‘Friedmans’ subject fights conviction

One of the central figures in the documentary “Capturing the Friedmans” plans to file legal papers today seeking to overturn his 1988 conviction for molesting children in the computer classes run by his father in their Great Neck, N.Y., home. Jesse Friedman served 13 years in prison after he pleaded guilty to the charges, at 19, rather than face trial on 245 counts that could have resulted in many more years in custody. The massive motion contesting that conviction -- approximately 1,000 pages including exhibits -- is based in large part on evidence uncovered during the making of the acclaimed documentary by first-time filmmaker Andrew Jarecki.

The documentary, which featured excerpts from home movies made by the Friedmans themselves while their lives were falling apart, suggested that while Andrew’s father, Arnold Friedman, indeed had a history of pedophilia, the son may have been a victim of police pressure on alleged victims and the sort of mass hysteria seen in other high-profile child abuse scandals of the time, such as California’s McMartin preschool case.

Arnold Friedman wound up killing himself in prison with an overdose of antidepressants.

The motion to be filed today in Nassau County Court argues that law enforcement officials illegally withheld potentially exculpatory evidence from Jesse Friedman and his lawyer, such as statements from numerous students that they witnessed no molestation in the $10 computer classes. “The police spoke to over 100 kids and ended up with 14 who became the basis of charges,” said Jarecki, who helped Jesse Friedman find lawyers willing to handle the motion for free. “They never told the Friedmans that the others said nothing happened though they sat alongside the [alleged victims] in the classroom.”

Police detectives, prosecutors and the judge in the case defended their conduct at a series of screenings of the documentary last year, noting that Jesse Friedman not only pleaded guilty but admitted abusing the students in television interviews at the time. Jarecki has countered that the younger Friedman had no choice but to make such admissions, and appear contrite, if he hoped to win parole.