Yesterday was mostly police and fire day in the Harlow Cuadra trial. This was stuff we knew already from the affidavit, so, not too much of it was muse-worthy, I say. The only thing that I found mildly amusing was the "gasps" in the courtroom when the 'Danny Moilin' photos sent to Bryan were shown. I guess despite this being the so-called "Gay Porn Murder Trial" in the news media, these jurors haven't been exposed to much full-frontal "art" in court thus far. Or anywhere else for that matter.
Although, there was the Brent-Harlow nude beach frolic video shown last Friday I suppose...but that must not have been in the same league so as to inure them enough from gasping.
Bryan's mother did testify at the end of the day (or possibly not?), and I take it the prosecution will wrap up it's case on Monday with the rest of the Kocis relatives. Then, the defense begins it's case.
Which brings me to the subject of today's Trial Musing...will Harlow actually take the stand, as rumored?
We've already got a thread discussing the pros and cons of calling Joe as a defense witness. Harlow, however, is a whole different matter. The pros I'd say are speculative at best. The cons are obviously enormous.
The major 'con' being Harlow's vulnerability to questions from D.A. Melnick like this:
MELNICK: Mr. Cuadra, you claim Joe Kerekes "dominated" you into your role in this murder. However, on this video interview with filmmaker John Roecker, you have nothing but good, kind and loving things to say about, and I quote, your "partner in life" and "your first and only." Your honor, I would like to introduce the following video clip into evidence, and play it for the jury now. Baliff, will you please roll the tape?...As you can see, questions like this are going to be a problem for Harlow, should he opt to take the stand.
[Video clip plays]
So Mr. Cuadra, I ask you: If Joe was such oppressive influence on your life, forcing you to do things against your will, why didn't you say so during this interview, when you were perfectly free to do so? Were you lying then, or are you lying now?
Update: Kocis case makes the Times Leader Sunday editorial page.
50 comments:
ROTFLMAO (to quote our dear, departed BB) at the quite striking resemblance you have discovered between Harlow and Damien. Now that I have picked myself up off the floor, I will read your post.
Well, the part is on the wrong side. But other than that... :-)
"Bryan's mother did testify at the end of the day. . ."
I think you might have misinterpreted the opening of the CV article, where it says:
"Bryan Kocis’ mother averted her eyes Friday as prosecutors showed photos of the charred, black living room. . ."
I don't think that's inferring she was on the stand, is it? Or is there mention of her testifying somewhere that I'm overlooking?
Mmmm, yeah, I'm assuming she was on the stand (testifying to Bryan living 20 years in the house, for example), but as you say, it is actually unclear, and I could be mistaken...
OK, I will play devil's advocate here, to keep with our Satanic theme.
Possible Harlow response to the Roecker clip and the DA's question:
"Mr. Melnick, when I gave that interview I stupidly believed that Joe still loved me, in spite of the horrendous things he made me do when I was under his influence. Since that time, the duplicitous bastard sold me down the river, and claimed I was the one who actually killed Bryan, when nothing could be further from the truth. He and he alone committed this murder, and he refuses to take responsibility for his heinous actions. So I feel absolutely no love or loyalty to him any more, and have decided to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God."
Then his eyes turn red.
"MELNICK: Oh so you were lying then, you now say.
Well, if you were capable of telling such a huge lie back then, why should the jury here today believe you now?"
CUADRA: "Where was I lying, Mr. Melnick? I just got through telling you that at the time I mistakenly believed he loved me, and I still was somewhat under his sway, even after all the time we had been apart. Never did I say anything that was untrue in that interview, those were my feelings when I gave it. I still thought I loved Joe and that he loved me, and I wanted to protect him.
"How was I to know he would no longer stand by my side and stick to Plan B, as he had promised? Now I know what a turncoat and a cowardly liar he really is. He can rot in Hell."
Damien is sort of cross between Harlow and Jared Leto.
Harlow's reply: Because I am the child of Saten and I will condem you all to burn in hell if you do not believe me.
MELNICK: OK, why did you fail to mention the controlling, dominating side of Joe in that interview?
Yes, and then Melnick is attacked by a Satanic crow...
CUADRA: "Mr. Melnick, you aren't paying attention. Court reporter, would you read back my testimony please?"
COURT REPORTER (in a robotic monotone): "I still thought I loved Joe and that he loved me, and I wanted to protect him."
CUADRA: "I rest my case."
MELNICK: Well, if you were concealing information back then, for whatever reason, whats to say you are not concealing information today? [shoo! shoo crow!]
CUADRA: "Objection!"
PPO: "Mr. Cuadra, there will be none of that."
CUADRA: "Oops, sorry your honor. I just wish those so-called lawyers of mine that cost Mr. Roecker such a pretty penny would get off their asses and object once in a while.
"Anyhoo, Mr. Melnick, sir, now you say I was 'concealing information,' which is a far cry from lying, now isn't it? My contract with Here!TV said nothing about me revealing everything, in fact that would have been quite foolhardy for me to do before trial, now wouldn't it? Believe me, you ain't heard nothing yet, just wait until my book comes out, which Roecker is in the midst of shopping around for me as we speak.
"Now look, you're making my poor mother cry again. Isn't it bad enough that she gave birth to the spawn of Satan, now you have to make her sit and watch while you try and destroy my crediblity? Have you no shame, sir?"
MELNICK: I'm asking the questions here.
And you are not the judge. Elm can be "JUDGE OLSZEWSKI".
And you can't object. Only Geoff, your lawyer "D'ANDREA" can object.
Rob can be your weeping mother.
Anyways, moving on...you said you no longer love Joe, because he no longer supports "Plan B." What is "Plan B?" Come to think of it, what is "Plan A?" And any other letters we should know about? Might as well go in alphabetical order here.
For the most preposterous April Fool's story this side of u-no-hoo, see: http://www.brentcorriganinc.com/blog/
And some of the commenters believe in it.
CUADRA: "Don't you read 'Harlow and Joe. . .On Trial" or that fine blog 'Silence of the Chinchillas' Mr. Melnick? Plans A, B, C, et al. are discussed there in great detail. You already have recordings of us talking about them quite openly on the phone with Madame Renee, who you so conveniently and rudely dismissed after only 30 minutes the other day. It's your problem if you were so afraid of her as a witness that you only played 10 minutes of those phone calls. There was a lot of good stuff nobody ever got to hear. That's OK, it'll all be in my book.
"So is that all you got, Melnick? You are no match for the Prince of Darkness. I will be a free man soon, so watch your back."
MELNICK (trembling and checking for crows): "No further questions."
OMG-
Jim - he does look like Damian!
I too was thinking - this trial took another really "fellini-esque" or better yet "Pier Paolo Pasolini" moment yesterday with the courtroom seeing Harlow "provocatively" I wonder if it was the "Studwonder" pic. or something like it.
These poor jurors, they are not ready for this-
I would not be ready for this had I been selected to be on the jury-
Today I stopped for a moment and thought about it-
it has been a long time coming- this trial-
I was wondering today- "what did I expect it was going to be like?"
only answer I could give myself was "not this bizarre".
Damn,
Will and Jim- that little back and forth was funny as hell!
Yeah, I have to confess I was privately wrong about this trial.
I kinda thought it would not be all that dramatic, since we all knew all the evidence anyways. I thought it would be a bit of a slog.
My expectations have been greatly exceeded.
Jim,
I have a feeling the drama is going to kick into an even higher gear next week.
Like some really, really weird stuff- drama.
jim said...
"My expectations have been greatly exceeded."
I thought that there would be no deals and both would go to trial. But I expected it all to be about car rental, mileage, motive and emails.
All these pictures and the video shown in court were not expected. Is "Boy Splatter" next in the que? Or is "Young Bucks in Heat" coming at closing remarks?
Two of the pictures Harlow sent Bryan were on him in bikinis, and they were not the same ones as in his myspace page, they were more gay looking. To see a guy this style get-up on a screen in court, is pure embarrassment, totally cringe worthy. I felt embarrassed for him, it looked really odd, in court with this audience and in this setting it was simply weird.
I am sure Harlow at some point might be thinking that a plea deal might have been better than going through this nightmare. And this nude picture must be just about as bad as it gets.
The Las Vegas shot of Harlow with evil eyes and a middle finger while hugging Sean was shown twice in court, for each of Sean and Grant to identify. That picture we have discussed here in this blog, I described as the moment when Harlow was about to crash. And I wondered what he was thinking right when it was taken?
It was like he was saying "I've bagged the hottest twink in the land, I am going to do porn with him, I'm hot, you are not, so fuck you. The prosecution must have agreed that the picture was worth a thousand words, and so they showed it twice to jury.
Conventional wisdom would suggest a strong "No." Most defendants meet the prosecution meat grinder on the prosecution's cross examination, with the consequences left freshly planted in the minds of each juror.
I do concur with you Jim that Cuadra would be taking withering questioning on Plans A, B, C, etc. despite the Pollyanna spin that Harlow pulled into Kocis' driveway, saw the man's door ajar, found a body and copious pooling blood and smelled smoke and just fled the scene in a panic, even though he had a cell phone and did not call 911. And that the CCT's and BBT's are a big hahaha knee slapping joke pulled by the ever sharp Harlow and Joe and those beach bumpkins, Sean and Grant. The prosecution would have a field day or two.
Geoff Harvard said...
For the most preposterous April Fool's story this side of u-no-hoo, see: http://www.brentcorriganinc.com/blog/
----
It's a true claim I would bet. But the guy wants to suck off Sean to get a DNA sample!
"V.J. said...
Jim,
I have a feeling the drama is going to kick into an even higher gear next week.
Like some really, really weird stuff- drama."
You could be right.
The defense is going to be "Johnson's Baby Shampoo" gentle in their portrayal of Harlow and how he came to be even mentioned in this twisted drama.
And the prosecution might be all done with the wildest stuff after showing that nude suggestive or erotic picture to the jury, which a sweet image for the jury to sleep on, saved for last I think.
Yeah, I noticed that about the prosecution, how they time managed the trial to end every week on an "artistic" note.
Friday before last it ended with Brent, and he and Harlow's nude romp on the beach. This Friday, the Danny photos.
And thats the image of Harlow the jury carries home with them for the weekend.
regarding Brents "Father possibility"
That Gene Carrier gentleman is Johnny Harden
1970's gay porn star-
is it not?
I have a funny story about him :)
Off topic i know, but since i can't post ANNON over at Elm's maybe it can't get answered here ?
elmysterio said...
To tell you the truth had Bryan lived Brent would have been more screwed. Bryan had other plans for Brent and Lee Bergeron was key in those plans. Now brent could say this if Bryan lived.
Does anyone know what ELM is talking about here? I remember hearing something about Bryan trying to put Brent up in a condo but what are these "Other Plans" and were does the info come from ?
Yep you can read about that here.
In a nutshell, Harlow revealed to Brent and Grant that day on Black's Beach a plot to "steal" Brent from Grant, cutting Grant out of the picture and put Brent back in a place of dependency on Lee Bergeron and of course, Bryan Kocis.
A big part of the plot involved a condo, and the fact Harlow was aware of this condo being offered to Brent indicated that he had indeed overheard the details of this plan correctly, shortly before he killed Bryan.
Then why does Elm make it sound like Bryan was gonna have him killed ?
You got that impression? I always thought otherwise, that he just wanted him "repossessed."
He'd had to go through this brick wall for that to happen! Many have tried... none have been successful! ;)
>Grant
To me the evidence is overwhelming that he was there, in the house and with joe. u have joe admitting the deed, harlow essentially doing the same, "he went quick," "my guy came round." Re the motive, the rest of you discount the million dollar dream as silly, but my reading of the transcripts indicates that harlow truly thought this was his ticket. Unsaid in the trial was the common means of slashing a throat in 2 cases, this one, and when Harlow and his lover first bought the escort service whose throat was slashed in a gay hate crime, and they got it in a "distress" sale. It's one the tapes in his words, but not played up, but it is arresting when you hear it, and more so, when u review the whole case. A cherry on top of the cake, makes you wonder. And you look at Harlow, and your reaction is not that he didn't do it, but rather, my gosh, he is this cold. And i love trials, I was hoping for that perry mason moment, but sadly, I've only seen one in real life.
As bad, Harlow's trial plan he wrote Renee in a letter, you tell a story, dress the part, clean-cut; he has no crediblitiy, he's told too many versions. Unhappily for him, he can't be believed or trusted.
At this point, he's lost. He has to take the stand to try to give the one or two jurors some reason for doubt, but i don't think he can pull it off.
If he were more likable, and the rest of the cast so despicable, maybe, but that train left.
I'm sure it was a sobering weekend for him, even though he appears delusional re his abilities to spin tales, but it's show time tomorrow, and I don't see the jury really believing anything he says.
He's just lied too much, and there's way too much proof. One of the best laid prosecution cases I've read in a long time, methodical, built in stone.
And for the record, I still think there was more to that dinner in Vegas, but it doesn't matter as to harlow's guilt; a loose end the da's office chose to ignore. Will that offend one juror in rural Penn.? I don't think so, but take a shot. When all is said and done, I don't see any real meat to hang the crime on anyone else, and that's what the jury wants to know.
Anon the story about the rival Escort Service owner getting his throat slashed in an alley is well Knonw in Virginia Beach. I suspect the DA declined to mention this because the man could not positively identify his attacker.
It is interesting after the attack he felt it necessary to sell out his buisness to Joe and Harlow.
BTW something else whenever pornstar/escorts made their way to the Norfolk/VB area and advertised on Craigslist or MySpace they were open for business. Joe would call to see if they were indeed escorting and then make a "date".
He then called VBPD Vice and informed them a prostitute was operating at such Hotel & gave the rm#.
Afterwords a message was forwarded to the "Escort"
"No freelancing we OWN this region"
Joe and Harlow were budding Mafioso
and violent.
Violent? Harlow and Joe? Not according to Elm.
According to Elm, Harlow just happens onto Kocis lying dead in a pool of blood. He doesn't attempt to explain why Harlow and Joe "reconn" the neighborhood before that visit. A sane and benign visitor would have no reason for this "reconn."
Could someone please explain why Elm believes the Black's Beach and Crab Catcher recordings are Harlow's and Joe's playing along because they knew they were being recorded. That simply makes no sense to me.
You're not alone. But in his defense, Elm got fed a bunch of lies (by his own admission) by people defending Harlow and Joe, and this has always tainted his views on the subject, to varying degrees over time.
I could't find the answer to this.
Did Brent and Harlow film any sex scenes after the Blacks Beach taping? In the dinner tape, they didn't seem to have cut a firm dea. I realize that Brent/Grant were playing along to get Harlow on tape, but from Harlow's perspective, how did it end that weekend?
Anonymous said...
Violent? Harlow and Joe? Not according to Elm.
Could someone please explain why Elm believes the Black's Beach and Crab Catcher recordings are Harlow's and Joe's playing along because they knew they were being recorded. That simply makes no sense to me.
----
Elm does not believe a word he has written concerning Harlow and Joe being innocent, or nonviolent. Elm is simply enjoying the slight bit of attention he (or his blog) has received by taking this alternate position.
"I realize that Brent/Grant were playing along to get Harlow on tape, but from Harlow's perspective, how did it end that weekend?"
That's an interesting question. I know they didn't film any "sex scenes" other than prancing nude together on Black's Beach.
The gist of what happened is written over on Elm's blog; look for posts written around Apr 28 or shortly after. But IIRC, Harlow and Joe simply went home, empty handed. Brent claimed personal issues for not actually filming stuff that weekend, I believe.
In fact, Elm conducted a poll on his blog (at Joe's request) as to public reaction at the idea of Harlow and Brent filming...it was negative. Most people were horrified at the notion (myself included, you can see my comments of disgust posted there still, I think).
Anyways, based in part on that negative reaction, Harlow posted on his blog that filming plans were on hold for a while.
And then of course, two weeks later... disgust turns to elation. :-)
quickysrt are you saying Elm is a gadfly regarding this trial? He strikes me as being one of Harlow's supporters.
Is he hoping that Harlow gets the DP out of some misguided notion that Harlow cannot face a term of years or life behind bars?
Anon, I think I will contact our friend V.J. to answer your questions about Elm. He is an expert on this subject, he has studied Elm carefully and come up with an all-encompassing theory known as "It's Elm-telligence!" V.J., help Anon out please!!
LOL!!!
Dear Anon-
Elm-telligence, as my friend Will mentioned -is a way of thinking-
one persons way of looking at Harlow and Joes situation as well as other events going on around the world.
Some say it is a very distorted view-
Elm-telligence used to make me crazy-
trying to make sense of the absurd,
however I believe that Elm is a good guy -
just born with "elm-telligence"
that only he can understand.
Be careful trying to make sense out of an "elm-telligent" remark-
as they can be volatile,
can turn an ordinary day into a whirlwind.
I hope this was helpful.
VJ you mean that the only guy who believes an Elm thought on this murder is Elm?
Not even the people who fed him all the bad info over the years believed in it, I am certain.
Jim, tks for your response re the sex scene, porn, whatever u want to call it. :)
I was asking cuz it went to credibility, how could Sean stage the scene after he discovered what he knew on the tapes and in fear of them. That would be over the top to me.
We never had any intentions of filming. Our objective was to secure the taped conversations over the two days. I just had to come up with an excuse as to why and hopefully not alert them as to what had just taken place.
I told them Brent had some family issues that unexpectedly resurfaced and it was urgent we travel to Modesto immediately. We were advised to stay with a friend at undisclosed location until Joe and Harlow had departed.
As far as I'm aware, the two went to Sea World the following day. Then flew home the next.
Elm's negative poll response nor any of his wild claims or assertions were ever taken in consideration with ANY of our decisions in this matter whatsoever!
>G
Interesting!
Yeah, doubtless they had no impact on Sean and Grant, but the negative blog reactions to the Black's Beach visit did seem to influence Harlow and Joe a bit:
"...As our filming with Brent Corrigan is a delayed & complicated Project involving Murder accusations, Police, Lawyers, Press, and many emotions, WE have decided to release this Massively important work with Troy Hunter NOW! to tide you over :) So, Hang on tight as we introduce Troy Hunter to the World FIRST!!! brought to you by Boybatter's Harlow!
May 2, 2007 4:25 AM"
Grant said . . .
"Elm's negative poll response nor any of his wild claims or assertions . . . ."
Grant's remark confirms my beliefs regarding Elm's outlandish claims for Harlow's and Joe's place inside this terrible tragedy.
"the only guy that believes an Elm thought on this murder is Elm"
Why yes, exactly-
nobody else- no one at all.
It should be noted that Elm really does believe [what I fondly refer to as elmisms*] his elmisms.
*an elmism is a single remark-
tends to take one by surperise when one reads it, they sometimes ask themselves [rather quickly]
"did I read that right?
Then we have "ElmL ogic"
which is reasoning behind that single "elmism"
watch out for those, they are tricky little buggers- can suck you in-
Then we have "Full Blown Elm telligence"
which takes on a sort of debate style at first- seems harless right??
No, No-
Before you know it you are sucked in - there is no return.
I used to engage in elmtelligent conversation and it took its toll on me.
I then could sense when an elmtelligent thought was going to be conveyed over the computer - even before it happened.
I had learned during these times to shut the computer off.
I can say proudly that I can now hear eltelligent conversations going on all around me and it does not phase me.
I am a survivor of ElmysterioLogic.
You can be too.
I may start a "People living with this disorder Recovery Group.
Post a Comment