purpose of any Kocishere monitoring would be to check for the release of any confidential case info; ie, clear violations of the gag order.

Rob said...

Jim--

There are certainly statements made that make this worthwhile.

DeWayne In San Diego said...

BB all the Active players know who they are,,they are the ones who have been interviewed or contacted by authority's.

The standard line at the end of all such contacts "Keep all information discussed confidential" applys to all "Active players" hence we do not have people on the blogs telling everything they know.

We will of course have some surprises at trial when certain bloggers are revealed (or not)

I will point out one blogger will be an obvious participant at trial.

Cad

He disappeared from the Blogs at the time of the Prelim in Aug,when we learned a Gag order was issued.
A lawyer Cad would take a judges instruction very seriously.

Cad I find interesting just because I have seen him pop up around the net in so many interesting places,,going back so many years.

He is the one Active player I take big interest in.

Albert said...

Yeah,... CAD....
ANYWAY, if you have a mind to, please go to DeWaynes's blog and make a positive comment of support for Octavier who is trying to start a legitimate modeling and photographic career after a short stint in porn.
It has nothing to do with Bryan or Brent. Just a good man trying to do better.
Thanks friends.

jim said...

Hmmm, Cad...yeah he just disappeared after the prelim. I had assumed it was in reaction to extreme personal disappointment: He (and others) had gloatingly predicted for months that Grant testifying would be some sort of fiasco...when in reality, Grant turned out to be a calm, cool, collected star witness.

Albert said...

The prelim didn't do it. Our BB made similar predictions at the same time and still marches on.
CAD, the 'attorney' suffered from 'hoof and mouth' disease.
Remember, out of all of us with too much time on our hands, only CAD actually put someone Else's life in danger. He did that intentionally and internationally by publicizing Brent Corrigan's physical address. He was just following in the footsteps of his "friend," who had pointlessly exposed Brent Corrigan's legal name.
I do not think that is what shut CAD up, nor did the hearing.
I think it was CAD (defending himself about exposing Brent's address) when he said he could go out out like a sheep or a lamb. He chose to go out like a sheep. (In fact he mixed up his metaphors and meant, like a sheep or a lion. That is just my guess, but not what he said.)
I think what finally shut him up was my discussion with him about how he would specifically deal with Brent Corrigan on the stand. He indicated he could keep Brent Corrigan on the stand for about a week, grilling, intimidating, humiliating and degrading him, it was that conversation that eventually shut him up. IMHO!!!
What was clear from the beginning was that CAD was not a 'trial' attorney. Most likely a corporate attorney. His big failure was in not understanding the U.S. Constitution. That was pointed out to him well before Bryan's death (by DeWayne.)
From Texas, Albert

DeWayne In San Diego said...

Well Jim according to Cad he had chatted with Bryan on IM that afternoon(the 24th) he also said he contacted authority's on Thursday.

So he assumed he would be called at trial as would anyone who talked to Bryan that afternoon. (Bergeron & Macias)

What I have wondered Cad referred to IM which imply's chatting but most IM has voice capability. So I wonder if he was talking to Bryan.

If so since Cad said he was online while "Danny" was present I wonder if he has confirmed to investigators that Harlow was there. (for example heard Harlow talking)

Albert the other big problem with Cad was his constant defense of Bryan Kocis, esp AFTER I pointed out there were other people who knew chatty Bryan from IM,Email and the like learned what was up with his little studio (usually after he made you an offer) and dropped him!

Or in my case reported him(which Bryan already suspected)

I think I told Cad pointblank in August if you keep defending Bryan at some point people will believe you exonerated and validated his lifestyle.

Your right this statement "He indicated he could keep Brent Corrigan on the stand for about a week, grilling, intimidating, humiliating and degrading him" showed that Cad was the same as Bryan he wanted to destroy the victim while defending his tormentor. Very revealing about his mindset!

jim said...

Well, I think you guys are giving Cad a bum rap in one respect - the whole address thingy.

I remember this whole affair clearly, as I was closely involved.

The address was on the MOU (of the proposed settlement agreement) attached to Document 41 of the Cobra lawsuit. Which Cad had purchased online. In other words...the address had already been made public, really.

All Cad did was provide Document 41 for all of us to look at, for free.

I know this, because, I was the one who urged him to do this.

Anyways, the address was there, and I don't think Cad really realized it. It was unintentional and accidental, I think. BTW, another bit of VERY confidential info...Brent Everett's real name...was in the MOU too, and got revealed in this little contretemps as well.

I am pretty sure Cad had/has no axe to grind with Brent Everett.

No...you know who I place the blame on here? Brent ex-attorney who filed Doc 41, and put the confidential MOU needlessly into the file as an attachment.

Doc 41 was a motion to withdraw as counsel. I can see no earthly reason why the MOU was attached to it as an exhibit. The MOU clearly stated the it was a CONFIDENTIAL DOCUMENT. That negligent act was arguably malpractice, IMO.

So no, I can't fault Cad for what happened here, personally. Blame Brent's lawyer, not Cad.

DeWayne In San Diego said...

Wow Jim you are so Astute nothing gets by you! ;-)

Your right Brents lawyer fucked up and attached the MOU and yes Cad found it paid for it and released it at your request,,,

BUT BUT what Albert and I REFUSE to exonerate Cad for was the FAILURE to see S & G's home address, Seans Soc Sec no OR Brent Everett real name.

Cad is a lawyer I read ALL three bits of confidential info in a very quick fast scan,,,

It simply beggars belief that a Lawyer would not notice that info and would release it without redaction.

It was very Obvious to us that Cad would have not been upset if something had happened to Sean & Grant from the release of the address.

Especially since they were receiving explicit Death treats that very week again something that Cad dismissed,

We became very aware early on Cad was not a disinterested player in this case, and in fact was as Agenda driven as Albert and I.

BB said...

I recall CAD made a post saying he was done with the blogs. He obviously meant it as he no longer posts.

As for Sean's address being made public, it was Sean's then lawyer who revealed that. CAD simply made those documents available to us bloggers. Someone else would have done so eventually. Those documents were already in the public domain.

To claim this put Sean's life at risk is ridiculous. At risk from who?

Grant made available all of Bryan's private information including his address long before this incident.

Pot, kettle, black is how I view this.

DeWayne In San Diego said...

Oh BB Cad is still around he checks in on all the blogs frequently as evidenced by the I.P address,
We even know when he is in the country on the weekend (dial up)

"To claim this put Sean's life at risk is ridiculous. At risk from who?"

Why to prevent his testimony in a future case involving underage porn and Robert Wagner who else?

really surprised you had to ask ;-)

jim said...

Well I hope he takes the time to make a "Deal or No Deal" entry on his next visit. :-)

Albert said...

It was immediately (hours) after CAD made public the MOU that I contacted Jason Secrest myself. We were already in contact as friends. Now that took only one reading for me to catch the address of Brent Corrigan. I recommended to Jason he not publicize this MOU for the reason I described, ‘Brent’s physical address.’ Jason wrote back to me that he would not. He also pointed out to me a small fact I had not caught. Brent Everett's real name was also exposed.

Now, I am a Philosopher, not an attorney, some courts, criminal, civil and domestic have allowed me to serve.

It would really take an effort to avoid Brent Corrigan’s address since that was in enlarged capital text, set apart from any other text. For an attorney to claim they were not aware of the defendant’s address in a court document is just not believable. In Texas we call that a LIE.

I am sure that CAD, as a friend of Bryan Kocis, had a huge axe to grind with Brent Everett. As you can read in the “Siren’s Tale,' Brent Everett is one of the witnesses that can reveal Bryan Kocis for what he was.

So, you do not expect the address of the defendant to appear in a legal document?

This is amazing.

BB said...

"Why to prevent his testimony in a future case involving underage porn and Robert Wagner who else?"

what future case? ack, nevermind, this current one is enough.

"really surprised you had to ask ;-)"

why? unlike you, i have no insider knowledge.

BB said...

The fact is, nothing illegal was done by the CobraKiller for posting information that revealed Bryan's address.

It was a shitty thing to do as it was done on purpose. It made public this war between all involved. Something Sean and his CobraKiller will never take responsibility for.

CAD did nothing illegal by posting information that revealed Sean's address as the information was already available to the public.

DeWayne In San Diego said...

unlike you, i have no insider knowledge.

It has come to my attention that Harlow Cuadra is currently in the midst of negotiations with the DA's office. Harlow's decision is due to evidence not made public.

This information came from a very reliable source.

More details will be posted here when I am given the OK to do so.

http://amurderisannounced.blogspot.com/2007/10/harlow-to-avoid-dp.html


BB there are just a handful of players with that kind of info,,,your source would be VERY reliable indeed,,,

Anonymous said...

dewayne,
Thanks for answering that, have to tell you. I did not have to dig that story up- I never forgot it and - I lived it.
I was in Crispos loft [same loft as murder] on several occasions shooting "test" photos with an aspiring photographer who also lived in that loft with Crispo.
Long story short Crispo asked me out to dinner- I said no. I saw him several times around his place while I was getting pictures shot. He was a cokehead and asked me one evening if I wanted to stick around as they would be having a party that night. I was then told by others there that those parties consisted of a boy [young man] getting beaten, others watching etc., scared the shit out of me.
Skip to 6 months later I am living in Italy modelling and I see Andrew Crispos arrest and the whole story in [I believe] Vanity Fair - I read the story and shit my pants. I was a little too close for comfort and I have always been deeply saddened by what these sick individuals did to this young man. He was not looking to die that night. This perverted maniac went too far and as if that was not enough - had sex with the corpse. This is one of those things that has haunted me over the years.

quickysrt said...

Jason S. (in his response) acts like Sean is doing some serious damage, self destructive type of damage. Like when you bite the f'ing hand that feeds you, as if, as if these sites have fed Sean or something. Or that he will need them more than they NEED HIM. He has starved more like it.

Well, if I were Sean, I would at this point start saving for a really good looking suit, keep trim and get a light tan. Get ready for the close ups in PA. Because if he must be dragged through the ringer, he may as well look absolutly stunning for the real press. Bring some cards (with a little picture and web address) to toss around and milk that gawd damn appearance at the trial for everything it could be worth. Better publicity than all those little web sites together ever gave him.

At this point he may as well take that next step, and be choosy about which rags he will grant interviews to starting now.

That's right, plan ahead and work every room like a pro when he arrives in PA if there is a trial, and as they say, don't look back.

BB said...

"your source would be VERY reliable indeed"

yes I said so at the time ;-)

my source is definitely not one of the players. do you really believe joe, harlow, sean or the cobrakiller would give me any information? most unlikely.

you on the other hand get plenty of information from Sean and his cobrakiller. you have blogged it often.

Albert said...

BB, I am pretty sure DeWwayne was pointing out your disclaimer about having insider knowledge is not consistent with your citing of a 'very reliable source.' There is a lot D and I are not allowed to speak about but if someone else proposes the concept, IE. that Harlow has cut a deal, then there is no reason not to support the truth with reason. I still defend your position on this. I believe the current movements of the attorneys on the chess board is a reaction to that Queen (the real deal) being pulled out.
You seem to be publicly denying any other possible litigation about Cobra ET AL. Fine for you. D and I will not let that company continue without publicly exposing it for the illegal operation it is. I will spare the other words I would write about that company because I am just making our position clear.
Jim, Brent is not criticizing critics. He is criticizing people that call themselves journalists or reporters. They did not get their facts straight and therefore told lies. Before my interview with Octavier was published, he reviewed it twice. Once after it was transcribed and then again when DeWayne had it ready for publication. In both cases he made minor corrections we were grateful for. This is while he is working two jobs in addition to his modeling. The final approval came during a ten minute break he had at work. That is accurate journalism. These clowns that write for Rolling Stone and Out and write outright falsehoods need to be called on it. Brent can and does call them on it because he is independent. They are liars. They may as well be called liars, particularly when they lie.
Now I will make a rare but oh so obvious observation about my young friend Brent (and Grant for that matter.) From Chris Henriquez to Michael Gross or most recently Steve Pena, and so many in between, most notably Bryan Kocis and Lee Bergeron, Brent and Grant have not demonstrated a consistent ability to judge a good person from a bad one. I particularly think of the intense level of scrutiny and investigation DeWayne and I have gone through and we are just fans. Sometimes I am just flabbergasted.

Geoff Harvard said...

For the trial, I would chose for Sean a navy single breasted suit in the $1200 range, a light blue shirt with pinpoint collar (doesn't glare on TV), solid maroon silk tie, and black Allen Edmonds Park Avenue shoes. Very business like, but not pretentious. Socks have to be black, very thin, and over the calf. Keep crap out of your pockets, or you'll look like a Luzerne County prosecutor. Get a fucking haircut. And don't forget a manicure. I've noticed a lot of Cobra boys bite their nails and have overgrown cuticles, and it looks like shit in certain close-ups. For the suit, don't forget that it takes at least two fittings to get it right. And insist on four cuff buttons on the jacket, not three. Cuff buttons on suit jackets are like holes on Buicks.

Albert said...

Geoff you cracked me up. Geoff said, "Cuff buttons on suit jackets are like holes on Buick's." I am like 100% sure Brent would have no idea what that means. Grant might, having a little more experience with cars.
Your fashion sense is impeccable and so right on for a tv camera. There is clearly more in your blood then salt water, but your service is respected. Thank you friend, Albert.

Geoff Harvard said...

The waist on suit trousers must cross your belly button or a little above. The way you can spot a hick is he wears his pants down around his hips to convince himself he doesn't need 40's. The other suit fit faux pas is the little knap sack between the shoulder blades on the jacket. You should be able to raise your arms to horizontal or above without disturbing the fabric on your back. That's what the two fitting sessions are for.
In the evening, try to air the suit out a bit while you eat room service (without Erik Rhodes) and watch yourself on TV, then with the same suit change into a solid white pinpoint collar shirt and navy tie with very tiny white polka dots. The tinier the white polka dots on your navy tie, the more credible you are. And I shouldn't have to tell you that your belt must be black to match the shoes, no funky accessories, and touch up your shoeshine whenever you get a chance.

Albert said...

Geoff, this seems to be getting a bit into the fetish realm. Remember, this is a guy that can wear nothing or a fishtail and still look intelligent.

jim said...

Well, if he takes the stand in his Stan the Merman outfit, someone will have to carry him (as he cannot walk in those fins).

Rob said...

Geoff--

That is the advice agents give their witnesses for dressing to please the court, the jury, the prosecution, and the ever so objective press. Dress like a conservative and, bless your soul, NO CRAP IN YOUR POCKETS. If you need money and a credit card use a money clip.

Geoff Harvard said...

This reminds me of the crucial, if obvious, issue of necktie length. The tip of the tie must touch the plain belt buckle when the trousers are worn at proper height. Neckties are made in different lengths. If a Pennsylvania State Police corporal were to borrow a tie intended for Sean, it would fall somewhere between his ribcage and his hiphugging trousers, and he would pierce the silk with a handcuff tie tack. If the situation were reversed, Stan the Merman's Barbie crotch would be concealed. A guy 5'7" with a 14 1/2" neck and a flat belly needs a tie 56" or less. Try before you buy. All this fashion advice is intended for those whose dads didn't take them on the train to Brooks Brothers before college.

Grant said...

Geoff,

Don't worry, I can assure you both Brent and myself will be the more than adequately as well as eloquently presented and prepared for any trial and/or other public representation in which we are involved.

I've been keeping current with fashion since original demise of the bell bottoms back in the mid to late 70's.

Thanks,

Grant

Grant said...

Who do you think was the inspiration behind the "Sassy Prom" entourage, back in late May 2006?

Clean, Classic, Traditional yet up to date and sexy! :)

>g

DeWayne In San Diego said...

SIGH so right Rob & Geoff as ridiculous as it sounds (dressing for the court)I got a lesson in how important when I served on a jury in a drug case about 15 years ago.

A federal trial we had 2 agents testify to a drug buy. One was an SDPD detective, the other a DEA man.

In the jury room we are discussing the officers testimony when this prim & proper 60's women informed us she would DISREGARD all the testimony from the SDPD officer but she WOULD BELIEVE the nice federal agent.

Our foreman said why their testimony was nearly identical.

Her response "Well that so called policeman has long hair,a scraggly beard and the worst suit i have ever seen,, he looked just like a Hells Angel trying and failing to Dress up!"

"The DEA man is smartly dressed and very clean cut" she added

Our foreman then pointed out that the SDPD officer was on undercover detail and that was why he had the beard & hair long.(He was asked and explained this on the stand)

She replied "he disrespected the court showing up that way,,he should have stayed home"

Our foreman was patient but the woman would not budge her last comment before we voted was "he is obviously an unsavory character"

Yes we voted to convict and one of our number voted solely based on the testimony of the "clean cut DEA man" ;-)

Jury's SHHESSH!

BB said...

"Albert and I REFUSE to exonerate Cad"

does this come with a life sentence?

lol.

Geoff Harvard said...

Grant, please.
Grant . . . please.
grantplease
Grant . . .
. . . please.
Grant . . . please. We've seen the '80's pic that Elm dug up, and it doesn't inspire confidence.

The Sassy Prom horror is exactly the sort of Appalachain train wreck you don't want a jury to contemplate. "Jeremy Carsson" was the least offensive member of the gang, and he looked like he had just fallen off a hay wagon bound from Cullowhee to Sylva. Talk about the Old Lockhart Place, the last ten acre mountainside plot at the end of the hollow, I saw that exhibit in Smoky Mountain National Park when I was 14 and took a bunch of artsy BW pics of it. You couldn't swing a dead cat at the Winter Park Art Festival in 1968 without hitting some dude's oil paintings based on my photos. My grandmother was with us on that junket, and she wouldn't shut up about how that was just like the place where she grew up, the log hovel, the spring box, the outhouse, cousin Sam Ervin. To think I am an octoroon, and that makes me one of them.
Brooks Brothers has gone squishy soft now, and Britches of Georgetown went out of business, so I don't know where you go in 2007. Saville Row may be your only recourse.

BB said...

"D and I will not let that company continue without publicly exposing it for the illegal operation it is."

Albert, that is up to you guys. I short while back I felt the same about Dewayne - and exposed his illegal online activities which included the downloading of material that surpasses the Cobra material he is always complaining about.

Pot, kettle, black.

What I do not grasp is Dewaynes pot kettle black attitude in this.

BB said...

"I served on a jury in a drug case about 15 years ago"

that is interesting.

Rob said...

Dewayne and Grant--

We do try to cut a dashing figure in court. I shave extra close, no 5o'clock shadow. My charcoal grey, medium weight wool, single-breasted, three button, and my white, pin-point, French cuffed, shirt with my French braid cufflinks, and a silk, black, plum and silver neck tie work for me. I complete this statement with my dress, Bates low quarters, black over the calf socks, and black dress belt. I hope I meet with Geoff's sartorial approval.

Rob said...

Geoff, Grant, Jim, and PC--

When gay guys get together! Damn this is fun. The guys in my office are content to wear 4 in hand ties with very sloppily done tie knots. Bugs the Hell out of me! I'd take Geoff or Grant or Dewayne to lunch or dinner anytime dressed to turn heads so to speak.

Rob said...

Elm wrote, "That (regarding his black helicopter theory of the crime) being said the rest is pretty easy to figure out."

Sure is easy to figure out--the two grifting con boobs got carried away and killed Bryan Kocis on 24 January 2007. And now, the amassed evidence and excellent, dilligent police work have the grifting pair behind bars, awaiting trial for their hasty actions. The legal system works.

Geoff Harvard said...

Rob, with french cuffs you have to be very careful with sleeve length or you'll look like a Broadway craps shooter. I had to think about the black, plum, and silver tie, but it would work with the grey suit, although my own impulse would have been for a charcoal/maroon rep.

elmysterio said...

Not really Rob you see Bryan was murdered and he should have been in jail. He had his charges reduced for raping that 15 year-old boy. And he should have been required to register as a sex offender.

Why don't you ask the paents of the kid from 2001 if the justice system works. Why don't you ask Brent if the justice system works.

Rob it would appear that the justice system only works when you agree with what it does.

Geoff Harvard said...

Elm, the justice system worked in both of the cases you mentioned.

The 15 year old and his parents refused to cooperate with the prosecution, and the family even moved away. Without the boy's testimony, the most serious charges against Kocis could not go forward.

In Sean's case, he performed under age in FEB2004 and in the months following. He signed an exclusivity contract on July 21, 2004 under age, he received valuable consideration under age starting in SEP2004, then he ratified the underage contract by receiving valuable consideration after his majority and performing after his majority. He signed another contract in July, 2005 as an adult. There has been no public discussion of his having reported or preferred charges in connection with Kocis's probable sexual battery of him while he was a minor. He did report to the FBI that Kocis had illegally produced pornography with him as an underage subject, but we don't know what action, if any, the FBI took. They may have seen the complaint as an attempt to draw them into a civil matter and disrupt Kocis's business.

I imagine a competent attorney representing Sean ca. AUG2005 would have advised him to stay off of Juicygoo and could have used the leverage of potential child rape charges to get Kocis to do the following:
--annul the underage contracts
--declare the 2005 contract discharged in full
--disgorge the Brent Corrigan brand
--agree not to disrupt further business dealings

jim said...

I just had to throw another yellow flag on the field; just remember, avoid attaching labels to persons, so as not to run afoul of the "no personal attacks" rule here. Thx guys! :-)

Rob said...

Elm commented, "Rob it would appear that the justice system only works when you agree with what it does." Unfortunately for you, I have spoken out, vociferiously, about Kocis' rape of the 15 year old teen male. You are irritated that I don't buy your Harlow is innocent crap. The reason is the facts in case say otherwise. Harlow is behind bars where he belongs. He can't menance society anymore.

BB said...

"I imagine a competent attorney representing Sean ca. AUG2005 would have advised him to stay off of Juicygoo"

Sean and his CobraKiller really screwed themselves by posting on JG.

Had they not posted on JG, they just MIGHT have some credibility today.

Lets not pretend here - I am sure it is difficult enough having credibility working in the porn biz.

The CobraKillers anger is a problem. It is also Sean's problem.

Neither of them have credibility due to their own actions. It gets worse each time the CobraKiller comments.

jim said...

"Sean and his CobraKiller really screwed themselves by posting on JG. "

I dunno. You go back a ways, BB. You keep citing this Juicy Goo thing. Juicy Goo this. And Juicy Goo that.

And as you know from my blog intro, I was not here for all this Juicy Goo. So, I am trying to understand. And not succeeding much.

I go to Juicy Goo today. It has a "forum" section, a moribund message board that has not been posted to since Nov 17.

Are you saying this wasteland was once a popular forum? That's hard to believe. But ok...

And it does not archive the old posts. If a tree falls in the forest, and no recording of it's fall is kept...to whom does it matter, except the dwindling number of forest squirrels (such as yourself) who actually saw it fall, way back when?

So, I dunno. I'm of the general opinion that we bloggers tend to overemphasize our importance here ...and our posts are actually readable today.

If I don't think my own posts don't matter much in the grand scheme of things...then you can imagine how little regard I have for posts that no longer exist.

BB said...

Jim,

My comment was a reply to Geoff Harvard who mentioned the JG forum.

Nothing more, nothing less.

Odd to see you read so much into it.

Whatever floats your boat ;-)

jim said...

One logical extension of the "no personal attack" rule I think we are going to adopt is, none of this "you are really so-and-so" speculation.

Like I said before, people's real identities behind their screen names interest me not. I've already mentioned that I do not have a stat counter, for precisely the reason I do not care about such things.

As such, I think I'm going to redirect such chatter to other sites that already allow it. BB's blog seems to tolerate it, and as a result engages in it quite extensively.

Jakester's blog quite openly encourages it; indeed, he has openly declared his sacred mission in life to exposing people's identities.

Since there are these other fine outlets to go to for such debate, I think I'll cede that entire field to them.

Anonymous said...

Geoff,
I thought an "octoroon" was somebody in their 80's.
I was wrong :)

Rob said...

BB

You want a clear field to lay misrepresentations and baseless accusations against Grant Roy and Sean Lockhart while trying to convince us all how innocent Bryan Kocis and RW are, well it isn't going to happen. I will point out the errors in your statements. By the looks of things, it is job security.

Rob said...

Jim has written, "Jakester's blog quite openly encourages it; indeed, he has openly declared his sacred mission in life to exposing people's identities." Jakester must have too much time on his hands.

Geoff Harvard said...

bb, don't be so selective and dishonest about quoting me. The substance of my post was that Brayan Kocis had probably committed the felony of child rape, and that if Sean wanted him to go away both personally and in their business relationship, a competent lawyer could use the sex charge as a hammer to make him go away. The JG exchanges were ridiculous, and they enraged and empowered Kocis to file frivolous lawsuits to harass Sean, who did not have the means to respond to them. See dhsd's link to the enraged, drunken, threatening Kocis email to Sean ca. Sep2005. Kocis drank. He stalked and raped underage boys. He took pleasure in tormenting boys he felt he had a right to control. The Luzerne County prosecutor will face a labor like unto those of Hercules in overcoming Kocis's good ridance factor in front of a jury. I do not understand bloggers who display a residual loyalty to Kocis. B is for Bloomington.

jim said...

"Jakester must have too much time on his hands."

Don't we all. :-)

Rob said...

Jim--

Not necessarily.

jim said...

[OK, below is a very interesting post sent in by DeWayne, explaining in a nutshell the whole JuicyGoo war (in his eyes). HOWEVER I decided not to approve it as posted, as small bits of it delved into identity speculation...which I just declared this morning as a form of ad hominum attack and hence verboten.

SO what I've done (and I hope this is OK with you DeW) is REDACT the minor digressions into identity speculation, and recopy and approve the rest. Which is very interesting and helpful to me...and to others too no doubt...thanks much. It touches on areas of a big new post I am working on "tentative title: The Root of All Evil" so should come in handy.]


Jim,Geoff just an FYI about Juicy goo. After the l... Jim,Geoff just an FYI about Juicy goo.

After the last video shoot in PA June 2005(Cameron Lane & Brent,scene for Cream Boys) Sean returned to San Diego.

Sometime in mid to late July he happened upon the JuicyGoo forum (kind of like JustUsBoys is now) there was a lot of back and forth discussion in the Porn Star forum and sometimes models would come on and interact with fans.

Brent saw a discussion about Barebacking in porn and started leaving comments in this thread. posters got excited that the real Brent was here some were skeptical and demanded proof. So Brent attached a pic with date to a message.

Identity established he continued interacting on the thread. Someone asked Brent was he worried about barebacking in his videos he said NO Bryan used a Dutch Instant HIV test you urinated on to determine if the models were neg or not. (I know!!!)

There were a couple of us "older guys" (I was one) who "questioned " this test. As I recall I said this was Bullshit, a bogus test probably a PH strip from a Tropical fish store! (and why Bryan did not want "his" boys talking to older guys we would expose his BS)

Yes Jim I may have very well started this some of this shit ;-)

Anyway the discussion went back & forth for a couple of days and then a new poster "The Truth Be Told" appeared on the board.

Truth immediately discounted the comment from Brent about the "Dutch instant HIV test" and said real testing was required from a clinic (a lie of course) and Brent did not know what he was talking about!

A person comes on a board and calls the only person who HAS identified himself (Brent) a Liar about info he should have known on a Cobra shoot and you know it's about to get nasty.

Brent immediately informs everyone that "Truth" is spouting bullshit and is probably a model of Bryans.

Bryan he sends an email to the Owner of JuicyGoo demanding he delete the thread since Brent has posted pix of himself (Bryan states ANY image of Brent Corrigan is his property and may not be used)

He is ignored although the pic is removed(a pic Sean had taken)
Bryan and Truth then proceed to attack Brent on the forum (always under an Alias, even as Bryan makes an allusion to who he is, he never says This is Bryan Kocis)

Brent is told he knows he is not supposed to be on a forum or discussing proprietary Cobra production secrets! (Bryan's MO at Cobra)*

A new poster appears Casey Cain (Grant) and all hell breaks lose as Grant attacks Bryan for trying to hide the fact he is putting his models in danger and lying to them.

This all occurs over about 5 weeks late July thru late Aug 2005.

The board is soon in total chaos and it's almost all generated by 4 or 5 people Grant,Bryan & Truth be Told & a new poster later on gets into it with Grant (BB).

So the split,the animosity between all started at JuicyGoo, it's also where Grant made his famous Cobrakiller comment in Sept 2005

Grant stated he would use all legal means (the law,the courts) to Destroy Bryan Kocis and Cobra Video. It was the first week of September when Bryan sends his email threatening Sean with arrest and death in jail.

It was during Sept the JuicyGoo forum was locked and some months later deleted.

Jim I was on the forum from late July till Aug 6th then I flew to North Carolina, I saved the initial BareBack discussion at Juicy Goo and forgot about it. Sometime in October 2005 I looked up the locked thread read it and when I went back a couple of months later it was gone.

Julian Deveraux and Cad are the only 2 bloggers I know who were there beside S & G(we suspect on Bryans side in addition to RW he also had Cody Lockhart & Conner Ashton)and BB of course.

Jim to wrap this up

Bryan was furious with Sean for going on the JuicyGoo forum.

Why?

Bryan put in EVERY contract a CobraBoy signed several stipulations (He alone in the industry required)

1.No boy could work for another studio for six months after a Cobra Shoot(no extra compensation was made for this exclusivity however)

2.The name a Cobra model used was the property of Cobra Video and was not to be used at any other studio!
Corbin Michaels & Erik Grant(Manhattan Heat) changed names to continue in porn,,Erik works for Michael Lucas.
http://www.lucasentertainment.com/
models.asp?ModelID=193

3.If a model worked for another studio Bryan would no longer hire them for future projects.

4.Models were STRICTLY forbidden to post on any forum,blog,MySpace etc using their Cobra model names at any time! No other studio requires this and very revealing about Bryan and his insecurity.

Bryan was upset Sean maintained a MySpace page under his real Name and demanded he take it down.

On reflection Bryan imposed such secrecy out of fear,
fear that someone would talk,discuss what went on at Cobra Video.

This is why JuicyGoo was the flashpoint for the Cobra/Brent Corrigan war.

Damn just wish we had the whole saved forum I plan on posting what little I have,on my future Cobra Video Website (yes I have a Cobra site planned for 2008 post Trial).

Rob said...

Dewayne--

Actually, you are an eyewitness as would be Sean and Grant. Sean was threatened with harm, that is a chargeable offense.

DeWayne In San Diego said...

Hi Jim well as I stated I had planned to send this as private message.

I have no problems with the redactions in fact I prefer to post this here because you like PC take moderation seriously.

I do have an observation Everyone knows who Sean,Grant,DeWayne and Albert are we have all posted pix and personal info.

The other side continues to reside in the shadows, they refuse to reveal a scrap of info about themselves not even a pic.

This was consistent from the beginning at Juicy Goo attack the public figure (Sean) while remaining hidden.

I do believe you should have posted the one name since he admitted just recently he was at Juicy Goo on BB's blog and he is the NEXUS of everything. ;-)

Do understand your reticence however and thanks for taking the time to repost.

Oh and Jim I wanted you to have your first 100 comment post,,
this will guarantee that!

Anonymous said...

This is very interesting,
I had also wondered what I had missed regarding the JG thing and with all the references to it - it seemed like if you did not know what was on that forum you were in the dark a bit.
I was thinking it would be great if someone could repost it all just so that we who were not there yet could get caught up and see its relevance or irrelevance.

Albert said...

Let's make it 101. Anyway, my name is Albert (yes, really.) My picture is readily available. OMG, is that me over to the upper right of this comment? Scan back a bit on BB's blog for one of the best resolutions. I am still disappointed BB does not have me on his top splash collection. I try so hard to be, well, you know, a Brent supporter.

Anonymous said...

Albert said,
"Let's make it 101",
I think that is very cool!
My name is Vincent James Nickerson.

jim said...

"Update 4: J.C. Adams replies."

Brent's rant about the news becomes news.

Maybe AVN, Rolling Stone and Out will cover it too...

BB said...

Geoff Harvard, I did not quote you. Like you, I posted an opinion in reply to yours.

BB said...

Dewayne, are you ready for this...

You are 95% correct about the start of the JG thing.

So much is left out, understandable as there is so much.

At the time I did not know Bryan and Robert were posting on that forum. It did not take too long till I found out they were.

Most of us have bits and pieces saved from JG. It is too bad we can not come together, and piece it together to make one hell of a post about it.

Each side was brutal. The CobraKiller took it to new heights with his CobraKiller thing. He posted about his goal of destroying Bryan and Cobra. He did not say 'legally' as you claim.

BB said...

Geoff & Jim,

Just to be clear. I did not bring up JG on this blog. What I said about JG was in reply to Geoff Harvard, who brought up the subject of JG.

BB said...

Geoff, a correction, I did quote you. The quote is accurate.

Geoff Harvard said...

bb, you quoted a sentence fragment and used it dishonestly.

DeWayne In San Diego said...

BB said...

Dewayne, are you ready for this...

You are 95% correct about the start of the JG thing.

So much is left out, understandable as there is so much.


THUD Dewayne gets off floor ;-)
bb your too generous since I missed the crucial mid Aug threads & only caught them in a quick scan in Oct 2005. I have the barebacking(discussion) thread (2 weeks worth) as soon as I locate it on the hard drive I'll post.

Too bad the Way Back machine missed most of JuicyGoo

jim said...

"Update 5: In a new blog post, Brent flies to sunny Florida, meets his cast, and also runs into a couple fellow porn stars cast as cameos for Another Gay Sequel. The handshakes are chilly, as one of these porn cameos once had "taken the liberty of posting written, multi paragraph notices to the industry urging fans, viewers, journalists, studios, and producers not to buy my work, support my cause, or hire me for adult projects."

Hehe, well of course, we have NO idea who this mystery porn star/producer is, but Brent reports that he does not hold a grudge, and will not let a little antipathy interfere with the general sense of la dolce vita he is experiencing on the set in SoFla."


Hey you know what, I have an idea...maybe things will be less tense with this mystery porn cameo if Brent and he just sat down, got to chatting and getting to know one another a bit more.

Maybe Brent should try to start a friendly conversation with this mystery porn cameo, like say:

"Hey my name is Brent. I was once involved in a huge copyright infringement lawsuit. Copyright infringement lawsuits can be ruinously expensive, did you know that?

Boy, if I were you, I'd try to avoid getting involved in any copyright infringement lawsuits. But if you ever do, and have any questions about them...I'm your go-to man!"

And there! A PERFECT icebreaker for Brent to start a friendly conversation. I'm sure once they get to chattin' like this, he and this mystery porn cameo will end up being best of buds. A little free advice from jim to Brent (jim take a bow).

Grant said...

That is exactly what he tried to do, but neither of them seemed to be interested!

Albert said...

History is written by the winners.

Rob said...

Elm snidely stated, "you are getting just a little ridiculous."

And you aren't ridiculous? You have hearts and flowers tatooed, noticeably across your forehead for Harlow and that fact is clouding your judgment. Jim is hitting too close to home. You are a piece of work. At least Dan and RW are openly hostile toward Sean. You are the lamb in wolf's clothing, feigning respect for Sean, but really wanting to be his ruination. For what? Harlow? Harlow is a con artist. He won't give you the time of day if, by some quirk of Fate, he walks from his judgment day in Luzerne County, Pennsylvania.