Would you hire David Friedman as your party clown?

I asked this question on this board a while back. I personally would not take the risk with my children or with children in my care. While party clowns aren't left unsupervised, they are neither watched like hawks.

My take on the film is this: Arnold Friedman, while not necessarily guilty of the crimes with which he was convicted, was nonetheless undoubtedly a child molester. Jesse's guilt carries somewhat of a question mark for me.

Given that, while I have reservations about penalizing David for his father's sins, it is his continued denial of those sins even in the wake of clear cut confessions that give me pause about his character. While I understand that denial may speak of nothing other than unconditional love for his father & an inability to reconcile the facts with the man he knew his dad to be, I cannot entirely dismiss the possibility that they may be indicative of something darker & more dangerous. It is for that reason that I would choose to err on the side of caution. I wonder, in fact, if David had been able to accept the truth of who Arnold Friedman was & expressed that in the film, if his business might not have been salvaged.

"Sacred cows make the best hamburger."

I would never hire a clown no matter what his background or family situation was. Clowns are f'ing creepy!

Of course I would. You can't blame someone for the mistakes of others. If my brother comites a crime tomorrow, what do I have to do with that?

What a sad thread this is. David Friedman is shown in the film to be a pretty normal person. He is angry at things that would make anyone angry. Torn up by things that would tear up any normal person. While his father may not have been worthy of David's filial love, that does not change the goodness of David's character in giving his father this affection. The complexity of his feelings towards other members of the family may not be ideal, but is pretty much in the range of the ordinary dysfunction shared by most of us.

David is related to a criminal. No accusation was EVER leveled at him. So what is it that makes people so uncomfortable with him???????

My opinion stems from:

1)His decision to work with children
2)His vitriolic animosity against his mother
3)Histrionic tendencies

I would say that, this is just from my inference, that he was possibly molested by his father but approached this issue by repressing it and avoiding it completely like Arnold's brother, who said he never raped him even though Arnold admits to it in letter. Anyhow, I think David confused his emotions for father because he was introduced to that experience too young and saw his mother as a competitor. I can't understand the animosity he shows in interview when discussing her opinion; as it seems more likely that a person's romantic couple will know more than their children about their personality/conduct. She also views Arnold from a different perspective, not altogether objective I mean, but different than a child would see his parent. In order to avoid destroying the idyllic fantasy life he's created of his childhood, and indeed pursues still, made me think he was emotionally/sexually retarded.

His perspective just sounded to me like, 'yep, this is what the romantic partner would say'

Arnold also excluded himself from the company of his wife frequently, and I don't consider pedophiles to be considerate of boundaries in the first place, making his first and perpetual domestic victims easier to control and manipulate.

I would not let him work around children I knew or any children, just because this person has some deep issues.

#1, this is 2012. Do young children still have parties with clowns? I never had an interest in having a clown at my birthday party, at any age.

#2, the minute the allegations were made against his father and brother, he should have switched careers.

And #3, you can't blame anyone for not hiring him for their kids. When it comes to one's kids, there is no such thing as being too careful, too irrational, too overprotective.

I would probably hire him (if I could afford it, which I can't) but would keep a close eye on him, like I would any stranger around my hypothetical children.

The documentary actually made me more wary of trusting anyone, not just members of the Friedman family. It really drives home how nobody really knows anyone. Everyone has secrets, occasionally awful secrets. Some people are so good at concealing their other selves that they fool everyone around them, including their spouses and children, as Arnold apparently did.

Not in a million years would I let him near my children.
He's obviously in major denial and very confused.
There's something weird about him, something in his eyes.