Here! TV Director John Roecker Funded Harlow's Private Lawyers

As reported earlier on PC's blog, Harlow Cuadra has new (proposed) private attorneys. This announcement came almost simultaneously with Harlow's rejection of a plea deal that could have saved him from the death penalty. In fact, the timing is such that it is not unreasonable to assume that one event (the imminent arrival of the newly retained private lawyers) influenced the other event (the rejection of the deal).

This naturally begs a question: where did Harlow Cuadra and his Defense Fund get the money for this new legal team?

While we obviously don't know the full list of contributors to Harlow's Legal Defense Fund, we do know for certain the identities of at least two: Porn star Jason Ridge, and Here! TV documentarian John Roecker.

We know this for a fact, because Ridge disclosed on his blog back in June of 2007, announcing both himself and Roecker as co-creators of the Fund (click on the screencap for a better view):


Roecker's participation in paying for Harlow's lawyers raises a number of interesting journalistic and ethical questions. Doesn't Roecker's upcoming Harlow documentary stand to gain significantly in ratings if Harlow goes to trial? And as such, Roecker himself stands to gain both financially and in prestige if Harlow is somehow convinced not to plea, does he not?

In other words, Roecker would appear to have some fairly obvious non-altruistic reasons "to help him get an Attorney to fight this all the way Through." Spending money on Harlow, to make money off Harlow, as it were.

Now, lets take these interesting journalist and ethical questions into the realm of the hypothetical, shall we? Hypothetically, lets say Harlow Cuadra, given false hopes by the presence of his new private lawyers and spurred on by the self-interested backers who funded them, continues to spurn all plea overtures and decides to gamble everything on a trial.

And then hypothetically, lets say Harlow loses his ill-conceived long shot gambit, and is found guilty of 1st degree murder.

And finally hypothetically, lets say Harlow gets the death penalty, and is executed.

Given the hypotheticals above...would John Roecker (and the other Harlow Fund contributors with less-than-honorable motives) have Harlow Cuadra's blood on their hands?

Would Here! TVs increased ratings be, in effect, "blood ratings?"

Like I said, some very interesting journalist and ethical questions are raised here. In fact, if all the hypotheticals I listed above come to pass (which I believe could very well happen) it would make for a fascinating story. Perhaps worthy of a serious documentary.

Update: Here! TV officially announces the release date for Roecker's Harlow Cuadra documentary (i.e., Porn Stars Episode 6) as next Friday, 12/19/08:



Update 2: Tomorrow is the scheduled release date. And looking back at their past comments, it's pretty much no secret which direction Roecker and Ridge will slant this. Even before this "documentary" got underway, this was their stated position:

And there you have it. So, there should be no Rolling Stone-like surprises here over this, come Friday. The fix is in, as they say.

Although you know, there is something about this comment of theirs which is very interesting, that I hadn't really seen before. Notice how they don't exactly insist Harlow is innocent; there is this "or" clause in which they are quite happy to accept Harlow committed murder...provided he had help from "a little twink boy and an older man."

In other words, their agenda seems not so much to save Harlow, as it is to ruin others' reputation. Harlow is merely a convenient tool for them to use, towards that ruination.

Update 3: PC completes his invaluable transcription of the episode. Rhetorical question: Could what I wrote above possibly have been more prophetic?

Update 4: Blast from the past - how this Harlow interview most likely came about.