@write2topcat said:

If this series depicts J. Paul Getty and his sons accurately, they were a messed up family. The old man was a ******* through and through.

I believe it does. And I agree they were messed up and the old man was a piece of . It is so sad and just awful what JP III suffered through- and being only 16 at the time. This is a great series, loving the actor that plays JP III , I even Like Brendan Frasers role.

That kidnapping really f-ed him up for life.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Paul_Getty_III

"Paul's health began to decline rapidly as his wound became infected, combined with pneumonia caused by the cold winter temperatures which were descending. His captors, alarmed at this sudden decline, gave him large doses of penicillin, which caused him to develop an allergy to the antibiotic and further affected his health.[14] Getty's biographer John Pearson attributed the root of his later alcoholism to the large amounts of brandy he was plied with in the last few months of his captivity to keep him warm and numb his pain.[14]

After young Paul's ear was cut off, Getty Sr. negotiated a deal to get his grandson back for about $2.9 million (equivalent to $16 million in 2017[10]). Getty Sr. paid $2.2 million—the maximum amount that was tax deductible—and lent the remainder to his son, who was responsible for repaying the sum at 4% interest.[15]

Getty III was found alive in a petrol station of Lauria, in the province of Potenza, on 15 December 1973, shortly after the ransom was paid.[16] At his mother's suggestion, he called his grandfather to thank him for paying the ransom, but J. Paul Getty refused to come to the phone.[17]

Nine of the kidnappers were apprehended, including a carpenter, a hospital orderly, an ex-con, and an olive-oil dealer from Calabria, as well as high-ranking members of the 'Ndrangheta—a Mafia organization in Calabria—Girolamo Piromalli and Saverio Mammoliti.[16] Two were convicted and sent to prison; the others, including the 'Ndrangheta bosses, were acquitted for lack of evidence. Most of the ransom money was never recovered.[15][18] In 1977, Getty had an operation to rebuild the ear that had been cut off by his kidnappers.[2]

Permanently affected by his kidnapping, Getty suffered from drug and alcohol addiction during the years that followed.[17] In 1981, he drank a Valium, methadone, and alcohol cocktail which caused liver failure and a stroke, leaving him quadriplegic, partially blind and unable to speak.[20][21] Afterwards, he was taken care of by his mother. He eventually sued his father for $28,000 a month to cover his medical needs.[17] He never fully recovered and remained severely handicapped for the rest of his life. By 1987, however, he was able to regain some degree of autonomy. He could again visit concerts and movies and was even able to ski when strapped to a metal frame.[19]

On 5 February 2011, aged 54, Getty died at Wormsley, Buckinghamshire, following a long illness. He had been in poor health since his 1981 drug overdose."

I read a similar account once though I had forgotten the details. There was another son who committed suicide. How awful. It says something about the interpersonal relationship skills, or lack thereof, of J Paul Getty that one of his sons, born to such wealth and privilege, would take his own life. JPG2, father of the kidnapped boy, had a drug habit. His second wife, the beautiful model Talitha Pol, died of a heroin overdose. Of course they came up during the 60's when drug use was chic. So their his drug use wasn't necessarily due to his poor relationship with his father.

I really do wonder however how many liberties were taken in portraying his life in this series. I have not read anywhere that he refused to take the loan from the trust at 4% as the show suggests. So I wonder if this is merely a plot device or if it has any basis in fact. He sure doesn't come off very well in the series.

I have not been able to find out much about the kidnappers fate other than that only a few men were convicted for the crime, but none of the Calabria mafia leaders. I could not find the names of those convicted, surprising since it must surely have been news when they were convicted. Perhaps I just didn't search well enough. I guess it's no surprise that the bosses escaped justice.

@mechajutaro said:

Gettys were messed up

And yet, you're still better off as a train wreck who's loaded beyond imagination than your typical head case who's living paycheck to paycheck in addition all the other drama

Not necessarily. Your problems are just different. Those kids may have been even more isolated and miserable than the average person living check to check. Also, it seems that the old man teased them with the money, withholding it from the kids as long as he was alive. Can you imagine visiting your father and having to use a pay phone to make a call from his house?

@write2topcat said:

@mechajutaro said:

Gettys were messed up

And yet, you're still better off as a train wreck who's loaded beyond imagination than your typical head case who's living paycheck to paycheck in addition all the other drama

Not necessarily. Your problems are just different. Those kids may have been even more isolated and miserable than the average person living check to check. Also, it seems that the old man teased them with the money, withholding it from the kids as long as he was alive. Can you imagine visiting your father and having to use a pay phone to make a call from his house?

...and for all we know there could have been a coin slot on the toilet also, since the old man was so f-ed up in the head. Can you imagine being kidnapped and knowing that your richest in the world grandpa would not pay, making you feel like you were worth nothing especially at 16 years old?

That is some seriously sad shyt.

@ScorpionQ2 said:

@write2topcat said:

@mechajutaro said:

Gettys were messed up

And yet, you're still better off as a train wreck who's loaded beyond imagination than your typical head case who's living paycheck to paycheck in addition all the other drama

Not necessarily. Your problems are just different. Those kids may have been even more isolated and miserable than the average person living check to check. Also, it seems that the old man teased them with the money, withholding it from the kids as long as he was alive. Can you imagine visiting your father and having to use a pay phone to make a call from his house?

...and for all we know there could have been a coin slot on the toilet also, since the old man was so f-ed up in the head. Can you imagine being kidnapped and knowing that your richest in the world grandpa would not pay, making you feel like you were worth nothing especially at 16 years old?

That is some seriously sad shyt.

No joke. He had to have heard about his grandfather publicly stating that he would not pay one cent in ransom. And later when he did agree to pay, he only paid the amount he could deduct from his taxes. He loaned the kid's father, his son, the remaining amount of the ransom at 4% interest, so he was profiting from the kidnapping. Talk about a cold, calculating bastard. And the kid would have found that out after he was released. It's not a surprise that he escaped into heavy drug use after all of that.

Plus, because of all the haggling about the ransom, they cut his ear off. He said it bled for a day or day and a half. Clearly the kidnappers didn't have even any styptic pencils, much less any clotting agents. They just cut it off. It got infected. He got pneumonia. They pumped him so full of penicillin when they feared he would die that he had an allergic reaction to it. You can die from drug allergies. You can go into anaphylactic shock. He suffered from exposure to the elements up there in the mountains where it was cold. That kid could have died from the mistreatment he suffered. He went through all that shit because his fucked up grandfather was too cheap and didn't care enough about his own offspring to pay to get him back. But there is one mitigating circumstance for the grandfather, old man Getty.

The grandson had previously talked about faking his own kidnapping in order to squeeze some money out of his grandfather. That became known to granddad after grandson was taken, during the investigation into who took him. That is the only reason I can't completely condemn the old man for the way he handled it. Until they cut his ear off he couldn't be sure that his grandson hadn't made some deal with the mafia to do a fake kidnapping and split the money with them.
In fact, the kidnapping may never have happened had the grandson not initially planned a fake kidnapping. The story goes that he and his girlfriend backed off the idea after they got modeling jobs and started making some money. But before that, he had apparently talked to some of the Calabria mafia about doing a fake kidnapping. The mafia would have loved the idea. They would have already been counting that money in their minds. When the kid said 'sorry, plans have changed, I don't want to do that anymore' those mafia guys probably thought to themselves "well that doesn't matter, cause we don't actually need your complicity to make this work out for us". Then it was on.

I do blame the grandfather for being a horrible, unloving father, a complete bastard and cheapskate. He evidently didn't know how to show love. Perhaps he didn't really feel love. Most fathers love their kids enough to forgive their shortcomings and mistakes, and help them learn from and grow through them. And it appears that the old man wasn't like that at all. If he had been the sort of father and grandfather who took enough of an interest in his children and grandchildren to help them, not spoil them, but help them find their niche and arrange opportunities for them to find profitable work in things they enjoy then the kids and grandkids would have been much more well adjusted to life. That kid would never have griped and thought about faking his own kidnapping. None of this would have happened.

@write2topcat said:

The grandson had previously talked about faking his own kidnapping in order to squeeze some money out of his grandfather. That kid would never have griped and thought about faking his own kidnapping. None of this would have happened.

Truth.

It was his friends who got him into trouble in the first place, getting drugs and saying JPIII would pay for them because his granddaddy was rich. From the series, he was so naive and didn't realize his friends were making those promises. That's when (supposedly ) he came up with the fake kidnapping plan.

Another reason grandpa wouldn't pay was because he said he didn't want anyone else trying to kidnap other family members and thinking it was so easy to get paid.

I live close to two Getty museums. The Getty Villa in Malibu and The Getty off the 405 freeway. It will be hard to visit them again, if I ever will after seeing this train wreck tragedy.

@ScorpionQ2 said:

@write2topcat said:

The grandson had previously talked about faking his own kidnapping in order to squeeze some money out of his grandfather. That kid would never have griped and thought about faking his own kidnapping. None of this would have happened.

Truth.

It was his friends who got him into trouble in the first place, getting drugs and saying JPIII would pay for them because his granddaddy was rich. From the series, he was so naive and didn't realize his friends were making those promises. That's when (supposedly ) he came up with the fake kidnapping plan.

Another reason grandpa wouldn't pay was because he said he didn't want anyone else trying to kidnap other family members and thinking it was so easy to get paid.

I can easily imagine that he had leeches for friends, hangers on who thought they could grift off of the grandson of the world's richest man (at the time, or so I read). I suppose we have all seen people like that at some point in our lives. They would naturally gravitate to the grandson, not realizing that granddad wasn't inclined to bail out a kid with drug debts. It was much more common in granddad's generation for people to insist that people be responsible for their own actions, make their bed and sleep in it, and learn from their mistakes and having to correct them. According to the show the kid didn't tell his granddad he was in debt to the mafia; he didn't learn that until after the kidnapping. I wonder whether the granddad might have acted differently had he known before the kidnapping that the grandson was in debt to the mafia.

Obviously it would have been better for granddad to make a contract with the grandson to loan him the money to pay the debt, and then make him work to pay it off. He could have had him jailed for failure to comply with the contract. That would have been tough love, but protected the kid from the mafia. We'lll never know how he would have handled things had he known beforehand that there was a debt to the mafia.

And I understand why he made the public statement that he did. It's the same reason that governments state that they won't negotiate with terrorists; it would simply invite lots more terrorism. You get what you pay for.

And also, according to the show, just before that public statement granddad received information from the investigator that J Paul G III, the grandson, had talked about faking his own kidnapping. If that is true, then it would make a whole lot of sense for him to make that statement as a way to tell the grandson that he couldn't get away with his criminal plot to extort money.

Still, the show depicts J Paul Getty as pretty much of a bastard and extreme cheapskate who couldn't and didn't show love to his family, not in any way recognizable to most people anyway. Once it became clear that his grandson was in fact kidnapped by the mafia, he ought to have been very hands on and determined to get him back, and done what was needed to make that happen. Refusing to pay any more than he could deduct from his taxes, and neglecting to make sure that the first payment/agreement was successfully transacted, would seem to indicate that he had little love for his family and was an extreme cheapskate.

There are other ways for a man of his means to ensure that his other grandchildren (and his children) would be left alone. He should have made sure that the transaction was completed and that he got his grandson back. And after that, a man of his means could have and should have contracted with private military and or intelligence operatives to obtain extra-judicial justice and punishment of those involved in the kidnapping.
The message would have been clear. I don't mess with your business, but if you come after me or my family I will use my considerable resources and influence to lay waste to anyone and everyone who attempts to hurt, kidnap, or otherwise harass any member of the Getty family or businesses. When someone offers you lethal violence, the proper response is overwhelming counter violence.

Mafia members operate by certain codes, and family members are off limits. The other mafia clans would have respected and honored such a move by Getty. And they would certainly not want to suffer the consequences that the guilty clan should have been made to suffer. After DEA agent Kiko Camarena was captured by a Mexican drug cartel and tortured to death, the US government responded so violently and thoroughly that drug dealers all over the world got the message. You cannot harm DEA agents or your organization will be decimated with extreme prejudice. Getty should have made that clan pay such a high price that no one would ever want to go after any Getty family members or concerns ever again. Even though he had to pay the ransom to get the kid back, he should have extracted such a high price in blood and other means that everyone got the message. This guy can and will hit back hard. Don't mess with him.

@write2topcat said:

I can easily imagine that he had leeches for friends, hangers on who thought they could grift off of the grandson of the world's richest man (at the time, or so I read). I suppose we have all seen people like that at some point in our lives. They would naturally gravitate to the grandson, not realizing that granddad wasn't inclined to bail out a kid with drug debts. It was much more common in granddad's generation for people to insist that people be responsible for their own actions, make their bed and sleep in it, and learn from their mistakes and having to correct them. According to the show the kid didn't tell his granddad he was in debt to the mafia; he didn't learn that until after the kidnapping. I wonder whether the granddad might have acted differently had he known before the kidnapping that the grandson was in debt to the mafia.

Obviously it would have been better for granddad to make a contract with the grandson to loan him the money to pay the debt, and then make him work to pay it off. He could have had him jailed for failure to comply with the contract. That would have been tough love, but protected the kid from the mafia. We'lll never know how he would have handled things had he known beforehand that there was a debt to the mafia.

And I understand why he made the public statement that he did. It's the same reason that governments state that they won't negotiate with terrorists; it would simply invite lots more terrorism. You get what you pay for.

And also, according to the show, just before that public statement granddad received information from the investigator that J Paul G III, the grandson, had talked about faking his own kidnapping. If that is true, then it would make a whole lot of sense for him to make that statement as a way to tell the grandson that he couldn't get away with his criminal plot to extort money.

Still, the show depicts J Paul Getty as pretty much of a bastard and extreme cheapskate who couldn't and didn't show love to his family, not in any way recognizable to most people anyway. *Once it became clear that his grandson was in fact kidnapped by the mafia, he ought to have been very hands on and determined to get him back, and done what was needed to make that happen. Refusing to pay any more than he could deduct from his taxes, and neglecting to make sure that the first payment/agreement was successfully transacted, would seem to indicate that he had little love for his family and was an extreme cheapskate. *

There are other ways for a man of his means to ensure that his other grandchildren (and his children) would be left alone. He should have made sure that the transaction was completed and that he got his grandson back. And after that, a man of his means could have and should have contracted with private military and or intelligence operatives to obtain extra-judicial justice and punishment of those involved in the kidnapping.
*The message would have been clear. I don't mess with your business, but if you come after me or my family I will use my considerable resources and influence to lay waste to anyone and everyone who attempts to hurt, kidnap, or otherwise harass any member of the Getty family or businesses. * *When someone offers you lethal violence, the proper response is overwhelming counter violence. *

Mafia members operate by certain codes, and family members are off limits. The other mafia clans would have respected and honored such a move by Getty. And they would certainly not want to suffer the consequences that the guilty clan should have been made to suffer. After DEA agent Kiko Camarena was captured by a Mexican drug cartel and tortured to death, the US government responded so violently and thoroughly that drug dealers all over the world got the message. You cannot harm DEA agents or your organization will be decimated with extreme prejudice. Getty should have made that clan pay such a high price that no one would ever want to go after any Getty family members or concerns ever again. Even though he had to pay the ransom to get the kid back, he should have extracted such a high price in blood and other means that everyone got the message. This guy can and will hit back hard. Don't mess with him.

I agree. Great Post

My heart truly is sad for all the torment JPIII went through., one of the saddest stories I have ever heard...and even after he was released he still had to walk down a cold freezing highway.

If I were JPIII, I would have never spoken to the old cheap dusty bastard again.

Finale Sunday.

@ScorpionQ2 said:

My heart truly is sad for all the torment JPIII went through., one of the saddest stories I have ever heard...and even after he was released he still had to walk down a cold freezing highway.

If I were JPIII, I would have never spoken to the old cheap dusty bastard again.

Finale Sunday.

Yeah, he was just a young kid growing up in the early 70s when casual drug use was still chic and hip. His own dad was a heroin user and his step mom (the beautiful Talitha Pol) overdosed and died from heroin. He grew up in that milieu. Which of us did not do things in our teens which we now look back upon with at least a little chagrin? He deserved so much better than he got. And that a family as wealthy as his failed to protect, guide, and look after him any better than they did is mind boggling in retrospect.

The trauma he experienced, being mutilated, and coming close to death from exposure and infection, as well as the knowledge that his granddad wouldn't pay more than he could deduct from his taxes, and actually made money charging his son interest on a loan for the rest of the ransom payment must have all weighed heavily on the boy. Only his biological mother seems to have showed him any love or provided him with something akin to normal family affection. Add to that the glare of global media exposure, lack of privacy, constant harassment for interviews or comments (I am assuming this to be the case) and it's no wonder that he escaped into deep drug use. And that led to his tragic stroke.

I remember the kidnapping, I was just a young teenager at the time it made the news. I am keenly interested to see what other details the show will reveal about the aftermath and subsequent lives of those involved. I will be watching Sunday.

I've read that the Getty family brought a lawsuit against the makers of Trust claiming it is defamatory and that they were never consulted. They reject the notion that any of them were complicit in the kidnapping.

I wondered how they would react. Certainly JPG II comes off very badly in this series. I wonder what the truth really is regarding the episode in which JPG2 meets with his dad and rejects the offer to take a loan from the Trust at 4% to pay the ransom. It is hard for me to imagine that a father would refuse to pay a ransom for his son, even though it meant he would have to take a loan at interest from a trust (one he would later inherit). In this episode and others JPG2 is shown as being emotionally crippled and battling substance abuse. I look at the real life photos of the man taken at various points in his life and he doesn't strike me as someone who is emotionally battered like the man in the show. But then what can you really tell from snapshots? We do know that he was a drug user who hosted parties at his Marakesh home for celebrities including Lennon, McCartney, and others of that swinging hippy crowd. But anyway, a father would do whatever it took to get his son back from kidnappers, I would think. So it is hard for me to believe JPG2 would have refused the offer as shown in the series.

The old man JPG may have suspected that the whole affair had been orchestrated by grandson, possibly in collusion with his father. That would make his plan to loan the money from the trust at interest make more sense. If he believed the grandson was not really in danger and that his son and grandson were extorting money from him, he would have wanted to make his son pay for having tried to do so.

But why would they involve the mafia in such a scheme? That would mean having to trust criminals and splitting the ransom with them. Granted, sometimes people do very stupid things to try to get large amounts of money, but... I think it more likely that the grandson got into debt with the mafia, and when he could not acquire the money to pay it back, perhaps he agreed to be kidnapped as a way for them to get paid back with interest. That would be better than getting killed. The grandson was simply in a tough situation.

At any rate, I cannot imagine the Getty family is happy with this version of the story. There was a film about the kidnapping titled ALL THE MONEY IN THE WORLD which showed JPG Sr. the grandfather as the really bad guy, according to an article I read. It also said relatives of the kidnappers claimed the old man was somehow complicit, which sounds absurd to me. But the film made the kidnappers look incompetent, which made the relatives angry. lol

Clearly this series is very tough on the father, JPG2. I suppose we will never know the truth since there are conflicting accounts and no way to know whose story is really accurate. I would think the idea to depict the father being so weak and unwilling to do whatever it took to get his son back must have been suggested to the producers by someone. Perhaps his ex wife? I wish I had access to all the research which went into the making of this series. I would like to be able to judge the sources myself.

[@write2topcat said:

I've read that the Getty family brought a lawsuit against the makers of Trust claiming it is defamatory and that they were never consulted.

Are they making the same claim against the movie All The Money In The World too?

They reject the notion that any of them were complicit in the kidnapping.

Well what else are they going to say, The way grandpa was portrayed in the series, it seems like he was the type to actually go meet with the kidnappers and haggle over the kidnapping amount.

I wondered how they would react. Certainly JPG II comes off very badly in this series. I wonder what the truth really is regarding the episode in which JPG2 meets with his dad and rejects the offer to take a loan from the Trust at 4% to pay the ransom. It is hard for me to imagine that a father would refuse to pay a ransom for his son, even though it meant he would have to take a loan at interest from a trust (one he would later inherit). In this episode and others JPG2 is shown as being emotionally crippled and battling substance abuse. I look at the real life photos of the man taken at various points in his life and he doesn't strike me as someone who is emotionally battered like the man in the show. But then what can you really tell from snapshots? We do know that he was a drug user who hosted parties at his Marakesh home for celebrities including Lennon, McCartney, and others of that swinging hippy crowd. But anyway, a father would do whatever it took to get his son back from kidnappers, I would think. So it is hard for me to believe JPG2 would have refused the offer as shown in the series.

As bad and horrendous as that deal was I thought- but WHY wouldn't you make ANY sort of deal and do ANYTHING to get your son back alive?

The old man JPG may have suspected that the whole affair had been orchestrated by grandson, possibly in collusion with his father. That would make his plan to loan the money from the trust at interest make more sense. If he believed the grandson was not really in danger and that his son and grandson were extorting money from him, he would have wanted to make his son pay for having tried to do so.

True, this could be possible, but it seemed no one really liked him- not even his butler . To make both a series and a movie portraying him as a penny pinching, mean, uncaring son of a for no reason? He would not pay the ransom but yet he had no problem at all offering all that money for the museum pieces?

But why would they involve the mafia in such a scheme? That would mean having to trust criminals and splitting the ransom with them. Granted, sometimes people do very stupid things to try to get large amounts of money, but... I think it more likely that the grandson got into debt with the mafia, and when he could not acquire the money to pay it back, perhaps he agreed to be kidnapped as a way for them to get paid back with interest. That would be better than getting killed. The grandson was simply in a tough situation.

I thought that was what was shown in the series, its just that the guy that the grandson made the deal with was killed by a higher up/tougher mafia guy?

At any rate, I cannot imagine the Getty family is happy with this version of the story. There was a film about the kidnapping titled ALL THE MONEY IN THE WORLD which showed JPG Sr. the grandfather as the really bad guy, according to an article I read. It also said relatives of the kidnappers claimed the old man was somehow complicit, which sounds absurd to me. But the film made the kidnappers look incompetent, which made the relatives angry. lol

I haven't seen the movie yet, would like to. I didn't think the kidnappers looked really competent in the series, though I was glad when some of the handlers were nice/friendly to JPIII. Both Getty relatives and kidnapper relatives are probably mad about how they are portrayed- which makes me believe it is probably the truth.

Clearly this series is very tough on the father, JPG2. I suppose we will never know the truth since there are conflicting accounts and no way to know whose story is really accurate. I would think the idea to depict the father being so weak and unwilling to do whatever it took to get his son back must have been suggested to the producers by someone. Perhaps his ex wife?

Perhaps. People had to talk, friends and relatives both. I believe that butler told everything he ever heard or saw. Which accounts are conflicting?

I wish I had access to all the research which went into the making of this series. I would like to be able to judge the sources myself.

There is probably a documentary about the researchers doing the research too . It is truly a very interesting story .

I watched "Inside Trust" a 2 minute discussion On Demand and the creator/writer/director Simon Beaufoy said , "... From reading interviews of everyone surrounding the kidnapping, the more research I did the more fascinating the story became." and ' ...The father - JP2 , nor the grandfather would not take calls from the kidnappers.'

@ScorpionQ2 said:

[@write2topcat said:

I've read that the Getty family brought a lawsuit against the makers of Trust claiming it is defamatory and that they were never consulted.

Are they making the same claim against the movie All The Money In The World too?

Not according to the article I read.

They reject the notion that any of them were complicit in the kidnapping.

Well what else are they going to say, The way grandpa was portrayed in the series, it seems like he was the type to actually go meet with the kidnappers and haggle over the kidnapping amount.

Yeah, I don't doubt that grandpa was as much of a tightwad with his family as the film depicts him to be. I am sure there are elements of truth to everything in the series. What I meant to convey is that it's almost impossible to get the whole truth told correctly for a lot of reasons. For example, the producers may have every intention of telling it exactly as they believe it happened, with no liberties taken for dramatic purposes. But even if so, they are reliant on the accounts of others, some of whom are relying on imperfect understandings. Personal beliefs and prejudices of witnesses and those surrounding the events undoubtedly color some of the accounts given. Recollections of events this far in the past are not as accurate as of much more recent events. Some of the people involved may have shaded their accounts to cast themselves in a more favorable light, and so on.

I wondered how they would react. Certainly JPG II comes off very badly in this series. I wonder what the truth really is regarding the episode in which JPG2 meets with his dad and rejects the offer to take a loan from the Trust at 4% to pay the ransom. It is hard for me to imagine that a father would refuse to pay a ransom for his son, even though it meant he would have to take a loan at interest from a trust (one he would later inherit). In this episode and others JPG2 is shown as being emotionally crippled and battling substance abuse. I look at the real life photos of the man taken at various points in his life and he doesn't strike me as someone who is emotionally battered like the man in the show. But then what can you really tell from snapshots? We do know that he was a drug user who hosted parties at his Marakesh home for celebrities including Lennon, McCartney, and others of that swinging hippy crowd. But anyway, a father would do whatever it took to get his son back from kidnappers, I would think. So it is hard for me to believe JPG2 would have refused the offer as shown in the series.

As bad and horrendous as that deal was I thought- but WHY wouldn't you make ANY sort of deal and do ANYTHING to get your son back alive?

EXACTLY! The grandfather was more of a tightwad than anyone I've ever heard of. When have you EVER heard of any other kidnapping in which the family has way more money than is needed to pay the ransom but tries to negotiate down the amount? The part I wonder about is whether the father, JPG2 really refused to pay the trust back with interest in order to get his son back. I understand that he would be incensed over JPG Sr. charging him interest on the loan, but I cannot understand him refusing to make the deal when doing so could cost his son his life. He had a chance to get his son back but refused to pay. If this part is true then the father is no better than the grandfather.

The old man JPG may have suspected that the whole affair had been orchestrated by grandson, possibly in collusion with his father. That would make his plan to loan the money from the trust at interest make more sense. If he believed the grandson was not really in danger and that his son and grandson were extorting money from him, he would have wanted to make his son pay for having tried to do so.

True, this could be possible, but it seemed no one really liked him- not even his butler . To make both a series and a movie portraying him as a penny pinching, mean, uncaring son of a for no reason? He would not pay the ransom but yet he had no problem at all offering all that money for the museum pieces?

I would also trust the account of the butler. I wish I could read that account. Clearly the grandfather cared more about himself than anyone or anything else in the world. Like I said, I think there are elements of truth in the movie. I think the main thrust of the movie is probably correct. But some things are not entirely clear. The show has grandson tell his mother that he was behind the kidnapping. But did he make a deal with the mafia to be involved only in order to clear his debt? Or was he supposed to get part of the ransom? Did the deal change afterward? Was his father involved in any way? Did JPG2 or his mother ever admit to this plot? From which accounts did this information come? It's impossible for a show to answer all the questions one I think of. I will always have more.

But why would they involve the mafia in such a scheme? That would mean having to trust criminals and splitting the ransom with them. Granted, sometimes people do very stupid things to try to get large amounts of money, but... I think it more likely that the grandson got into debt with the mafia, and when he could not acquire the money to pay it back, perhaps he agreed to be kidnapped as a way for them to get paid back with interest. That would be better than getting killed. The grandson was simply in a tough situation.

I thought that was what was shown in the series, its just that the guy that the grandson made the deal with was killed by a higher up/tougher mafia guy?

At any rate, I cannot imagine the Getty family is happy with this version of the story. There was a film about the kidnapping titled ALL THE MONEY IN THE WORLD which showed JPG Sr. the grandfather as the really bad guy, according to an article I read. It also said relatives of the kidnappers claimed the old man was somehow complicit, which sounds absurd to me. But the film made the kidnappers look incompetent, which made the relatives angry. lol

I haven't seen the movie yet, would like to. I didn't think the kidnappers looked really competent in the series, though I was glad when some of the handlers were nice/friendly to JPIII. Both Getty relatives and kidnapper relatives are probably mad about how they are portrayed- which makes me believe it is probably the truth.

Yeah I think that on the whole the film makers tried to find the truth and nobody came out of this looking very good except the mother. Not that she didn't make some mistakes in her life or wouldn't have done some things differently, but she was clearly solely interested in the life of her son. She didn't care about the money.

Clearly this series is very tough on the father, JPG2. I suppose we will never know the truth since there are conflicting accounts and no way to know whose story is really accurate. I would think the idea to depict the father being so weak and unwilling to do whatever it took to get his son back must have been suggested to the producers by someone. Perhaps his ex wife?

Perhaps. People had to talk, friends and relatives both. I believe that butler told everything he ever heard or saw. Which accounts are conflicting?

Oh, I don't know. I have not been able to read the research. I am just assuming that the account of the mother and of the father will probably not be congruent. If the father really refused the deal, I am sure his account would be different from that which we saw in the film. I am guessing that there would be such discrepancies.

I wish I had access to all the research which went into the making of this series. I would like to be able to judge the sources myself.

There is probably a documentary about the researchers doing the research too . It is truly a very interesting story .

@write2topcat said:

What I meant to convey is that it's almost impossible to get the whole truth told correctly for a lot of reasons. For example, the producers may have every intention of telling it exactly as they believe it happened, with no liberties taken for dramatic purposes. But even if so, they are reliant on the accounts of others, some of whom are relying on imperfect understandings. Personal beliefs and prejudices of witnesses and those surrounding the events undoubtedly color some of the accounts given. Recollections of events this far in the past are not as accurate as of much more recent events. Some of the people involved may have shaded their accounts to cast themselves in a more favorable light, and so on.

True, I understand.

EXACTLY! The grandfather was more of a tightwad than anyone I've ever heard of.

Me too.

I would also trust the account of the butler. I wish I could read that account.

Me too.

When have you EVER heard of any other kidnapping in which the family has way more money than is needed to pay the ransom but tries to negotiate down the amount?

Never. More like 'we don't have that kind of money, but we will get it somehow.' And he was just a kid .

The part I wonder about is whether the father, JPG2 really refused to pay the trust back with interest in order to get his son back. I understand that he would be incensed over JPG Sr. charging him interest on the loan, but I cannot understand him refusing to make the deal when doing so could cost his son his life. He had a chance to get his son back but refused to pay. If this part is true then the father is no better than the grandfather.

True. You know the saying " You become what you hate."

I really have enjoyed all your posts .

What else do you watch?