Dylan Farrow writes that she was sexually abused by Woody Allen

[rockNrollaDIM]

The Soon Yi thing is so gross when you think about it.Regardless of their "legal" situation , he was a father to that girl. He knew her from before she was in middle school for fuck sake.

[The Futurist]

Being the victim of molestation/sexual abuse is already humiliating enough, and since Dylan is now publicly speaking out about this for the first time, she is now putting herself out there in the most vulnerable way possible because she knows she is gonna get a lot of negative feedback from some celebrities and some people in the media on top of death threats + harassment from Woody Allen's aggressive apologists.  So why would she make this all up?

 

Would people be defending Woody Allen and be so willing to give him the benefit of the doubt if they didn't love a lot of his work?  Would he have such strong apologists if his movies were average or sucked ass?  I don't think anyone would be lining up to defend someone who doesn't put out work a lot of people deem to be great.  I hate this mentality in our society by quite a few when it comes the rich, famous, and talented/powerful where the victims are often just dismissed as liars just out to destroy "the famous guy I love!", especially in the case of a creepy ass weirdo like Woody Allen, where its not that much of a stretch to think he could have easily done the things he is being accused of after he "fell in love" and married his adopted daughter that he helped raise.

 

First post of yours that makes sense out of 6000, hence the like.

[The Futurist]

The Soon Yi thing is so gross when you think about it.Regardless of their "legal" situation , he was a father to that girl. He knew her from before she was in middle school for fuck sake.

 

Being a great artist gives a free pass for a lot of things.

That s just the way it goes.

[Ozymandias]

First post of yours that makes sense out of 6000, hence the like.

 

Thats rich coming from someone who has spent 2 years making thousands of creepy and obsessive overblown posts about Jennifer Lawrence in addition to comical rants about 12 Years A Slave being a pretentious white guilt trip.  You get a like for agreeing with my post though.

Edited February 8, 2014 by Ozymandias

[rockNrollaDIM]

Did Woody write a letter or somethig?

[CoolioD1]

Did Woody write a letter or somethig?

He did. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/09/opinion/sunday/woody-allen-speaks-out.html?hp&rref=opinion&_r=1

 

And here's Dylan Farrow's response to that. http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/dylan-farrow-responds-woody-allen-678552

[Jack Nevada]

I still love his movies but fuuuuuuuuck Woody Allen. 

[All about Eve - old]

 Would people be defending Woody Allen and be so willing to give him the benefit of the doubt if they didn't love a lot of his work?  Would he have such strong apologists if his movies were average or sucked ass?  I don't think anyone would be lining up to defend someone who doesn't put out work a lot of people deem to be great.  I hate this mentality in our society by quite a few when it comes the rich, famous, and talented/powerful where the victims are often just dismissed as liars just out to destroy "the famous guy I love!", especially in the case of a creepy ass weirdo like Woody Allen, where its not that much of a stretch to think he could have easily done the things he is being accused of after he "fell in love" and married his adopted daughter that he helped raise.

This is a very interesting comment Ozymandias. It's worth noting that the babies the singer from The lost prophets abused were provided to him by 'fans'. Later, when he actually admitted the offences ( so was not convicted whist still protesting his innocence), some 'fans' telephoned him and pledged their support for the, quote, 'lol situation' he was in.Some years ago I wrote an article for an online magazine about the Michael Jackson case. I didn't give an opinion on his guilt or innocence. I tred to be as fair as possible. But I did say that if Michael Jackson the plumber had little boys over for a sleepover, his neighbours would call social services not say, 'aah, isn't it sweet how he relates to children because he's so childlike himself.'For that observation, which many people shared, I received more hate mail than I have ever done for anything else I've written. It came from Jackson fans (and I liked the guy as an artist myself) who were beside themselves with 'grief' for the situation their hero found himself in. Some furiously told me that they were on anti depressants and sleeping tablets because they were so stressed by the 'lies' being told against 'the greatest human being who ever walked the planet'!Fandom is a curious thing indeed!

[archiebunker704]

Being the victim of molestation/sexual abuse is already humiliating enough, and since Dylan is now publicly speaking out about this for the first time, she is now putting herself out there in the most vulnerable way possible because she knows she is gonna get a lot of negative feedback from some celebrities and some people in the media on top of death threats + harassment from Woody Allen's aggressive apologists.  So why would she make this all up? Would people be defending Woody Allen and be so willing to give him the benefit of the doubt if they didn't love a lot of his work?  Would he have such strong apologists if his movies were average or sucked ass?  I don't think anyone would be lining up to defend someone who doesn't put out work a lot of people deem to be great.  I hate this mentality in our society by quite a few when it comes the rich, famous, and talented/powerful where the victims are often just dismissed as liars just out to destroy "the famous guy I love!", especially in the case of a creepy ass weirdo like Woody Allen, where its not that much of a stretch to think he could have easily done the things he is being accused of after he "fell in love" and married his adopted daughter that he helped raise.

Who knows but a 7 year old could easily have been manipulated to believe certain facts by someone like mia Farrow who was upset about so many things.I know that some times within a day or a week, I start to get confused about cetain past events. So I wonder how you could believe a 7 years old memory is 100 % correct.

[dashrendar44]

Who knows but a 7 year old could easily have been manipulated to believe certain facts by someone like mia Farrow who was upset about so many things.

I know that some times within a day or a week, I start to get confused about cetain past events. So I wonder how you could believe a 7 years old memory is 100 % correct.

 

From the article linked above:

 

 

With all the attempts to misrepresent the facts, it is important to be reminded of the truth contained in court documents from the only final ruling in this case, by the New York Supreme Court in 1992. In denying my father all access to me, that court:

[*]Debunked the "experts" my father claims exonerated him, calling them "colored by their loyalty to Mr. Allen", criticizing the author of their report (who never met me) for destroying all supporting documentation, and calling their conclusions "sanitized and therefore less credible". 

[*]Included testimony from babysitters who witnessed inappropriate sexual behavior by my father toward me.

[*]Found that “there is no credible evidence to support Mr. Allen's contention that Ms. Farrow coached Dylan or that Ms. Farrow acted upon a desire for revenge against him for seducing Soon-Yi. Mr. Allen's resort to the stereotypical ‘woman scorned’ defense is an injudicious attempt to divert attention from his failure to act as a responsible parent and adult.”

[*]Concluded that the evidence "...proves that Mr. Allen's behavior toward Dylan was grossly inappropriate and that measures must be taken to protect her.”

[*]Finally, the Connecticut State prosecutor found "probable cause" to prosecute, but made the decision not to in an effort to protect "the child victim", given my fragile state.

[Fancyarcher]

You know Dash their going to throw Woody Allen in jail anytime.

 

The Farrows attempt at supposedly "getting back at him" is likely not going to end in their favor, innocent or not.

Edited February 9, 2014 by Fancyarcher

[dashrendar44]

 

5:15 PM, February 7 2014

10 Undeniable Facts About the Woody Allen Sexual-Abuse Allegation

By Maureen Orth

 

This week, a number of commentators have published articles containing incorrect and irresponsible claims regarding the allegation of Woody Allen’s having sexually abused his adopted daughter, Dylan Farrow. As the author of two lengthy, heavily researched and thoroughly fact-checked articles that deal with that allegation—the first published in 1992, when Dylan was seven, and the second last fall, when she was 28—I feel obliged to set the record straight. As such, I have compiled the following list of undeniable facts:

1. Mia never went to the police about the allegation of sexual abuse. Her lawyer told her on August 5, 1992, to take the seven-year-old Dylan to a pediatrician, who was bound by law to report Dylan’s story of sexual violation to law enforcement and did so on August 6.

2. Allen had been in therapy for alleged inappropriate behavior toward Dylan with a child psychologist before the abuse allegation was presented to the authorities or made public. Mia Farrow had instructed her babysitters that Allen was never to be left alone with Dylan.

3. Allen refused to take a polygraph administered by the Connecticut state police. Instead, he took one from someone hired by his legal team. The Connecticut state police refused to accept the test as evidence. The state attorney, Frank Maco, says that Mia was never asked to take a lie-detector test during the investigation.

4. Allen subsequently lost four exhaustive court battles—a lawsuit, a disciplinary charge against the prosecutor, and two appeals—and was made to pay more than $1 million in Mia’s legal fees. Judge Elliott Wilk, the presiding judge in Allen’s custody suit against Farrow, concluded that there is “no credible evidence to support Mr. Allen’s contention that Ms. Farrow coached Dylan or that Ms. Farrow acted upon a desire for revenge against him for seducing Soon-Yi.”

5. In his 33-page decision, Judge Wilk found that Mr. Allen’s behavior toward Dylan was “grossly inappropriate and that measures must be taken to protect her.” The judge also recounts Farrow’s misgivings regarding Allen’s behavior toward Dylan from the time she was between two and three years old. According to the judge’s decision, Farrow told Allen, “You look at her [Dylan] in a sexual way. You fondled her . . . You don’t give her any breathing room. You look at her when she’s naked.”

6. Dylan’s claim of abuse was consistent with the testimony of three adults who were present that day. On the day of the alleged assault, a babysitter of a friend told police and gave sworn testimony that Allen and Dylan went missing for 15 or 20 minutes, while she was at the house. Another babysitter told police and also swore in court that on that same day, she saw Allen with his head on Dylan’s lap facing her body, while Dylan sat on a couch “staring vacantly in the direction of a television set.” A French tutor for the family told police and testified that that day she found Dylan was not wearing underpants under her sundress. The first babysitter also testified she did not tell Farrow that Allen and Dylan had gone missing until after Dylan made her statements. These sworn accounts contradict Moses Farrow’s recollection of that day in People magazine.

7. The Yale-New Haven Hospital Child Sex Abuse Clinic’s finding that Dylan had not been sexually molested, cited repeatedly by Allen’s attorneys, was not accepted as reliable by Judge Wilk, or by the Connecticut state prosecutor who originally commissioned them. The state prosecutor, Frank Maco, engaged the Yale-New Haven team to determine whether Dylan would be able to perceive facts correctly and be able to repeat her story on the witness stand. The panel consisted of two social workers and a pediatrician, Dr. John Leventhal, who signed off on the report but who never saw Dylan or Mia Farrow. No psychologists or psychiatrists were on the panel. The social workers never testified; the hospital team only presented a sworn deposition by Dr. Leventhal, who did not examine Dylan.

All the notes from the report were destroyed. Her confidentiality was then violated, and Allen held a news conference on the steps of Yale University to announce the results of the case. The report concluded Dylan had trouble distinguishing fantasy from reality. (For example, she had told them there were “dead heads” in the attic and called sunset “the magic hour.” In fact, Mia kept wigs from her movies on styrofoam blocks in a trunk in the attic.) The doctor subsequently backed down from his contention.

The Connecticut state police, the state attorney, and Judge Wilk all had serious reservations about the report’s reliability.

8. Allen changed his story about the attic where the abuse allegedly took place. First, Allen told investigators he had never been in the attic where the alleged abuse took place. After his hair was found on a painting in the attic, he admitted that he might have stuck his head in once or twice. A top investigator concluded that his account was not credible.

9. The state attorney, Maco, said publicly he did have probable cause to press charges against Allen but declined, due to the fragility of the “child victim.” Maco told me that he refused to put Dylan through an exhausting trial, and without her on the stand, he could not prosecute Allen.

10. I am not a longtime friend of Mia Farrow’s, and I did not make any deal with her. I have been personally accused of helping my “long-time friend” Mia Farrow place the story that ran in Vanity Fair’s November 2013 issue as part of an effort to help launch Ronan Farrow’s media career. I have also been accused of agreeing to some type of deal with Mia Farrow guaranteeing that the sexual-abuse allegation against Woody Allen would be revisited. For the record, I met Mia Farrow for the first time in 2003, more than 10 years after the first piece was published, at a nonfiction play she appeared in for a benefit in Washington, D.C. I saw her and Dylan again the next day. That is the last time I saw her until I approached her in April 2013 to do a story about her family and how they had fared over the years. I talked to eight of her children, including Dylan and a reluctant Ronan. There was no deal of any kind. Moses Farrow declined to be interviewed for the 2013 piece.

 

The decision in its entirety from the presiding judge in Woody Allen's 1992 custody suit against Mia Farrow

 

How can someone still claim nothing about Allen is fishy at best to blame it all on Mia Farrow sounds delusional and oddly supportive of pervasive behavior in the light of those glaring facts.

Edited February 9, 2014 by dashrendar44

[Fancyarcher]

The author of that article is a actually a friend of Mia Farrow's. Regardless of what she says (I am not a long time friend of Mia Farrow or what not) does not change the fact that nobody is perfect and that she could have actually said false. She is not some "saint".

 

Also there a few inaccuracies in her information, so saying that her article is "undeniable facts" is laughable at best.

 

It's the same thing with the Robert B. Wiede defending article. So I'm not just trying to just defend Allen or something, it's just that there's no definite answer to this case.

Edited February 9, 2014 by Fancyarcher

[dashrendar44]

What is killing me is this:

 

 

Finally, the Connecticut State prosecutor found "probable cause" to prosecute, but made the decision not to in an effort to protect "the child victim", given my fragile state.

 

How many child molesting cases did not get in court, cases of which the prosecutor finds it better to not prosecute even if there are valuable cause/proofs/charging evidence to "protect" the victim?

 

How many abusers did roam free because of those arbitrary decisions in the face of child abuse "probable causes"?!

 

That's sickening.

Edited February 9, 2014 by dashrendar44

[dashrendar44]

Fancyarcher, are you on a witch hunt against Mia Farrow? Because she's not the one accused of molesting her own daughter...It's odd how you're so bended to defend Allen's side as much as possible and paint Mia Farrow as the definitive criminal of the story (with a good chunk of hysteria thrown into, of course she's a "bitch", she's not to be believed right. Even if it's Dylan Farrow, an adult that is talking right now, about her abuse, her trauma, her difficulty to cope with those memories, her struggle to heal that wound and carry on her adult life in the wake of those painful memories. You're all over Mia's Farrow derriere. )

 

Orth is a "long-time friend" of Mia Farrow except for the paragraph in which she explained in details she is not really her "long-time" friend.

Edited February 9, 2014 by dashrendar44

[Fancyarcher]

Fancyarcher, are you on a witch hunt against Mia Farrow? Because she's not the one accused of molesting her own daughter...It's odd how you're so bended to defend Allen's side as much as possible and paint Mia Farrow as the definitive criminal of the story (with a good chunk of hysteria thrown into, of course she's a "bitch", she's not to be believed right )

 

Nope, but I do acknowledge that Mia "I'm On a Madman Hunt" Farrow is acting much less sane than Woody "I Don't Care Enough to Even Show Up To Accept My Awards" Allen.

[Fancyarcher]

 

Orth is a "long-time friend" of Mia Farrow except for the paragraph is which she explained in details she is not really her "long-time" friend.

 

Didn't read my post clearly now did you? She has some connections with Mia.

 

Like I said, nobody's perfect.

Edited February 9, 2014 by Fancyarcher

[CaptainJackSparrow]

I just hope no one here is "certain" that Woody did or did not abuse her.

[dashrendar44]

Nope, but I do acknowledge that Mia "I'm On a Madman Hunt" Farrow is acting much less sane than Woody "I Don't Care Enough to Even Show Up To Accept My Awards" Allen.

 

But you're more prone to believe Barbara Walters and all of Allen's friends in the showbiz right away instead of Dylan Farrow just because she's named Farrow, right.

 

You didn't read the judge's decision clearly, did you?

 

The judge is Farrow's long time friend too?

Edited February 9, 2014 by dashrendar44

[Fancyarcher]

But you're more prone to believe Barbara Walters and all of Allen's friends in the showbiz right away instead of Dylan Farrow just because she's named Farrow, right.

 

Maybe! But Mia Farrow is not somebody that I particularly like. I acknowledge that.

 

Personally I think those whole affair should have been much more private.

Edited February 9, 2014 by Fancyarcher