Jesse Friedman served 13 years in prison after confessing to molesting children. He continues fighting to clear his name with the help of Andrew Jarecki. It was announced last month that convicted sex offender Jesse Friedman’s law suit against Nassau District Attorney Kathleen Rice will proceed. Friedman filed a suit against the DA and two of her aides for defamation. After initially dismissing Friedman’s suit, the judge has now decided to let Friedman proceed with his case.
This law suit filed on behalf of Friedman, with the support of director Andrew Jarecki, has sparked a controversial debate:
If convicted of child molestation in the court of law, is it right for the offender to sue for defamation?
It is important to put ourselves in the shoes of Friedman’s victims, and victims family members. How do they feel? How do the victims feel seeing their attacker fight to clear his name after being convicted by a jury? Even after the Nassau County Review Team conducted a reinvestigation of the case as requested, the conviction was upheld. The report stated the original conviction against Friedman was justified.
In fact, the reinvestigation found several errors made by Andrew Jarecki while producing his film, Capturing the Friedmans. Jarecki’s intention of his film Capturing the Friedman’s has been under scrutiny for a long time. His failure to comply with the investigation team revealed his true intentions of the film: to create ambiguity and manipulate the victims to portray Jesse Friedman in a certain light. This ambiguity created would earn Jarecki a storm of media attention and millions of dollars.
Jesse Friedman served 13 years in prison after confessing to molesting children who went to take computer classes at his father’s Long Island home in the 1980s, the New York Daily News reported. But now Friedman fights to clear his name, and film director Andrew Jarecki is helping him.
What’s wrong with this picture?
Hey, Parents: are you okay with a convicted child molester clearing his name of any wrong doing?
Why would a hollywood film director be involved in advocating for a child molester? Andrew Jarecki is involved because the recent press surrounding Jesse Friedman, is generating more attention for his film. Therefor, Andrew Jarecki is in a position to make more money off of his film, Capturing the Friedmans. Andrew Jarecki is using Jesse Friedman as his puppet. Can this man be trusted?
Andrew Jarecki, making up more lies.
Andrew Jarecki: Advocate for a convicted child molester?
After the original conviction against Jesse Friedman, the Nassau County DA was pressured into conducting a reinvestigation of the case, according to Newsday. The Review Team took three years to conduct the full reinvestigation, that resulted in the reaffirmation of Jesse Friedman’s guilty conviction. The report also blasted filmmaker Andrew Jarecki for being biased in Friedman’s favor.
When the Nassau Country District Attorney submitted the results of their reinvestigation of Jesse Friedman, the report revealed Jesse Friedman was caught with pornographic material in his prison cell. According to the New York Post,
“Prison disciplinary records show that Friedman was caught possessing a magazine photograph depicting two nude children, and was punished for writing allegedly fictional accounts of bestiality, incest and child rape…”
The reinvestigation determined that original sanctions against convicted child molester, whom director Andrew Jarecki continues to advocate for, were accurate and were upheld.
In June 2013, after a three-year reinvestigation of Jesse Friedman’s case, the Nassau County DA concluded that their findings of the reinvestigation “Only increased confidence in the integrity of Jesse Friedman’s guilty plea and adjudication as a sex offender.”
A main focus of the reinvestigation by the review team, were the actions of the film’s producers, including director Andrew Jarecki.
Much of the public debate surrounding Jarecki’s controversial film, is Jarecki’s push to turn Jesse Friedman’s alleged innocence into a controversial, self-serving, public relations campaign. Furthermore, the reinvestigation noted that Jarecki was not forthcoming with evidence that he had access to.
Jarecki chose to share only partial evidence, “thereby rendering it of poor evidentiary quality,” according to the Review Team.
Learn more about the truth of Andrew Jarecki:
Conviction Integrity Review: Nassau County DA Reinvestigation
Twitter : Follow Andrew Jarecki’s Activity
Watch the truth: Andrew Jarecki Lies on YouTube