SPOILERS - Entertaining but extremely bias
So I rewatched this documentary today. The first time watching it I felt there was some bias trying to sway the audience to think of the accused as human's rather than criminals. Which is really f'ed up considering the case. But rewatching it today I also noticed how intentional they were with trying to disprove the facts against them.
It truly annoyed me how whenever they mentioned that the father was in fact a pedophile in the next couple of scenes it was everyone explaining how it was just thoughts and he didn't hurt anyone.
All through the movie they basically act like it's no big deal, even when they all announce he admitted to molesting kids while on vacation. So, yes he is a pedophile and right there it shouldn't matter what is said next, he belongs in prison. I get it though, wanting to show how the law was against them, but EVEN after they start going into the confessions during the interviews with the son's they still seem to try and justify it in some way. The brother of Arnold says he doesn't remember being molested when asked about Arnold's confession to molesting him, and even he goes on to say nice things about Arnold. Jesse's guilt is questionable based on evidence, but based on behavior I would lean towards guilt. Arnold's entire family acts like they are not only protecting Arnold but also themselves.
The other thing that irritated me was with the victims they seemed to choose the ones who didn't want to show their faces. At least none of the core ones who helped to get Arnold convicted. It really doesn't give us any humanizing qualities about them if we can't see and relate to them. There were quite a bit of children said to be molested, I'm sure they should have been able to find at least a handful willing to show their faces if they knew it was to bring this story to light. The main guy they talked to they disproved fairly early on, and "confirmed" this by bringing up the hypnosis in a scene then shortly after him mentioning he was hypnotized. Most likely the reason they couldn't find more people was because those victims realized the directors had a bias. Yes, the victims names might have been harder to find due to them being underage during the trials, but keep in mind they manages to find the victims they put in this film who actually kind of helped sway opinions in their direction rather than against the Friedmans.
The problem with child molesters, the ones who get away with it for long periods of time, is that they are charming. It's rare to hear someone say in interviews that they knew all along that their loved one was a child molester but just didn't have proof. No, generally they all are shocked because they had the assumption they were a good person. They groom the children to trust them completely, and try to convince them that they have a special bond which other people would not understand. They can even use threats to try and control them. Probably one of the worst things I found in this documentary was over and over people claiming that it couldn't have happened because the kids didn't tell anyone. Really? Horrible logic. I do think that the police pushed the kids, but I also think that they started with actual victims then created false victims or exaggerated victims (either intentional or accidental) with their forms of interrogation.