Stanley Marsh, the owner of the Cadillac Ranch tourist attraction in Amarillo, Texas, is being sued by a number of male teens who allege he bribed them with money and alcohol in return for sex.
The New York Times reports at least eight plaintiffs, ranging in age from 15 to 17, have stepped forward to accuse the 74-year-old millionaire.
The suits accuse Mr. Marsh of being a “serial abuser” of boys and young men, allegations that Mr. Marsh’s lawyer said he planned on fighting in court. Papers filed in the lawsuits allege that those close to Mr. Marsh, including his wife, Wendy Marsh, and business associate, David L. Weir, were aware of the abuse and at times facilitated it. Mr. Weir, the lawsuits claim, required the teenagers to sign a document that waived any liability for Mr. Marsh while they were his employees or guests.
Mr. Weir, Mrs. Marsh and the Marshes’ adopted son, Stanley Marsh IV, were also named in the suits, as well as the company that manages the Chase Tower and the firm that handles building security. The boys are charging sexual assault and intentional infliction of emotional distress, suing Mr. Marsh for unspecified monetary damages, and the other defendants are being sued for negligence, among other allegations.
A larger-than-life character, who inherited his grandfather’s oil and gas fortune, Marsh has helped put Amarillo on the map with attention-getting gestures like the Ranch—an automobile “graveyard” immortalized in song by 
Bruce Springsteen—as well as traffic signs that read ” Wish You Were Here,” “Welcome to Amarillo: Home of 160,000 Nice People and a Few Old Soreheads.”
Marsh is still something of a beloved figure in town, with many refusing to accept he could be guilty. “Because he’s unusual, some people get the wrong idea about him,” Houston lawyer Dick DeGuerin told the Times. “Stanley is a generous, fine, honest person, and I will not believe these allegations against him.”
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
But it’s not the first time he’s faced allegations of improprieties with minors: In 1996, Marsh was accused of grabbing the genitals of a 16-year-old, but the boy’s family declined to press charges. Another case, involving the sexual assault of an 18-year-old in 2004, was dismissed by the plaintiff.
“Any suggestions about the truth of these allegations needs to be reserved until the evidence is fully developed,” stated Mr. Marsh’s attorney, Kelly Utsinger. “We will file responsive pleadings that challenge and deny these allegations.”
We’re pretty sure that’s lawyer speak for, “We’re in big trouble.”
Photos: Richie Diesterheft
jerry_pritikin
If truth be said about Texas billionaires,football coaches,boyscout leaders and most kids next door neighbors, there wouldn’t be any room left for any other news!
Dakotahgeo
It tickles me to read about these “millionaires and billionaires” getting bit in their netherparts from “improprities,” etc. I hope this is one scandal that Mr. Big Pants Marsh! As is noted, this isn’t the first time he’s been caught!
Dakotahgeo
Correction:
“…that Mr. Big Pants Marsh can buy his way out of. As is noted, this isn’t the first time he’s been caught!”
My bad!
Dumdum
How shocking!!! A wealthy person abusing their position to abuse others. I am simply under-whelmed. I hope they sue his big pants off. He abused me too, but I got paid hush money. As did my parents.
Joel J
Why is it these pedophiles, like Jerry Sandusky and this crapola from Amarillo, are always such beloved members in the community? Good reason: it’s their modus operandi, their psychological personality profile.
2eo
@Joel J: We have the same mentality over here. Jimmy Saville, I think he may have made the news a little over the pond.
He’s been raping children for decades, and it isn’t a small time thing, it was a well known thing he did for DECADES, with full cooperation of the police and people in the media.
Some people think the good they’ve done, and Jimmy Saville raised millions for charity, that this somehow exempts them from paedophilia charges, even though they are guilty.
The problem with Jimmy Saville is that there is a massive child pornography ring going right to the top in media, in the Metropolitan police and government.
Notice how it’s always the right wing who find these excuses for people.
Joel J
@2eo: The American press appears to be more interested in the management changes at the BBC resulting from the scandal. For an excellent profile of pedophiles, critic at large Malcolm Gladwell has book review in the September 24th issue of the New Yorker Magazine titled “In Plain View.” The article is available on the newyorker.com website.
Ridpathos
Isn’t Stanley Marsh the name of the kid on South Park?
Dumdum
@Ridpathos: South park does have a Stan Marsh.@2eo: The Daily Show with John Stewart had a segment about Jimmy Savile. They also pointed out that Mark Thompson formerly of the BBC now at the New York Times dropped the expose on Savile’s decades long child abuse activities in favor of a tribute touting that vile ugly misshaped crone as a national treasure. I have seen some ugly things in my life, but Savile’s face would give The Frankenstein Monster nightmares. If I had a face like that, I’d teach my arse to talk. The British writer Hanif Kureishi wrote….”England has become a squalid, uncomfortable, ugly place … an intolerant, racist, homophobic, narrow-minded, authoritarian, rat-hole run by vicious, suburban-minded, materialistic philistines.” Maybe they all work at the BBC and the New York Times now.
Dumdum
@Ridpathos: South park does have a Stan Marsh.@2eo: The Daily Show with John Stewart had a segment about Jimmy Savile. They also pointed out that Mark Thompson formerly of the BBC now at the New York Times dropped the expose on Savile’s decades long child abuse activities in favor of a tribute touting that vile ugly misshaped crone as a national treasure. I have seen some ugly things in my life, but Savile’s face would give The Frankenstein Monster nightmares. If I had a face like that, I’d teach my arse to talk.
2eo
This goes way deeper and is more ingrained than anyone in our media wants too say, they’re hoping it goes away.
The right wing press had a field day when they could dig their knives into the BBC [whom they loathe, even though it is run by conservatives] but when it was found out that editors and press at the Daily Heil and Telegraph and Sky and the Tories were being brought into it they stopped immediately.
It doesn’t surprise me that many in the US would be overjoyed at the tearing down of the BBC, it’s the last publically accessible news agency with the slightest none biased credibility, it doesn’t surprise me that the US media hates it.
Dumdum
@2eo: I don’t think the US media hates the BBC. The question was raised as to why this man was honored and not reviled. It was even suggested that while he was still alive his reputation was protected even though there were those who knew what he was doing. I cannot imagine that a person could go several decades without someone knowing what he was up to.
Joel J
@2eo: The BBC is well-respected here in the U.S. Most cable subscribers have BBC world news available. It is respected because it just reports the news without opinion and without the theatrics of our infotainment culture. The scandal with News of the World was played up big here and was closely followed, including the testimony of the Murdochs before a committee of Parliament.
Joel J
@2eo: It would seem that every major London institution is involved in scandal these days–the Murdoch-owned press, Scotland Yard, the PM’s office, etc. First the scandal with News of the World, now with Savile and the BBC. Of course, we are getting used to the occasional scandal of some conservative MP’s sexual peccadilloes. Those seem par for the course.
Joel J
@Dumdum: Can’t imagine even after the Sandusky trial?
balehead
Sad that everyone is “playing victim” like a lottery ticket these days…..
sfbeast
Obviously child abuse is a terrible thing. But 15 – 17 year olds taking money and gifts for sex and claiming they had no choice sounds more like milking the cash cow.
Charli Girl
do u ever wonder HOW a mother or father in this day and age could turn a blind eye and continue supporting someone that MIGHT be a pedophile??? Id be soooo in their face PRONTO!!!!!
Joel J
@Charli Girl: How can a mother turn a blind eye to incest within her own family?
Dumdum
@Charli Girl: Yawn Snore.
Bob LaBlah
@sfbeast: VERY WELL SAID. These past few weeks I have been awe struck at not only the allegations being made by “former” children claiming to have been “raped, molested, coerced….” and NO ONE questioning the motives behind the allegations. Yes, I do believe that sex did take place but where my problem lies is here………when these kids were taking gifts in exchange for sex, were not sent to the hopital with trauma nor overdoses of drugs and alcohol didn’t it occur to ANY OF them THEN that they were prostituting themselves in exchange for payment OF SOME KIND?
I refuse to believe that a fifteen-year old is too young to say NO to temptation. If I were fifteen, couldn’t afford it and knew all I had to do was SHUT UP about what was no one elses business but me and the “adult” then I would have done EXACTLY what they DID DO. Take the money and shut up.
All of a sudden (years later) I have dreams about what happened and need to be FINANCIALLY COMPENSATED IN ORDER FOR THEM TO GO AWAY. What a crock of shit. Interesting how all of the allegations are aimed at those capable of paying the “crier” to shut up and go away and not at the poorer perpetrators. They aren’t too dumb to know nothing from nothing will get you just that, hunh? Interesting, indeed.
tdx3fan
My guess is that after vowing to fight it in court that they try to quietly cover it up and settle out of court for an unannounced sum. Because after all, settling out of court for an unannounced sum is NOT an expression of guilt (SARCASM).
Dumdum
Wish I could get me some of that creepy cash. Back in the day. 1975-1979 age 15 to 19 a girl could make a nice chunk of change getting bribes (wink wink) for sex. Egon Von Furstenberg was the only really wealthy guy I ever knew. However everyone knew he was Gay. Back then there were a lot of us kids on the street, I don’t recall anyone saying, “I’m gonna sue that bastard for bribing me with money and drugs for sex.”