Comments...

After some careful consideration... I've decided that "comments" should still be permitted on posts labled "useful trial resources", regarding the Harlow Cuadra and Joseph Kerekes trial... as such, comments are once again open for these previous posts/discussions:

Harlow & Joe's Debt
Black's Beach Transcripts
Affidavit of Probable Cause
Criminal Charges Filed
Preliminary Hearing (Day 1)
Preliminary Hearing (Day 2)
2007 Timeline of Events
Evidence Presented Thus Far
Prosecution's Witness List

Comments will likely remain open until the trial of Harlow and Joe is over... if this would make things confusing, or you have a better idea... please let me know.

Harlow and Joe's Charges... Spelled Out

As a follow-up to the criminal complaint... I also wanted to list the charges filed against Harlow Cuadra and Joseph Kerekes (since the burglary charges were dismissed, they are not included):

CRIMINAL HOMICIDE
Section 2501(a) of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code

IN THAT, on or about said date, THE DEFENDANT intentionally, knowingly, recklessly or negligently caused the death of Bryan Charles Kocis, another human being, that is to say the defendants were responsible for the victim being slashed across his throat with a cutting instrument, as well as being stabbed twenty eight times, in violation of Section 2501(a) of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code, Act of December 6, 1972, 18 Pa. C.S. 2501(a).

CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT CRIMINAL HOMICIDE

Section 903(a)(1)/2501(a) of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code

IN THAT, on or about said date, THE DEFENDANT, with the intent of promoting or facilitating the crime(s) of Criminal Homicide conspired and agreed with Joseph Manual KEREKES that they or one or more of them would engage in conduct constituting such crime or crimes or an attempt or solicitation to commit such crime or crimes, and in furtherance thereof did commit the overt act of murdering victim Bryan Charles Kocis that is to say the defendant along with KEREKES did cause the victim to suffer a slash wound to his throat, as well as twenty eight stab wounds to his body, in violation of Section 903(a)(1) of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code, Act of December 6, 1972, 18 Pa. C.S. 903(a)(1).

LIABILITY FOR THE CONDUCT OF ANOTHER, COMPLICITY

Section 306(b)(3)(ii)/2501(a) of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code

IN THAT, on or about said date, THE DEFENDANT did commit the act of Criminal Homicide while being the accomplice of another, namely, Joseph Manuel KEREKES, in the commission of said offense, and did aid or agree or attempt to aid KEREKES in planning and/or committing the offense, in violation of Section 306(b)(3)(ii) of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code, Act of December 6, 1972, 18 Pa. C.S. 306(b)(3)(ii).

ROBBERY

Section 3701(a)(1)(i) of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code

IN THAT, on or about said date, THE DEFENDANT, in the course of committing a theft, inflicted serious bodily injury upon Bryan Charles Kocis, that is to say the defendant did, along with Joseph Manuel KEREKES, slash the victim's throat and stab him twenty eight times, after which the accused removed numerous items from the victim's residence, not having license or privilege to do so, in violation of Section 3791(a)(1)(i) of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code, Act of December 6, 1972, 18 Pa. C.S. 3701(a)(1)(i).

ARSON AND RELATED OFFENSES

Section 3301(a)(1)(i) of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code

IN THAT, on or about said date, THE DEFENDANT intentionally started a fire or caused an explosion or aided, counseled, paid or agreed to pay another to cause a fire or cause an explosion at 60 Midland Drive, Dallas Twp., Luzerne County, Pa., owned by Bryan Charles Kocis causing pecuniary loss in excess of $25000 and thereby recklessly placed responding emergency personnel in danger of death or bodily injury, that is to say the defendant did, in concert with Joseph Manuel KEREKES, intentionally start a fire at aforementioned location for the purpose of criminal destruction of said property as well as the concealment of a crime, in violation of Section 3301(a)(1)(i) of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code, Act of December 6, 1972, 18 Pa. C.S. 3301(a)(1)(i), as amended.

ARSON AND RELATED OFFENSES
Section 3301(a)(1)(ii) of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code

IN THAT, on or about said date, THE DEFENDANT intentionally started a fire or caused an explosion or aided, counseled, paid or agreed to pay another to cause a fire or cause an explosion for the purpose of destroying or damaging an inhabited building or occupied structure of another, namely 60 Midland Drive, Dallas Twp., Luzerne County, Pa., owned by Bryan Charles Kocis causing pecuniary loss in excess of $25000 that is to say the defendant did, in concert with Joseph Manuel KEREKES, intentionally start a fire at aforementioned location for the purpose of criminal destruction of said property as well as the concealment of a crime, in violation of Section 3301(a)(1)(ii) of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code, Act of December 6, 1972, 18 Pa. C.S. 3301(a)(1)(ii), as amended.

THEFT BY UNLAWFUL TAKING OR DISPOSITION (Movable Property)

Section 3921(a) of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code

IN THAT, on or about the said date, THE DEFENDANT unlawfully took or exercised unlawful control over movable property of another, namely, two computer towers, a laptop computer, a Rolex watch, two video cameras, and multiple business records or the victim having a value in excess of two thousand dollars belonging to Bryan Charles Kocis with the intent to deprive the owner thereof, that is to say the defendant did remove aforementioned items from the victim's residence having not the license or privilege to do so, in violation of Section 3921(a) of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code, Act of December 6, 1972, 18 Pa. C.S. 3921(a).

TAMPERING WITH OR FABRICATING PHYSICAL EVIDENCE

Section 4910(1) of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code

IN THAT, on or about the said date, THE DEFENDANT, believing that an official proceeding or investigation, namely, Homicide Investigation was pending or about to be instituted, altered, destroyed, concealed or removed, the victim's body as well as the scene of the victim's death, as well as numerous items from within the victim's residence with intent to impair its verity or availability in such proceeding or investigation, that is to say the defendant did burn the victim's body as well as the scene of the victim's murder, as well as remove and subsequently destroy multiple items of evidence which would have been found within the victim's residence, in violation of Section 4910(1) of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code, Act of December 6, 1972, 18 Pa. C.S. 4910(1).

ABUSE OF CORPSE

Section 5510 of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code

IN THAT, on or about the said date, THE DEFENDANT, without authorization of law, treated the corpse of Bryan Charles Kocis in a way that the defendant knew would outrage ordinary family sensibilities, that is to say the defendant did stab the victim twenty eight times after his death, and did burn his body, in violation of Section 5510(1) of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code, Act of December 6, 1972, 18 Pa. C.S. 5510(1).

CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT ROBBERY

Section 903(a)(1)/3701(a)(1)(i) of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code

IN THAT, on or about the said date, THE DEFENDANT, with the intent of promoting or facilitating the crime(s) of Robbery conspired and agreed with Joseph Manuel KEREKES that they or one or more of them would engage in conduct constituting such crime or crimes or an attempt or solicitation to commit such crime or crimes, and in furtherance thereof did commit the overt act of theft by inflicting serious bodily injury to the victim that is to say the defendant did in conjunction with accused KEREKES slash the victim's throat and did subsequently commit a theft of the victim's property, in violation of Section 903(a)(1) of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code, Act of December 6, 1972, 18 Pa. C.S. 903(a)(1).

CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT TAMPERING WITH OR FABRICATING EVIDENCE

Section 903(a)(1)/4901(1) of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code

IN THAT, on or about the said date, THE DEFENDANT, with the intent of promoting or facilitating the crime(s) of Tampering with or Fabricating Physical Evidence conspired and agreed with Joseph Manuel KEREKES that they or one or more of them would engage in conduct constituting such crime or crimes or an attempt or solicitation to commit such crime or crimes, and in furtherance thereof did commit the overt act of destroying evidence pertinent to a Homicide investigation that is to say the defendant did in conjunction with accused KEREKES destroy multiple items of evidence as well as burn the victim's body and attempt to destroy the scene of the victim's homicide, in violation of Section 903(a)(1) of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code, Act of December 6, 1972, 18 Pa. C.S. 903(a)(1).

CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT ARSON

Section 903(a)(1)/3301(a)(1) of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code

IN THAT, on or about the said date, THE DEFENDANT, with the intent of promoting or facilitating the crime(s) of Arson conspired and agreed with Joseph Manuel KEREKES that they or one or more of them would engage in conduct constituting such crime or crimes or an attempt or solicitation to commit such crime or crimes, and in furtherance thereof did commit the overt act of arson, that is to say the defendant did, along with accused KEREKES, set fire to the victim's residence for the purpose of criminal destruction of said property as well as the concealment of a crime, in violation of Section 903(a)(1) of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code, Act of December 6, 1972, 18 Pa. C.S. 903(a)(1).

CRIMINAL USE OF COMMUNICATION FACILITY

Section 7512(a) of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code

IN THAT, on or about the said date, THE DEFENDANT used a communication facility to commit, cause or facilitate the commission or the attempt thereof of the crime of Criminal Homicide and Burglary, which constitute a felony as defined by this Title 18, in violation of Section 7512(a) of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code, Act of December 6, 1972, 18 Pa. C.S. 7512(a).

Affidavit of Probable Cause

This post has been moved here.

Does The Camera Lie?

Two video cameras were found missing from Bryan Kocis' house after his murder, meanwhile the same two brands and models of cameras were also found in Harlow Cuadra and Joseph Kerekes' house. Here's a copy of the affidavit regarding the matter, with my personal observations and thoughts following.

Since the camera topic seems to surface from time to time, I thought it would only be fitting to discuss it:

"On 02/10/07, the Virginia Beach Police Department, in conjunction with investigators from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, executed a search warrant at the residence of Cuadra and Kerekes, that being 1028 Stratem Court, Virginia Beach, Virginia, in pursuit of the furtherance of this investigation. As a result of said search, numerous items of evidence were seized, inclusive of items previously illustrated herein. Additionally, two Sony digital video cameras, model numbers DCR-VX2000 and HDR-FX1, respectfully, were seized it was observed that both cameras had serial numbers forcibly removed and obliterated. Based upon the observance of said items, investigators with the Pennsylvania State Police contacted the victim's associate Robert Wagner, who had in the past assisted the victim with video production. Wagner stated that he had, within the six months prior to the victim's death, observed said cameras within the victim's residence. It should be noted that both cameras were conspicuously absent during the intensive search of the victim's residence. Additionally, investigators contacted J&R electronics store, located in New York, NY., which is a location the victim regularly purchased electronic items. According to a sales manager at that location, the victim did purchase a Sony HDR-FX1 camera on 12/23/05.

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 harlowcuadra@excite.com with the signature of "boys do what they can...men do what they want". Eleven posting IP addresses were also provided, one being 70.174.54.38 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?

Harlow also stated that he had the manual, so they must have bought it right? Not necessarily... the manuals for both cameras can easily be downloaded in .pdf format online here and here.

"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.

Recordings Don't Lie... But Sometimes People Do

Since the taped beach recordings of a 2 day conversation involving Harlow Cuadra, Joseph Kerekes, Grant Roy, and Sean Lockhart will be used as evidence in trial, I decided to review once again what was mentioned in the affidavit. It's pretty damning to say the least, and I'm including the entire text for those that haven't had access to the criminal affidavit:

On 04/27/07, an electronic intercept and surveillance was conducted by a task force consisting of members of the San Diego Police Department Homicide Unit, the Drug Enforcement Administration, Naval Criminal Investigation Service, San Diego County District Attorney's Office, Pennsylvania State Police, and the Luzerne County District Attorney's Office. The location of said intercept was within the area of La Jolla, San Diego, California. The subject of said intercept was conversations between Grant Roy, Sean Lockhart, Harlow Cuadra, and Joseph Kerekes concerning the homicide of victim Kocis. During said conversations, it was observed that Roy and Lockhart made statements regarding how their lives have been damaged by the murder of the victim, specifically regarding the business setbacks they have suffered. As a response, both Cuadra and Kerekes made apologetic statements for their hardship. The foursome additionally spoke of doing business, specifically the creation of pornographic film showing Cuadra and Lockhart. At one point in the conversation, Roy asked Cuadra/Kerekes if the victim "felt any pain". Both Cuadra and Kerekes became silent, at which time Cuadra leaned towards Lockhart, who was walking next to him and stated silently; "don't worry, he went quick". Cuadra and Kerekes then addressed Roy and Lockhart stating that if the foursome went to the nude beach the next day, Cuadra and Kerekes would answer any questions asked of them.

On 04/28/07, another electronic intercept and surveillance was conducted by task force members from aforementioned agencies with the exception of the San Diego County District Attorney's Office. The location of said intercept was within the area of Torry Pines Gliderport and beach area, aka Black's Beach, San Diego, Ca. The subject of said intercept was conversations between Grant Roy, Sean Lockhart, Harlow Cuadra, and Joseph Kerekes. During said conversations, Cuadra stated that he was present when the victim was murdered. Cuadra spoke of conversations the victim had with various individuals while Cuadra was present. Both Cuadra and Kerekes referenced the victim's records which were kept within his residence as being "gone". Both Cuadra and Kerekes stated that they viewed approx fifty five "master tapes" which were removed from the victim's residence, as well as business records. Cuadra and Kerekes subsequently destroyed said items, as they would be considered "proof". Cuadra then stated that illustrated items remained in his residence for approx two days. Cuadra added that he was going to afford a tape to Roy and Lockhart as a gift, but it was "too hot". Cuadra also referenced the victim's Rolex watch, and described the initials engraved on the back. Both Cuadra and Kerekes also referenced two computer towers and a laptop computer which were removed from the victim's residence, all of which was destroyed. Cuadra also illustrated how he and another "did some recon work", and described that the victim's front door didn't have a "peephole" in it, and further described it as "two square blocks of windows on top and Bryan's not tall enough to see through that". Cuadra continued; "it was quick; he never saw it coming". Cuadra also stated that while he was at the victim's residence, he heard the victim calling Lockhart a "little bitch" and the "product". Cuadra stated to Lockhart; "don't feel too bad". Kerekes added that the victim had a contract prepared for Cuadra at the time of Cuadra's arrival. Both Cuadra and Kerekes intimated that the victim was aware of Cuadra's real identity, and continued with the meeting nevertheless. Cuadra also stated that during his initial meeting with the victim, they were drinking wine, to which Kerekes stated that he believed that Cuadra "slipped (the victim) something" in his drink. At some point, the doorbell rang and the victim "was kind of stumbling, and uh, that was it". Cuadra and Kerekes both illustrated the interior of the victim's residence, specifically the victim's high-end, expensive home entertainment center. Cuadra and Kerekes also stated that the victim desired for Cuadra to "move in", and illustrated an upstairs bedroom as was found to be at the victim's residence. Cuadra then stated that he believed that the victim recogized him from the Internet, to which Cuadra became concerned. At that point, the victim picked up the phone and Cuadra's "dude" "came around", and "it was crazy". Cuadra then referenced insulting comments made by the victim towards Lockhart and Roy, the stated "... and it's what kind of made the whole decision kind of easy. Almost a little too easy... and I should of thought where all those fingers would have pointed, I remember lookin at the press... I'm just glad that shit's over". Cuadra later went on to say that "the cops put it (investigation) on the back burner". Cuadra additionally made the statement; "... actually seeing the fucker going down actually it's sick but it made me feel better inside. It almost felt like I got revenge and I know that sounds fucked up..." Cuadra and Kerekes then again illustrated a modeling contract which the victim had prepared for Cuadra to sign. Kerekes then interjected; "Harlow had all the little documents he (victim) told him to bring and he didn't even ask for them". Cuadra responded; "Oh no he didn't ask for my ID". Cuadra and Kerekes then stated that the victim expected that he and Cuadra were going to "have sex all night" without the victim paying Cuadra any money for same. It should be noted that conversation about other topics not related to the victim's death occured regularly intermixed with discussions concerning the planning, execution, and subsequent destruction of evidence related to the investigation.

Fire & Water & Rubber Boots: The Case For Trace Evidence

It is a commonplace by now that the investigation into Bryan Kocis’ murder did not stop on 15 May (when the affidavit of probable cause was filed.) And something else we can pretty safely count on is that the affidavit does not contain every last shred of evidence the police thought the had against Mr. Cuadra and Mr. Kerekes.

The affidavit was written to get two guys arrested, not to convict them.

It’s not an undue presumptive jump, then, to the conclusion that right now there’s more evidence kicking around than we know about. Granted, much of it is peculiar to the case at hand, and will be news to us once we hear it (if we hear it.)

But there are classes of evidence that are routine: the stuff that the police almost certainly have—or tried like hell to get. Perhaps then, we can speculate about that evidence with reasonable propriety.

The foremost class of such thingies about which we have heard nary a peep about (thus far) goes by the overall name ‘trace evidence.’

Crime writer Katherine Ramsland: “No matter how much someone tries to clean up a crime scene, something is generally left behind. It may not always be detected, but it's difficult to take any kind of violent action without shedding something.”

Trace evidence includes fibers, hairs, fluids, shoe prints, palm and/or fingerprints, natural materials like plant matter and/or rocks, tire tracks... all of it.

And not a bit of it was mentioned in that affidavit.



Of course not, I hear you saying, that’s because there isn’t any. Surely, you continue, the fire and the subsequent Stampede of the Volunteer Firemen destroyed it all.

Granted, maybe that’s true; fires and fire-hoses and firemen all play havoc with fragile evidence. But we do know that the fire was only started in one place—“the rear of a living room couch/loveseat in very close proximity to the couch on which the victim was found deceased.”

Plus, the number and variety of items missing from the house informs us that the killer(s) roamed all over that house.

The farther the bad guys strayed from what was to become the hottest part of that fire, the more likely that some manner of trace evidence was recovered.

It also seems axiomatic that the more hurried the burglary (after Mr. Kocis’ quick demise), the more likely that something was shed. And there, the tight timeline likewise points toward the prospect of a less-than-antiseptic heist.

So then, if they indeed did this thing, should Mr. Cuadra and Mr. Kerekes be certain that they left behind no sign?

You can be sure that their lawyers share no such surety. They know better.

As forensic-science pioneer Edmond Locard put it, "[t]his is evidence that does not forget. It is not confused by the excitement of the moment. It is not absent because human witnesses are. It is factual evidence. Physical evidence cannot be wrong, it cannot perjure itself, it cannot be wholly absent."

-KM

Let's start taking an honest look at the affidavit... Part 3

Let's buy a knife and gun... right after renting the SUV... ( Page 18/Paragraph 1 ):

"Further investigation by the Pennsylvania State Police in conjunction with the Virginia Beach Police Department revealed that on 01/23/07 at approx 0944 hrs., accused Cuadra along with accused Kerekes entered the "Superior Pawn and Gun Shop", Virginia Beach Blvd., Virginia Beach, Va., and purchased a "Sigarms" model # FX1SG, lock blade folding knife with 30% serrated edge. Cuadra additionally purchased a Smith and Wesson .38 caliber revolver and ammunition, utilizing a Visa credit card issued to Harlow Cuadra. Both Cuadra and Kerekes were observed on surveillance video at said location purchasing the knife as well as ammunition for the firearm. Kerekes was observed exiting said location carrying a handgun case containing aforementioned firearm. Subsequent to that observation, a similar knife was purchased by Cpl. Hannon with the identical model number for the identical price. Said knife was shown to Forensic Pathologist Doctor Gary Ross, who was consulted regarding this investigation and the injuries suffered"

Here's a map from the rental car location to the pawn shop with approx driving time ( trust me, I live in the area, and even on a good day you wouldn't be able to go from one to the other in less than 5 minutes ):



A few observations of note:

* The driving time would conflict with the time Cuadra was renting the SUV, to when Cuadra and Kerekes were at the pawn/gun shop. Harlow rented the SUV at approx 0945 hrs... yet he was at the pawn/gun shop at 0944 hrs. Something doesn't make sense... as both locations are an easy 5-10 minute drive apart from each other.
* Times listed within the affidavit are approx. - so guess we'll have to see if a real time can be had.
* There is proof of Harlow being at both locations on the same day. Perhaps this is another timing blunder? It's also not unusual for different businesses to have different times. ( I have 7 clocks in my house and I don't think any of them are accurate to the exact minute ).
* Is the knife found at the scene of the crime the same make and model? If so... that would be interesting... though again circumstantial, unless they're able to pull DNA, which I doubt due to the fire, but then again you never know as forensics has come a long way.

Let's take a break from working-out ( Page 18/Paragraph 2 ):

"On 02/23/07, investigators traveled to the "Big House Gym" Virginia Beach Blvd., Virginia Beach, Va., and interviewed the owner, one Lance Paul Treadway. Treadway stated that he purchased said gym in March of 2006. Both Cuadra and Kerekes had been members prior to the purchase. Treadway added that both Cuadra and Kerekes always worked out together, to which both possess a "swipe card" which allows entry to the facility. Swipe card read outs were requested for both January and February. The most dated reading available was 01/23/07, as there is a thrity day rentention period only. Both Cuadra and Kerekes were absent, which was unusual to Treadway, on 01/23/24,25/07, however were present every day the remainder of the month, along with every day from 02/01 through 02/09/07. There were no accesses following 02/09/07. It should be noted that the date of search warrant at the residence of both Cuadra and Kerekes was 02/10/07"

Observation of note:

* Though the timing is odd... in itself it's nothing but circumstantial evidence at most... though it is rather suspect if you add it to the rest thus far.

Let the hate mail begin ( Page 18 continued to 19/Paragraphs 3-8 ):

"Subsequent to further investigation, the following email exchanges were obtained by investigators with the Pennsylvania State Police;
On 03/03/07, at a time registered at 1014 am, the following message was forwarded via "myspace.com/harlowcuadra" to Grant Roy; "hey grant its harlow so when we gonna start filming? U know we had an agreement Joe"
On 03/03/07 at a time registered at 1015 am, the following message was also forwarded via "myspace.com/harlowcuadra" to Grant Roy; "you need to make some kind of contact with us before I tell them you hired us joe"
On 03/03/07 at a time registered at 1017 am, the following message was also forwarded via "myspace.com/harlowcuadra" to Grant Roy; "and we all know what u said to us at the avn in vegas and we have it on tape recorder and out conversation a le Cirque is recorded as well dont fuck with us"
"On 03/03/07 at a time registered at 1043 am, the following message was also forwarded via "myspace.com/harlowcuadra" to Grant Roy; "we are going to visit san diego this week or next and we need to meet we hope to see u soon"

A few observations of note:

* Why are there no IP addresses listed for these posts?
* Why would the first message start out saying it's Harlow... only to be signed by Joe?
* These emails could 'sound like' another possible admission of association, as there's an obvious strong-arm tone to it. I'm also willing to bet that there is no recording by Joe/Harlow in regards to the AVN/Le Cirque get-togethers. Sounds more like a strong-arm tactic from Joe to get the other party to comply with his wishes.

Informant #2 ( Page 19/Paragraph 2 ):

"On 03/21/07, investigators from the Pennsylvania State Police and Virginia Beach Police Department interviewed Confidential Informant #2. Said informant has been proven reliable in that information relayed to Cpl. Hannon has been independently corroborated through means not associated with said informant. Said informant has been associated with both Cuadra and Kerekes since approx April of 2005. Informant #2 illustrated, as did informant #1, the male escort and homosexual pornography business of both Cuadra and Kerekes. Additionally, informant #2 advised that both Cuadra and Kerekes were at "the avn" awards within the past several months, and returned to advise that they planned a collaboration with "Brent Corrigan", which could potentially make a very large sum of money. Both additionally stated that there was some type of contractual problem with Corrigan, however a "verbal agreement" was made pursuant to the meeting."

A few observation of importance:

* Once again this will be considered as heresay... though it will likely be heard by the jury. If informant #1 & #2 testify at trial, I can assure you the defense will try to make them look as unreliable as possible. Guess it will be up to the jury to decide.
* Second mention of 'striking it rich'... going back to the money issue as being a possible motive.

... more tomorrow...

Let's start taking an honest look at the affidavit... Part 2 (updated 7-14-07)

Confidential Informant #1 (Page 16/Paragraph 4 - continues to Page 17):

"On 02/10/07, investigators with the Pennsylvania State Police and the Virginia Beach Police Department interviewed Confidential Informant #1. Said informant has been associated with accused Cuadra as well as Kerekes for approx eight months. Said informant has worked with the Virginia Beach Police Department in the past, and has proven to be a reliable source of information. Additionally, said informant provided known factual information to Cpl. Hannon which was independently corroborated by sources not associated with said informant. Said informant advised that the day prior to the "Las Vegas trip" of Cuadra/Kerekes, or approx the middle of January, 2007, Cuadra/Kerekes advised that they "planning something big" and were attempting to hire "Brent Corrigan" for a movie. Both Cuadra and Kerekes were expecting to make "a ton of money" pursuant to said agreement, somewhere around "six to seven figures". They were planning to pay Corrigan around fifty thousand dollars for four scenes. Cuadra and Kerekes both stated that Corrigan was somehow contractually obligated to Cobra Video/Bryan Kocis, to which Cuadra and Kerekes stated that they were attempting to make a deal with Corrigan without it costing any money to Kocis. Cuadra and Kerekes were additionally in direct competition with Cobra Video/Bryan Kocis, although both stated that they had never met Kocis before. Informant also stated that Cuadra and Kerekes stated that they were planning on traveling to Pennsylvania at some point around the time of the Las Vegas trip, although the informant could not recall if it was prior to or after the trip. The informant also added that both Cuadra and Kerekes have been acting "very suspicious and unusual" since their return from Las Vegas. Both are normally rather "flashy" and flamboyant, enjoying exotic vehicles, extravagant dinners, and making contacts for their escort business and pornographic video business."

"Both Cuadra and Kerekes collect expensive Rolex watches as well, and own approx five or six. It should be noted that none were found within the residence subsequent to the search same date."

Photo of Cuadra & Kerekes wearing a Rolex:





"Informant added that recently both Cuadra and Kerekes have been reclusive, with limited contact with anyone. Additionally, accused Cuadra has recently changed his phone number, and made his "myspace" account "private". Said actions significantly hurt the business of Cuadra/Kerekes, and is "highly suspicious" behavior."

A few observations of note:

* Just because this "informant" says what he said, doesn't make it true, but it could be as well.
* Cuadra/Kerekes state that they're planning to hire Brent Corrigan, yet Grant Roy states ( Page 14/Paragraph 5 ) that Cuadra informed Lockhart that Cuadra would like to work with LSG Media, specifically Sean Lockhart. Who's hiring who? Or was this to be a joint business venture?
* Informant stated that Caudra/Kerekes thought they could make a "ton of money"... after reviewing their credit records ( which I legally can't post )... they could have used it. They owed almost $1,000,000.00 in debt, yet when their assets were seized by Virginia, they only had $25,000.00 - could this be a motive... possibly.
* Cuadra changing his number is nothing earth shattering... likely to stop a barrage of media/unwanted calls.
* Cuadra and Kerekes stated that they were attempting to make a deal with Corrigan without it costing any money to Kocis... interesting statement if true.

Police visit with Kerekes' parents... ( Page 17/Paragraph 1 ):

"On 02/12/07, investigators interviewed the parents of accused Kerekes at their residence located on Dandelion Crescent, Virginia Beach, Va.. While compiling biographical and investigatory information relating to this incident, accused Joseph Kerekes phoned said residence a minimum of three times. On each occasion, it was requested that Kerekes speak with investigators and/or provide a location where he could be reached so that an interview could be conducted. On each occassion, Kerekes refused. Kerekes additionally related to his parents that he did not want them to speak with investigators, and abruptly terminated the conversations. Contact information for investigators was left with Kerekes' parents, to which Joseph Kerekes did not attempt to contact same. "

Observation of note:

* Joe Kerekes had no legal obligation to speak with investigators... yet it probably would have been wise to refer them to his attorney, which was Barry Taylor at the time. Not wanting to speak with investigators doesn't admit guilt or association.

Let's rent an SUV and take a road trip... ( Page 17 & 18/Paragraph 2,3 & 4 ):

"While working with the Virginia Beach Police Department, investigators with the Pennsylvania State Police learned that on the morning of 01/25/07, Officer Brent Riddick, Virginia Beach Police, obtained the registration number for a silver/grey Nissan Xterra sport utility vehicle with dark trim and three brake lights. Said registration came back to "Enterprise Leasing Company", Virginia Beach Blvd., Virginia Beach, Va.. Further investigation revealed that said vehicle was rented by accused Cuadra on 01/23/07 at approx 0945 hrs.. The vehicle was returned on 01/25/07 at approx 1245 hrs.. Mileage out on the vehicle was recorded as 21357. Mileage in on the vehicle was recorded as 22409. The vehicle was rented in the name of Harlow R. Cuadra, to which Cuadra's driver's license was afforded subsequent to the rental agreement, as was Cuadra's signature. Rental vehicle was paid for by Discover Card issued to Harlow R. Cuadra, Norfolk Male Escorts, Inc.."

Here's a map showing the location of the rental car company in relation to Harlow & Joe's house... it's approx 10-12 miles away:



"It should be noted that from the accused's residence to the victim's residence is approximately 385 miles, as clocked by Pennsylvania State Police affiant Cpl. Leo D. Hannon, Jr. utilizing Pennsylvania State Police Wyoming vehicle #24. As such, total mileage, direct route and round trip is approx 770 miles without deviation. Total mileage registered on rental vehicle registered to Caudra was approx 1052 miles."

"Investigators also traveled to the "Fox Ridge Inn", located within Plains Township, Luzerne County, PA., and observed that on 01/23/07, an individual identified a Joseph Kerekes, who provided Virginia Driver License #########, checked in at said motel.

Map of hotel location in regards to Kocis' house:



Check in was for two occupants for the evenings of 01/23/07 and 01/24/07. Room rented was #211, and vehicle listed was a grey vehicle with Virginia registration. Said individual did not "check out" of the room, as both night were pre-paid in cash. It should also be noted that the 570-579-4437 mobile phone tower registrations are commensurate with that location as well as other locations within the immediate area of both the "Fox Ridge Inn" as well as the victim's residence on the dates of 01/23/07 and 01/24/07."

Cell tower locations near the Fox Ridge Inn:



A few observations of note:

* It's quite apparent that Harlow rented the SUV... I've rented many vehicles and know that showing a drivers licence is a requirement, plus they have a copy of his signature - which I'm sure they've matched.
* Check in at the motel was the same date as the vehicle rental... and the vehicle listed at check in was the same color. Unless there's an actual description as to the type of vehicle... this will be hard to prove as evidence... though I would think that the check in time would coincide with the travel time taken to go from Virginia Beach to said location. The affidavit also mentions Virginia registration... if they have the licence plate number, and they match... then it was obviously the same SUV rented in Virginia Beach.
* Joe Kerekes using his own driver's licence to check-in will pose some problems for the defense... unless his identity was stolen, and he can prove that such was reported before this date. Even though he paid cash, I'm sure they have his signature on file, as all hotels/inns/motels require it in the event of damages/additional charges.
* I wouldn't focus much on the mileage... the rental car company was some 10-12 miles from their house, the motel they stayed at was some 13-15 miles from Kocis' house... the little extra's can add up.
* There's that 570-579-4437 number that is from a pre-paid cellular phone that made it's original call from Virginia Beach.

Part 3 Sunday...

Let's start taking an honest review of the affidavit... Part 1

Pre-paid Cellular Phone ( Page 14/Paragraph 3):

"The telephone number of 570-579-4437 was observed to have phoned the victim a number of times during the time span of 01/22/07 through 01/24/07. It should be noted that the only interaction with said number ( besides law enforcement inquiry ) was activation, extrapolation of voice mail and contact with victim Kocis. It should also be noted that said phone number registered calls to the victim at times when "Danny Moilin", later found to be Cuadra, was scheduled to either call or receive calls from the victim. The initial phone call was placed on 01/22/07 at approx. 19:26 hrs, and was relayed from a cellular tower located on Bells Road, Virginia Beach, VA... said location is several hundred yards from the residence of Harlow Cuadra and Joseph Kerekes:"



"The final call placed from said phone was 01/25/07 at approx. 18:35 hrs., and was relayed from a cellular tower located on Country Club Road, Dallas, PA. Said location is several hundred yards from the victim's residence: "


Observation of note:

Not too much to learn from this one, but the locations of activation, and the last call placed are quite a coincidence... and are obviously close to both the victim and the accused. The timing of the activation and last call is also interesting.

The Background Check ( Page 14/Paragraph 3 ):

"An investigator with the Pennsylvania State Police reviewed financial and credit card activity related to Cuadra pursuant to this investigation. A check of Cuadra's Discover credit card activity showed a charge of $39.95 from the company USA People Search: "



"The company indicated that on January 20th, 2007 a background check report was purchased for information related to the victim, Bryan C. Kocis. The order for this information was made via the internet from IP address 70.174.54.38. The associated customer information is Harlow Cuadra of 4221 Link Court, 23451, email address of harlowrcuadrda@excite.com, PH: 757-567-0055. This report provides detailed information about the victim, his residence of 60 Midland Dr, Dallas, PA, as well as information relating to his relatives and neighbors. "

A few observations of note:

*The email address name appears to be mis-spelled. Was this a mis-spelling on the writer of the affidavit, or a deliberate mis-spelling by Cuadra.
*The address listed is the Link Court address, which was a valid address for Harlow & Joe... yet he was living at the Stratem Ct. address at the time of purchase.
* Why would someone pay $39.95 to find out information on someone they didn't know, unless there was a valid reason. Unfortunately, what that reason was is unknown for now.

The media blitz begins ( Page 14/Paragraph 4):

"On or about 02/09/07, it was reported within various northeastern Pennsylvania news media that Cuadra was interviewed by reporters regarding this investigation. Within said published reports, Cuadra "denied any connection" with the victim, stated that he had never met the victim, and further denied any involvment in the victim's death. "

Here's one of the articles: http://citizensvoice.com/site/index.cfm?newsid=17831124&BRD=2259&PAG=461&dept_id=455154&rfi=8

An observation of note:

* In one of the interviews, Cuadra says he does not own nor is he an officer of Norfolk Companions, Inc.

Well we obviously know now that Cuadra was part owner, and at different times listed himself as vice-president, or president of the company:



The mysterious video camera's ( Page 15/Paragraph 4-5 & Page 16/Paragrapgh 1-2):

"On 02/10/07, the Virginia Beach Police Department, in conjunction with investigators from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, executed a search warrant at the residence of Cuadra and Kerekes, that being 1028 Stratem Court, Virginia Beach, Virginia, in the pursuit of the furtherance of this investigation. As a result of said search, numerous items of evidence were seized, inclusive of items presviously illistrated herein. Additionally, two Sony digital video cameras, model numbers DCR-VX2000 and HDR-FX1, respectfully, were seized it was observed that both cameras had serial numbers forcibly removed and obliterated. Based upon the observance of said items, investigators with Pennsylvania State Police contacted the victim's associate Robert Wagner, who had in the past assisted the victim with video production. Wagner stated that he had, within the six months prior to the victim's death, observed said cameras within the victim's residence. It should be noted that both cameras were conspicuously absent during the intensive search of the victim's residence. Additionally, investigators contacted J&R electronics store, located in New York, NY., which is a location where the victim regularly purchased electronic items. According to a sales manager at that location, the victim did purchase a Sony HDR-FX1 camera on 12/23/05."

"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; http://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 and inquiry related to the use of video camera HVR-ZI/DHR-FX1. Said camera is the same model which was found to be removed from the victim's residence at or around the same time of his death. It is also the same model camera which was seized from the accuseds' residence pursuant to the search warrant on 02/10/07. Said camera had all serial numbers forcibly obliterated from same."

Here's the post: http://dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=85094

"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 harlowcuadra@excite.com with the signature of "boys do what they can... men do what they want". Eleven posting IP addresses were also provided, one being 70.174.54.38 which is a static IP address assigned to Cox Communications Inc., to Cuadra of 1028 Stratem Ct., Virginia Beach, Va."

A few observations of note:

* Harlow also posted quite a few other times on this message board: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=+site:dvinfo.net+cuadra+dvinfo.net
* Who buys something and removes the serial number... or who would buy something with a removed serial number? Sounds a little odd.
* There's that Cox IP address again... the same one used to do the background check on Kocis
* The e-mail address used this time is spelled correctly, was the previous simply a mis-spelling by the author of the affidavit, or did Harlow use several different variations?

Joe's parents do some spring cleaning ( Page 16/Paragraph 3 ):

"Subsequent to the search conducted at the accuseds' residence, it is noted that neither Cuadra nor Kerekes have been observed at same. It has been observed that the parents of Kerekes have been at the residence on multiple occassions, and have been observed removing multiple items from therein."

An observation of note:

* Other than just being odd... I don't know what to speculate. I would assume if any of these items is of importance, they've been retreived by PA or VA authorities.

Part 2 tomorrow... my fingers are numb.