Fresh From The Archives of History: Michael Lucas vs. David Forest and the Grabbys

Here's an old JUB blog post from 2007, about an even older awards show incident from 2003.

So, why am I reposting this old news about old news here? Weeeeeell, because you never know! Like this post from the past about the past says, it always good to keep the past in mind "...JUST IN CASE it becomes relevant again in the near future.":

Now I realize that this is actually really old news, but with Michael Lucas, you never know when old feuds will again rear their ugly heads (i.e., Raging Stallion Studios), and since I have only been writing the Newswire for a few months, I figured it would be OK to re-tell this story JUST IN CASE it becomes relevant again in the near future.

Picture it. Chicago. 2003. Gay porn agent David Forest is given the Grabby Award (which are kinda like the Golden Globes to the GAYVN’s Oscars of gay porn) for Best Non-Sex Role for the film Brad’s Buddies. Good old Michael Lucas, who was presenting an award right afterward, took the opportunity to express his disdain for Forest. He said from the stage,

“It’s very sad for me that we are putting ourselves, once again, so low in society by giving an award and supporting such a scum-bag as David Forest who, for years, has taken advantage and destroyed people with drugs…This industry will never gain any respect unless we will stop promoting this evil pimp, and those of you who are booing me should be ashamed of yourselves, because there’s not one word that I’ve said that isn’t true, and you know it.”

He exited the stage and was the talk of the (then-burgeoning) blogs for the next 4 days. David Forest had a rebuttal, Michael had a clarification, every columnist weighed in with their 2 cents. The general consensus within the industry was that whether or not you agreed with Michael Lucas (and there were plenty on both sides) all agreed that it was an inappropriate venue to air those opinions. In fact, Michael Lucas has pretty much been persona non grata at the Grabbys ever since. In fact, this year, after Michael Lucas’ La Dolce Vita swept the GAYVN awards, it was completely shut out at the Grabbys, not receiving a single nod. Michael claims that they are still holding a grudge from 2003, they claimed that they did not receive his screener in time to be eligible for consideration (and two of his other films did get nominations).

That’s pretty much it for that saga (it boiled over in no time at all), but another thing (which ties this story into the Johnny Hanson post) is that, after Michael Lucas left the stage, Matt Sizemore announced that he had just shot a bareback video. I think the poor BAFFLED (see I am using that word already) crowd didn’t quite know who to react more to. I hope you enjoyed this little trip into the recent history of gay porn. Hopefully we won’t need to revisit it again.

Yeah, hopefully not! :-)

Update: I must be in a nostalgic mood today, because for some reason this scene from Stanley Kubrick's 1975 classic Barry Lyndon popped into mind as well.

For those not familiar with this 18th century period piece, here's a brief recap of the scene: An arrogant puffy-lipped European aristocratic snob (Lord Bullingdon) has a long-simmering jealousy feud with the social-climbing hero of the film (Barry Lyndon). In order to tear down his "low bred" rival, Bullingdon bum rushes a stage, interrupting a recital to publicly denounce Barry as an "insolent Irish upstart" to a shocked audience:



BTW, Bullingdon then went on to use that carefully-baited and well-deserved thrashing at the end, exploiting the incident to generate a public relations pity storm in his favor.

Yep. It's funny how often life imitates art!

Update 2: An interesting chart:


Update 3: Lucas acknowledges he tried to hire Brent back in 2006, and that emails to that effect are in existence:

"To those who are saying I am going after Corrigan because he declined to be in my movie, how can that make any sense? In 11 years of business, there were many models which my company turned away and there were many models who turned down working for my company. Today we looked through all of our casting records, and found an email dating back to September 15, 2006, between our previous casting director and Brent Corrigan. At this point we, regrettably, did not know about his past and we are forever thankful that things did not work out and we declined working with him. My conscience would have never been cleared and a heavy deal of personal guilt would have shadowed me and my career."

That a "casting director" at a porn studio, former or otherwise, would have been unaware of Brent's celebrated past in September of 2006 (just when Velvet Mafia was released!) frankly strains credulity. Is Michael Lucas lying? Or are all employees of Lucas Entertainment this incompetent?

Update 4: A so-sick-he-could-vomit Jason Secrest takes Lucas out to the woodshed for misquoting him, poaching comments for his press releases, and publishing private phone numbers without permission.

Update 5: The editor at Queerty, who described the controversy as:

"The war between porn stars Michael Lucas and Brent Corrigan — or rather, Michael Lucas and the rest of the porn industry who loves Corrigan..."

...is getting sick of the Lucas Entertainment spin machine as well.

Update 6:The GorgeousBoys Online Entertainment Network disassociates with Lucas:

"Therefore, in light of my belief that “what’s good for the goose is good for the gander” my Network is now removing all of the affiliations and promotions to Lucas Entertainment’s websites and products."

Free speech, gotta love it!

Update 7: Breaking News! A Chinchilla Exclusive!

We've just received via our secret tip line a yet-unpublished but soon-to-be released on LucasBlog photo of Michael Lucas, taken right after the afterparty altercation. Obviously, it's authenticity is beyond question:


Update 8: Well, now that Michael Lucas outed Brent's new boyfriend's full real name in his latest press release, the obligatory tracking down and posting of a MySpace profile is sure to follow...and it might as well occur here, I suppose.

His full name is Eric Paul Martinez, age 31. Hmmm, and he's a father (of a six year old son). No indications of any anger issues here; although, looking at his physique, I can well imagine how just about anything he could say, from "Hello, how are you" to "Stop stepping on my feet, Mr. Lucas," could easily be misconstrued as threatening...


Update 9: Michael Lucas threatens the entire industry by knowingly and willfully violating 2257 requirements (hat tip: Elm).

Update 10: Michael Lucas - A liar AND a hypocrite. Lucas was well aware of the underage controversy as early as 2005, contradicting his own press statement claiming to be unaware when negociating to hire Brent in September of 2006 (see Update 3 above) (hat tip: Brynawel).

Update 11: Brent fills in the details on those September 2006 negociations:

""The assistant told me that Lucas didn’t write his own messages because he didn’t have a firm enough grasp of the English language, and that he had other people relay information for him. I thought this was pretty strange, you know, for one of his assistants to be telling me this, but negotiations continued.”

Update 12: J.C. Adams has an excellent, well-researched article up on the whole affaire here. Note the official statement by Joan Irvine of the Association of Sites Advocating Child Protection (ASACP.org): "Brent is now over 18 and has the right to engage in whatever legal business he chooses."

Update 13: Lucas called Village Voice columnist Michael Musto during the GAYVN's to brag:

"Remember Brent Corrigan, who forged his birth certificate and lied about being of legal age? He did porn videos when he was 17 and basically sent the owner of the company to jail. Well, I've been trying to stop him from being in porn ever since. Tonight, he was supposed to present the first award at the GayVN's. But I talked to the producers of the event and made sure he didn't. He was just canned."

But of course, the notion he was doing this for publicity is completely absurd (hat tip: Yves).

Update 14: Mark Adams interviews Brent. Most interesting quote:

"One of the things that studios, and that includes Michael Lucas, tend to ignore is the fact that the producer knew exactly how old I was, and he exploited the situation. He was smart enough to make it appear like I alone forged my documents. I was told by my boyfriend at the time and by the producer that it wasn’t a big deal, and it happened all the time. The big mistake I made was not listening to that voice inside me that said, “You should hold off.”"

Update 15: Unzipped (which will soon feature Brent on the cover of Freshmen) tells Michael Lucas to go fuck himself, after he calls to complain about the upcoming cover. A permanent link to Unzipped the Blog has been added to the right.

Update 16: And now this post has come full circle...an open letter to the GAYVNs from David Forest, in which he calls for Michael Lucas to "not be allowed to attend" future award shows:

"(Posted 4/1/2009 10:00:00 PM)
Letter to AVN's "Gay Editor" (Harker Jones) and "Owner" (Paul Fishbein)

Harker & Paul –

Congrats on the big success at last night’s GAYVN AWARDS. Sorry I wasn’t there this year … however … I would have been very upset, now that I’ve heard the reports about Michael Lucas … and how, again (he did it at the Grabby’s a few years ago) … this guy interrupted YOUR show with his highly illegal “bum rush” of your stage … the same exact stage that YOU used, a few minutes later, for his induction into your GAYVN Hall of Fame. Funny how you refuse to allow talent handlers into that elite “Hall” … but … you DO allow BUMS.

You know why it’s called a “bum rush,” right … because only a BUM would rush a stage. If a “bum” were to have done that, last night (actually, a BUM DID DO THAT) … he’d currently be sitting in the SF jail. Why you folks, involved in adult industry functions, allowed Lucas to continue coming to your events, after his Chicago “bum rush” at the Grabby’s … is puzzling. You should have known that a BUM, who already showed his true colors, was surely going to do it, again … especially when he felt “bummed” about his LACK of awards (coincidentally, the ONLY award that Lucas Ent won, last night, was for NON-SEXUAL PERFORMANCE … which Lady Bunny actually won).

Michael Lucas has NO regard for anyone, any show, any event. Since he was basically a loser, last night (believe me, he’s a HUGE LOSER now) .. not winning any awards except for his “Hall of Fame” induction and the “non-sexual perf” one, above …. he decided he’d make sure he was “remembered” … and just FORCE his way on stage to do something “loud.” That’s just what happened back in Chicago … when he did his “DAVID FOREST tirade” … unexpectedly … and without permission.

Between the Grabbys and, now, the GayVN’s … Lucas has shown his total disregard for rules, proper etiquette, scheduling, etc. … and should not be allowed to attend the events. As gracious as the guy CAN BE … he’s also a total “animal” … and cannot be trusted to behave.

I can’t believe that you let him get Corrigan bounced as a presenter … then … he goes and “steals” the microphone … since Brent’s name wasn’t properly pulled from the cue cards … and Brent got to present, anyway. Lucas didn’t fully get “his way” … so … he wanted to make sure everyone knew his feelings (about Corrigan’s movies that he did while underage). Actually, the XXX biz should never have let Corrigan continue in the biz … after his fraudulent misrepresentation of his age. BUT … he wasn’t banned … so you just gotta move on. For Lucas to decide, years later .. that it was up to him to CALL ATTENTION to Brent’s wrong doing …. and to do it the way Lucas did (like an animal) … is so wrong. Lucas just couldn’t let last night go on without making sure that HE was “remembered.” With no awards to be remembered for … he decided to create his own attention … even if it meant disrupting your show.

Lucas cannot be trusted at a public event … evidenced by his improper behavior, now, at both a GRABBYS and a GAYVN awards. The fact that Brent’s b.f. decided to show Lucas how wrong he was …. is just the KARMA coming out.

Michael Lucas AND Brent Corrigan have both been given “chances” that should never have been given. They’ve both caused major disruptions to the adult business, big events … acted in ways that are inexcusable (maybe illegal) … but … weren’t reprimanded, scolded or had sanctions placed upon them.

It’s time for the gay adult world … especially the folks who produce the big industry events, etc. … to wake up and smell the obvious. Michael Lucas will always make sure that he is a HIT at these events … even if he has to make a fool of himself. He’s a firm believer that, “all publicity is good publicity.” Can you imagine if an actor/producer/director were to ever do what Lucas has done … at the Oscar’s or the Golden Globes? You let him trash your event, last night. I’m sure you won’t let it happen again. Lucas has “scored” at both big awards shows, now. AND, to think … the guy was still inducted into your HALL OF FAME … event AFTER what he did earlier in the evening. It all makes no sense.

DAVID FOREST"

The Price Tag

A couple more Harlow Cuadra after-trial stories in the Times Leader today, dealing with the financial costs of the prosecution, and the public outlay for the defense.

The prosecution bill came to $112,317, which according to District Attorney Jacqueline Musto Carroll was "very expensive." One interesting thing that caught my eye:

"According to the 2009 budget for the district attorney’s office, $100,000 is set aside for capital cases and $350,000 is set aside for examinations/witnesses. By comparison, there was no money for capital cases and $179,800 for examinations/witnesses for the district attorney’s office in 2008."

Thus it seems that by going for the death penalty, Melnick was able to tap into a $100,000 pool of extra funding for the prosecution of this wide-ranging and complex case.

The alternate public defender bill for both Joe and Harlow (while Harlow was still alternately publically defended) came to $25,310 "so far," which means bills are still coming in. Of that, it looks like $10,280 was spent on Joe, leaving Harlow's tab at $15,030 I guess.

Of that, $4,497.50 was paid to the Jesse Detective Agency of Dallas. This was over the 300% over the $1000 budgeted for investigators, but after reviewing the bill Judge Olszewski "found it reasonable considering it was a capital murder case."

Other expenses included $7,546.20 to Court Consultation Services to testify during the penalty phase that Harlow's childhood years were less than ideal, and an imprecisely known amount "not to exceed $3,000" for the services of Dr. Richard Bohn Krueger, who performed a psychiatric evaluation of Harlow but curiously didn’t testify during the trial.

You know, you add these various Harlow totals up and they come to close to 15 grand, which tells me the actual alternate public defenders for Harlow haven't submitted their bills yet.

Anyways, you take these recently revealed totals together, and they come to:

$112,317
+ $25,310 ("so far")
---------
$137,627, which represents the total cost to the taxpayers of Harlow and Joe and their enablers' idiotic decision to drag this thing out for over two years. With the lion's share of this blame going to Harlow and his enablers, of course, as they actually took this ridiculous story of his all the way to trial.

Now, you combine this with the police investigation bill, and the total cost of their hairbrained scheme to deal with mortage, cars and credit card debt comes to:

$137,627
+ $100,000 ("with bills still coming in")
----------
$237,627. So far.

Altogether, quite a tidy sum for a case Harlow thought was going to be put "on the back burner."

Update: Death penalty debated. "Paul J. Walker, who along with Joseph D’Andrea represented Cuadra during his trial, said he believes it’s time for Pennsylvania to change its death penalty law..."

Update 2: Off topic LOL...NO, this movie is NOT what you think it's about!

Update 3: Off topic...Luzerne County corruption story on ABC's 20/20 tonight (March 27).

The Investigation

New Times Leader article here: "Cuadra case was a work in progress, right up to verdict"

Perhaps not surprisingly, this is one post-game report which holds few revelations for us all, having combed over the affidavit, trascripts and court filings on PC's blog for over two years. And even those revelations are minor:

- "Three more search warrants followed on Jan. 29 for phone records belonging to Sean Lockhart, Merlin Lee Bergeron and e-mails traced to a computer at Indiana University in Indiana." Presumably, all were people Bryan talked to on the day he died. Sean we knew about. Lee we long suspected, and this prooves it. The Indiana University connection to the case I actually ran across a while back, in an obscure news article, and has always been a mystery. And still is.

- "“It was a work in progress as soon as the victim was found right up until the verdict was read,” Krawetz said. “Believe it or not, there were still interviews being performed during the trial." The prosecution was railroaded!

- "County District Attorney Jacqueline Musto Carroll said the investigation cost from her office exceeds $100,000 with bills still coming in." And that's just the investigation I guess, not the legal work (both prosecution and public defenders).

The Client List

OK, as I can foresee the comment below (actually a half-comment) easily has the potential mass to generate it's own gravitational field, I think it's prudent to go ahead and put it in it's own post, rather than leave it in the incongruous post below.

And to be frank with you all, I don't know WHAT to make of it at this point...you guys can form your own opinions:

L' Chayim

The train approaches Britneyville Station...


Update: A new anonymous comment posted to the Advocating Murder thread:


...also from "San Diego." When you factor in the same lazy spelling, O.J. Simpson reference, and the timing of it all, it becomes increasingly likely that the author of the Advocate death threat was indeed Will Jones (aka Jason Ridge).

Update 2: And here's that "...last blog entry detailing the events that have lead up to the wrongly accused Harlow Cuadra and the actual killer(s) on the run..." that he promised us.

Indeed, I just finished doing as Mr. Jones suggested ("...and the bloggers who are exploiting Brent and taking all sides should really look at themselves and ask if they are happy and love themselves."), and I must say, thanks to him it's difficult for me to imagine being more happy or in love with myself at this moment.

Mmmmm...aaah! :-)

Update 3: As they say, birds of a feather...


Update 4: A re-edited post, deleted comments...in other words: "A CELEBRATION OF LIFE AND HUMANITY."

The Jurors Speak

Both the Times Leader and Citizen's Voice have major Harlow Cuadra trial juror interview stories today. Fascinating stuff! Various myths propagated by online Harlow apologists in recent days are put to pasture, and the recent self-congratulatory statements by the Cuadra defense team are shown to have been a bit premature.

Anyways, here are the highlights, plus commentary:

1) Amazingly, four jurors actually held out for a bit on finding Harlow guilty in the guilt phase:

“There were four jurors who thought it could have been Joe,” Scutt said. “You had no direct evidence, no DNA linking (Cuadra) to the murder. There was so much circumstantial evidence. There were several that couldn’t put the knife in his hand.”

A smoking break, of all things, quickly broke the logjam, however:

“The jurors went out for a smoke, and when they returned, one of them told us she thought about the case when she was outside for a cigarette and came to agree (Cuadra) was guilty,” Stavitzski said. “The other jurors who had doubt then came around.”

Smoking was defintely hazardous to Harlow's health in jury deliberations.

2) It looks like my earlier doubts as to the wisdom of Harlow taking the stand were right on the money, because according to these jurors, THATS what convicted him:

Stavitzski and Scutt said they also had doubt Cuadra actually killed Kocis until Cuadra testified in his own defense. “To me, he solidified the whole case,” Scutt said.

“Harlow wasn’t answering the direct questions,” Stavitzski said. “In my mind, the evidence was circumstantial; he turned it into hard evidence. He was talking in circles.”

and

“He basically looked like a kid sitting there at the table,” Stavitzski said. “But as soon as he took the stand, he took off the glasses and he sounded like Hulk Hogan giving a wrestling interview. He had more holes in his testimony than Swiss cheese.”

and

Matulis and fellow juror Daniel Austin said the person who sealed Cuadra’s fate was Cuadra himself when he took the witness stand.

“He shot himself in the foot with the different lies,” said Austin, 58, a retired postal worker from Harveys Lake. “In my eyes, Harlow definitely was the one who did the actual killing.”

“He placed himself in the house, he described it. All reasonable doubt, as far as him being an accomplice, went out the window when he opened his mouth,” Matulis added.

and

Stavitzski said testimony from forensic pathologist Dr. Mary Pascucci, who performed Kocis’ autopsy, was powerful in explaining Kocis suffered a single swipe from a knife that nearly decapitated him.

“She explained it was one swipe that ended Bryan’s life,” Stavitzski said. “Harlow’s description of Joe storming in and fighting with Bryan, and slashing his neck twice and Bryan is still talking was just unbelievable.”

The two jurors said that if Kerekes and Kocis fought the way that Cuadra claimed the fight occurred, there would have been defensive wounds on Kocis’ arms.

“If someone is coming at you with a knife, what’s the first thing you do, you put up your arms,” Stavitzski said.

“Bryan didn’t have any injuries or stab wounds on his arms,” Scutt said.

3) The recently fabricated "Stockholm Syndrome" theory Team Harlow tried to pitch, both online and in the court room, fizzled with most of the jury:

“Their relationship was brought up a lot in deliberations,” Stavitzski said. “Joe was more muscle but Harlow was the brains.”

“As far as Joe being dominant and Harlow acting as the housewife, I found that hard to believe,” Scutt said.

Note juror Stavitzski coming to exactly the same conclusion I did yesterday on PC's comment thread:

Joe was more the emotional, flighty type. Do first, think later.

Harlow was the cold, calculating type. He was the brains (such as they were). He would think for the both of them, and reign Joe in whenever Joe was about to do something particularly stupid.

4) The Harlowites have recently been spreading a pair of essentially contradictory talking points regarding the Joe Disaster. This first one is: the Joe Disaster was bad. Had Joe not evilly betrayed them, Harlow would be a free man today.

But not so, say the jurors:

Kerekes briefly appeared during the trial under a subpoena issued by Cuadra’s lawyers. When he took the witness stand, Kerekes opted not to testify on Cuadra’s behalf.

“Harlow gave (Kerekes) a look to kill,” Stavitzski said. Had Kerekes testified, Stavitzski and Scutt said it wouldn’t have mattered.

“I would have taken into consideration his credibility,” Stavitzski said.

The other talking point is: The Joe Disaster was good! It showed the jury Joe's dishonest and controlling nature, still trying to "dominate" Harlow from his jail cell.

And the jury shoots that one down as well:

“What did he have to lose, he had nothing to gain. For what he did, I have to respect him for telling the truth.”

Kerekes said from the witness stand on March 10: “I’ve been thinking a lot about my parents. I think it will destroy them to say something that I didn’t do. What I told you (D’Andrea) is untrue.”

D’Andrea informed the jury that he met Kerekes several times before Kerekes’ appearance during the trial.

“I think Joe told the truth on the witness stand,” Scutt said.

It looks like Team Harlow needs to come up with new talking points. Do they have any left? I could be wrong, but at this point, I don't think they do.

5) Sean and Grant and the CCTs and BBTs played a noteworthy role:

Stavitzski said the relationship between Cuadra and Kerekes was solidified when assistant district attorneys Michael Melnick, Shannon Crake and Allyson Kacmarski played to the jury recorded conversations of the two men with Lockhart and Grant Roy.

Roy, a producer of gay pornographic films based in San Diego, Calif., wore a body wire on two consecutive days when he met with Cuadra and Kerekes in late April 2007.

“Those tapes that were played, I got to know their mannerisms, I got to know what this whole case is about,” Stavitzski said. “Harlow did a lot of talking on those tapes; it showed me he was at the house.”

6) Interesting tidbits about how the jury interacted:

The jury deliberated for nearly three hours and 30 minutes before they reached a verdict convicting Cuadra. Scutt said the jury convicted Cuadra in three hours, and allowed 30 minutes for jurors to express their thoughts and opinions before they notified the court that a verdict had been reached.

and

“I’d be a liar if I said voices weren’t raised. Obviously, if you got people who want a death penalty, it gets tense,” she said. “We carried a person’s life in our hands.”

and

Images presented as evidence by the prosecution about the brutal murder will be seared in jurors’ minds forever, Matulis said.

“The shock of actually seeing some of this, it was mind boggling — seeing a burnt corpse, a heart cut with stab wounds …” Matulis said. “My life was changed and I wasn’t the criminal.”

7) The jurors also talked about their 8-4 deadlock in the penalty phase, which PC has previously covered here.

Advocating Murder

This comment was just submitted and approved on the comments section, on the latest Harlow story at www.advocate.com:


Incidentally, The Advocate is owned by Regents Entertainment Media Inc., the parent company of the Here! TV Network.

Update: The Advocate opts to give no further sanction to one of it's contributors who called for murder, other than to edit out one line of his comment:

Harlow Gets Life

Update: Actually, according to PC's 7:35pm update, Harlow got two lives, served consecutively, plus a few other goodies:

"Life w/o Parole for first-degree murder
Life w/o Parole for criminal conspiracy engaging
20 Years for the rest
1 Year probation."

It's entirely appropriate that Harlow should get two life sentences to Joe's one, as Harlow was, after all, the dominant partner and criminal mastermind in this relationship (see Update 6 to this post here). The only other sentences I could've hoped for was anger management classes; and $1000 restitution to Matthew Brannon (since Harlow obviously isn't going to "webmaster school" at ODU now).

Update 2: GayWired: "Porn Wannabe Harlow Cuadra Gets Life in Prison". I like the accompanying photo!

Update 3: LOL! of the week: Harlow's lawyers declare victory! No, I am NOT making this up. Although, they admit "[Harlow] wasn’t the best witness."

Update 4: An emotional Melnick "lauds all who aided conviction." ""We were prepared for Harlow taking the stand; I felt he did very poorly," Melnick said. "I saw some things, like when he said (Kocis) was talking after his neck was slashed that nearly decapitated him.""

Update 5: Meanwhile, another touching story from a porn star, wrongly accused. Wow, according to Howard, he's only gotten one fan letter so far (was it from Nep?).

Victory!

Update: And now that my emotion is adequately conveyed, here are the details. It's a complete sweep, guilty on all 12 counts, the homicide charge graded as 1st degree murder. Deliberation time: 3.5 hours. The death penalty phase commences tomorrow.

Prediction: Death. This was one pissed off jury, to go down this complex checklist of charges so quickly. The most obvious blame for this rests with Harlow, and foolish decision to ignore his lawyers' advice, and take the stand. The jury was clearly NOT amused.

Oh and then there's the other people, those who encouraged Harlow's folly. But I'll save THAT blame discussion for a future post...

Update 2: A programming reminder, you can view WNEP live here; it is 4pm EDT now, so, in exactly one hour they'll have their first post-verdict news broadcast.

Update 3: Times Leader video...



Update 4: You see Will? If you want to be first to comment on a new thread, you have to be quick, you have to be alert, and you have to be on the ball:


Update 5: You know, after all the excitement of the past couple weeks, this sounds like a great way to relax, break free, and put the whole drama out of one's mind for a day:

"Next week is supposed to climb in the high 80’s in temperature here in San Diego. I am looking forward to hitting the nude beach with the boys at some point. It will be my first time with the sand between my cheeks since . . . July 5th, I think?"

I'm planning on dining with friends at one of my favorite seafood restaurants this weekend myself.

Update 6: PC has done his usual stellar job of providing a round-up of all the relevant news this morning; most interesting to me was the interviews of alternate jurors now dismissed and ungagged from the case:

"Cuadra’s testimony had too many holes in it, said two of the three alternate jurors, who heard all the testimony but were released before the jury began deliberations.

The two men both said they had trouble believing parts of Cuadra’s story. Cuadra testified Kerekes had set up a meeting with Kocis ... but in the middle of the meeting, Kerekes stormed in the house and slashed Kocis’ throat.

“It seems like he didn’t finish his thoughts,” alternate juror four Francis Kopko said. “Some of it seemed credible and then you wondered about some aspects.”"

Update 7: Here's the skinny on how today's DP trial will go; sounds to me like it'll be all wrapped up in one day...today:

"The jury is expected to hear testimony from Kocis’ family, Cuadra’s family and likely psychiatrists before it deliberates Cuadra’s punishment of life in prison without parole or death.

Olszewski said he will have the jury deliberate until a verdict is reached today. If the jury is unable to reach a unanimous decision for the death penalty, Olszewski is mandated by law to sentence Cuadra to life in prison without parole."

Update 8: Penalty phase continued to Monday, thereby averting this problem for Harlow.

Update 9: Good article on what Harlow may face on death row in PA here.

Update 10: I just added a poll, to your upper right. Note the one-word difference from PC's poll question. It'll be interesting to compare results...

Update 11: Times Leader Sunday editorial on Harlow's sentencing defense: "The jury looked either unmoved or inscrutable."

Update 12: Harlow stabs director/supporter John Roecker in the back with a hot butter knife, saying “At the time, I didn’t know (Roecker) was recording my voice, our conversations in order to make a documentary until way later on,” when Melnick used the Roecker interview to impeach Harlow (as I predicted would happen).

It's Up To The Jury Now

Closing arguments are over. It's in the jury's hands, starting tomorrow. A few trial watcher observations are trickling into PC's blog.

While I cannot imagine how the past few days could have possibly gone better for the prosecution in this case, I think it may be advisible for us all to take a sobering moment here and remember that *anything* can happen in a jury room. It only takes one loony case to be illogical and unreasonable and hang a jury in a criminal trial. Yes, it's a horrific thought, but it must be kept in mind...and prayed against. So, lets not jinx this by celebrating prematurely. At least not too much! :-)

Another alternate consideration, far less catastrophic (indeed, IMO, not at all unwelcome in fact)...a deal could still be struck, any time before the jury comes in with a verdict. Granted this is unlikely to be offered now by the prosecution, now that the time and expense of a trial has been outlayed. But you never know. I think it's fair to say Harlow would jump gleefully at the chance of getting a life sentence at this point. Is there something extra Harlow could offer to coax the prosecution extend such a deal once again? Offer to testify against Renee Martin or other Harlowites involved in Obstruction of Justice perhaps?

Like I said, you never know; as long as the jury is still out, possibilities remain. Which is something to keep in mind now, as we wait.

Update: Deliberations begin. Instructions took an hour and a half to get through. Olszewski: “these are the longest instructions I've ever heard given to a jury.”

Update 2: This jury question doesn't sound good for Harlow.

Trial Musings 16: The Plan C Express

From PC's blog, quoting the Times Leader:

"3:51 PM: The Times Leader reports that homicide suspect Harlow Cuadra put the murder of Bryan Kocis on his former lover - Joseph Kerekes.

Going against his lawyer's advice not to testify,...

[An aside; I like how D'Andrea is trying to salvage his career and distance himself from this fiasco, LOL!]

"...Cuadra told the Luzerne County jury that he was inside Kocis' home in Dallas Township on Jan. 24, 2007, when they heard a loud, rapid knock on the door.

"Bryan gets up and goes up to the door; the minute he turns that knob, Joseph comes in," a sobbing Cuadra told the jury. "They fight a little at the door, I'm yelling, 'Joseph, what are you doing.'

"Joseph looks at me, and knocks Bryan in the face. Bryan was wearing one of those workout suits, all black, no socks, and Joseph grabs Bryan and throws him in the couch and starts punching he hell out of him.," Cuadra said.

Cuadra said he jumped on Kerekes' back in an attempt to stop the assault.

"Joseph reaches in his pocket and pulls out a knife and slashed Bryan's throat. I yelled, "Joe, what are you doing, he said to get the (expletive) out."

Cuadra said he was scared for his life and the life of Kerekes. They fled to South Beach, Fla., where they stayed in a motel for more than a month. They returned to their Virginia Beach, Va., home the day before Easter in 2007.

Cuadra said he understood that he was a "person of interest" in the case and wanted to talk to Pennyslvania investigators.

"Joseph wouldn't let me," Cuadra said. "I can't even go to the store to buy toilet paper without him.""

Update: According to the Citizen's Voice, Joe's evil dominence telepathically dictated Harlow's actions, even when safely in police custody:

"Cuadra said he wanted to tell police his story, but Kerekes was very controlling.

“People can say ‘Harlow, do this’ or ‘Harlow do that,’ but they don’t know," Cuadra said. "They’re not Harlow. They’re not with Joseph. Individual valor doesn’t matter when you’re with Joseph in a little room.”"

Yeah, but Harlow...your little room was in Lackawanna County. His little room was far far away, in Luzerne County.

Update 2: A helpful programming note...you can view WNEP live here...new story due at 6pm EDT!

Update 3: The Sword: Harlow Looking Screwed. Yeppers!

Update 4: Just One Hot Minute: Cobra Killers Testify Today. Hey, that's a catchy moniker!

Update 5: Per PC's Day 11 Overview, there was one hour of cross-examination by Melnick yesterday. Most surprising question and perhaps equally surprising answer:

"“Mr. Cuadra, let’s cut to the chase. Are you saying that Grant Roy and Sean Lockhart have anything to do with this murder?” Melnick asked.

“No,” Cuadra responded."

Also, Melnick was able to produce credit cards owned by Joe, which showed he didn't exclusively rely on Harlow's credit, as Harlow alledged.

As to why Harlow never went to the police, he was "scared" of Joe, and actually described their relationship as "Stockholm Syndrome." Which considering how famously unsuccessful this defense was for Patty Hearst, may have been inadvisable.

Anyways, they are going to be picking up with cross-examination this morning, and as notable nuggets appear, I'll Update them here. A couple inferences as to what will happen: 1) Unless he was sedated, I doubt Harlow slept last night, so expect to see a groggy defendant; and 2) Melnick has had 12+ hours to go over Harlow's fanciful tales of yesterday, and will be 100% fresh and chipper.

In other words, let the slaughter begin...

Update 6: Per Sassy's advice in the comments here, I went combing through the CCTs and BBTs, to see what clues I could find as to who dominated who in the Harlow/Joe relationship. These were the most telling items I found:

"HARLOW CUADRA: I'll tell you what, when we're nude on that beach you can ask me whatever the hell you want.

GRANT ROY: Okay.

JOSEPH KEREKES: Really?

HARLOW CUADRA: Yea."

Here we have Harlow making a critical (ha ha, how's that for understatement!) decision in this saga, all on his own. Joe meekly aquieses, with the one-word question to Harlow: "Really?" And then right after that we have:

"GRANT ROY: So y'all going to Sea World tomorrow?

JOSEPH KEREKES: Honestly Grant, if you can't give us a positive word tonight, we're gonna head back tomorrow morning or tomorrow afternoon.

HARLOW CUADRA: Well we'll give you 'til tomorrow."

Now, here's the exact opposite; Joe makes a decision, and then Harlow completely overrides it.

I think we now know who was the "controlling" partner in this relationship.

I am certain with time I could find more such examples in the transcripts, showing Harlow to be the dominant partner, but these I could locate quickly enough because I recall musing about the first one specifically before, months ago.

Update 7: The defense rests. No testimony from the chaplain, the other prisoner, or a certain other personage. :-) Closing arguments next, after some legal wrangling. No details yet what specific holes Melnick punched in Harlow's story this morning, but should get a clearer picture once additional news stories and court watcher reports come rolling in.

Update 8: Melnick seemed to rely pretty heavily on what Harlow said on the CCTs and BBTs to impeach him on the stand. This was Harlow's response:

""I regret making those statements, but it’s not true," Cuadra said, beginning to cry. "I was under a lot of stress. He played with me. It’s not true. It’s not true."

See Update 6 above; I don't see a whole lot of stress there as he calls the shots and overrides Joe's decisions.

Update 9: Closing arguments underway...

Update 10: More cross-examination highlights, via PC's Day 12 Overview...

- This was Harlow's big pre-rehearsed line; it seems to have made an impact as all news sources are quoting it:

"Harlow Cuadra shook his head and his voice reached a near frantic tone as he responded to lead prosecutor Michael Melnick’s question.

“He pleaded guilty to murder,” Cuadra said. “I did not. For two years, I have held on to my innocence.”"

...and the Times Leader adds: "Cuadra repeated the statement two more times on Wednesday, telling the jury Kerekes, 35, killed Kocis."

- "Joseph Kerekes stabbed Bryan Kocis in a jealous rage, Cuadra said, sticking to his story during two hours of questioning Wednesday." This after jealous Joe sat behind computer screens and engineered the hookup.

- "He was confrontational and cried several times during cross-examination by Melnick."

- "Cuadra testified when he arrived at Kocis’ home, Kocis kept calling him “Danny.”" Is Harlow actually saying he was unaware until he got there he was supposed to be "Danny?" What about his phone calls to Bryan as "Danny?"

- "“Joseph had a lot of chances to get away with this, but he pleaded guilty to murder,” Cuadra testified." Sounds like Harlow is bitter that Joe took the plea.

- Here's a fun fact: "Cuadra wore the same blue jacket with gold colored buttons during his testimony on Tuesday that he wore at the dinner with Lockhart and Roy, he said." But sadly, not the bow tie, it would appear.

Update 11: Also from PC's Day 12 Overview, more highlights from the closing arguments...

- These two statements sum up the different closing arguments:

"“The horror that was inflicted on Bryan Kocis by his killer was terrible,” attorney Joseph D’Andrea said during his closing argument. “But a mystery remains, who is Bryan Kocis’ killer? … Did that young man who I represent do it? Or, did he die by the hand of a violent man named Joseph Kerekes?”"

and

"“There is one thing I will agree with Harlow Raymond Cuadra about,” Melnick said. “Joseph Kerekes is a murderer. I agree with that. But … this wasn’t a solo performance by Joseph Kerekes.”

Melnick continued, pointing at Cuadra, “He aided and abetted that man.”"

The defense wants the jury to think the murder was one or the other. The prosecution wants the jury to realize it can be both.

- The problem with Boybatter:

"Cuadra alone slashed Kocis’ throat, Melnick told jurors, because he wanted to increase attention to his pornography Web site.

“(It) is a very mediocre Web site,” Melnick said. “But you heard him. What did the defendant call himself? ‘I’m a gay porn star.’ He was a wannabe. He wanted to be a big deal.”"

- "Melnick’s closing argument reviewed prosecution evidence, but spent more time quoting Cuadra’s own testimony, saying it was filled with incongruities." I'll say.

- "“Was the defendant telling the truth?” Melnick asked. “He has the most at stake. He has a significant interest to lie and fabricate, and you have to take that into account. Does it ring true or is it complete, unadulterated fiction?”"

- "“He wrote, and these are his words, he needs lawyers that can tell a good story,” Melnick said. “Innocent people don’t need alibis. They’re innocent.”"

- The Girlie-Man-Can't-Throw-A-Football Defense:

"Cuadra’s attorneys said Kerekes is the more domineering and physically imposing of the two men. D’Andrea referenced a video showing Cuadra throwing a football.

“I hate to be so condescending, but it was almost feminine,” D’Andrea said. “Harlow is not a jock. Harlow is not the muscleman who has the physical ability to kill.”

“Ladies and gentlemen, I don’t care how Harlow throws a football,” Melnick retorted during his closing argument. “He’s a gym rat … The kid is ripped.”"

- "“At best, folks, my client was a witness to a crime,” D’Andrea said...He waited two years to talk to you folks.”" You know, an off-topic yet irresistable musing springs to mind while reading this. Consider:

1) One party learns of a crime. They contact the police within hours. Result? For two years they are accused of having "blood on their hands."

2) Another party supposedly only witnesses a crime, NEVER tells police, and waits two years to reveal it. Result? "And now you know the truth," people say.

- The Condom Defense:

"Prosecutors presented evidence of lighter fluid, condoms and other items purchased at Wal-Mart. Cuadra wanted condoms because he thought he really was going to model for Kocis and have sex with him, and he didn’t know about Kerekes’ plans.

“You’re not worried about safe sex if you’re going to kill someone,” D’Andrea said."

Depends on whether you victim plans on sex before or after you get a chance to kill him, I suppose. And I guess the lighter fluid was intended as lube.

- And lastly, a forensic problem with Harlow's testimony:

"While sitting on a couch talking, Cuadra testified, Kerekes stormed inside and fought with Kocis before slashing his throat twice. Pascucci and Ross testified Kocis’ injury to his neck was by a knife in a single swipe."

OMFG!

Hat tip to Bryn...WOW! :-O

Breaking News: Kerekes won't testify in Cuadra homicide trial

By Coulter Jones
Staff Writer
Published: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 10:05 AM EDT
Harlow Cuadra's former lover and co-defendant Joseph Kerekes took the stand this morning in Cuadra's capital homicide trial, but the 35-year-old Kerekes didn't testify.

After answering several brief questions from Cuadra Attorney Joseph D'Andrea, Kerekes said he wouldn't testify on Cuadra's behalf.

"I've been thinking a lot about my parents and it would destroy them if I said something that I didn't do," Kerekes said.

Kerekes, 35, pleaded guilty to second degree homicide in December and is serving a life-sentence. In his plea he said Cuadra had killed Bryan Kocis and then set fire to his Dallas Township home.

Cuadra's mother seated in the courtroom, shouted at Kerekes as he left the courtroom.

Cuadra started testifying after Kerekes stepped down.

Cuadra could face the death penalty if found guilty of first-degree homicide for Bryan Kocis' death in January 2007. Prosecutors allege Cuadra killed Kocis, 44, in order to lure an actor to the gay pornography he co-owned with Kerekes.

Kerekes was the second defense witness called this morning. Testimony started more than an hour late because of several legal issues that had to be addressed prior to Kerekes' testimony.

Update: "...Kerekes said. "What I told you (D'Andrea) is untrue." HOLY CRAP! Harlow is toast...simple as that, folks...I don't see WHAT he could possibly say on the stand now to undo this damage...the jury is not stupid, I'm sure they figured out what just happened...developing...

Update 2: Yeah, I'd be weeping too at this point...

"Cuadra is currently testifying on his behalf, recalling his childhood in Florida and enlisting in the U.S. Navy when he was 17 years old. He is weeping on the stand."

Update 3: We kinda saw this one comin'...

"Joseph Kerekes controlled Harlow Cuadra’s e-mail accounts and kept his credit and identification cards when the two men went out, Cuadra testified Tuesday morning."

Update 4: The Cuadra Family Secret is trotted out...

"Cuadra's attorney Paul Walker is questioning Cuadra. Much of the testimony has focused on how Cuadra met Kerekes and how he was molested as a child by his step-father. Cuadra said he stopped talking to his family after he left the Navy.

He couldn't reveal to his family his homosexuality, or what his stepfather did, he said.

A weeping Cuadra apologized to his mother, who was also crying

"I'm sorry, Momma," Cuadra sobbed."

Update 5: From PC's blog: "12:31 PM: WNEP TV-16 reports that It turned out to be a bizarre morning in the murder trial of Harlow Cuadra..." Gee, ya think?

Update 6: LOL! This is what Harlow's defense has been reduced to: "During dinner, in which, Cuadra said Roy and Kerekes talked about filming movies together, Cuadra said he and Lockhart were "playing footsies" under the table."

Update 7: The Plan C Express leaves the station! Looks a lot like the Plan B Express, but w/o Joe on board.

Update 8: BTW there WAS a third witness so far today (if you count Joe, LOL!) and it was originally a typo; he was indeed a "defense" witness. Although what good he did for Harlow is far from clear at this point: "The defense's other witness, James Quare, 24, testified he met Kocis online and stopped by the Dallas Township home for a sexual rendezvous."

Update 9: WNEP video of 2:14pm on the Joe disaster. Excerpt: "...and the man who the defense expected to be a big help here, but WASN'T. This is Joseph Kerekes...:

Update 10: LOL! from PC's blog: "11:48 AM: Sources tell me that Joe had $300 deposited in to his canteen (so that he could buy a TV), in order for him to agree to testify... looks like the defense lost that money."

She's Baaaaack!

And testifying for Harlow, WHAT a surprise... "Renee Martin, a prosecution witness who returned to her home state of Texas after she testified last week, is in the courthouse and likely will be called to testify by Cuadra's attorneys, Joseph D'Andrea and Paul Walker."

Here's a handy quick link for the prosecution to use; saves them the time and trouble of clicking the "Older Posts" link below.

Trial Musings 15: The Good, The Bad And The Ugly

The prosecution rests.

As on Friday, there were a few minor revelations today. One, Harlow's laptop had photos of Bryan Kocis on it. Evidence I'd say you could draw inferences roughly the same as that of the USA People Search report Harlow ordered.

Two, Harlow had a brief email exchange with executives at Falcon, in which Harlow used the claim that he was "working with a high profit porn star beginning in three weeks" as leverage to get his Falcon application noticed. A high profit porn star who Falcon immediately figured out was Brent Corrigan (the reference on his application).

And three, Harlow blurted out a few interesting things after he was arrested and read the affidavit against him, including "Joe didn't do it."

Michael Kocis, Bryan's father, also testified today. Although his testimony was not new (to us), one bit of it was important: That his son was a very private person who "you just couldn't drop in" on. This will be critical to the jury, as it shows Harlow (not Joe) had the ability to enter the Kocis home, as only someone looking like Harlow (aka "Danny") was expected that evening. Bryan would never have opened the door had Joe (or anyone else not looking like Harlow/Danny) called on him that fateful night.

So now...it's *finally* Harlow's turn to play show and tell. And besides the possibility of Harlow himself taking the stand, it looks like he has three witnesses lined up, that we know of so far:

1) Chaplain Tom Winiarczyk of Providing Hope Ministries, which provides hope and ministrations to the inmates and staff at the Luzerne County Correctional Facility;

2) Joe Kerekes, Harlow's life-incarcerated co-murderer, tenderly described in a documentary interview by him a few months ago as his "partner in life" and "first and only," but now portrayed as an evil gunslinging dominator who was so controlling that he actually wrote and sent every email purportedly from Harlow, both before and after the murder; and

3) Bobby Lee Komrowski, a probable former cellmate of Joe Kerekes, and currently serving 20-40 years after pleading guilty to the stabbing death of his girlfriend back in October of 2007 (although he now appears to be suffering from some buyers remorse over that deal).

So, which one of these duelling defense witnesses will the jury find more credible? The saintly Chaplain Tom, perhaps telling them Harlow has now found salvation? The malevolent Joe, who pled guilty and then claimed that Harlow did all the actual killin' work? Or the rather unattractive cellmate Bobby Lee, to whom Joe possibly told a different story?

Stay tuned Chinchilla readers, as this trial's climactic final scene unfolds...


Update: Here's a fun fact I just noticed in that news story about Komrowski: His lawyer is former Joe Kerekes attorney Mark Bufalino, whose belatedly revealed conflict of interest back in July derailed this trial for months; see here here here here and here.

Update 2: Ah, those globe-trotting cameras!

"Two Sony digital cameras with obliterated serial numbers found under a towel in the Virginia Beach, Va., home of Cuadra and Kerekes were the same exact models missing from Kocis’ residence, Hannon said.

Hannon said the cameras seized from the Virginia Beach home were analyzed by the FBI in Virginia, and shipped to Sony corporate offices in Japan. Sony engineers were unable to find a second serial number on both cameras, Hannon said."

Update 3: "The surprise development appeared to have caught prosecutors off guard..." Hmm, they must not be keeping up on the blogs:

"Earlier today and without the jury in the courtroom, Judge Peter Paul Olszewski Jr. questioned Cuadra, who waived his right to remain silent.

The surprise development appeared to have caught prosecutors off guard.

Melnick and Crake were observed running out of the courtroom on the third floor, and were leaning over the shoulders of state police Trooper Brian Murphy, a computer forensics investigator, working on a laptop computer."

Were they reading HAJOT or SOTC? Or both? :-)

Trial Musings 14: Will Harlow Take The Stand?

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?...

[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?

As you can see, questions like this are going to be a problem for Harlow, should he opt to take the stand.


Update: Kocis case makes the Times Leader Sunday editorial page.