Dylan Farrow Accuses Father Woody Allen of Sex Abuse

[VGThuy]

Except several of Allen's children don't see it that way. They talk about how their father is also their brother-in-law.

That's the point the judge in the custody case made. Farrow and Allen's children certainly still view Allen and Soon-Yi Previn's relationship in a negative light even well into adulthood.

 

[barbk]

http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20783306,00.html

Primarily comments from Moses Farrow.
"Moses accuses Farrow of bullying him as well. "Our mother has misled the public into believing it was a happy household of both biological and adopted children," he says. "From an early age, my mother demanded obedience and I was often hit as a child. She went into unbridled rages if we angered her, which was intimidating at the very least and often horrifying, leaving us not knowing what she would do."

"I don't know where he gets this about getting beaten," counters Dylan. "We were sent to our rooms sometimes." "

Hard to know what went on in that household; even here two siblings can't agree on what did or didn't happen re discipline.

 

[Wyliefan]

The thing which really bothers me is this romanticised, idealised image of childhood as being pure. When in reality, once you enter puberty, sex is obviously something that you think about a lot. And unless you're extremely shy, you're likely to be flirting/making passes at much older people. It's normal human behaviour and not some kind of depraved and exotic 'Lolita personality.' We are sexual beings, after all. So no, children definitely aren't 'willing participants' but teenagers can be (which is why the age of consent is 15 in most European countries). Obviously none of that justifies sexual abuse or taking advantage of somebody when there's a power imbalance. But it's a very big (and unjustified) leap to brand somebody having sex with a post-pubescent teen a paedophile. Paedophiles are interested in pre-pubescent children.

Not quite sure what you're getting at here. You say you don't like the "image of childhood as being pure," but then you go on to talk about how teenagers, who you acknowledge are no longer children, think a lot about sex. So what does that have to do with childhood being pure or not pure?

 

[taf2002]

The argument in Allen's defence is that she was his 'step-daughter' in theory and name only. She was the daughter of his girlfriend whom he didn't live with and with whom he had hardly any contact with, according to Mia Farrow.

This is hair-splitting IMO. His "girlfriend" was long-term which means he was the father figure in that household (whether he lived there or not) for a very long time & was the actual father of some of those kids. There are certain things people with morals just don't do. I had a neighbor who was married & had 2 kids with one sister & then seduced & knocked up the other sister, got a divorce, & married her. The 2nd sister was not a minor (barely) so does that make what he did all right? What he did was legal but was it ethical? He actually came on to me while 2nd wife was pregnant. :shudder: I call that a creep. YMMV

 

[judiz]

http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20783306,00.html

Primarily comments from Moses Farrow.
"Moses accuses Farrow of bullying him as well. "Our mother has misled the public into believing it was a happy household of both biological and adopted children," he says. "From an early age, my mother demanded obedience and I was often hit as a child. She went into unbridled rages if we angered her, which was intimidating at the very least and often horrifying, leaving us not knowing what she would do."

"I don't know where he gets this about getting beaten," counters Dylan. "We were sent to our rooms sometimes." "

Hard to know what went on in that household; even here two siblings can't agree on what did or didn't happen re discipline.

I remember reading something about this during the custody hearing and wondering how Farrow was ever approved to adopt so many kids. Also just read an article that Mia Farrow's brother is in jail after admitting he molested two children in Maryland in 2000.

 

[Wyliefan]

I remember reading something about this during the custody hearing and wondering how Farrow was ever approved to adopt so many kids.

Money plus celebrity buys you a lot.

 

[overedge]

Money plus celebrity buys you a lot.

Which may be the case for Allen's family as well - both of his daughters with Soon-Yi are adopted.

 

[Deleted member 19433]

Several more articles that I haven't had a chance to read fully yet:

"Woody Allen v. Dylan Farrow: The Court of Public Opinion is now in session."
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...ourt_of_public_opinion_is_now_in_session.html

>> This one links to several more I hadn't seen, including:

"Momma Mia!"
http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2013/11/mia-farrow-frank-sinatra-ronan-farrow

"What We Should Talk About When We Talk About the Dylan Farrow Case"
http://jezebel.com/what-we-should-talk-about-when-we-talk-about-the-dylan-1514959143

"In The Court Of Public Opinion, Let’s Try Preponderance Of Evidence As The Standard"
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/02/...ry-preponderance-of-evidence-as-the-standard/

"Woody Allen statement disputes molestation allegations"
http://www.latimes.com/entertainmen...sponse-20140203,0,6345488.story#axzz2sH6Vn5WF

"Dylan Farrow's Brother Moses Defends Woody Allen"
http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20783306,00.html

---

One more a friend posted:
"Understanding The Woody Allen Abuse Scandal -- To The Extent That We Can"
http://cognoscenti.wbur.org/2014/02/05/dylan-farrow-eileen-mcnamara

 

[taf2002]

Several more articles that I haven't had a chance to read fully yet:

"In The Court Of Public Opinion, Let’s Try Preponderance Of Evidence As The Standard"
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/02/...ry-preponderance-of-evidence-as-the-standard/

This is an especially good article on why the benefit of the doubt should always go to the victim & not the accused, not necessarily in court but in life.

 

[MacMadame]

I liked the article but it doesn't actually say benefit of the doubt should always go to the victim. It says that the standard should not be "beyond a reasonable doubt" but "preponderance of evidence". Which means, if two people are in the midst of a messy divorce and the woman has always been batshit crazy and the guy has never had any questionable behavior and suddenly the woman is saying he has molested their kids, it's okay to have doubts and not necessarily just believe her.

 

[taf2002]

But it's not the case here that the guy has never had questionable behavior. And it brought up something I hadn't thought about. Woody now has 2 adopted daughters with Soon-yi.

 

[Karina1974]

and the guy has never had any questionable behavior

Yeah, but who would have the right to say that about the guy, if that is true of not? A wife can see behaviors, attitudes and hear things said that the guy's friends and family wouldn't be privy to.

The s'path I was involved with, for example ... he has a very large group of "peeps" who worship the ground this man walks on (I witnessed this firsthand and was, in fact, one of those people at one time). How many of them would believe me if I told them about MY experiences with him as a liar and user??? The other OW he was involved with besides me (that I know of) was actually foolish enough to get back with him only a week after finding out that he was duping her, too, into thinking she was his "one and only." I'd love to have heard the lines he used to convince her he had changed. He won't try that on me because he knows he can't lie to me anymore. Lie to me and I find out? I'll assume everything out of your mouth after that is a lie, too.

 

[MacMadame]

But it's not the case here that the guy has never had questionable behavior. And it brought up something I hadn't thought about. Woody now has 2 adopted daughters with Soon-yi.

Definitely not true in this case. As was pointed out in the article.

But if you knew someone and saw him with his daughters all the time and never saw questionable behavior or his daughters afraid of him or not wanting to be with him and you saw his wife constantly lash out at him whenever he did something she didn't like and constantly accuse him of all sorts of ridiculous things, then this article is NOT saying you have to believe the wife if she says he molested one of his daughters. I do think that other article about the rape culture comes pretty close to saying that and I do think that is why it got some people's backs up.

As for WA and SY, I have been very aware that they adopted two daughters and it concerns me.

 

[barbk]

http://amradaronline.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/yale-new-haven-hospital-allen.pdf

Some pages from Yale's report. Their assessment was that Dylan was not sexually abused, but that they weren't sure if her statements were the result of being, "an emotionally vulnerable child who was caught up in a disturbed family and who was responding to stresses in the family," or that "Dylan was coached or influenced by her mother, Ms. Farrow." "We believe it is more likely a combination of these two formulations best explains Dylan's allegations of sexual abuse."

 

[overedge]

If this document is real, whoever posted it on the Internet should be ashamed of themselves. (not you, barbk, whoever posted it originally).

However, it's rather suspicious that it doesn't have any signatures, and that it doesn't explain what, in all that evidence was collected, led to the conclusion.

 

[barbk]

Dylan publicly accused Allen of one of the most heinous crimes imaginable, and many have suggested that it is an obligation to believe the victim in cases like this when it involves a he said - she said situation. I've seen mentions of the Yale analysis before, but this is the first time that any of the documents have surfaced.

The team at Yale interviewed Dylan on 9 separate days, the police twice, the babysitter once, Allen three times, and both psychotherapists who had treated Dylan and Satchel. Their conclusion is unequivocally that she was not abused by Allen, but unsure as to whether it was emotional disturbance or coaching by Mia Farrow at the root of the story.

Is it still so clear that Allen must have abused her?

(I find the whole thing with Soon-Yi Previn creepy and distasteful, but not particularly indicative of a child sex abuser.)

 

[overedge]

As I mentioned above, the document doesn't say what evidence led to that conclusion, it isn't signed, and it doesn't name an author and/or the people who conducted the investigation. I'm not inclined to believe it unless there's more verification that it's a legitimate document.

 

[MacMadame]

Not to mention there are many, many reports from people involved with the family at the time that Allen's behavior towards Dylan was troublesome. Such as are listed in this article from the 90s that was linked to in the article about the preponderance of the evidence:

http://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/archive/1992/11/farrow199211

These are not the actions of a loving normal father towards his daughter.

 

[morqet]

https://twitter.com/jonlovett

Jon Lovett has been posting a lot from the original investigation & court ruling - this extract talks about a babysitter who also raised the alarm which undermines the "brainwashing" argument: https://twitter.com/jonlovett/status/431259891848605698/photo/1

& there is considerable doubt around the credibility of the Yale-New Haven report
https://twitter.com/jonlovett/status/431615759349858304/photo/1
https://twitter.com/jonlovett/status/431616733032378368/photo/1

 

[heckles]

I have never seen any of his movies, so I must ask: what the feck is so great about him anyway???

Some middle-age women are turned on by self-absorbed, neurotic, heavily pontificating, "creative" types of slight stature. They confuse these traits for sensitivity, and/or think they can mother him. See: Johnny Weir's ubers.

 

[agalisgv]

Some of the psychologists who wrote the Yale report were payrolled by Woody Allen. Seriously now...

To me the tell-tale sign are the non-criminal "weird" things Dylan says Woody did. Those are classic grooming techniques child sex abusers employ to gain access to a child. If you look at Sandusky's MO, it's eerily similar.

But just like with Penn State, a lot of people defended Paterno et al BC he and football were their idols.

 

[OliviaPug]

In this case, given all that I've read, I do believe the victim.

O-

 

[Karina1974]

Some middle-age women are turned on by self-absorbed, neurotic, heavily pontificating, "creative" types of slight stature. They confuse these traits for sensitivity, and/or think they can mother him. See: Johnny Weir's ubers.

Gotcha. Good thing I already did my turn with the self-absorbed, heavily pontificating type - I think I'll pass.

 

[heckles]

I already did my turn with the self-absorbed, heavily pontificating type - I think I'll pass.

It's a fortunate woman indeed who gets over that type by, say, 27? For those who are slow to learn, there are pilgrimages to Graceland. And Woody Allen movies.

 

[leesaleesa]

To be fair to Elvis, he at least was physically attractive and charismatic. Woody Allen has always been a whining, unattractive schlub.

 

[orbitz]

"Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder."

I'm sure Allen's intelligence, wealth, fame and talent are attractive to many.

 

[overedge]

To be fair to Elvis, he at least was physically attractive and charismatic. Woody Allen has always been a whining, unattractive schlub.

It's an image he cultivates. Mia Farrow claimed in her book that although Allen slops around in rumply chino pants and shirts that look like they come from LL Bean or some other mass retailer, he buys all his clothes at very top-end stores and even has some of them custom-made.

 

[kwanfan1818]

Allen's statement in the NY Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/09/opinion/sunday/woody-allen-speaks-out.html?hp&rref=opinion&_r=0


Dylan Farrow's rebuttal:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...se-to-woody-allen-s-new-york-times-op-ed.html

The most recent Vanity Fair entry referenced in Dylan Farrow's rebuttal:
10 Undeniable Facts about the Woody Allen Sexual-Abuse Allegation

The author, Maureen Orth, wrote the long articles on the subject for Vanity Fair.


An article in the Huffington Post that examines how Allen presented his case in his open letter:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lauren-duca/woody-allen-dylan-farrow_b_4749664.html

 

[Wyliefan]

Whatever the truth is -- and I tend to believe Dylan -- I cannot believe some of the asinine things people are saying. Like, "If it turns out Ronan is Sinatra's kid, that'll shut him up." Really? If you're not related to someone, you can't care about her or defend her? In what bizarro universe does THAT make sense??

 

[agalisgv]

--A pediatrician, not Mia Farrow, reported the abuse incident to police based on Dylan’s firsthand account.

--Court documents support [Dylan's] claim that Allen was in treatment for what his therapist described as “inappropriate” behavior towards her since 1991.

--Allen refused to take a lie detector test administered by the state police, instead hiring someone to administer their own lie detector test on him, which was deemed inadmissible as evidence by authorities.

Dylan claims that the “only final ruling in this case” came courtesy of the New York Supreme Court in 1992, that, “in denying my father all access to [Dylan],” claimed:


--The experts that Allen says exonerated him were “colored by their loyalty to Mr. Allen,” were guilty of “destroying all supporting documentation,” and ruled that their conclusions were “sanitized and therefore less credible.”

--Babysitters testified to witnessing “inappropriate sexual behavior by my father toward me.”

--They found “no credible evidence” to support the claim that Mia Farrow coached Dylan or “acted upon a desire for revenge against him for seducing Soon-Yi.”

--Their findings proved “that Mr. Allen’s behavior toward Dylan was grossly inappropriate and that measures must be taken to protect her.”

And:

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.

It's difficult for me to understand why some persist in thinking Mia was involved in coaching at all. There's absolutely no evidence in support of that, nor has there ever been.

If someone gets mugged, no one thinks to say, 'Well, *if* that was actually the case-we can never know." But somehow when it comes to child sex abuse, all of a sudden people are so scared to believe the victim. Very inexplicable...