Cuadra + Kerekes Attorneys Seek Delay In Trial

WILKES-BARRE — Accused killer Harlow Raymond Cuadra has family scattered across the country and even some outside the country that attorneys need to interview.

Sailors and Marines whom Cuadra befriended before being honorably discharged from the U.S. Navy also have to be found and questioned as part of a life history. The analysis of Cuadra’s life is needed should the 26-year-old be convicted of first-degree murder and face the death penalty. Jurors will hear about Cuadra’s life if they must determine whether he should be sentenced to death or life in prison.

Those interviews of family and friends, coupled with other trial preparation that must be completed by a limited staff, were included in a motion filed Monday by the Luzerne County Public Defenders’ office asking to delay Cuadra’s trial. Judge Peter Paul Olszewski Jr. scheduled the trial to begin March 24, 2008.

Cuadra and his alleged accomplice, Joseph Manuel Kerekes, are accused of slashing and stabbing Bryan Kocis in his Dallas Township home in January. The Virginia Beach men also are charged with torching the 44-year-old’s Midland Drive home to destroy evidence.

Cuadra’s public defenders John Donovan and William Ruzzo also argue the deadline for pre-trial motions in the case should be extended. Donovan and Ruzzo have received 614 pages of information and expect to receive 2,000 more.

Luzerne County District Attorney David Lupas’ office also has concerned the public defenders’ office about their ability to be ready for trial because of six hours of Cuadra’s conversations recorded as part of authorities’ investigation. Those tapes are expected to be used as evidence.

Cuadra and Kerekes, who are business and romantic partners, allegedly killed Kocis to eliminate the man they considered their main rival in the gay pornography business. Kocis owned Cobra Video and the rights to actor Sean Lockhart, whom Cuadra and Kerekes were trying to lure to launch their start-up gay pornography business.

The audio-taped conversations include Lockhart and Cuadra talking about Kocis on a nude beach in San Diego, according to arrest papers. Those recordings contain “discussions concerning the planning, execution and subsequent destruction of evidence,” police said.

The other defendant in the case also believes a delay is needed. Kerekes is currently represented by court-appointed county conflict counsel Mark Bufalino, Shelly Centini and John Pike.

“We are taking the same position that the trial needs to pushed back,” Pike said Monday. “There is a tremendous amount of documents to review and it will take a significant amount of time to prepare for this case.”

Olszewski has scheduled a Dec. 21 hearing in the case. The judge will hear arguments from Kerekes’ attorneys and the district attorney’s office about whether prosecutors have to provide a bill of particulars. If legally required, the district attorney’s office may be forced to place the knife in either Cuadra or Kerekes’ hands.

http://www.citizensvoice.com/site/ne...d=455154&rfi=6

Im telling you, this is going to make one great movie, all these different twists and turns LOL

Regards,

Lee

I am not surprised that additional time was requested since there is a LOT of evidence to digest -- thousands of pages already! Even the prosecutor thinks the defense needs more time to prepare. If I were the defendant, I would NOT be comfortable knowing that my defense lawyers did not have all the resources they needed to prepare for my case! It does set up a potential "ineffective assistance of counsel" appeal if convicted too.....



The Bill of Particulars is a cool limiting tool -- it forces the prosecutor to lay out the elements of the crime and how the defendant satisfied each element of that crime making them guilty and the facts that will be presented. For example, let's say Jack was accused of stealing a candy bar from 7-11.

The elements of the crime would be:
1. An Item
2. Of Value
3. Not belonging to me
4. Was taken from the premises of the owner
5. By Jack

Then, in order to prove Jack was guilty:

1. The item was a Butterfinger candy bar in the candy rack
2. Security camera footage shows the candy bar alone in its box on the rack
3. The candy bar is normally sold for $1.59
4. The candy bar was part of the stock of the store
5. Jack is shown on camera coming into the store and approaching the rack
6. Jack's back is to the camera
7. Jack leaves the rack, the candy bar is gone
8. Jack does not pay for the candy bar
9. Jack leaves the store
10. The security guard follows Jack outside the store and observes Jack chewing and swallowing, then drop a Butterfinger candy bar wrapper to the ground
11. The Butterfinger wrapper that Jack dropped on the ground has the store's price tag on it.

I have made this example with a few red herring holes in it for all of you bleeding heart liberal defense lawyers ;-) so you can argue why he is NOT guilty [ What if Jack bought a Butterfinger from the store the previous day and had it with him but just ate it now?? ].

The Bill of Particulars should make the case more clear for both the prosecution and the defense. It gives both sides a road map to follow in the trial.

So Lee, are you going to be sitting in the court room every day, notepad in hand to give us moment -by - moment breaking news on the trial? Or report from the GWW Newsroom like a gay euro Nancy Grace?? ha ha ha you know I love you babe~