Also, Crazy Days and Nights has much on the subject.

(I’d highly recommend the film in any event, it’s hilarious in some spots.)

EDIT: As someone else mentioned, this isn’t the first time this sort of allegation has been leveled against Marsh. There was a Texas Monthly article (registration required)about Marsh in ’96, at which time Whittenburg himself brought it up.

This is a civil suit, not criminal. The parents are suing Marsh because of the things their sons did with the money and vehicles he gave them. I’m not saying that he is not in the wrong, but it seems to me that the parents just want money.

Disclaimer:
I am acquainted with a number of people who work for or who have worked for Stanley, and their experiences with him vary from being completely ordinary to slightly scary.

the law pays no attention to reality once the age numbers get low enough.

The “reality” that you describe is so limited and self-serving as to be worthless.  An eleven year-old is not capable of giving informed consent, and that behavior is very likely the product of abuse at a younger age.

An old man giving money and drugs to a 15 year old for sex is abuse, dude, and calling them “rent boys” is just gross.

And NOW I’m wondering if my failure to see a chicken coop for the perversion it is somehow marks me as a part of the problem.

Further, the “turning homo” part doesn’t compute.  The boys in the allegations all are somewhere on the continuum between gay and straight.  Money might prompt them to perform a sexual act they otherwise wouldn’t, but that doesn’t make them any more gay than they were before.  It does, however, make them prostitutes.

IANAL, but when it comes to the prosecution, I suspect that all this is probably academic if we’re talking about underage kids.  AFAIK, the old “Fifteen will get you 20″ rule applies regardless of how the plumbing fits.

meh, maybe he did it–in which case, he is a despicable human being and throw the book at him–but the fact that they were paid makes this a lot harder to call.  there is nothing in any of the links to clarify whether he used cash to tempt virginal young teens into turning homo, or if they were male prostitutes who saw an easy mark, particularly since they waited until after he had multiple strokes to file suit.  since the former is implied and the later is not really entertained by the press, coupled with my personal experience of how desperate people act and of society’s willingness to railroad mental outliers, my bullshit detector is at “yellow/elevated alert.”  15-17 yo boys DO want sex.  did they want it from a rich old fruit for cash?  let’s hope the jury can figure it out.