“He Felt ‘Tricked’ By Andrew Jarecki”

In the Conviction Integrity Review: People V. Jesse Friedman, conducted by Nassau County DA Kathleen Rice, it was revealed that a witness (Witness 14) had felt tricked by filmmaker Andrew Jarecki.

Filmmaker Andrew Jarecki Tricked Witness

“In an edited interview done by the filmmakers, Witness 14 specifically disclaimed acts he once described to police in sworn statements. But, in light of the entire interview, and the witness’s subsequent statements to the Review Team, the ‘recantation’ is not credible. For instance, though Witness 14 told the filmmakers that he did not recall being abused by the Friedmans, he went on to state unequivocally that others were abused—’stuff really did happen,’ he said, and added that pornography was present in the classroom. And Witness 14 also balked at participating in an attempt to exonerate Jesse Friedman: ‘I’m certainly not, not going to sit there and let Jesse Friedman off the hook for what . . . he did to people that I know about.’ […] He explained that he had not told his wife or his children anything about his involvement in the 1987 case, and that he was upset to learn that his previous conversation with Andrew Jarecki had been covertly recorded. In late April, 2013, Witness 14 was informed that Jesse’s attorney, Ron Kuby, was seeking a court order requiring disclosure of witness statements to police, and grand jury testimony. In response, Witness 14 hired counsel, and informed the Review Team that he felt ‘tricked’ by Andrew Jarecki, and that he stood by the statement he made to the Review Team.”

 

Read the full reinvestigation that highlights the manipulative tactics used by Andrew Jarecki online at Nassaucountyny.gov.

Bikers Protect Child Abuse Victims

In a recent NPR story, reporter Gloria Hillard interviews a group of motorcyclists part of an organization called “Bikers Against Child Abuse.”

A report of child abuse is made every 10 seconds in the U.S., and victims often find themselves feeling helpless. But some children are getting assistance from a group of unlikely heroes — on motorcycles. Gloria Hillard reports on Bikers Against Child Abuse, an organization that promises to support scared kids on their way to court.

Listen to the story or read the full transcript on NPR.

To learn more about the Bikers Against Child Abuse organization, visit their Facebook page.

 

Six Victims Expose Andrew Jarecki for Falsifying Film

Sharon Waxman, a correspondent for the New York Times, reported that film director Andrew Jarecki has been criticized by six former victims of his film, “Capturing the Friedmans.” (Watch Andrew Jarecki Exposed on YouTube for more information about why the director has been criticized).

In Waxman’s interview, the victims expose Andrew Jarecki for his misrepresentation of evidence in his film.  In the production of his film, in which he asserts was a fair representation of the Friedmans investigation, Andrew Jarecki omitted and distorted evidence, as well as other imperative information about the case.

“The six are suggesting that the director, Andrew Jarecki, created more ambiguity than actually existed about the case both to heighten the dramatic impact of the film and to elicit sympathy for the Friedmans.”

Read the full article on the New York Times website.

Visit the Andrew Jarecki Lies Facebook Page for the latest updates in the effort to expose director Andrew Jarecki for his insensitivity and disregard for the victims and victims family.

Andrew Jarecki

New York Times: “Victims Say Film on Molesters Distorts Facts”

The Need For Child Abuse Education

Supporting responsible research and information on child abuse and sharing that information with the public, is how we can help protect victims from being taken advantage by money-hungry members of the media. Controversial film director Andrew Jarecki, is just one example.  For the production of his film “Capturing the Friedmans,” Andrew Jarecki used several tactics to create an ambiguity in his film and to gain media attention, at the expensive of the victims.  Distorted interviews and withholding pertinent information from officials, are just a few of the offenses committed by Andrew Jarecki. Darkness to Light is a nonprofit with the mission of reducing the incidence of child sexual abuse through public awareness and education.

Darkness to Light

 In a recent blog post, Darkness to Light addresses the question:”Do you think the government should mandate preventative education for K-8?”

“Over the past few years, we’ve seen much more governmental involvement and interest in child sexual abuse legislation. This is certainly one avenue to prevention and early intervention, and lately there has been some success with initiatives for prevention programs developed for children. Mandates should also include adult-focused prevention, especially in the field of education. Child sexual abuse prevention is primarily an adult responsibility. There is no doubt that children need to understand concepts like physical boundaries, appropriate touch, and reporting uncomfortable situations or actual abuse to a trusted adult. But no matter how much education children receive, they cannot always fend off unwanted advances or overcome threats and manipulation – things at which abusers excel. Adults are uniquely positioned to protect kids by creating environments that are as safe as possible. We should equip kids with the knowledge to understand abuse and to protect themselves, and then we should do everything in our power to ensure they never have to use this knowledge. Ideal mandates would take this into account and focus on prevention and response education for youth workers. Mandated reporting is not enough – there must be a strong element of prevention included. We mention educators, specifically. This is because educators identify 52% of all identified child abuse cases, more than any other profession including child protective services agencies and the police. Teachers may be the single best protection network children have, and yet two-thirds of them have not received training in how to prevent, recognize, and report child sexual abuse. All of these options are part of a comprehensive system to prevent child sexual abuse. Ideally, every government, community, and parent would recognize the importance of protecting children from sexual abuse. Cultural change requires a team effort.”

Learn more about the real story behind Andrew Jarecki and the intentions of his film by visiting the Andrew Jarecki Lies Facebook page.

Andrew Jarecki Calls District Attorney’s Investigation “Superficial”

In an interview with the Daily News, filmmaker Andrew Jarecki refers to the Nassau County district attorney’s investigation as a “superficial probe.”  Jarecki felt that his own investigation was “far more thorough” than the district attorney’s.

How thorough was Jarecki’s research? Not thorough at all, as highlighted in the three-year reinvestigation conducted by the Nassau County district attorney.

It was a documentary loaded with fiction,” as stated by the Daily News. “The Nassau County DA’s office blasted the 2003 film ‘Capturing the Friedmans’ as misleading, and accused the moviemakers of interfering with the probe they were responsible for reopening. The report said the filmmakers misrepresented comments from an investigator and the judge presiding over the case, and took at face value comments by one victim that he was ‘hypnotized,’ when there’s no evidence of such.”

By claiming his own personal investigation is superior to the district attorney’s investigation, Andrew Jarecki insults the investigators of the Nassau County district attorney’s office, as well as the victims.  In fact, the reinvestigation revealed that Andrew Jarecki would not hand over some of the evidence under his control, and refused to hand over the unedited versions of interviews used in the production of his film.  Andrew Jarecki has no regard for the emotional damage inflicted upon the victims.

Deconstructing The Ambiguity Created By Andrew Jarecki’s Film

The Leadership Council on Child Abuse and Interpersonal Violence is committed to protecting children and supporting responsible research and information on child abuse.  An analysis of the documentary “Capturing The Friedmans” conducted by The Leadership Council, reveals the tactics used by film director Andrew Jarecki, in order to create ambiguity in his film.
In his documentary, Andrew Jarecki is able to manipulate his audience with the tactics he used during production and editing process of the film.  The Leadership Council stated:

“Jarecki’s documentary creatively interweaves recent interviews with home movies shot by the older Friedman brother as the events were unfolding. The effect is a complex story where truth appears ever elusive. Many viewers leave the theater believing that they have seen an objective documentary presented by a director who entrusted audiences to draw their own conclusions on Arnold Friedman’s and Jesse Friedman’s guilt. A careful review of the original evidence, however, shows that the case against the Friedmans was much stronger than the film revealed.”

Jarecki accomplished this through omitting reference to some of the most damning evidence and by promoting common myths about child sexual abuse.  Andrew Jarecki’s work promotes social acceptance of those myths by silencing victims which shows disregard the pain and suffering faced by the victims and victims families.

The Leadership Council

The Leadership Council On Child Abuse & Interpersonal Violence

It is important to educate the public on the issues of these crimes against children.  Additionally, it is important ensure the public has access to accurate information, not myths, regarding child abuse and other forms of interpersonal violence.  The Andrew Jarecki Lies Facebook Page works to provide accurate information regarding the truth about Andrew Jarecki and exposing his controversial tactics.

For additional research, visit The Leadership Council website.

Child Abuse Prevention Month

Child abuse can have damaging effects not only on the victims, but also on the families and community as they must address the aftermath of abuse.  School staff, family members, friends and neighbors all play important roles in preventing and responding to child abuse.  When the issue of child abuse is not taken seriously or even disregarded, this can lead to further damaging effects on the social and emotional well-being of the victims and victims families.

Several reports, including a reinvestigation led by the Nassau County District Attorney of Jesse Friedman’s case, for which film director Andrew Jarecki used as the subject of his controversial film, “Capturing the Friedmans,” indicate that Jarecki had no regard for the victims or victims families involved in the case.  The Leadership Council reported:

“Our research into the case shows that the director [Andrew Jarecki] of the film sacrificed truth in favor of creating artistic ambiguity. Clear evidence is omitted and facts are distorted. In addition, the film relies on popular but erroneous myths about child sexual abuse. As a result, uncertainty is created about the guilt of two confessed pedophiles — who are recast as victims — while the real victims — the boys and their families — are portrayed as untrustworthy.”

Read more information about the deceit perpetrated by Andrew Jarecki on Facebook.

During the month of April, several events and activities took place across the country to raise awareness for National Child Abuse Prevention Month and Sexual Assault Awareness Month.  Although the awareness month has come to a close, you can support families and protect children all year round. Even the smallest acts can help protect children, strengthen families, promote traits that help protect families and prevent the abuse and neglect of children.

Visit the American Human Association website for donation information, or donations can be made to Pinwheels For Prevention.

Mayor Rahm Emanuel

Mayor Rahm Emanuel attends “Big Pinwheel Garden” at Navy Pier, Chicago, to mark Child Abuse Prevention Month and promote the pinwheel as the symbol for healthy starts for all children.

NY Daily News: Andrew Jarecki Failed To Provide Comprehensive Account

In an article published by the New York Daily News, Dareh Gregorian exposes film director Andrew Jarecki for failing to provide a comprehensive account of entire case against Jesse Friedman, for which was the basis of Jarecki’s film, ‘Capturing the Friedmans’.

The conclusion reached by the Nassau County District Attorney’s three-year reinvestigation into the case, was that Jesse Friedman, was not wrongfully convicted.  The 172-page report also criticized director Andrew Jarecki for using misleading, out-of-context snippets of interviews to further his campaign to absolve Friedman and to create ambiguity in his film.

“‘Capturing the Friedmans’ was a provocative and entertaining movie, but it was not an exhaustive account of the entire case against Jesse Friedman. The Review Team had to go behind the excerpts and sound bites that the producers used in the film and other ‘reels’ and exhibits the producers have produced over the course of this re-investigation,”

According to the Daily News, the Nassau County District Attorney’s report also claimed Andrew Jarecki would not hand over some of the evidence under his control.  Withheld evidence included:

  • Unedited versions of interviews with Jesse Friedman
  • Unedited versions of interviews with Jesse Friedman family members
  • Unedited versions of interviews with another co-defendant involved in the case

Furthermore, Andrew Jarecki told the Daily News that he felt his investigation was far more thorough than the “DA’s ‘superficial’ probe.”

Andrew Jarecki continues to face a great deal of scrutiny for the deceitful tactics he used while making his film, ‘Capturing the Friedmans’.

Resources:

 

Andrew Jarecki Inconsistent In Defending Research

New York Times

In the New York Times article, “Victims Say Film on Molesters Distorts Facts,” author Sharon Waxman highlights the scrutiny faced by film director Andrew Jarecki and his work in Capturing the Friedmans.

When the New York Times asked Andrew Jarecki about his research for the film, Jarecki was inconsistent in his responses to the questions.  Furthermore, Jarecki was asked about a lie-detector test that Jesse Friedman took and failed while he protested his innocence, to which Jarecki claimed he knew nothing about the test.  However, an interview online revealed Jarecki had knowledge when he spoke in detail about the lie-detector test, saying he considered it “inconclusive.”

The New York Times article also brings to light the lack of in-depth research Andrew Jarecki conducted during his film production.  Lawyer Salvatore Marinello, who represented four of the victims involved in the case, told the New York Times that Andrew Jarecki, made no effort to reach his clients for interviews for his film.

”I see the film as a capsulized version of what was taking place in the Friedman household during the time the case was pending,” Mr. Marinello said. ”There’s no doubt that it’s fascinating. But why are we reliving these events? Because some director decided to make a movie. They believe the motion filed on Jesse’s behalf was simply a result of publicity garnered from the movie, that there’s no factual basis.”

Resources:

 

Director Andrew Jarecki Misses the Facts in Documentary

When it comes to documentary films, it can be difficult for viewers to tell where ethical research leaves off and self-interest steps in. Cineaste Magazine provides a detailed analysis of Capturing the Friedmans, the controversial film directed by Andrew Jarecki and the challenges of theatrical documentaries.

“How we see them [the Friedmans] is a product of Andrew Jarecki’s and editor Richard Hankin’s and composer Andrea Morricone’s pointed esthetic choices. Nor is this, I would contend, simply a bullshit countertruism. Jarecki, like Michael Moore and Steve James and a dozen other ‘cutting-edge’ documentary practitioners, traffics in grossly manipulative dramatic structures and effects of a kind usually associated with classical Hollywood…”

“So what is it, exactly, that Jarecki does to pump the dramatic quotient, hence raise the emotional stakes for his audience?” asks Paul Arthur, author of the Cineaste Magazine feature article. Andrew Jarecki raises the emotional stakes for his film by using certain methods including film editing, interview mixing, and even music:

  • Film editing- Footage found by Jarecki would be snipped into small segments. According to Arthur, the same camera angles, lighting, clothing of the interviewees throughout the film, point to and exhaustive editing and mixing. Additionally, unusual filters and altered footage speed create an unnerving sense for viewers.
  • Interview mixing – Arthur notes Andrew Jarecki chops up interviews and into bite-sized pieces, based on the camera angle, lighting, clothing of the individual being interviewed. Virtually all of the individuals who appear in the film were recorded in one session, yet Jarecki’s film took three years to produce. Therefore the individual pieces would be inserted at contradictory times and dialog throughout.
  • Music- Andrew Jarecki manipulates viewer’s emotional response by choosing particular music compositions in the film. “Emotional responses are pushed,” says Arthur. “Devices such as music played under the (silent) early home movies, and minor cues are give off by claustrophobic compositions…”

A lack of a relevant theme can be seen in Andrew Jarecki’s film. There is a strong emphasis on material that has nothing to do with recorded chronology, or relevance to the legal charges. Nevertheless Jarecki’s fast-paced assertions are undoubtedly exciting for viewers. Andrew Jarecki’s YouTube video highlights the reasons why his film faces a great deal of scrutiny.

 

“Calling the collection of putative facts and subject memories rehears by Jarecki a can of worms would be an understatement. It is more like a worm farm, and almost no one emerges from the cinematic argument without a slimy and slightly disgusting appearance. None of the people involved in this mess ‘tell their own story’, as in the utterly bankrupt documentary rubric; they engender neither trust nor skepticism, sympathy nor revulsion on their own.”

Read Paul Arthur’s full article, on the Cineaste Magazine website.