Brent Corrigan On Bryan Kocis Murder: “That Should Have Never Happened To Him”

Brent Corrigan a.k.a. Sean Paul Lockhart recently sat down in an SUV for the “Jeff 4 Justice” show (don’t ask me, I just follow the links in the email tips I receive) and did an hour long interview about his underage porn, his mainstream career, safe sex, and the infamous murder of Cobra Video’s Bryan Kocis. Full interview here, but the excerpted discussion of the murder is above. Obviously, Lockhart is still haunted by the grisly murder (remember, Kocis was stabbed 28 times and set on fire by wannabe porn producers and now convicted murderers Joe Kerekes and Harlow Cuadra), as evidenced by his reaction around the 5:30 mark.

25 thoughts on “Brent Corrigan On Bryan Kocis Murder: “That Should Have Never Happened To Him””

        1. awww….is everybody raining on your agenda? Are all the puss (or, in my case “piss”?) boys getting in the way of your narrative by using nasty ‘facts’ and ‘reason’?

          Better luck next time! Cheers!

          1. Hey Andy dumbass pisser… Outside of my earlier post of saying Brent and Grant weren’t involved in the murder and had NOTHING to do with it, my only agenda is to get a rise out of turds like you! And by the way I might add that your rise is slightly less than three inches, which gains you the coveted title of tiny, little pee pee boy…lmao

  1. dead guy was a pedophile. The people who went to jail were psychotics.

    This is a story with a happy ending.

  2. This is so sad.. I wonder if he sought any kind of therapy and his shrink told him to talk it out… on film….in a SUV..

  3. “Why did you deliberately defy me!!?”

    “Why did you say I got expelled?!!”

    “Because you DID get expelled!!!”

  4. Sorry about my horrible English. What I meant to write is…

    Sean still comes across as angry and not at all sorry. He makes allegations that can’t be substantiated (HIV poz models? Other underage models?) and I believe he’s sorry because it means he couldn’t prove Bryan was a “bad man” (his own words) in the court of law. Same old Sean, he’ll never change. If he had just left it at Bryan didn’t deserve this, Sean would have come across as genuine.

  5. He still comes across as angry and not at sorry. He makes allegations that can’t be substantiate and I believe he’s sorry because it meantime couldn’t prove that Bryan was a “bad man” (his own words) in the court of law. Same old Sean, he’ll never change.

  6. The 'host' is ....

    ….painful. I thought Brent/Sean was trying to put all of this behind him. Does anyone really still think he was involved. The authorities ruled out both Brent and his (former) partner.

    1. The authorities did not rule out Brent and his former partner. They traded immunity for their involvement, there’s a difference.
      This video also makes it seem like Harlow contacted him, when in fact the reverse is true, Brent’s partner made the first contact on behalf of Brent while looking for ways out of his contract with Cobra.
      This video is one sided. When asked about Kocis, Corrigan says how hard it was on HIM. He blames Kocis for being a bad man shooting unprotected sex, but other than Corrigan, his models were over 18 and could make their own decisions. A decision Corrigan himself continued to make after he turned 18.
      He talks about how the FBI didn’t care about the underage modelling, even after he himself brought all this evidence to them, but he leaves out that he went to the FBI and implicated Kocis during the suit for control over his name in an attempt to get out from his contract and destroy Cobra.
      He says Kocis would never have been killed if he had been in jail but part of the reason he wasn’t in jail was it was never proven that he knew Corrigan was underage as he had provided a fake ID to him, twice.
      The last thing he says is agreeing that he did not plot to kill Kocis. In Las Vegas when he had dinner with Cuadra at the Adult Expo and murdering Kocis was discussed, Corrigan did nothing. I would argue that conversation was a plot to kill.
      I don’t envy Corrigan’s position. It may be that he became wrapped up in this, but his own actions did contribute to him being on this path and I don’t see an acknowledgment of that, or regret.

      1. The 'host' is ....

        Adam … well written and thought out post. Sorry, I thought I’d read elsewhere that Corrigan and his partner were not ever considered real suspects. I guess that was a reference to the actual murder (and it not being possible for either of them to have committed it).

        I do tend to agree that if you’re with people and they’re talking about murdering someone, you have a responsibility to contact someone about it (even if it’s just the potential victim so that THEY can do something about it). But there were four people at that table and it’s become a kind of a ‘he said/he said’ situation. Also, I think I lot of people in that situation would probably say “I didn’t think they were serious….”.

        I’m not a huge Corrigan fan. In this situation, when he talks about it … he DOES tend to present himself as the ultimate victim. And that is actually Bryan Kocis (“bad guy” or not…) and his family. Corrigan does strike me as ambitious and cunning with regards to seeing the potential for his own success and wanting the ultimate control of it (even at that very young age). If a conversation like what you present DID occur in Vegas, I hope Corrigan is human enough to suffer great guilt about what ended up happening. Especially since his great hopes for his career haven’t particularly panned out that well.

        1. Brent’s narcissism plays out very well in this vid. If Brent had never associated with Chris Henriquez he would have never met Bryan. perhaps this is the pain of guilt about Bryan’s death. Of course Brent was not involved in Bryan’s death. In fact, the lead prosecutor at Harlowe’s trial stated that Grant and Brent had NOTHING to do with his death. Bryan did & said bad things about Grant and Brent. HOWEVER, Brent and Grant said and did bad things to Bryan. So, don’t believe Brent’s pretty face and mouth telling you otherwise. Finally the FBI WERE involved in the sting operation as well as the navy in a consultative, support role to the SD county authorities. His producer, former partner, Grant Roy was the instrumental figure in the sting operation.

      2. OneOfTheManyChris

        According to Brent, the fake IDs were Photoshopped scans and he only got a physical ID after Kocis ordered him to come up with one, long after he had become famous and people were starting to say “Sean was only 17 when I knew him.”

        At the time, some people called him a liar, including Kocis, but Brent names names. For example, he says that the OTHER Brent was present when he was unable to present an ID to Kocis and had to pull up the Photoshops. Kocis then would then have filmed him standing in front of a computer and declaring he was of legal age. If this happened, it was a clear violation of 2287. The thing is, if I were Brent Everett and Corrigan did have two physical fake IDs, I sure as hell wouldn’t let him get away with saying this about me in public. But who knows, Everett was in a ugly place through all of this, maybe he just wanted to shut up about it.

        But as far as the murder, I don’t see what Sean and Grant’s motive was supposed to be. If it was just that they hated Kocis’s guts, then they wouldn’t have settled the lawsuit five days earlier. They could have taken that case to trial and won about six different ways. Can you imagine anyone, for any reason, saying, “I know! Let’s get those two dunderheads Joe and Harlow to murder someone for us! Yeah! That will totally work!”

        1. I agree, the first ID was photoshopped and he only got a physical one after Kocis ordered him to get one. Why would Kocis order him to get one if he knew he was underage and couldn’t get one? I think it’s important to remember that Kocis was not Falcon, he was relatively new to the whole thing at the time and may have made mistakes.

          Motive. They went to the FBI to put Kocis behind bars twice and that didn’t work. Let’s say your theory is right, that they had no motive. They did discuss murder with Harlow in Vegas, they both acknowledge that. Why then a week after the murder did Harlow fly to San Fran to see them? If you have dinner with someone and then a week later they kill an acquaintance of yours with no provocation, the next time they call you, you scream and hang up. You don’t agree to go to dinner and a nude beach.

          1. OneOfTheManyChris

            Roy and Lockhart went to the police first, and the police set them up with a wire and had them arrange the dinner. The police told them not to scream and hang up. The recording of that conversation on the nude beach was what put J & H behind bars. It’s clear that they thought Roy and Lockhart were on their side. The only real question is what who said to whom before the murder and how someone who wasn’t completely delusional would interpret it.

            My take on it is that between the police investigations, Kerekes’ confession and Cuadra’s trial, that if there were an actual suborning to commit murder that we would have heard about it by now. In fact I’m surprised that we haven’t heard all about it even if it never happened. Maybe the lawyers told J & H not to go there, even if it were true.

            Kocis filmed underage boys on at least 10 occasions–seven times for Brent Corrigan, once each for whichever models got “College Boys I” and “College Boys II” pulled, and once for the scene that got him his sex offender conviction, which involved himself and an unknown 15 year old boy. Kocis got off lightly because he claimed the kid lied about his age and the kid didn’t stand up and say he hadn’t. I’m really not seeing Bryan Kocis as the sort of man who is dumb enough to make barely legal porn without reading the laws first, sorry.

          2. Lockhart and Roy went to the nude beach with the murderers at the request of the police. They went to dinner with the murderers at the request of the police. They recorded the murderers with the tools the police gave them with the police listening in.

            Adam, were you always this much of a douche or was it something you grew into?

      3. “The authorities did not rule out Brent and his former partner. They traded immunity for their involvement, there’s a difference.”

        Sorry, this is pure delusion. The prosecution made it very clear at the time of the trial that no deal was made and there was never an offer of immunity. Didn’t happen, pure conspiracy theory. Please show any evidence of immunity (or the fact that they were EVER actually considered suspects) outside of the insane internet ramblings of “Marion” or any of his “conspiracy theorist” alter egos.

        I call bullshit.

        1. The DA trying the case is on record as exonerating Lockhart and Roy from having anything to do with the murder. There was no deal for their testimony. Both went over and above what any “civilian” would be expected to do — a sting on the nude beach — to bring the murderers to justice.

          Haters gonna hate.

        2. The book on the case, Chapter 8, “…the story Brent Corrigan tells the police for his limited immunity he received in reference to the statement he gave.”

          I read the book and the facts speak differently than the internet murmurings I’ve heard. I guess because one is dead and one is in jail. I was really disappointed as I was such a huge fan of Brent, but to say he’s an opportunist is putting it mildly.

          1. “The book on the case, Chapter 8, “…the story Brent Corrigan tells the police for his limited immunity he received in reference to the statement he gave.”

            See Adam, this is why I’m calling you complete bullshit. The full unedited quote from that book is:

            “Cuadra used the blog to openly suggest that it was Sean Lockhart and Grant Roy who were responsible for the death of Bryan Kocis. “You shouldn’t always believe what you read ’cause a lot of things in our business are made up,” Cuadra cautioned. “(D)on’t believe the story Brent Corrigan tells the police for his limited immunity he received in reference to the statement he gave. Brent did what he did to cover his ass, he had a motive, everyone knew this and he needed to get the heat off himself, so he did, he diverted them to me, and made his self (sic.) look innocent.”

            You’re actually quoting Harlow Cuadra’s BLOG as proof that Corrigan received immunity? Seriously?

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 50 MB. You can upload: image. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop file here

Scroll to Top