# "Capturing The Friedmans" Is On HBO Tonight **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [July 8, 2004, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/capturing-the-friedmans-is-on-hbo-tonight/254187 "2004-07-08T23:25:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2004, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/capturing-the-friedmans-is-on-hbo-tonight/254187/41 "2004-07-13T19:41:34Z")
> [@Otto](#): > > … a jury pool that was quite likely tainted beyond recovery by pre-trial publicity… If a jury pool has been tainted, you move for a change of venue. Happens all the time. Hardly an insurmountable problem. Sorry, but I’m still not buying that the Friedmans were innocent men “forced” to plead guilty. There is plenty of evidence we know about to suggest they were guilty. Moreover, there’s plenty of evidence we don’t know about because the filmmaker didn’t present it, and because the case never went to trial. For all we know, the prosecutors had a slam-dunk case. The Friedmans (who were in a better position than we to know what evidence the prosecution had) decided to plead guilty. That should tell us something. Aside from all that, it is my firm belief that no innocent man would plead guilty to child molestation. Would you? Under _any_ circumstances? I wouldn’t. And even if (against all odds) I entered a false plea of guilty, I wouldn’t go on Geraldo to reaffirm my false confession. Would you? (As an aside I hope -in the name of all that is holy- that none of my fellow dopers have been suckered into contributing to Jesse’s defense fund. For one thing, he’s already served his time. For another thing, he doesn’t have a chance in hell of getting the guilty plea withdrawn, or the conviction expunged. All you would be accomplishing by contributing to his fund is the enrichment of his lawyers.) ---
**Author:** ![Otto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Otto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Otto)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2004, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/capturing-the-friedmans-is-on-hbo-tonight/254187/42 "2004-07-13T21:24:33Z")
Well, I got no dog in this particular hunt and I’m not really that interested in persuading anyone of anything so I’m pretty well done. I did say already that I do think there was some illegal sexual activity going on in those classes but I still seriously doubt that it rose to the level of hundreds of undetected acts of forcible sodomy. ---
**Author:** ![pepperlandgirl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/f17d59/32.png) [@pepperlandgirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pepperlandgirl)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2004, 6:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/capturing-the-friedmans-is-on-hbo-tonight/254187/43 "2004-07-16T06:15:07Z")
I finally caught the movie tonight. I couldn’t believe what I saw. I think the most surprising thing is that I found the self-admitted pedophile the _lease_ creepy of the bunch. Seriously, David freaked me out on a lot of levels. His deep denial (“I don’t even know what that sentence means!”), his anger issues, his misogyny (I think it went a lot deeper than just anger at his mother. Especially when he yelled about his father being “pussywhipped.” That sent off the remaining alarms). A few times I wondered if he was so angry with his mother because she “knew” or suspected what her husband was capable of and never did anything about him. Even if David was deep in denial, he might have sublimated that anger. I think he’s a man treading the fine line and probably doesn’t need much to push him over the edge. I wondered almost from the very beginning if the father molested any of the three boys. My suspicion only deepened throughout the documentary. The whole vibe I was getting from their family dynamic skeeved me out. And then when we heard Jesse speak for the first time and he _sounded like a child_, as though he had regressed or was stuck as a 10 year old. I know that’s not proof of anything either, but I don’t know…that’s the revelation I kept expecting throughout the movie. So imagine my lack of surprise when the lawyer confirmed that Jesse had claimed he had been molested. I don’t see how those boys could have been safe from their father. He was a pedophile, surrounded by children constantly in his role as a teacher, the computer instructor, and all the time he spent with his children. He might have been able to resist temptation with the children he taught every day, but his own children would have been prime targets. I don’t think we’ll ever know the extent of his crimes, but I’ve no doubt he was guilty of something, that hidden inside the wildfire of accusations was a spark of truth. It’s sad though that because of the general hysteria of the time, there couldn’t be a fair trial. Everybody involved deserved one. Or I could be talking out of my ass. These were just my feelings as I was watching. There were just so many things wrong with the entire family. ---
**Author:** ![Go\_You\_Big\_Red\_Fire\_Engine](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/eada6e/32.png) [@Go\_You\_Big\_Red\_Fire\_Engine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Go_You_Big_Red_Fire_Engine)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2004, 12:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/capturing-the-friedmans-is-on-hbo-tonight/254187/44 "2004-07-16T12:39:18Z")
> [@Fiver](#): > > Given that: > > 1. There was no physical evidence. > 2. Not one of the alleged “victims” reported these “crimes” before the detectives “interrogated” them, using protocols that have since been completely discredited. > 3. The judge in the case admits on film that she made up her mind about Jesse’s guilt before she’d heard all arguments. I’m pretty sure one of those bad-jurist-words like “malfeasance” applies here. > 4. Related to #2 above, the allegations against the Friedmans took place in the witch-hunt climate of the 1980s… 1. Kids continue to sign up for classes. I loved the movie. I loved the bit where the stoner guy tells the interviewer that he had repressed memories of the events and hypnosis “brought them out”. I found the whole idea of what the people say happened unbelievable… and including the points above, that’s my main reasoning for him not being as guilty as they say he is. \ ***But** , stranger things have happened. \* ---
**Author:** ![kung\_fu\_lola](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/f4b2a3/32.png) [@kung\_fu\_lola](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kung_fu_lola)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2005, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/capturing-the-friedmans-is-on-hbo-tonight/254187/45 "2005-01-17T23:01:45Z")
> [@spoke-](#): > > Moreover, his own mother didn’t seem to believe he was innocent. Would any mother who believed her son innocent of such a charge advise him to plead guilty? Let me answer my own question: HELL NO. She would fight tooth and nail to clear her son’s name. You’ve got your facts wrong. She asked **Arnold** to plead guilty because she thought it gave Jesse a better chance at a fair trial. > [@](#): > > _The mother’s demeanor through this whole thing seemed very damning to father and son. If the computer sessions were innocent, wouldn’t she know that? If not, why not? Was she barred from the sessions? If so, why?_ I thought she really was given enough rope to hang herself with. When she was talking, everything was about her. It was always about her, how her needs weren’t being catered to. Rather than banding together as most families do (as the expert on hysteria pointed out), she tried to distance herself from the whole thing out of self-preservation, which is so selfish. The sons called her on it, and that takes a lot of courage. In our society, men are so often predators and aggressors that our first instinct is **not** to give them the benefit of the doubt, so I think there is a bias towards sympathizing with her, but what came out of her mouth was just so self-centered. She came off as a shrill harpy. Like when she said; “Nobody asked me what I wanted”. Who the feck cares what you want? You’re not the one facing jail time! > [@](#): > > - > > 1. The father molested his own brother.\* It’s possible that it never happened, like the brother said himself. It’s also possible that Arnold’s stories about sex with his brother were him “testing the waters” before he came out with the **real** stories of how he molested his friend’s son. This, they should have pursued a conviction for. But I guess the basement stories were more sensational and got the lawyers more tv-time. > [@](#): > > - > > 1. As I mentioned before, victims of molesters often become molesters themselves, which would help explain the younger son’s putative involement in molestation.\* Not so fast, sparky. The lawyer made that up to make his own case stronger. It’s possible that the kids implicating Jesse in the first place had a grudge against him and were picking on him, or just making it up thanks to the police’s hamfisted interrogation techniques. > [@](#): > > 1. The clown’s choice of profession is highly suspicious, given that victims of molestation often become molestors, and given that molestors tend to seek out jobs that put them in contact with children. I think this is more hysteria. I don’t think clowns are often left alone with children, aren’t parents usually hovering around? Maybe he was just looking for joy and laughter and trying to be a force for good, after having been demonized. And even IF he does want to be around children, what does it matter if he goes home and whacks off? Like I said, being a clown means you entertain at parties and hospitals, where there is adult supervision and lots of witnesses. Not ideal conditions for trysts with kids. In my opinion, Arnold was a pedophile. But nothing happened in the basement. Arnold was convicted because of ignorant people and because he had a dysfunctional family. The end. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2005, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/capturing-the-friedmans-is-on-hbo-tonight/254187/46 "2005-01-18T02:11:34Z")
I agree with the consensus that Friedman was a pedophile but that the charges about the computer class were trumped up and ridiculous. The kids’ stories had the same fantastic and unbelievable quality as the satanic ritual abuse stories of the 80’s. There was also the guy in the movie who had benn a student in that class who said the stories were completely made up and that the Friedman’s had never done anything untoward. The logistics of the story (like the impossible amounts of time that would have been necessary to perpetrate these incredibly involved and organized sexual dramas), the fact that every kid went home without the slightest sign of physical or emotional harm, the utter lack of physical corroboration for anything, etc. all make it as clear as a bell (IMO) that not a damn thing happened in that basement. Having said that, I’m not convinced that Friedman didn’t molest his _own_ kids and possibly others. I just don’t believe a word of the computer class allegations. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/capturing-the-friedmans-is-on-hbo-tonight/254187.md?page=2)