10 Undeniable Facts In The Woody Allen Sexual-Abuse Allegatios

[Are_grits_groceries]

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.”
<snip>
The rest: http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2014/02/woody-allen-sex-abuse-10-facts

Yes, I know somebody is going to deny these.
Yes, I know that Orth is Luke Russert's mother which has f***all to do with this article.

[dipsydoodle]

1. Woody Allen denies abusing his daughter Dylan Farrow

Woody Allen has repeated his denial that he molested his adopted daughter, in a letter to the New York Times.

The filmmaker said Dylan Farrow had been coached to make the claim by his estranged former partner, Mia Farrow.

Mr Allen, 78, wrote in the newspaper that Dylan had been "used as a pawn for revenge" against him by her mother.

Dylan Farrow wrote last week in the New York Times that Mr Allen abused her in 1992 when she was seven years old in an attic at Mia Farrow's Connecticut home.

Mr Allen alleges that Mia Farrow orchestrated the "smear" after discovering earlier in the same year that he was having an affair with her other adopted daughter from a previous partner.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-26096048

[Bonobo]

3. "I have something very nasty planned for you. You took my daughter and I'm going to take yours."

This is what Woody Allen said she threatened him with verbally one month prior to the accusation of molestation, according to a 1992 60 minutes interview.

It is untenable that he would of to his ex's home in the midst of a fierce custody battle and rush off for a 15 minute sexual escapade with Dylan, leaving her without her underpants. It is a made up event.

To believe it, you would have to believe that he is not only a monster, but one SO INCREDIBLY horny as to be completely unable to make a rational decision in his own best interests, Someone so willing to take a risk that one would have to wonder how they ever made it to that point without ever being accused of being a pedophile in 57 years. I mean, I thought pedophiles leave lots of victims, that it is a pattern they cannot break? Certainly that is what you would expect if a man did such a rash, uncontrollable act at the home of his angry ex, surrounded by people that hated him.

[Dorian Gray]

10. That argument doesn't work

bc pedophiles are not rational creatures. They have an illness that they can not control.

[Schema Thing]

15. so we should expect several incidents with various victims?

[Bonobo]

19. As he pointed out in his interview,

if he had wanted to engage in pedophilia , he certainly had a far greater opportunity to have done so before then, but to pick that day in those surroundings... it strains belief.

Furthermore, the threats Mia had made a month earlier about "nasty surprises in store" as well as the note she wrote and left on the door a month earlier (he showed the actual note in the 60 Minutes piece by the way) are a strong indication that it was pre-planned and that Mia probably worked hard on that poor girl to convince her how bad Daddy was.

[Dorian Gray]

31. I've wondered that myself

and it's the one thing that makes me question if there is a third thing that went on here. Mia's concern convinced a young dylan that inappropriate behavior happened. Nobody lied.

I don't 100% know what the truth is. But I do know that Dylan believes that she was abused, and nobody should be attacking her. Or her mother for believing that. That the press/woody allen/posters here denigrate their character to prove woody didn't do anything is what offends me the most.

[Schema Thing]

32. I have a friend who accused her father of abuse

my friend was an adult, and a therapist brought out the "memories".


There was no evidence it happened, and my friend does not now believe that it happened. I believe the therapist is reprehensible. If Mia did something similar to Dylan, then that is reprehensible and abusive.

[Dorian Gray]

36. I agree

if she convinced her, that is reprehensible and abusive. And if he molested her, that also is reprehensible and abusive. It seems that the parents are not looking out for the best interest of the child, at all. Either way, Dylan is the victim here.

[Bonobo]

2. More facts

From a 1992 "60 Minutes" interview...

Woody Allen: She's threatened my life many times. I mean, she called me and threatened my--she's threatened to have me killed and to kill me. And to--and to stick my eyes out, to stick my eyes out, to blind me because she became obsessed with Greek tragedy and--and felt that this--that that would be a fitting, you know, vengeance.

Steve Kroft: Did you take it seriously?

Woody Allen: I took it seriously in the middle of the night. When you get a phone call at 4 in the morning saying that you're going to be killed and that your eyes are going to be put out, you get scared because it's the middle of the night and your heart's beating, that's what--you know, when it got to be daytime, you know, I felt better, and I--moving around in New York City I always feel--you know, I always feel scared anyhow, so this was no worse.

Steve Kroft: Was there ever a time when you started to think, maybe she means some of this?

Woody Allen: Yeah. The--the--she--she sent me a Valentine card. She didn't send it to me; she gave it to me. And I said, "Oh, thanks," you know. And I went downstairs, I got into my car and I opened it up, and there...was a very, very, very chilling Valentine, meticulously worked on. I mean, I--one hesitates to say psychotically worked on--you know, a Victorian Valentine and photo of the family, and through all the kids was thrust needles and a steak knife stuck through the heart of the thing.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/woody-allen-defends-himself-on-60-minutes-in-92/

[Major Nikon]

12. Another fact convieniently omitted by Vanity "Fair" was that Mia tried to extort money from Allen

Mr. Dershowitz's testimony focused on a meeting last Aug. 13 in the Manhattan offices of one of Mr. Allen's lawyers. At that meeting -- held on the day Mr. Allen filed his custody lawsuit, and a few days before Mr. Allen made Ms. Farrow's charges public at a news conference -- lawyers for both sides had met to see if they could come to some agreement on the terms of a settlement.

The discussions, both sides agree, were centered on the issues of money and visiting rights for Mr. Allen for the couple's three children, Dylan, 7, Satchel, 5, and Moses, 14. Neither issue was resolved, both sides say. But one of Mr. Allen's lawyers, Irwin Tenenbaum, testified last week that two of Ms. Farrow's representatives -- Mr. Dershowitz and David Levett, a Connecticut lawyer -- had said that Dylan's charges could be made to "go away" if Mr. Allen made a lump sum of from $5 million to $8 million.

http://www.nytimes.com/1993/04/16/nyregion/dershowitz-says-farrow-involved-him.html

[Bonobo]

14. Yes, Allen confirmed that in his interview on 60 Min. He says she asked for $7 million, I think. nt

[Major Nikon]

18. Alan Dershowitz (shitbag lawyer) doesn't even deny the figure

He just claims there was no onus between the money and the charges, as if Allen was going to give Farrow $5-8 million for nothing.

So here is a woman that was willing to drop everything and grant Allen custody (who she alleges molested her daughter), so long as she got paid.

Also convieniently missing from the Vanity "Fair" piece was that at least 3 people have said Farrow physically and emotionally abused her children. Moses said it, at least one of the nannies swore to it under oath, and Soon Yi also said it.

[treestar]

16. facts? those are only his statements

typical of divorce battles. It is naive simply to believe one side in those.

[Bonobo]

17. Not so. He actually showed the note that had been pinned to his door for example. nt

[treestar]

20. the judge decided that was understandable

and dismissed it as a fact to use against the mother. The judge reams Allen up and down - he is not fit to be a parent at all.

[Bonobo]

21. Judge's prejudice to one side was indeed clear.

To me, only a psycho would write that. It was a foreshadowing of her plan.

[treestar]

26. The judge is the only one who considered all of the evidence

That decision is well thought out. And the evidence weighed and considered. The judge thought it was a better outlet for her frustration than many others that can be done.

[JTFrog]

27. Well someone's prejudice is clear indeed. n/t

[Donald Ian Rankin]

4. Congratulations. You've proved that the allegations might be true.

What you *haven't* done is proved, or even provided significant evidence, that they *are* true.

I am not for a minute saying that they are false. I *am* saying that I don't think there's sufficient publicly-available evidence to be confident that they are true, and that these ten claims don't amount to a hill of beans, evidence-wise.

[TorchTheWitch]

5. how to go out of one's way to blame the mother

for her husband's molestation of her daughter.

This is sick. How anyone could possibly have read that 33-page decision by Judge Wilks and only come away with this shit is vomit worthy.

Yes, no question that Farrow acted inappropriately about Allen molesting her daughter. How that is even noteworthy compared to Allen's molestation of and gross physical contact with his daughter, his absolute self-absorption, his having a sexual relationship with Farrow's older teenage daughter behind Farrow's back whom he previously totally ignored like the other children, his unquestioned disdain for his adopted children compared to his biological children, and everything else in that 33-page decision is disgusting.

That fucker should be in jail not what he did completely ignored by the press and worse blaming the mother for her reaction to HIS MOLESTATION OF HIS SEVEN YEAR OLD DAUGHTER.

[mythology]

6. Except there has never been a trial finding him guilty of molesting his 7 year old

There are accusations, but that's not actual proof.

[TorchTheWitch]

8. how anyone could possibly read that decision

and come away with disbelief that he molested Dylan - a SEVEN YEAR OLD CHILD - just as she said to her mother, to therapists, etc. along with what other people witnessed him do to her and her absent underpants after the two of them disappeared into the attic where that poor seven year old CHILD alleged he had touched her genitals along with all the grossly inappropriate physical contact witnessed that he did to her is fucking sicko especially when EVERY DAY there is thread after thread here about shooting deaths and other deaths where the vast majority of people here immediately place blame with virtually no actual facts at ALL. Just where have you been making this statement in all of THOSE threads?



Just like all the Roman Polanski threads years ago that placed blame on the CHILD and/or the CHILD's MOTHER for the gross and CRIMINAL actions of what an older adult man did to them, here we are again. Oh, except when it comes to priests molesting little BOYS... no trial needed, no facts necessary - bury them under the jail is the prevailing opinion here. Funny, I don't recall you or anyone else making this statement then either.

[DLevine]

9. +1. Thank you. nt

[Major Nikon]

13. The investigators selected by the prosecution didn't believe it

Family court judges have a different playbook and quite commonly have a bias against fathers, especially 20 years ago. What's amazing is that Farrow's physical and emotional abuse of her children is convieniently ignored, even though the evidence for it is much stronger than anything against Allen.

Funny also that you should mention Roman Polanski(who actually admitted to and was convicted for drugging and raping a child), who Farrow pals around with.

[kathysart_decoration]

7. More interesting follow-up

Just want to throw this into the pot and feel comfortable doing so now that so much time has passed. Years ago I was a social worker running training classes for people wanting to be adoptive parents. I won't say where. In my last class was someone who had been an attorney in the New York division of sexual crimes at the time this case was being investigated. I was discussing this case and sex abuse in general involving children and this person spoke up and said that the evidence clearly showed that Allen had sexually abused this child. There was no doubt about it, but it was Woody Allen, and so deals were struck.
I, also, would point out that Mia Farrow could have done all the things discussed, but that has no bearing on Allen's behavior and whether this abuse took place. The evidence was clear, according to someone with intimate knowledge of the case, that it happened as stated.

[Major Nikon]

11. Reality check

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.

This speaks more about Farrow than it does about Allen.

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.

Allen went to therapy about everything. He loves going to therapy. He had multiple therapists that were consulted by the investigation team (with Allen's permission) that concluded Dylan was most likely coached. Farrow claims she suspected the abuse from the time when Dylan was 2 1/2 years old, but none of it came to light until after the breakup started. Furthermore why did she continue a relationship for 4 years with a man she thought was molesting her daughter? Very telling that.

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.

He would be monumentally stupid to do otherwise. A polygraph is subjective and no more accurate than a coin flip. Allen could have refused to take a polygraphy by anyone and it never could have been held against him. The fact that he took one at all demonstrates he had nothing to hide.

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.”

No credible evidence other than the findings of the official investigation team which was selected by the prosecutor who then rejected those findings but ended the investigation.

Dr. Leventhal said: "We had two hypotheses: one, that these were statements that were made by an emotionally disturbed child and then became fixed in her mind. And the other hypothesis was that she was coached or influenced by her mother. We did not come to a firm conclusion. We think that it was probably a combination."

http://www.nytimes.com/1993/05/04/nyregion/doctor-cites-inconsistencies-in-dylan-farrow-s-statements.html

The prosecutor was rebuked by the disciplinary board, but just didn't disbar him. The fact that Vanity "Fair" didn't tell the whole story here speaks volumes about bias and their "undeniable facts".
http://www.nytimes.com/1994/02/24/nyregion/panel-criticizes-prosecutor-in-inquiry-on-woody-allen.html

[nadinbrzezinski]

22. Reality check, trash bin

[Tuesday Afternoon]

23. "All the notes from the report were destroyed."

this is the BIG :::WTF::: for me.

[Whisp]

24. I think some people would only take actual video of the crime for proof.

and then still deny and say it was the kid's fault for being a girl.

Thanks for the post.

[Ohio Joe]

25. +1 - nt

[Comrade Grumpy]

28. I'm not voting for either one of them if they run for anything.

Otherwise, I don't much care about this saga.

[davidpdx]

29. While I'd only vaguely heard of the accusations against Allen before all the stuff

that has come out in the past few months. After reading about, it seems to me that there is so much out there that muddies the water on both sides as to what the truth it.

[Gothmog]

30. Allen could sue Dylan Farrow if he really believed that he was defamed

The last paragraph of Allen's latest letter makes clear that he is not going to sue. Dylan Farrow knew that Allen could sue her if she was not telling the truth and published her letter anyway. The fact that Allen does not want to be under oath tells me a great deal

[Orrex]

34. That doesn't work at all

The fact that Allen does not want to be under oath tells me a great deal

You're basically throwing out the 5th Amendment, of course. One could as readily ask why Dylan Farrow didn't bring this up decades ago or why Mia Farrow didn't have Allen arrested in the 90s. The fact that Dylan and Mia apparently don't want to be under oath tells a great deal.

I'm not defending Allen, and I have no opinion on the current allegations simply because I have no basis from which to draw a firm conclusion. I find him rather creepy, but creepiniess alone is no proof of guilt. For that matter, Farrow's behavior has been less than exemplary, though this is likewise no proof of guilt.

I'm simply pointing out that Allen's choice not to litigate is no proof of anything.

[Gothmog]

35. Allen could claim the 5th amendment in a civil case

A witness can claim the 5th amendment in a civil case but unlike a criminal case the jury gets to hear about and consider the use of the 5th Amendment

[Orrex]

37. Regardless, his choice not to sue tells us nothing conclusively

Last edited Mon Feb 10, 2014, 09:31 PM - Edit history (1)

It's a fine Rorschak test, to the extent that people will invariably project their expectations upon it as you have done, but it's dangerous and speculative to draw conclusions from it. It's just as wrongheaded as the famous slogan "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear."

[seabeyond]

33. the attc one. number 8. very telling. i didnt know about that one until the other night.

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.