We pick up where we left off on our
last musings way back in April, where Harlow and Joe are discussing their client/attorney
Barry Taylor. This is from the Blacks Beach Tapes
Part 24. Harlow and Joe are talking about their decision to fly out to California to meet with Sean and Grant that very weekend:
HARLOW CUADRA: Ain't shit gonna happen, so, better get on with the show.
JOSEPH KEREKES: Even Barry said, go film them.
JOSEPH KEREKES: Yea, ya know.
HARLOW CUADRA: I thought Barry would be like say hell no.
That's funny, I thought so too!
That's because I distinctly recall Elm talking about this; about how he and Barry were both opposed to the trip, how they both felt it was a set up...and how Harlow and Joe ignored their dire warnings and went anyways.
Well...as you can see here, this appears to be completely untrue, at least as concerns Barry Taylor. Barry said "hell yes!" to the trip, not "hell no." Which makes me ponder whether Elm's version of HIS advice to them was 100% opposite as well.
It would certainly be a great irony if Elm ended up contributing to Harlow and Joe's capture and conviction, by giving them the notion that such a trip would be a good idea.
Barry's motive for giving the trip the thumbs up is pretty obvious to both Joe and Harlow:
JOSEPH KEREKES: I think he wants the paycheck.
HARLOW CUADRA: Yea. He said ya know what, cause we told him the whole story, everything, he goes ya know what, go make your money.
Hmmm: "...we told him the whole story, everything..." I wonder if "everything" includes the fact that they murdered Bryan? Not at all a far fetched prospect, as we know they have freely blabbed about it to many others before; to Sean, to Grant, to Renee, and to at least three random cellmates.
Of course Mr. Taylor technically would have been duty bound to not to reveal this information, due to attorney-client priviledge. Still, this fact is interesting nonetheless. Especially in conjunction with the jailhouse revelation Barry Taylor may have been the original source of the idea to murder Bryan Kocis:
"KEREKES advised RIGGS that he and CUADRA conspired to murder the victim as a result of a desire to hire “some porn guy from another state” who was under contract with the victim. According to KEREKES, he and CUADRA met said actor “in another state” to discuss doing business that would“make (CUADRA and KEREKES) millions. Upon their return, they discussed the venture with TAYLOR, who advised that the only way that CUADRA and KEREKES would benefit significantly from the arrangement was if the victim were to “disappear’."
Joe goes on to make more observations about Mr. Taylor's character, via an anecdote (
which we've discussed here before):
JOSEPH KEREKES: I almost fired Barry the other day, if we hadn't come home that day, the next day, Barry had hired an auctioneer, all of the plasma's, all of our beds, everything was gonna be sold, and he had told my mom that she would get ten percent, of the... no, ninety percent of the sales, and they would get ten percent...
GRANT ROY: You gave them all your stuff?
JOSEPH KEREKES: I gave it all, it was tagged, we walked in the house, all these little tags, forty-five hundred, thirty-two hundred, ten dollars for that little turtle thing that's on the wall, in the bathroom and ah, what the truth of the matter is, they were getting sixty percent and my mom was getting forty, and since we came home, they said oh, you owe us twenty-five thousand dollars for the stuff that we would have made off this shit, I said Barry if you, I will fire you right now and haul you into court cause he... my mom would testify that you told ah them ah, ten percent, ninety percent. I was mad at Barry.
GRANT ROY: Lawyers, (inaudible).
HARLOW CUADRA: Well when the cat is away, ya know the mice played big, ya know.
JOSEPH KEREKES: He was telling us to stay in South Beach to stay there, it's not safe, I said Barry everything looks good for us here, I wanna go home, I don't wanna lose our house, and we came home and its been fine. All our plates have been run by our State Trooper down at the end, everyday we ask him to and we're fine.
HARLOW CUADRA: What he wanted us to do is hang out in South Beach, (inaudible) a couple of grand here and there and then...
JOSEPH KEREKES: Yea, I told him I had a hundred grand cash, ya know, and ah, just to keep him working for us, right, I didn't, but ah, so he kept and he wanted us to give him all that money and not come home and pay our bills up, ya know? I hate lawyers.
OK, one final musing here: Notice Joe mentions a "State Trooper down at the end" who aided and abetted their flight by illegally running their license plates for them. I wonder whether this rogue Virginia trooper has been exposed yet?
If he has...I imagine he's a disgruntled ex-Virginia trooper by now.
39 comments:
"OK, one final musing here: Notice Joe mentions a "State Trooper down at the end" who aided and abetted their flight by illegally running their license plates for them. I wonder whether this rogue Virginia trooper has been exposed yet?"
we dont know if joes story on this incident is true. its probably more BS.
Perhaps we'll find out at the July hearing.
Yall haft to check this out.
http://nlsngrc.blogspot.com/2008/06/bloggers-asinine-theory-about-joe.html
Somebody who knows all about the case.
Yeah...OK...
jim said...
Yeah...OK...
LOL
Thats what I was thinking.
Oh, please stop linking those 'National Enquirer' type sites. I will stick with Jim and PC. As BB, say's, 'drama free' zones.
BB that state trooper was our next door neighbor and i dont think he would of played joes game, dont think he would of took anything from them, or had anything to do with them, he was a pretty much to himself guy that really doesnt seem like he had anything to do with this, I personally think it was another one of joes lies...
I find it very humorous that the phrase attorney/client privilege is used in connection with Barry Taylor's name because he was both their attorney and their client.
Can he really invoke the tenets of attorney-client privilege since H/J were doing him?
Yes because Taylor was their attorney in fact. What was told to him in his capacity as their attorney is covered by privilege regardless of his after hours activities.
"Yes because Taylor was their attorney in fact. What was told to him in his capacity as their attorney is covered by privilege regardless of his after hours activities."
If it involved illegal activities... that may be open to interpretation of the courts... especially if Barry was one of the 'illegals'.
I have been on vacation for three weeks and have not been keeping up here. I would like to address a point that has been glossed over and is more important than it would first seem. That point concerns what a "material witness" actually is.
A "material witness" is more or less a person who is a suspect in a criminal investigation. The authority comes the United States Code 18 § 3144. All state statutes must conform to the federal constituion and the US Code. So the Pennsylvania state version will be a variation based on this citation in the US Code.
The person charged this way may not be a prime suspect or even a suspect against whom criminal charges ultimately will be filed. Yet, a suspect who is important enough--"material" enough--to warrant being held "in custody" for a period of time for questioning. Usually, police officials will hold a person as "a material witness" when they are concerned that the person will flee their jurisdiction (the affidavit filed with the Luzerne County criminal courts states this point from the police and prosecutors' perspectives) but do not yet have evidence on that person to actually charge a crime against him or her.
The material witness procedure is one way for the police to gain custody of someone right away, to see where the particular investigation goes from that point. Occasionally, a material witness is charged with a crime as a result of that investigation.
A careful reading of the affidavit posted for this person can be found on PC's blog. I wondered about all the bluster over something that is a point of fact. It really means the police are investigating and since this is a murder, I am glad the police are covering all the bases.
Regarding Pastor George,
Around the time of our blow up on pc's blog I had to ask myself what it was that rubbed me the very wrong way about him.
Something in my past came back clearly.
I was 17 and bartending in a gay club in NYC. There was a priest that would come in and pick up boys/guys- it was easy to get into clubs then [underage] if you looked right.
This priest liked them young.
I was flabbergasted that a priest would be in a gay club and picking up guys. Well one night [I remember this incident like it was yesterday] he was hitting on someone - I don't remember if it was me or one of the other bartenders but I went off-
I was like "You are a Priest, you are supposed to be an example to people"
Mind you this was my major Catholic upbringing and I am definately not saying that I was right to do it but I almost had a physical fight with him. I totally went ballistic on him.
Something in that still remains with me I believe as I may have an irrational disdain for Pastor George.
V.J. - There is NOTHING irrational in your disdain for Pastor George, as his post on PC's made clear. Indeed it shows you have very sound instincts about people. He is vile, IMO.
Unfortunately, I'm not too shocked by your recollection of the priest in the bar -- indeed these days it's refreshing to hear that he wasn't an out-and-out pedophile. What WAS shocking to me in your story was that you were bartending at 17!! Now I've heard everything!
A message to all-
Pastor Gluttony has graciously agreed to hold services this evening over on blog SOS.
Thank you to Pastor Gluttony!
Pastor George if you are out there do drop over, at least to see the heartfelt comment left by one blogger for you.
That would be comment 1 under the first post.
Good luck to you my son!
Hey Jim whats up with this dead post , can we please get some action going here.
How about you do a we tell all about everybody involved in this murder saga.
LOL
Not a bad idea!
ok what time an what channel i would love to out the rest and there part in this saga.......
LOL
I did some catching up on the Kocisphere last night, and I must say I was appalled. Once again, Jim, you are totally exempt here, but really, it's a complete madhouse sometimes elsewhere and it really dismays me. My instincts about this phenomenon were always to stay away from it, and at the risk of offending everyone, I think they were correct.
Anytime your ready, Renee. :-)
Yeah Will, as this thing gets closer to it's inevitable conclusion, you'd think there be less bitching...but it appears the opposite is true.
There seems to be some jockeying for position going on with certain people, with certain people striving to create their own post-verdict myths about this case.
I predicted this would happen, BTW. Despite people's claim that they would accept the jury verdict, I KNEW that that was just meaningless words; they would forget about this pledge once a "guilty" verdict was read.
You know, I hope as a condition of any plea bargain, the DA imposes an allocution condition: Harlow and/or Joe must not only plead guilty, but they must say in open court exactly how they did it, why they did it, who was involved, and who was NOT involved.
Imposing such a condition before any plea is accepted will greatly diminish a lot of the post-verdict nonsense I sense is coming down the pike...
You know, I hope as a condition of any plea bargain, the DA imposes an allocution condition: Harlow and/or Joe must not only plead guilty, but they must say in open court exactly how they did it, why they did it, who was involved, and who was NOT involved.
Jim I agree with you totally on this one, all parties involved should be put out on the table and let the authorities deal with them in the manner they see fit. I am suprised that there have not been more charges filed, but I am sure they are only waiting on the trial to do this. I dont suspect luzerne county will let anyone out of this without charges. There was way to much pre planning for this to happen.
Sister Renee,
I am weary!
Try as I may to keep the flock together,
these sheep are all over the place!
Pastor George may have been right when he said
"Heathens, Blasphemas, & Ho's-
those bloggers - the whole lot of 'em"!
Now, I will go and try and sell a chandelier and contemplate.
Sister, we may need a mid-week Sermon!
Jim, I appreciate that thoughtful response to my perhaps unduly harsh comment, but I have one slight quibble: When you say they should be made to say who else was involved (if anyone), why should the court take the words of two convicted murderers harboring many, many grudges seriously? And I think we all know who they hold their biggest grudge against at this point.
Don't you think perhaps just an accounting of THEIR actions during that horrible day would be enough?
Sorry, I shouldn't have left that remark vague. In my view, anyway, they would do anything to get back at Sean and would say anything to do so.
I think it'll be readily apparent if they say anything false in allocution to settle a "grudge."
In fact, since the judge has to sign off on all plea deals, they would be jeopardizing their deal if they did that.
At this point in the game, when you are standing in front of a judge who holds your fate (and perhaps even your life) in his hands...total humility, honesty and remorsefullness is required.
V.J. said...
Sister Renee,
I am weary!
Try as I may to keep the flock together,
these sheep are all over the place!
Pastor George may have been right when he said
"Heathens, Blasphemas, & Ho's-
those bloggers - the whole lot of 'em"!
Now, I will go and try and sell a chandelier and contemplate.
Sister, we may need a mid-week Sermon!
hell ya we do Brother VJ what do you think the sermon should be about ? fornication?
will g said...
Sorry, I shouldn't have left that remark vague. In my view, anyway, they would do anything to get back at Sean and would say anything to do so.
ok Will so you say grudge what if they say accomplice? If they are telling the truth then you expect the judge and the DA to let accomplices go? I would hope not. If there was (is) (or could of been) solicitation for murder then all involved should be jailed and pay for there crimes. It doesnt make a differnce who it is!
Jim said:
and remorsefullness is required.
Well I dont know about this one Jim, you may get everything but this one. Joe doesnt even feel any king of sympathy for the Kocis family, hell atleast Harlow says he feels bad for them and there loss. Now what makes you think that Joe would be remorseful on anything to do with a dollar?
"Well I dont know about this one Jim, you may get everything but this one. Joe doesnt even feel any king of sympathy for the Kocis family, hell atleast Harlow says he feels bad for them and there loss. Now what makes you think that Joe would be remorseful on anything to do with a dollar?"
Yeah, you're probably right about Joe.
Renee - I certainly bow to you in your knowledge of the case, as I am of course not privy to the facts that you are. And God knows what is on those tapes you have spoken of that incriminates Sean, as you seem to believe with some certainty that he is culpable.
But I HOPE it isn't just Joe's or Harlow's words that make you feel that way, because they are both proven liars, as you so well know, and without Sean and Grant's cooperation they would not be where they are now. That is why I feel that anything they say about them cannot be trusted, and CERTAINLY not without corroborating evidence.
And I just have to say, as someone way, way outside the case, it is just my gut feeling that he and Grant had nothing to do with this, in any capacity. For whatever that's worth, and I know it's not worth much.
will g said...
Renee - I certainly bow to you in your knowledge of the case, as I am of course not privy to the facts that you are. And God knows what is on those tapes you have spoken of that incriminates Sean, as you seem to believe with some certainty that he is culpable.
Will never directly said Sean was on them, I mean whoever is on them that was an accomplice or person that solicited this murder should be punished with them as well , does this help clarify things.
Will said:
without Sean and Grant's cooperation they would not be where they are now.
Now this I know for sure is not the case, the DA had enough evidence before the blacks beach tapes sealed there fate/ That was just the deal locker.
My wonder about Sean and Grant is why did they have to speak with a criminal attorney before helping the police with these tapes, if you are innocent of any crime, you really dont need a lawyer, I for sure know that I didnt help them with the murder and did not hesitate to talk to them without a lawyer or there advice, the truth is the truth, you dont have to be scared of being implicated if you did not do anything, all they had to do was tell the truth and do the blacks beach tapes, but still why with the advice of a lawyer???
will g said...
Renee - I certainly bow to you in your knowledge of the case, as I am of course not privy to the facts that you are. And God knows what is on those tapes you have spoken of that incriminates Sean, as you seem to believe with some certainty that he is culpable.
But I HOPE it isn't just Joe's or Harlow's words that make you feel that way, because they are both proven liars, as you so well know, and without Sean and Grant's cooperation they would not be where they are now. That is why I feel that anything they say about them cannot be trusted, and CERTAINLY not without corroborating evidence.
And I just have to say, as someone way, way outside the case, it is just my gut feeling that he and Grant had nothing to do with this, in any capacity. For whatever that's worth, and I know it's not worth much.
Will we all have our opinions on all this as for my opinion on the Sean and Grant thing I really want to hear what comes out at trial before I back them 100%, have a funny feeling some things might come out that dont jive with this, but i may be wrong. I just know that I will not go on what Harlow or Joe has said, but i do have information from a third party that leaves the window cloudy on this one, that is why i say i will reserve any opinion until the trial..
ok Jim you will love this one, the unmentionable one is getting a dose of police medicine, maybe we will be rid of him soon
Ok it has been a while since I have talked to everyone but I hope everyone reading is well happy and enjoying their summer.
I have been showered with support these last few months, and I am so grateful to everyone who has been there for me through thick and thin.
I have a lot of great things going on in my life, but for obvious reasons I am forced to keep things private from stalkers' eyes.
This brings me to the reason behind this posting, and I ask every reader fan, porn star, producer, studio, director, assistant, blogger, and anyone who has a heart to please re post this, and support me.
I have tried every attempt to be a civilized person, and ask certain people to not post things about me on sites. I want the whole industry to know directly from me that today June 24 2008 at 7:29 pm I pressed charges against the man known as Kent Barclay.
I have realized my dear friends that some people do not take warnings well, and that is when one must take things to action and involve the law. When presented with my case the detective found probable cause for me to pursue harassment amongst other charges against this man for the countless months of false accusations, defamation, slander, and stalker like behavior.
I have plenty of witnesses who I know I can count on for their support. I have received full permission from the people I answer to to pursue this to the full extent of the law, and I will. I am doing this for myself as well as Mathew Rush, Kevin Clarke, and everyone else who for the past ten years has had to endure this man's terrorism.
I am calling on the adult entertainment industry all fellow models who read and everyone to please support me in this. I hate to have to take things to this, but enough is enough. I am also going to be joining in on Porn confidential.Com's as well as other blogs who have shut down anyone associated with this man.
This being said I do not want to receive e mails about him or anything with his name in it please my privacy has been invaded enough I want to let our fair justice system work for me as the war veteran I am.
I am very calm at this point, and I want to say in closing that anyone who is supporting this man is a terrorist just like him, and anyone who is supporting him with fake information about me will also be included in my case so please be careful people because this Puerto Rican is in attack mode and will use the law to make anyone who has hurt me in any way pay.
Let everyone know that I am through with pleading now I act!
A very calm,
Angel Skye
"'without Sean and Grant's cooperation they would not be where they are now.'
Now this I know for sure is not the case, the DA had enough evidence before the blacks beach tapes sealed there fate/ That was just the deal locker."
YES I've been saying this for months too, thanks Renee!
The BBTs are NOT the be all, do all, end all, of this case. There is PLENTY of evidence, both physical and circumstantial, to proove beyond a shadow of a doubt Harlow and Joe are guilty. The emails, the trip, the stolen cameras, Joe's mouth, etc etc etc.
The BBTs are gravy on top of all that. Granted, it's a lot of gravy; it's one of those 50 gallon barrels of gravy they sell at Costco. And it's tasty gravy too! But it's gravy nonetheless.
"My wonder about Sean and Grant is why did they have to speak with a criminal attorney before helping the police with these tapes, if you are innocent of any crime, you really dont need a lawyer,..."
Well, thats not true in all cases. And this was one of those cases.
In fact, if you read the Rolling Stone article, you'll see that Sean and Grant were the focus of INTENSE police suspicion early on. So, they needed a lawyer to deal with that. Eventually, thanks in large part to their cooperation (not to mention the Harlow Apology on the BBTs) they were totally and forever cleared of any criminal involvement for this crime.
In fact, this was the real reason for the BBTs, IMO...not so much as evidence against Harlow and Joe (this was 'gravy' as per my previous comment), but to give Harlow and Joe an opportunity to unwittingly either implicate or exhonerate Sean and Grant.
And they were indeed exhonerated. See here for more detailed thoughts on this.
Which is why we have this situation today:
Harlow and Joe: In jail
Sean and Grant: Not in jail
Oh, and to that we may add:
Kent Barclay: Soon in jail!
"ok Jim you will love this one, the unmentionable one is getting a dose of police medicine, maybe we will be rid of him soon..."
THANKS for the heads up! Cross-posted, with pleasure! :-)
Thsnk you both, Jim and Renee, your comments were very helpful. Renee, I'm glad to hear you are keeping an open mind about this (unlike SOME we could mention). I may have misinterpreted your previous comment saying "You say grudge, what if they say accomplice" to imply that you have faith in what they say being true, when it now appears that's not what you meant. Sorry about that.
Jim's most wise observation of fact, "In fact, this was the real reason for the BBTs, IMO...not so much as evidence against Harlow and Joe (this was 'gravy' as per my previous comment), but to give Harlow and Joe an opportunity to unwittingly either implicate or exhonerate Sean and Grant."
This Jim is the succinct version of present reality. Also, I especially like the way you discuss the reason that a criminal defense attorney was employed by Sean and Grant. It is one of the wisest and most prudent things done by both men. So in so far as Sean and Grant are concerned, Die neuesten Ergebnisse der Polizei bestatigen seine Unschuld. That is what the evidence bears out to date.
Post a Comment