THE “TICKLING” CONFESSION THAT SHOCKED THE COURTROOM
The defense strategy for disgraced actor Timothy Busfield has officially entered the realm of the bizarre. In a move that has legal experts scratching their heads and the public recoiling in disgust, Busfield’s team has openly admitted that the -year-old director was engaging in physical contact with child actors on the set of The Cleaning Lady. The spin? He claims it was just “tickling.”
This admission, found deep within the arrest warrant, is the bombshell that could blow the entire case wide open. While Busfield “vehemently denies any wrongful touching of a sexual nature,” the mere fact that a director was putting his hands on young boys in any capacity is a massive red flag. Legal expert Dave Ring, a partner at Taylor & Ring who specializes in these horrific cases, tells us this specific detail is the pivot point upon which Busfield’s freedom hangs.
“The boys originally said the touching only consisted of tickling. Later, they said it included touching of the genitals,” Ring explained. This evolution in the victims’ story is exactly what prosecutors are latching onto. Was the tickling a grooming tactic? Or, as the defense is desperately trying to argue, was the sexual element fabricated later under pressure from a vengeful parent?
“Who tickles their employees? Let alone children? This defense is disgusting. He’s digging his own grave.”
The “tickling defense” is a high-risk gamble. By admitting to the act, Busfield has placed himself at the scene of the crime, touching the victims. Now, the jury only has to decide where he touched them, not if he touched them. It is a legal tightrope walk over a pit of spikes.
THE “REVENGE MOM” CONSPIRACY THEORY
Busfield’s attorney, Larry Stein, is going scorched earth on the accusers. In a statement that attempts to discredit the victims before the trial even begins, Stein claims the entire case is a fabrication orchestrated by a bitter mother. The narrative? The boys were fired from The Cleaning Lady, and their mom vowed to “get her revenge” by destroying the director’s life.
It is a classic, ugly defense tactic: blame the parents. Stein is banking on the idea that the boys were “pressured or influenced by an adult” to change their story from innocent tickling to criminal sexual assault. “It will be crucial to determine if any outside influence caused the boys to change their story,”
However, experts warn that victims often disclose abuse in stages. Ring clarified that it is “not at all unusual for children to disclose abuse over time,” debunking the defense’s theory that a changing story automatically equals a lie. The “revenge” angle might play well in the tabloids, but in a courtroom, psychological evidence often tells a much darker truth.
A SECOND VICTIM EMERGES FROM THE SHADOWS
Just when Busfield’s team thought they could contain the narrative to a disgruntled ex-employee, a ghost from the past has resurfaced with a story that chills the blood. On Wednesday, January , a man named Colin Swift came forward with allegations that blow the “one-time incident” theory out of the water.
Swift claims Busfield sexually abused his daughter years ago when she was just . The details are stomach-churning. Busfield allegedly “kissed her and put his hands down her pants and touched her privates.” But the cover-up is even more damning. According to court documents, Busfield didn’t deny it at the time; instead, he “begged the family to not report to law enforcement if he received therapy.”
If true, this establishes a terrifying pattern of behavior: predation followed by manipulation. Swift, a therapist himself, agreed to the deal thinking it was the best course of action. Now, seeing another set of victims, he has broken his silence. This testimony could be the “corroborating evidence” prosecutors need to paint Busfield not as a misunderstood tickler, but as a serial predator who has been hiding in plain sight for decades.
THE POLYGRAPH GAMBLE
In a desperate bid to clear his name, Busfield reportedly took an independent polygraph test and—according to his lawyer—passed. “As a voluntary step, he submitted to an independent polygraph examination regarding those allegations and passed,” Stein crowed to the press.
But let’s be real: polygraphs are inadmissible in most courts for a reason. They are notoriously unreliable and can be manipulated by sociopaths or those who truly believe their own lies. Passing a private polygraph arranged by your own defense team carries about as much weight as a pinky promise in the eyes of the law. It is a PR stunt designed to sway public opinion, not a legal victory.
THE “I’M GONNA FIGHT IT” VIDEO
Before surrendering to police in New Mexico, Busfield released a defiant, rambling video statement to TMZ that reeked of panic. “I’m going to confront these lies. They’re horrible… I did not do anything to those little boys,” he insisted, looking rattled. “I’m going to be exonerated.”
His demeanor was that of a man who believes he can talk his way out of anything. But with the “tickling” admission on the record and a second accuser describing a similar pattern of boundary-crossing, his words are ringing hollow. He claims the allegations are “so wrong and all lies,” but the walls are closing in fast.
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?
Busfield remains in custody after appearing in a New Mexico court without entering a plea. The legal battle ahead is going to be brutal. Prosecutors will be looking for inconsistencies in his story, while the defense will ruthlessly attack the credibility of the children and their mother.
The key, according to Ring, will be “corroborating evidence.” Did anyone else see the tickling? Did Busfield have the “opportunity” to be alone with the boys? And crucially, will more victims come forward now that the floodgates have opened? With the “tickling” admission already public, Busfield has handed the prosecution a loaded gun. The question now is whether they have enough ammo to pull the trigger and put him away for good.
