Investigators conducting intelligence research relative to this investigation located a message board area titled; "The Digital Video Information Network", with an associated web address of; www.dvinfo.net. Said website is designed for individuals to read and post questions/solutions to various types of digital video inquiries. Anyone may read posts at said site however in order to post a message a user must have an account already created.
On 01/29/07, user Harlow Cuadra posted an inquiry related to the use of video camera HVR-ZI/HDR-FX1. Said camera is the same model which was found to be removed from the victim's residence at or around the time of his death. It is also the same model camera which was seized from the accused's' residence pursuant to a search warrant on 02/10/07. Said camera had all serial numbers forcibly obliterated from same.
Investigators contacted the Administrative contact for DV Info Net and requested subscriber information related to those postings. The subscriber DV Info has registered is Harlow Cuadra of Norfolk, Va., with an email account of firstname.lastname@example.org with the signature of "boys do what they can...men do what they want". Eleven posting IP addresses were also provided, one being 220.127.116.11 which is the static IP address assigned by Cox Communications Inc., to Cuadra of 1028 Stratem Ct., Virginia Beach, Va."
My own thoughts:
Harlow states in his DVI message: "i just got it but do not understand the manual to well :(" ... this would sound like Cuadra just got the camera. Bryan was murdered 5 days earlier... bad timing to make a purchase?
"it was observed that both cameras had serial numbers forcibly removed and obliterated" ... assuming Harlow and Joe did in fact purchase theses cameras, where would one buy cameras that have had their serial number removed? Even a pawn shop won't sell items like that. Ebay perhaps? Or maybe they removed them after they bought them... but why?
During the search warrant, receipts were also seized - assuming Harlow and Joe had receipts for the purchase of these two cameras, then there's certainly a reasonable doubt to these being Bryan's. If Harlow and Joe didn't have receipts of purchase (which would be very odd since both cameras would be considered a tax deduction as business equipment), then I guess it'll be up to a jury to decide.