tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3301523068872753691.post1298449760185108098..comments2023-06-20T14:13:16.470+01:00Comments on Silence of the Chinchillas: Victory Day 2013, Part Troisjimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05694604818743823008noreply@blogger.comBlogger186125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3301523068872753691.post-90186878929982610442013-07-20T22:15:18.877+01:002013-07-20T22:15:18.877+01:00This is the last comment of the thread. We'll ...This is the last comment of the thread. We'll pick it up with a fresh new post soon, on the topic of ... ooooh Joe's plea deal, start of Chapter 10! [reading reading reading ...]jimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05694604818743823008noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3301523068872753691.post-27073735880182274582013-07-17T23:03:26.436+01:002013-07-17T23:03:26.436+01:00And here I was so proud of you, Mr. Everhard, for ...And here I was so proud of you, Mr. Everhard, for getting through an entire comment (11:54 PM) with NO reference to Kids for Cash. Then you had to go ruin it with your last comment.<br /><br />So one of those judges appointed the conflict counsel. And? Were those lawyers part of the conspiracy too?will ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07564041856621863258noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3301523068872753691.post-74572820974936369532013-07-17T20:01:02.695+01:002013-07-17T20:01:02.695+01:00when the public defender's office in luzerne c...when the public defender's office in luzerne county has a conflict of interest representing a party, that party is assigned counsel from Luzerne County's "Conflict Counsel Pool". the attorneys in the conflict counsel pool were appointed to their positions in the pool by the president judge of the luzerne county court. In cuadra's case, his conflict counsel lawyers would have been appointed to the conflict counsel pool by either conahan or ciavarella (both now in prison).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3301523068872753691.post-14172841122243401532013-07-17T18:48:59.769+01:002013-07-17T18:48:59.769+01:00Following up on the main idea in Anonymous (Two?) ...Following up on the main idea in Anonymous (Two?) comment that the counsel did not have enough time to prepare, I would agree in part. However given the shortness of time envolved, and the likely importance of Joe's testimony to the defense, it would have been my priority to invest some of my limited time to interviewing Joe prior to the trial.<br /><br />And given the static on this blog about a TV set being given to Joe, some negotiating must have taken place between Harlow's new attorneys and Joe or his attorneys.<br /><br />ANonymous One Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3301523068872753691.post-54504823991661693282013-07-17T18:43:48.712+01:002013-07-17T18:43:48.712+01:00While a deposition gives counsel the advantage of ...While a deposition gives counsel the advantage of locking the witnesses testimony, it also has the disadvantage of allowing opposing counsel access when that witness is being questioned.<br /><br />In the case of Joe, you have no idea what he would say to a potential question, and you really would want to have a strong idea of what his answer would be. Supposing you were to ask him at a deposition who sliced Bryan's throat, and Joe says "Harlow did it" you just blew the cost of the stenographer. You do have the alternative though of interviewing him in private and sounding out all kinds of questions which you would never dare ask without knowing what the answer would be.<br /><br />As far as a witness having to be listed in order to be called, this is definitely the case for a prosecution witness. It would also be the case for an expert witness. However, I do not believe that the other defense witnesses need be listed in advance. This is one of the built in advantages for the defense. Of course not knowing the rules of local practice in Luzerne County, the other Anonymous could be correct. There would be another reason that might prevent Joe's testifying. As a prisoner in the State Penitentiary, a court order would be needed to allow his transport from the prison to the courthouse. The judge could refuse to sign that order.<br /><br />Anonymous One<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3301523068872753691.post-76419550814966881332013-07-16T23:54:57.509+01:002013-07-16T23:54:57.509+01:00"Had Joe really had qualms about testifying, ...<i>"Had Joe really had qualms about testifying, he would have told Harlow's Attorneys before the trial."</i><br /><br />The whole purpose of discovery / deposing a witness before trial is to know what the witness is going to say and to be able to confront the witness with his deposition testimony if the witness says something different at trial.<br /><br />the only way Kerekes could have just been called to testify at trial IF HE WASN'T ON THE DEFENSE's WITNESS LIST before trial, would have been if the Judge and the Prosecution agreed to allow Joe to be called as a last minute witness for the defense. <br /><br />the conflict counsel lawyers who represented Cuadra at trial weren't the conflict counsel lawyers for Cuadra during discovery / pre-trial. The Conflict Counsel Lawyers for Cuadra at trial didn't do any of the pre-trial legal work and they were left with only Cuadra's testimony (and without having deposed Kerekes) because the Judge would not give the new conflict counsel lawyers time to prepare for trial after the previous conflict counsel lawyers left the case.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3301523068872753691.post-32630975749997007832013-07-16T22:38:07.262+01:002013-07-16T22:38:07.262+01:00Will:
As Jim has commented, there was a discussio...Will:<br /><br />As Jim has commented, there was a discussion on this blog about how wise Melnick was not to put Joe on the stand. I would agree with that analysis.<br /><br />Melnick could have forced Joe to testify by holding back on sentencing pending the outcome of Harlow's trial (In other words rejecting the plea deal and then trying him in a death penalty case. He did not.<br /><br />Two reasons. I believe that Melnick thought that Harlow was the principal criminal in the case and Joe a mere conspirator.<br /><br />Second, the plea agreement included a statement by Joe that might not stand up under further examination. The prosecution figured no need to waste any more time on Joe since they got in their eyes a suitable result. <br /><br />As to Joe's statement "I will absoultely will not testify for the state case (sic) against Harlow", this is the same guy who stated "I am a serial killer""Harlow is telling the truth" and who laid out plans to throw Harlow under the bus to a fellow inmade at their joint trial. You can not accept what Joe says. He rationalizes, prevaricates, and outright lies depending on his mood at the moment and what he hopes to gain by making that statement.<br /><br />I hope though that you would look not to his statements but his actions which speak more truthfully. Unless Harlow's attorneys were absolute fools, they must have interviewed him way in advance of the trial to determine what he was going to testify about. If Joe was going to say something under oath prejudicial to Harlow, they would never have put him on the stand. Yet they did try.<br /><br />Anonymous One Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3301523068872753691.post-87255438969299769182013-07-16T19:03:11.148+01:002013-07-16T19:03:11.148+01:00"I absolutely will not testify for the state ...<a href="http://handjtrial.blogspot.com/2008/12/joseph-kerekes-to-take-plea-bargain.html" rel="nofollow">"I absolutely will not testify for the state case against Harlow," Kerekes said after his plea.</a><br /><br />That doesn't sound like someone who has never been asked to testify for the prosecution. If Melnick ever said he didn't think he'd be useful as a witness (which I couldn't find him saying anywhere) it sounds to me like it was something of a defensive rationalization after Joe made that public statement.will ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07564041856621863258noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3301523068872753691.post-26823004480019442352013-07-16T18:27:25.155+01:002013-07-16T18:27:25.155+01:00Yeah if my memory serves, Melnick never asked for ...Yeah if my memory serves, Melnick never asked for Joe to testify as a condition of his plea because he didn't see him as being useful as a witness.jimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05694604818743823008noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3301523068872753691.post-39037777470078466842013-07-16T17:44:25.621+01:002013-07-16T17:44:25.621+01:00He was called by the Defense, not the Prosecutor, ...<i>He was called by the Defense, not the Prosecutor, so he was under no pressure from Melnick to testify. In fact, Melnick was probably glad that he did not</i><br /><br />I don't know how you know he was under no pressure to testify for the prosecution. It's standard for one co-conspirator to agree to testify against the other one as a condition of a plea deal, and I'm sure this case would have been no different, except for the fact that the plea was for life without parole, so the prosecutor didn't have any leverage to compel him to take the stand. As for him being a "loose cannon," that's true whenever you put a convicted criminal on the stand. Melnick would have gladly subjected Joe to cross-examination in return for his testimony.will ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07564041856621863258noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3301523068872753691.post-7335336547148048292013-07-16T16:59:23.630+01:002013-07-16T16:59:23.630+01:00Will:
typed too fast again. The first sentence sh...Will:<br /><br />typed too fast again. The first sentence should read" he could NOT testify before them".<br /><br />Anonymous OneAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3301523068872753691.post-1586768740176875322013-07-16T16:57:31.786+01:002013-07-16T16:57:31.786+01:00Will:
Joe did not protect Harlow at Harlow's ...Will:<br /><br />Joe did not protect Harlow at Harlow's Trial. What he did was appear before the Jury and say he could testify before them. He was called by the Defense, not the Prosecutor, so he was under no pressure from Melnick to testify. In fact, Melnick was probably glad that he did not, since had he testified for the prosecution, Harlow's attorneys could have cross-examined him. I believe the expression "loose cannon" was used to describe his potential testimony.<br /><br />But the Jury hearing Joe take the stand and then refusing to testify, could only draw the inference that the Defense wanted Joe to say something in Harlow's behalf and Joe was refusing. That inference would be the same you and Jim have concluded: Harlow was the killer but Joe was refusing to fall on his sword for Harlow.<br /><br />Had Joe really had qualms about testifying, he would have told Harlow's Attorneys before the trial, before getting the TV Set and whatever into his canteen fund, that he was not going to testify. This would have given them time to prepare Harlow for testifying (which he clearly was not prepared)and align their trial strategy accordingly.<br /><br />And yes, I think Joe is smart enough to realize what he was doing to the man he "loved". In fact this was his plan ever since he decided to plead quilty to avoid the death sentence. Once again Joe showed Harlow who was the dominant personality in their relationship.<br /><br />Anonymous OneAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3301523068872753691.post-50085381451895916662013-07-16T08:04:46.411+01:002013-07-16T08:04:46.411+01:00I think what Josh is saying (and he does have a bi...I think what Josh is saying (and he does have a bit of a point) is that the plan I outlined in my theory may have been too crafty for them to have conceived.<br /><br />Neither Harlow nor Joe will ever be compared to the fictional Professor Moriarty, aka the Napoleon of Crime.jimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05694604818743823008noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3301523068872753691.post-19497509633919197572013-07-16T06:28:37.376+01:002013-07-16T06:28:37.376+01:00But accidentally leaving a bag of DNA soaked cloth...But accidentally leaving a bag of DNA soaked clothes behind? Oh dear, my bad.<br />Alberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15297732715801674024noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3301523068872753691.post-46458616985625387092013-07-15T20:07:03.695+01:002013-07-15T20:07:03.695+01:00A-1, Joe was adamant that he would never testify a...A-1, Joe was adamant that he would never testify against Harlow, as he told reporters, and he kept his word, despite what you know had to be intense pressure from the prosecutor when he was negotiating his plea. That just doesn't jibe with the portrait you're painting of him. When push came to shove, he still protected him.will ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07564041856621863258noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3301523068872753691.post-73976086735997259582013-07-15T19:49:53.290+01:002013-07-15T19:49:53.290+01:00Do we actually have someone new posting here? Spea...Do we actually have someone new posting here? Speak up Josh, explain your cryptic comment.will ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07564041856621863258noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3301523068872753691.post-68353800412511385572013-07-15T19:24:25.157+01:002013-07-15T19:24:25.157+01:00I also left out the pistol shots in the boy-dello ...I also left out the pistol shots in the boy-dello (which caused Hensley and Shunt to leave), and what Jim called the pistol whipping.<br /><br />Anonymous OneAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3301523068872753691.post-47688570225121907412013-07-15T19:20:04.665+01:002013-07-15T19:20:04.665+01:00I know I am making Joe out to be pure evil,and I b...I know I am making Joe out to be pure evil,and I believe I may be overdoing it, but this jealoulsy of Harlow has to have existed to explain most of his subsequent actions.<br /><br />Maybe Joe was merely bi-polar, but most of his actions were designed to make Harlow look guilty. Besides the confession to Melnick, and his weird actions when he was called to testify at Harlow's trial, we also have his jail house interview where he blew plan A, he was the first to contact clients to ask them to lie about an alibi(in Newport Beach), he took traceable cameras from Bryan's home, and he blabs on the three way talks before Renee in such a way as to imply Harlow's guilt.<br /><br />We also know about another conversation with a fellow prisoner where he planned to blame Harlow for the entire crime.<br /><br />It is one thing to claim he was in the Pinewood Lodge (that is self-preservation), it is another plant hints and evidence beyond that to incriminate his supposed lover.<br /><br />Contrast this with Harlow, who tries to deflect blame onto third parties rather than his business partner and you can see why I think that strong jealousy by Joe of Harlow existed.<br /><br />Anonymous OneAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3301523068872753691.post-57700712952776901732013-07-15T19:06:37.017+01:002013-07-15T19:06:37.017+01:00Jim:
Harlow was a fairly muscular 5'9" m...Jim:<br /><br />Harlow was a fairly muscular 5'9" man, Sean at that time was much shorter and a lot skinnier. The clothes would not match. Also the DNA from the clothes would contain Harlow's sweat.<br /><br />If those clothes existed (and I still have my doubts about that), Joe had a reason to keep them, and it concerned keeping Harlow's cooperation.<br /><br />I have also thought about why they were left in San Diego. I do not believe Harlow knew that that Joe left them behind. I think Joe had second thoughts about carrying them back on the plane where they might be inspected, and decided it was time to ditch them. Of course he would not tell Harlow of same, so he could still hold them over him.<br /><br />If the clothes did exist, it would also explain why Joe insisted on Plan B. After Harlow said that he was in the house and smelt fire and left, reference to the "bloody clothes" would have been extremely damaging.<br /><br />Anonymous One<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3301523068872753691.post-11805239429556708922013-07-15T17:41:20.165+01:002013-07-15T17:41:20.165+01:00that would require actionable intelligence.that would require actionable intelligence.joshnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3301523068872753691.post-29709670952905472212013-07-15T05:11:40.154+01:002013-07-15T05:11:40.154+01:00Yes there was discussion of the master tapes on th...Yes there was discussion of the master tapes on the BBTs. The original plan was to gift the tapes to Sean and Grant, they said, but they decided at the last minute they were too "hot" so destroyed them instead. But not before watching and enjoying them.<br /><br />You know, another thought just popped into my head. Sean and Harlow are about the same size and build, clothing-wise.<br /><br />Could the plan have been to <i>plant</i> the evidence in San Diego, to make it appear that Sean was the murderer?<br /><br />A back up plan to frame Sean and Grant for the murder might have been useful to them, for a whole variety of reasons.<br /><br />It could be that they had a scheme to bury the clothes near Sean and Grant's house (it overlooks a canyon, IIRC), but never got around to it...and forgot the clothes when they left.jimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05694604818743823008noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3301523068872753691.post-22016392083062879492013-07-15T02:33:09.534+01:002013-07-15T02:33:09.534+01:00If you think that carrying a bag of blody clothes ...If you think that carrying a bag of blody clothes around is crazy, how's this for topping that.<br /><br />After the Murder, Harlow wants out.<br />After all even he does not want to share a bed with a murderer. Joe tell him "if you leave me, I am going to give these clothes to the police". Joe has conveniently burned all of Joe's clothes so only Harlow's remain. In fact Joe is using the bag as a form of blackmail to keep Harlow around.<br /><br />In San Diego, Harlow manages to get the bag left behind (at last), or perhaps, Joe feels that at this point, so much time has elapsed that Harlow if he were to inform the police, his story would not believed. (Harlow did get blood on him when Joe cut Bryan's throat, and Joe has been scaring Harlow with stories of prison life, so Harlow is definitely afraid of going to Jail ). When Joe plea bargains for Life without Parole, the DA wants something on Harlow. So Joe gives Melnick the story of the bag.<br /><br />Yes you are saying: But Joe is in love with Harlow. How could he do this to the love of his life? Joe loved the money that Harlow brought in, and Harlow did make a nice trophy boyfriend, but Joe was also extremely jealous of the younger, handsomer and more popular man. So Joe figured if he was going to rot in Jail, why should Harlow be free?<br /><br />But being Joe (which means being as crazy as a loon)Joe decides to milk Harlow's attorney for a TV set and whatever else they can give him. Then at the very last moment (in front of the jury no less) Joe decides that he just can not testify. The Jury gets the impression that Joe wanted to give them. And Joe gets to scam Harlow once again. Joe feels victorious and for Joe that is all that matters.<br /><br />Anonymous One<br /><br />They say that being involved in a murder can affect one psychologically, and my guess that Joe went from being mildly sociopathic to severe psychotic after the murder. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3301523068872753691.post-29931374186477396162013-07-15T02:06:37.660+01:002013-07-15T02:06:37.660+01:00If you recall, there were comments on this blog ab...If you recall, there were comments on this blog about a barbecue on the beach where the master tapes from Cobra were destroyed. Was that a figment of somebody's imagination, or if it occured why weren't the clothes added to this clambake.<br /><br />Anonymous One<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3301523068872753691.post-9615434054939346862013-07-14T20:02:54.251+01:002013-07-14T20:02:54.251+01:00Well I wouldn't say it's JUST as crazy Jim...Well I wouldn't say it's JUST as crazy Jim! You've got to admit keeping and traveling with and leaving behind clothes soaked in Kocis' blood ups the ante on crazy.will ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07564041856621863258noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3301523068872753691.post-71742015918715456702013-07-14T19:52:25.283+01:002013-07-14T19:52:25.283+01:00That's quite a "happenstance"!
Like...That's quite a "happenstance"!<br /><br />Like I said earlier, normally I'd be disinclined to believe this story by Joe, BUT FOR the fact the hotel actually had a record of the bag.<br /><br />And yes, it's crazy to keep a bag of bloody clothes around, but they kept the video cameras as well, which is just as crazy, so...jimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05694604818743823008noreply@blogger.com