That's the headline from the February 21, 2013 story at The Times Leader. According to reporter Ed Lewis:
"Luzerne County prosecutors want convicted murderer Harlow Cuadra to stay put.
Cuadra, 31, is seeking a new trial, claiming mistakes were made before and during the first jury trial in March 2009 that ended in a first-degree murder conviction. He was sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole after the jury was unable to unanimously impose the death penalty.
State police at Wyoming and Dallas Township police had alleged Cuadra, of Virginia Beach, Va., killed Bryan Kocis, 44, inside Kocis' Midland Drive home in Dallas Township that was set ablaze on Jan. 24, 2007.
A co-conspirator in the case, Joseph Kerekes, 39, pleaded guilty to second-degree murder in December 2008 and was sentenced to life in prison with no parole.
Investigators said Cuadra and Kerekes, who were partners in an escort business and website pornographic production company, planned the killing of Kocis, whom they considered their main rival.
Issues Cuadra raised in his petition for post-conviction relief include:
* His lawyers, Paul Walker and Joseph D'Andrea, did not have sufficient time to prepare for his defense. Walker and D'Andrea were hired in December 2008, about 90 days before the trial began.
* Kerekes was the actual killer.
* Witnesses testified Kerekes was an abusive boyfriend and business partner and controlled Cuadra.
* Walker and D'Andrea did not raise a "duress" defense due to Kerekes' controlling power over Cuadra.
* Disqualification of attorney Demetrius Fannick from defending Cuadra after Fannick had met Kerekes in jail. Cuadra and Kerekes had separate defense strategies.
* Trial Judge Peter Paul Olszewski Jr. permitted prosecutors to play for the jury a video of Cuadra lifting weights.
Prosecutors claim they had a right to have Fannick disqualified from defending Cuadra because Cuadra and Kerekes wanted separate trials due to their antagonistic defenses.
Although Fannick was disqualified to defend Cuadra for the first trial, he is representing him in an attempt for a new trial.
Prosecutors also claim Cuadra never raised the "duress" issue when he testified in his own defense.
Cuadra is serving his sentence at the State Correctional Institution at Coal Township in Schuylkill County. He is scheduled to appear before Judge Fred Pierantoni III on March 15."
What's the difference, if any, between this "Petition for Post-Conviction Relief" and the "Petition for Review" he filed in November 2011, and what the hell ever happened with that? Or has that been superceded by this?
ReplyDeleteThis "duress" theory is a howler, since the only way he can argue that is if he admits he participated in the crime under duress, which makes no sense given his trial testimony, unless he's now admitting to committing perjury.
I don't care how strange the law is in Pennsylvania, there is no jurisdiction in this country where you will be granted a new trial based on a completely different defense theory. I will say that the one substantive argument he has for relief is the paltry 90 days his lawyers were given to prepare. That's rather shocking in a death-penalty case.
Will, the "Petition for Review" filed back on 11/2011 turned out to be nothing more than an appeal on a prison grievance that he had filed (Grievance DC-ADM-804).
DeleteDuress indeed. Who is paying Fannick to represent "wrongly convicted" Harlow in his new trial attempt? Maybe Nep is still holding a candle.
ReplyDeleteHmm Geoff it just occurred to me you shouldn't be poo-poohing a "duress" defense, since you hypothesized that they committed the crime under duress -- i.e. a threat on their lives -- in your infamous "motive theory."
Delete"It is whispered in their ears that maybe they will be allowed to live if only they do this one thing."
Maybe that's where Fannick is going with this!
(LOL)
Harlow is saying apparently that he was under duress from Joe, an abusive partner and the real killer. I said that the two of them were deeply in debt to a creditor who was also owed a lot of money by Kocis. I didn't buy the motive that Harlow and Joe simply wanted to snake away Sean Lockhart from Kocis. If that were the case, they could have offered him more money and a less hostile work environment.
ReplyDeleteWho is paying Fannick? Did the chinchilla coat finally sell? Is Fannick such a nice guy that he undertakes this kind of thing pro bono?
* Witnesses testified Kerekes was an abusive boyfriend and business partner and controlled Cuadra.
Delete* Walker and D'Andrea did not raise a "duress" defense due to Kerekes' controlling power over Cuadra.
I don't think it's 100% clear, the way it's written, exactly what Fannick has up his sleeve. Perhaps it was Joe's "control" that prevented Harlow from going to the cops when the "duress"/threat presented itself. Hell, it makes as much sense as Harlow thinking he can do a complete 180 and get a do-over based on a new "I did it but only because Joe made me" defense.
And come on Geoff, you know perfectly well that Grant explained to them that Kocis stood in the way of their hopes of making money off Sean due to the settlement. Followed by poor duressed Harlow asking, "What if Kocis goes to Canada?" You may not buy it, but them's the facts.
Fannick is being funded by John Roecker, the same guy who funded his lawyers at trial.
It would not have been out of character for Grant to have been filling them full of shit, and I think they left the meeting understanding that. I forget if the terms of the agreement were ever made public, but I imagine that they were that Sean would make a limited number of scenes with Kocis exclusively, and then Sean and Grant would not badmouth Kocis. It would have made just as much sense under the circumstances (although none of it makes sense) for H/J to have killed Grant.
DeleteSomeone please remind me who John Roecker is, and why he would be paying Fannick. Isn't he the pitcher for the Braves with the big mouth?
Roecker is the indie filmmaker who did the documentary with Harlow's prison interview. He's a pal of porn star Jason Ridge, and they both believe Harlow's completely innocent. I think it was Chinchilla Jim who discovered that he was funding Harlow's defense.
DeleteSpeaking of Jim, March 12 "Victory Day" is coming up. Will Jim come out of hibernation?
OK, I get it now. Roecker is the guy who made the 2008 documentary about gay porn workers, including Harlow. Unless he still has a huge trust fund, he didn't have the money to pay Fannick then, and can barely pay his rent now. (My niece has a lengthier IMDB entry, and she is not active in the business.)
DeleteIf the chinchilla still lives (and you can never tell with internet correspondents), he will be out on March 12. I would say look for a warning order on March 7. I wonder how many of the usual catfish will be out.
ReplyDeleteHere! TV Director John Roecker Funded Harlow's Private Lawyers
ReplyDeleteHere is what I said in Dec 2008:
DeleteIf John Roecker were a journalist, and he had contributed to Harlow's defense fund, it would be unethical for him do include Harlow in the Here!TV documentary unless Roecker at least disclosed to the audience at the time that he had a fiduciary relationship with Harlow outside the film.
That being said, who sez Roecker is a journalist? And how do we know he has any more money to finance defense lawyers for Harlow beyond what he can scrape together from prepaid VISA debit cards from his parents?
Don't forget that Mitch Halford contributed $70,000 in cash to Harlow's defense for his first trial.
ReplyDeleteMore FOS testimony:
Deletehttp://www.timesleader.com/stories/Day-seven-of-Cuadra-trial,114583
I did forget that PC, and I realize I rashly jumped to a conclusion by stating flatly that Roecker is funding Fannick. I have no way of knowing that. It's no more than an educated guess. Halford is probably a more educated one.
ReplyDeleteHoly cow, newspapers are still covering this story???
ReplyDeleteAnyways...hello everyone! Happy you-know-what day! And thanks for remembering, Geoff!
I'll try to get something up later today, but to be honest with you all, I'm a bit behind the curve this year. In fact, I BARELY remembered my login info; after days of trying it finally came to me again moments ago! So it's actually a minor miracle that I am actually speaking to you all here today. Whew.
I do have some stored up thought from the past year to share...MANY thoughts, in fact, on PC's splendid achievement, as you can well imagine. Give me some time to organize them a bit, and I promise I'll have a VD/reunion post up by the end of the day.
Good to see you Jim!
DeleteYes, the conviction of Harlow Cuadra seems to be a 'gift' that just keeps giving - and here I thought I would be done blogging about the trial years ago. Ha!
Ahem Jim, it was me who remembered, but that's OK. Just glad to see that the Chinchilla does indeed live. Looking forward to your post.
ReplyDeleteJim's post can be followed: here
ReplyDelete