Friday, February 27, 2009

Trial Musings 6: Brent Takes Full Responsibility


...under oath for the underage incident; and, as PPO notes, theoretically risks criminal exposure by doing so:

Day four of Cuadra trial
Edward Lewis elewis@timesleader.com

WILKES-BARRE - Luzerne County Judge Peter Paul Olszewski Jr. excused the jury to inquire if Sean Lockhart wanted a lawyer after Lockhart made "potentially incriminating" statements that he worked in adult films as a minor.

Lockhart was answering questions from Assistant District Attorney Michael Melnick about his background in adult films when Olszewski stopped the proceeding and excused the jury from the courtroom.

Olszewski cautioned Lockhart that he may have "incriminated himself criminally" by admitting under oath he provided a false identification and was performing in adult films while a minor.

Olszewski gave Lockhart several options, to include speaking with a lawyer or declining to speak with a laywer and continue to testify.

Lockhart declined to speak or have a lawyer, and Olszewski returned the jury to resume the trial."

Update: Since December of 2006, huh? Sounds like more of an "online one-night-stand" to me:

"POSTED 11:32 a.m.

WILKES-BARRE - Sean Lockhart testified he had several "internet interactions" with Harlow Cuadra beginning in December 2006. Lockhart was called to testify in Cuadra's capital murder trial before Luzerne County Judge Peter Paul Olszewski Jr."

Update 2: More on that "online relationship:"

"Sean Lockhart, a well-known gay pornography star, started his testimony this morning in the capital murder trial of Harlow Cuadra.

Prosecutors allege Cuadra, 27, killed Bryan Kocis in January 2007 at his Dallas Township home because Cuadra thought the rival pornography producer was preventing Cuadra and his partner Joseph Kerekes from signing Lockhart to their pornography production company in Virginia Beach, Va.

Lockhart, a key witness in prosecutor's case, testified Cuadra started contacting him in the fall of 2006 through his My Space account, a social networking Web site. Cuadra was very persistent that the two men produce a flim together, Lockhart said.

Lockhart, 22, testified for about 40 minutes before the lunch break. He will resume his testimony this afternoon...."
At the risk of stating the obvious, I should point out that undoubtably both prosecution and defense have the emails involved in their possession, gathered over the months-long discovery process. Making it, for all intents and purposes, impossible to lie about such matters on the stand, due to the certainty of them being produced upon a discrepancy being uttered.

It appears the facts are this: That Harlow pleaded with Brent to film with him, starting in fall of 2006...with Brent essentially ignoring him until December.

Update 3: Brent "nearly sobbing:"

"While walking along the beach on April 27, 2007, Lockhart said Cuadra and Kerekes were "opening up" about the murder. This made Lockhart upset, he testified, and he fell behind.

"Cuadra dropped back, he touched my arm and he said, 'don't worry, it was quick, he went quick,'" Lockhart testified while nearly sobbing."

Update 4: Extensive court watcher comments by Quicksrt over on PC's blog (5:38) and here...to sum up, Sean was "briliant on the stand!" and "running the show" (no surprise there) while cross examination was rather unambitious, it seems (in view of the defense opening statement, that is a bit of a surprise).

Update 5: Leeeavin', on a jet plane! It appears Sean WAS dismissed from the stand at the end of court on Friday, as he is now travelling back to San Diego as per his blog (hat tip to Bryn). Reading it now...done. Wow, powerful stuff. And I think we've only heard the beginning...

84 comments:

Rob said...

Sean's got integrity and his account is staying consistent despite the judge's warning of possible dire consequences.

But then, Sean and Grant have their clearing statements from the District Attorney for their cooperation in the murder investigation.

jim said...

But not from the underage thing.

Like PPO says, he's incriminating himself by doing so. Something he had a constitutional right NOT do do.

And Brent freely chose to sacrifice his rights, in the interests of justice in this case.

Geoff Harvard said...

Doesn't the news coverage of this trial just suck from our point of view?

jim said...

Frankly Geoff, I'm amazed it is as good as it is, what with the far more important (to Luzernians) story of the court corruption scandal, with new revelations breaking out practically every minute there too.

Rob said...

Yes, Sean has integrity.

Geoff Harvard said...

Yeah, and the goddamned flea market vendors in trouble for buying gold earrings without a license and Santorum agreeing with the bishop.

will g said...

"Update: Since December of 2006, huh? Sounds like more of an 'online one-night-stand' to me."

I have been mulling over the dicrepancy between the very brief period Harlow was actually in contact with Sean and the fact that Shunk testified that Harlow had wanted to work with Sean for a year. That combined with the witness statements concerning Harlow's purported "affair" with Sean, and how he was going to leave Joe for him, seem to indicate some serious mental issues going on with Harlow vis a vis Sean.

Just got through watching his Here!TV interview, and there were inconsistent statements from him about just how familiar he was with Sean and Cobra prior to Grant's contact. It's something we'll probably never know the truth about, but I think it may be key to a complete understanding of the motive for this murder.

jim said...

I predict Roecker's Here interview can and will be used to incriminate Harlow and his current "Plan X", if Harlow actually takes the stand.

Geoff Harvard said...

Is there a free source for Season 1, Episode 6?

will g said...

I always assumed that any criminal liability involved in the filming of underage models rested solely with the producer. Bryan certainly feared the truth coming out about Sean for that reason, and I never got the impression Sean thought he might be liable as well. Guess I should look up the PA statutes.

Geoff Harvard said...

Will, don't bother.

jim said...

"Geoff Harvard said...
Is there a free source for Season 1, Episode 6?"

I believe there is Geoff, but I refuse to publicize or indicate any links to it on my blog. Either in the main posts, or in the comments.

Knowingly providing access to material that defamatory and libelous could theoretically expose both me and Blogger to legal liability, and as a responsible blogger I shall refuse to do that.

Geoff Harvard said...

I see in my Gmail spam inbox that Olga wants a date. Do you think I should give this a try? Damn, this is a slow day, and the trial coverage sux.

will g said...

I don't even want to consider the possibility of BB getting his wish and Sean being put in handcuffs today for providing a false ID. I wonder if this is what BB has been referring to all along when he says "just you wait."

jim said...

LOL! That's actually the last thing BB and the underage denialists wants to acknowledge, that Brent was indeed underage.

Sounds to me like Sean would welcome such an arrest.

Geoff Harvard said...

Will, I think it would be a civil matter, Sean defrauding Cobra. But plausibly Kocis knew Sean was underage.

Some federal prosecutor would have to be motivated to charge Sean with mail fraud and have some evidence besides Sean's own blogging account of it. Don't worry. And I think BB=DK.

Anonymous said...

As a former resident of Luzerne County I find the appearance of sex for pay "actors" and former male prostitutes to be a breath of fresh air compared to the stench of corruption that's come to pervade the courthouse lately.
Can it get any worse? I know it's a rhetorical question.

jim said...

"I know it's a rhetorical question."

Yep!

Anonymous said...

Geoff you are cracking me up!! :)

If bb and dk are not the same they certainly share the very same traits.

jim said...

Careful Geoff and VJ, you are encroaching on personal attack territory with this comparison... :-)

Grant said...

Y'all get the ___ over it! There was NEVER any contact between Harlow and Brent prior to December 06!

Nothing he has stated on the stand in regards to the underage filming is any different than he has already stated!

If they (Feds, state, whoever) wanted to arrest him they had every opportunity to do so when we voluntarily approached the FBI, in their San Diego field office and he told his story back in February 06!

Get over it!

>Grant

jim said...

"Grant said...
Y'all get the ___ over it! There was NEVER any contact between Harlow and Brent prior to December 06!"

Yep, pretty much what I thought.

jim said...

"Nothing he has stated on the stand in regards to the underage filming is any different than he has already stated!"

That's true...but I think the point here is, by repeating it this time under oath, Brent's legal jeopardy potentially increases. In theory, anyways.

That was the reason for the pep talk by Judge PPO, as I understand.

jim said...

BTW you doing this on your Blackberry or something? :-) I'm guessing you're in the hallway, or at least nearby...?

Grant said...

PPO was just being overly judicious as he has throughout this process. No harm in that!

>Grant

Grant said...

No, I have a fly on the wall in there! (RW) :)

>G

jim said...

Well, say hi to Renee for me!

DeWayne In San Diego said...

I will point out an observation about the Federal law on underage pornography.

According Eichenwald in the Justin Berry case the FBI wanted to arrest and charge Justin Berry for child pornography since he had admitted to doing so.

Federal Law makes no distinction between a minor be he/she 5 or 17 if they film child pornography

its a felony.

As written (very badly) the Federal Law is a producers law.

All the producer has to do is state under penalty of perjury "I believed they were of age"

Since the LEGAL JEOPARDY for filming child pornography(if reported) rests with the model...

The Law as written INSURES that underage pornography involving teens remains "Underground and unreported"

The only kids protected under 2257 are the obvious children (the little kids) since no one would believe a pornographers defense of (I didn't know they were underage)

I have stated all along and I said this on several Gay Producers forums...

US Law as written and enforced

Ensures that a producer may film 15 to 17 teens with de facto Legal immunity.

Since the legal liability for underage porn (as enforced) rests SOLELY with the teenagers.

Please anyone prove me wrong by naming ONE PRODUCER in the US who has been charged and Convicted for filming teenage boys in this age group.

You will find nothing.

Conclusion

I am right

or

Underage Pornography does not exist!

Note on the girls..

Traci Lords was charged along with her producers the case imploded at trial.

Girls Gone Wild filmed 17 yo girls and resulted in technical violations with some whopping fines.

To sum up we have ALWAYS known Sean was placing himself in legal jeopardy by publicizing his underage status

Bryan Kocis and Robert Wagner were the first to point this out to Sean.

Bryan pressed Sean on the matter informing him that Sean would be the only one charged and imprisoned for Child pornography.

While Bryan with Robert backing him up would claim "we were not aware"

Do any of you begin to Understand and comprehend the legal jeopardy Sean Lockhart placed himself in to expose Bryan Kocis to the world!

Can you even begin to understand the hatred and bitterness I feel for Bryan Kocis?

A man who repeatedly played the 2257 laws to his advantage

and filmed with total immunity from prosecution.

The Failure here of the United States Dept of Justice in the case of Bryan Kocis was a complete and total abrogation of Justice and the Rule of Law.

Nearly two years ago I made the statement on GayWide webmasters

I or anyone here should feel free to film 15,16 or 17 yo boys since the law's prohibiting such filming were unenforceable.

As long as a fake id is photocopied the producer is "free and clear"

No one contradicted me.

Even as I was condemned for pointing out the obvious.

Are we Bitter? You dont know the half!

Rob said...

Will regarding the handcuff question and Sean's being the cuffee--that was a prediction of PC to both Dewayne and I in separate phone calls prior to the suppression hearing. The DA's clearing statement settled the issue.

I find extreme prejudice in the remarks of BB for Robert Wagner.

No, Sean will not and has never been a target of arrest. As much as this galls BB, he can quote me.

Rob said...

The law will punish the instigators, not the complaining witness.

quickysrt said...

Sean was briliant on the stand!

The bright red sweater as well as the whole look was a sharp clean presence. His response to each question showed a guy who is smart, and has indeed been around the block once or twice. I think the jury was impressed, I was, as was the person I sat with and left with. We both thought Sean earned many points on the truth scale.

Sean called Harlow's productions poor, but thought he was a good performer in the videos he sent to them in San Diego.

He thought of Harlow as a "good find." But that he needed to work out and firm up a bit if and when they might film together, so that "they both looked their best" in any filming they might do.

He said after the Vegas dinner that he and Grant had no idea the both of them were "skewed" until the murder of Bryan was confirmed. This was after the fire was in the news. The body was not id'd until later.

jim said...

Very interesting.

He's still on direct, right? They haven't begun cross? Or have they?

What was the jury/courtroom reaction when he got tearful over the "he went quick" comment? I have to imagine that was a moment.

jim said...

Oh never mind, I see from PC's thread he is on cross...good!

jim said...

OK new question...is he still on the stand for Monday? Or is he now off?

PC said...

Jim,

I don't think it's over.

jim said...

Ah, then you should be arriving in LC at the perfect time on Monday. Leading off with Sean, then into Grant.

Then I guess the tapes will be played (?).

PC said...

"jim said...
Ah, then you should be arriving in LC at the perfect time on Monday. Leading off with Sean, then into Grant.

Then I guess the tapes will be played (?).
"

Guess we'll know on Monday.

quickysrt said...

Jim, tapes are not being played just yet. They are setting up the timeline and who said what and when. No tapes were played of the CC dinner, it was only asked that Sean to go on memory.

I was shocked that the video of Blacks Beach was shown. It really brought something to long dry hours of ip, email, phone, cc info. The jury needed something more to end to end the week with, it was delivered.

Geoff Harvard said...

I hope the Black's Beach tape ends up on the proposed members' site. I'd sign up just for that.

jim said...

I presume you're talking about the video one, and not the audio one!

Geoff Harvard said...

No, I want to see Sean and Harlow frolicking nude on the beach, not listen to Sean and Grant argue about directions to a place they've been dozens of times.

BB said...

Sean and Grant are not allowed to see each other over the weekend per PPO.

Lots going on behind the scenes this weekend.

BB said...

"No, I have a fly on the wall in there! (RW) :)

>G"

ha, you wish. you just cant let go of this Robert Wagner stuff you instigated.

it will come back and bite you in the ass. it cant be undone now. it is too well documented, as is other 'things' you have said and done.

(this is not a personal attack)

jim said...

[DELETE]

Uh, unfortunately Geoff, that WAS a personal attack!

Geoff Harvard said...

I know, I was just fucking with you.

BB said...

"Rob said...

The law will punish the instigators..."

gosh, we agree on something for once.

Anonymous said...

ya think Sean and Wagner would stop by Macys and get a sports coat at least. It's their 15 mins, dress nice.

Anonymous said...

Just curious-
Does anyone still have blood on their hands?? :)

Grant said...

No my friend! It's gonna bite you in the ass! What of all this prediction of gloom and doom for Mr. Corrigan? Just like all the other shit you've been shoveling for about 4 years now!

>Grant

P.S. I'd like to know though. Did you lie in your interview or on the stand? I'd like to think you're smart enough not to commit perjury. Which is why you finally chose to tell the truth under oath!

quickysrt said...

jim said...
Very interesting. What was the jury/courtroom reaction when he got tearful over the "he went quick" comment? I have to imagine that was a moment.
----

That was an emotional moment at trial for sure, but I thought that it was a description of the Crab Catcher event (when Harlow said it), and not one in the court.

It was a damning moment for sure, nobody missed it.

quickysrt said...

I had another talk with RW today during a break as he has been in court most of the day watching, and talking with BK's parents, another blog follower, and myself.

I asked him what is the bad blood between yourself and S&G? He said that there are bloggers who have made statements against them that are attributed to him. I said so it is not you nor a friend or boyfriend or yours? He said no, as a matter of fact the DA asked that he not blog at all because it could harm the case.

I then asked if he had seen Grant, and said hello, it is not me, shake his hand and walk away?

He said as a matter of fact today I was walking by saw him, and it was an awkward moment, so I decided just to shake Grant's hand and say hello. He said it did not feel like Grant was completely accepting of this as a good kind gesture, but it was better than walking by with the awkwardness that was there.

I said good, then you have done your end of it, and moved on, and good for you. Everybody needs to do that.

I added that there must be nut cases out there saying things and attempting to ride the fame of someone else. There is no other reason.

I really don't think RW has been saying shit about S&G all this time. It is "unmentionable" types out there basking in disputes and enjoying the rifts. We know there is one who has a Lite Bright page, and another who has been allowed to post around here. So why the fuck can there not be another (or one of the same) who wishes to make Grant and Sean miserable? It does make perfect sense. And this case has brought out of the woodwork some real works of art.

I think I am correct, I did the leg work here.

prof said...

I have always felt that the key element in this trial is how Sean and Grant hold up under cross-examination. So far it looks like Sean is doing pretty well. I think that his refusing to consult with an attorney about the under-age issue adds to his credibility.

quickysrt said...

BB is not RW Grant. Just another nut case out there who wants the minimal amount of name recognition some other people have.

It's the wanna-bes, and never-was that wish to leach off of others. The porn world is full of them, you should know by now.

Let this one go the way of Kentie Loser. Forget it.

jim said...

Very illuminating Quicky, much thanks.

BB said...

"BB is not RW Grant."

The problem is Grant will never admit he is wrong. For over year Grant accused me of being Bryan Kocis. To save face Grant decided I must be Robert Wagner after Bryan was murdered.

You are correct on most of your assumptions.

Make no mistake about it, I am here because of accusations Grant Roy made towards me online.

As for me seeking fame LOL, hardly.

I told Grant apologize for his mistake and I'd go away. He refused coz he was still convinced that I was Bryan Kocis. I did eventually go away and ignored it all. Then I read of Bryan's murder. It was a perfect opportunity for me to finally prove to Grant I am not Bryan Kocis.

Now many have proven I am not Robert Wagner, does Grant accept this? NO. Grant, DeWayne and Rob continue to stir the pot with accusations. I give it right back to them.

Thank god this shit is almost over coz I've really had enough. I will not leave the blogs till the trial is over.

It is interesting that you do not mention the actions of Grant, DeWayne and Rob, more so Grant who started this whole mess with me.

BB said...

"Just like all the other shit you've been shoveling for about 4 years now!"

LOL. You accused me of being Bryan Kocis coz I disagreed with a comment you made on a blog. To this day you still have not admitted you were wrong.

RW was gracious to you yesterday. You had an opportunity to confront him face to face. You chose not to do so.

The FACT is RW was asked by the DA to not blog about this case. The FACT is RW has NOT blogged about this case.

I can assume you too were told asked not to blog by the DA. Yet you did. By doing so you involved many others.

Where has it go you?

You know more about shit shoveling than most.

Look where it got you!

jim said...

"The FACT is RW was asked by the DA to not blog about this case. The FACT is RW has NOT blogged about this case."

And the fact is, that is all rather unfortunate in hindsight.

Robert Wagner stated to Quicky that he does not think Sean and Grant had a hand in the murder.

Had Robert Wagner gone on the blogs, at the outset, and simply posted something like:

"Hi, Robert Wagner here...Sean and Grant really had nothing to do, criminally, with the murder...please stop all these false accusations against them, they are actually hurting the pursuit of justice in this case...Thank You."

...then a WHOLE lot of stupid nonsense, wasted time, and sore typing fingers could have been nipped in the bud at the outset.

will g said...

I dunno, if somebody accused me online of being somebody who I'm not, my response probably wouldn't be an unrelenting two-year hate campaign accusing them of murder. I'd probably laugh it off and let it go. But that's just me.

jim said...

Yeah, this all reminds me...how many of you oldtimers recall these immortal words:

"Jim = Grant."

That invariably followed every post I made, back on Jason Curious' and Elm's old blog posts. Sometimes a post was attached to it, sometimes not.

But some "anon" stalked me back then, and posted that after every post I made. This went on for months.

So, you know, to an extent I know where BB is coming from. It IS frustrating.

Anonymous said...

"If somebody accused me of being somebody I am not"

Exactly! Same here- if someone accused me of being someone I am not I would laugh.

I was wrong- I thought you were Robert Wagner because it is the only thing that would make sense regarding you-

If someones lover was brutally murdered - there may be some serious mental problems that come with that.
But it does not make sense, again - no sense at all that someone would go as far as you did,saying and doing the things that you have done.
If you have any conscience at all you will never forget it.

Jim, what about the "Occams Razor"
here- does not apply?

I gather that you never thought bb was rw- [excuse me if I am wrong]-
what would be the simplest explanation of this?

I don't believe for a second that "someone out of the blue" got riled up because Grant thought they were someone else -

Sounds to me like whoever this person is just wants an out now-
just an out-
good luck with that.

brynawel said...

http://www.brentcorriganinc.com/blog/?p=175

Brent is back home. That much for certain predictions ...

brynawel said...

Well, almost home ...

jim said...

Yes corrected! :-) The package is in flight...he should be over Ohio at least by now (whew).

BB said...

"Robert Wagner stated to Quicky that he does not think Sean and Grant had a hand in the murder."

RW had no responsibility to say anything to Sean and Grant.

Think about Jim, seriously. You know they accused me of being Bryan. Bryan is murdered. They decide I am Robert Wagner.

They created the problem for themselves.

You know I have always been consistent in my reasons for blogging about this stuff.

Do you people REALLY believe I'd not be found out by now if I knew the players?

I am called all kinds of names and the like.

Now it is proven I am not RW, you all ignore the HELL Sean, Grant, DeWayne, Albert, Rob, Elm and a few others tried to put RW through with their online accusations.

Pot Kettle Black.

BB said...

"But it does not make sense, again - no sense at all that someone would go as far as you did,saying and doing the things that you have done."

I made a comment on a blog. I got attack and was accused of being a child rapist, drugging children and much more.

That is hardly something to "laugh off". It is vile, evil and disgusting. I said so at the time. The attacks got worse, the rest is history.

The end result? I proved them ALL wrong . Yet you have no complaints about them and their actions towards a stranger. Weird. Bullying is something I do not tolerate, no matter the circumstances.

Grant has serious problems and issues. He is STILL claiming I am RW. Go figure.

(Yes Jim, I do recall you were often accused of being Grant and even DeWayne at some point. That one always made me laugh)

jim said...

Yeah, and you can see why I always steered clear of playing the identity game myself.

I tried to ban identity speculation on this blog a while back, remember? Frankly, it became impossible. Everyone kept reverting to form. Sigh.

I've always felt arguments should live and die based on their own merits, and not on the identity of the arguer.

will g said...

Agree 100% with what Jim just said.

But BB, I will never understand why insults aimed at Robert Wagner, who was NOT you, as everybody knows now and as YOU certainly knew from the start, would upset you so much. They are not accusing YOU of being a rapist, etc., but HIM. So that is why I say I would have just laughed it off and moved on. You chose not to do that, but instead escalated it into something truly nasty and vile in return. Not very mature behavior.

BB said...

Jim,

You know I have always had respect for you regardless of our different views.

You never once accused me of being any particular person. Which is why I never had a problem with you.

I have never bashed you in any way which is why you never had a problem with me.

You are also very aware (coz your not stupid) that I only answered back accusations. Not once did I start personal attacks to anyone on your blog.

DeWayne In San Diego said...

My problem Jim and PC is that you both allowed BB to post and continue to do so in the first place.

He never offered one constructive argument and ALL his predictions have been exposed as lies.

Sean just flew home to San Diego which itself lays waste to everything that bb has vomited for two years. Sean was obviously not involved in killing Bryan Kocis which BB claimed from day one.

As for Robert they are joined at the hip mentally and possibly electronically.

I turned over ip's in the summer of 2007 which conclusively proved BB was blogging from Roberts NYC home.

The IP's were timestamped with 2 bb comments on my blog.

In Nov 2007 BB published on his blog a "red herring story" that Harlow had accepted a plea story planted by the DA to identify leaks about the case. BB fell for it betraying the pillow talk he was getting from Robert Wagner.

The result of this Robert was told to refrain from blogging even as he denied he had been or knew who bb was.

Just two examples I have a multi gig archive of every utterance by BB on Jason Curious,Elm, PC's,Jims as well as my own.

I was at Juicy goo in 2005 there is simply no rational explanation for bb except his personal connection to Robert Wagner.

Come on people you can not be so blind this case has all been about couples from the beginning!

Joe and Harlow (online they used multiple persona's and alias)

Robert Wagner and Ben Leibig his bf do you really think bb has no personal stake in this?

Can anyone be so naive?

Has a comfortable middle class existence blinded you to reality?

Robert Wagner Lied and of that I completely and 100% sure.

He and his BF are malignant creatures.
and Robert Wagner is a Sociopath and unindicted co conspirator in Bryan Kocis illegal enterprises.

Which gos to the heart and marrow of why bb exists in the first place to protect his precious Robert form criminal prosecution and to destroy the prime witness against Robert

Sean Lockhart

This is not new folks..

this has been the MO since 2005.

Destroy Sean Lockhart protect Bryan Kocis and Robert Wagner.

Both men told Sean in numerous emails in 2005 exactly what they planned to do.

Robert continues the playing the game.

So do we.

With the conclusion of trial against Harlow Cuadra.

The gloves come off!

The Witness's no longer have to play nice.

BB's post here is just another in almost 4 years of lies and deflections.

Nothing has changed nor will it.

jim said...

Thanks BB.

Actually, there was one moment of identity speculation that regardless of what I've said above, I will always treasure.

From the Crab Catcher Transcripts:

"JOSEPH KEREKES: I know, do you know who Jim Is?

GRANT ROY: Horribly...

JOSEPH KEREKES: ... on-line, in those blogs.

GRANT ROY: I'm not sure.

JOSEPH KEREKES: I thought it was you.

GRANT ROY: No, no. I've, I've commented a few times when I've seen, very few times, a handful of times, that I've seen shit that just pissed me off to no end, and its an settlement stuff related, nothing to do with the other...

JOSEPH KEREKES: Yea, yea."

I AM IMMORTAL! :-)

will g said...

I think Jim is Will Herring.

BB said...

DeWayne says on another blog:

"Which gos to the heart and marrow of why bb exists in the first place to protect his precious Robert form criminal prosecution and to destroy the prime witness against Robert"

BB has been around since JG days, long before the murder. With that FACT in mind, DeWayne's claim makes no sense.

I do not understand why they continue this. Will you say I should laugh it off in the begining. Your right, I should have. However I did not. I did not think they would be as ruthless as they turned out to be. I was just as bad in my response to them. Do I regret it? Yes and no.

I hung around long enough to prove them wrong. They do not accept they are wrong. To me that clearly shows who has the problem.

Anyway, enough about that. Its done and can not be undone.

I am looking forward to Grant taking the stand. The trial seems to be moving along nicely.

Does anyone think Harlow will take the stand?

BB said...

"I AM IMMORTAL! :-)"

your a prick! *wink*

but yes, that was funny thing to say to Grant. made me laugh at the time. Yes I know I laugh allot. it got me through following this tragic mess.

jim said...

"Does anyone think Harlow will take the stand?"

In the main trial, no.

If he's found guilty, and it goes to a death penalty phase, then yes, I think he will take the stand to plead for his life.

Geoff Harvard said...

Thank you, will (in) g(reensboro). I think I understand, now.

BB said...

does anyone know how long Robert has been dating this Ben dude?

its only the past year i've heard reference to him.

if its less than 3 years, it throws DeWaynes latest attempt at spin control and claim out the window.

funny how he complains about what I have said on the blogs, yet he expects it to be ok for him to say anything he wants.

i am now thinking MAYBE DeWayne told Grant I am RW. if so, very very sad for Sean and Grant.

DeWayne In San Diego said...

SIGH Ben and Robert have been a couple since at least 2005.

The first reference was when Robert was dating him and begged Sean to keep it a secret from Bryan for some reason.(some trip to NYC)

That would have been early in the year.

Really BB you need to do a better job of deflection.

You both were on JuicyGoo BB and Truth Be Told. Look at your own blog and the obvious two writers of the blog up till last year.

Of course your tired denials are all about denial of your responsibility in screaming Murderers and implicating Sean and Grant as the killers from the beginning.

Before that on Juicygoo you were all about protecting Bryan and Robert. And this was before Sean said a peep about underage.

The vicious attack on that kid on that forum was a clear telegraphing of your fears that Sean would soon speak out(about being underage) and it was an attempt by You,Bryan and Robert to keep him silent!

THAT is why Grant rightly and justifiably attacked you.

In the end it does not matter IF you were have been accused of being Bryan,RW,Caleb Carter,Dan Ben or who the hell else.

What matters is you consistently and without variance from 2005, praised and defended Bryan Kocis a depraved Rapist and Child Pornographer and his CoHort Robert Wagner in that crime.

You are in fact their lover.
And their Defender.

For that you deserve nothing but complete Condemnation and Contempt.

You are in Fact the Malignant Katra Life force, the presence OF Bryan Kocis

Grant was really more right than he knew.

BB=Bryan Kocis

quickysrt said...

BB, why do you love conflict and disputes, and people not getting along?

This stuff about he said that she said that so and so is not really so and so because so and so said that so and so is too dating so and so. And they can spin it anyway so and so wants to, but the truth is what I know because someone in the know told me who was once in the inner circle, and nobody but me knows, but they will soon find out, because of an unknown yet documented source has reported it to the officials. And everyone will know I was right all along, just wait and see.

PC has harmed the credibility of his blog by allowing you to pollute the discussion with this nonsense.

From sitting through a week of court this past week, I saw the big picture of what this trial is about. Some of what I saw I can't even write about. Not because anyone told me not to, but out of respect to the victim, the familles, the witnesses, and the process of a capital case.

I saw Justin, Robert, Sean on the stand speaking the truth no matter how painful, frightening, and potentially legally risky it was.

And you ask "anyone know how long Robert has been dating this Ben dude?"

I don't know...............

BB said...

"Before that on Juicygoo you were all about protecting Bryan and Robert. And this was before Sean said a peep about underage."

um you do not know who I was on JG.

it was AFTER the age thing.

try again :)

sit back, take a deep breath and LOOK AT YOURSELF.

your COMPLETELY MAD.

oh and yet again, you fail to provide any words written by me that shows support or even RESPECT of Bryan Kocis.

yep, try again.

unlike you, I do not speak ill of the dead.

why do you protest too much?

did you tell Sean and Grant I am RW?

what name did i post under on JG?

can you quote any post I made at JG?

did you take your meds today?

(Jim, only fair you post this due to DeWaynes continued attacks, lies and accusations)

so DeWayne, now is your chance to PUT up or SHUT up instead of constantly showing yourself up.

BB said...

quickysrt

I am curious, what do you say to those who have abused and continue to abuse the victim online since his murder?

DeWayne In San Diego said...

Yes I told grant and provided the IP logs to his lawyer which were forwarded to PA.

Your a Lier a consistent Lier in everything you have ever spouted,on any forum.

Grant and I were on Juicy Goo you were there at the beginning of the Flambe on Sean.

You said I was a murderer,Grant was a murderer Sean was a killer an not underage.

Proven LIES

Jim you really need to shut this down the real irony is debating a creature like BB who does not know the meaning of the word Responsibility! The title of this post.

Both of your Blogs Jims and PC's have been destroyed and corrupted by a morally bankrupt individual!
This is why I delinked both blogs from mine.

If you all want to degenerate into Juicygoo 2 have at it.

I am out of here

have fun with your friend BB since you both seem to enjoys his company.

DeWayne In San Diego said...

Bryan Kocis was a victim of murder after a LIFETIME of Victimizing,Raping and drugging young boys.

In the end Karma paid back in kind.

No one but YOU BB ever shed a tear over Bryan Kocis!

jim said...

I probably let things get too personal here tonite, on all sides, my bad. Seems like everyone needed to vent though, so, perhaps it did some good.

quickysrt said...

BB said...
quickysrt

I am curious, what do you say to those who have abused and continue to abuse the victim online since his murder?
----

I don't see continual abuse of the victim here or anywhere. But if I did see it, it would not make it acceptable for others to go for it and do the same also.