Film director Woody Allen's adopted daughter renews sex abuse allegations

[F430murci]

RE: birthdate

Sources about birthdate? You gotta be kidding? Google Soon Yi birthdate and bone scan and every single link will be the source. If you don't know this, you don't even have a basic grasp of the situation.

RE: Legal Finding

There was no legal finding except that the DA wanted to pursue the case and said there was probable cause to pursue. They did not pursue because Mia did not want to further traumatize Dylan.

The civil judge also found that Allen was a danger and threat to Dylan.

RE: Report You Quote

The doctor authoring the report you quote later backed off because he had not seen or examined Dylan and his notes and records magically disappeared.

----------

In his 33-page decision, Judge Wilk found that Mr. Allens behavior toward Dylan was grossly inappropriate and that measures must be taken to protect her.

http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2014/02/woody-allen-sex-abuse-10-facts

The Yale-New Haven Hospital Child Sex Abuse Clinics finding that Dylan had not been sexually molested, cited repeatedly by Allens attorneys, was not accepted as reliable by Judge Wilk, or by the Connecticut state prosecutor who originally commissioned them. . . .

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.

. . .

All the notes from the report were destroyed. . . The doctor subsequently backed down from his contention.

http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2014/02/woody-allen-sex-abuse-10-facts

All you're doing is regurgitating the Vanity Fair article which is very one-sided.

Neither of us is going to convince the other. If Woody Allen was a child molester I would have expected other accusations to have been made, as child abuse is not something suddenly taken up in the later years of life. I'm convinced by Woody's remonstrations but I can understand why some others are not.

I guess only two people know the truth.

In any case Woody Allen's talent and body of work is unarguable.

I only cited that article for the following undisputed facts:

(1) Prosecutor Maco said there was probable cause, he wanted to prosecute, but based on wishes of Mia and his concerns about a fragile 7 year old witness, he did not prosecute.

This is unrefutted in any source and complete opposite to what you said.

(2) That the only legal ruling was in the form of a 33 page opinion by Judge Wilk saying Allen posed a threat and danger to Dylan

This is unrefutted and completely contrary to what you said.

(3) That the report you cited by Dr. Leventhall was rejected by the courts, Judge Wilke and DA Maco because Leventhall never examined or interviewed either Dylan or Mia and all of his supposed records to support his report vanished.

This is unrefutted and contrary to what you said.

(4) Dr. Leventhall later backed off that report you quoted and that those still defending Allen quote even though it was rejected by the authorities and recanted by the author.

Undisputed and contrary to your representation.

(5). Soon Yi's age was estimated by a bone scan and if those naked pictures if her found in Allen's possession in February of 1992 were more than 4 months old, they could have been of a minor or child porn based on low range of bone scan age estimate.

Edited February 8, 2014 by F430murci

[Ulysses G.]

There was no legal finding except that the DA wanted to pursue the case and said there was probable cause to pursue.

It could be possible that Allen did this, however unlikely. But the behavior of Mia and her family smells of vindictiveness and payback for marrying Soon Yi. The truth is that Woody Allen was never charged or convicted of anything. Regardless of what the DA says was behind his decision, it's obvious he would have gone forward if he wasn't afraid he might lose. Woody Allen should not be convicted on internet forums and in the press with no definite proof.

[sceadugenga]

I'm surprised that Slate has taken such a strong stand against Allen but they seem to be determined to present a one sided approach.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/02/08/dylan_farrow_responds_woody_allen_is_lying_in_new_york_times_column.html

[sms747]

Woody Allen should not be convicted on internet forums and in the press with no definite proof.

Quite so, but there is always the odd one who wants to think there is 'no smoke without fire' and to reach for the pitchfork at any suggestion of child molestation however weak.

[sms747]

If it walks like a duck and squawks like a duck, it's normally a duck.

I've had the unfortunate experience of coming across a few of these sick indIviduals over the years and each and every time they've left me with that skin crawling feeling. I'd love speak with some of the investigators that have dealt directly with the case, they'd know what's going on, even if they couldn't prove it.

I know one things for sure, I wouldn't leave my kids with the creep.

Sounds like you know something the rest of the world does not, why do you call the accused a creep?

[Ulysses G.]

I'm surprised that Slate has taken such a strong stand against Allen but they seem to be determined to present a one sided approach.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/02/08/dylan_farrow_responds_woody_allen_is_lying_in_new_york_times_column.html

Slate ALWAYS presents a one sided approach. I do not trust them at all, but I do enjoy some of their articles concerning entertainment.

[Jingthing]

Woody speaks about this in the past.

I find him convincing.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/02/06/woody_allen_60_minutes_interview_watch_director_defend_himself_against_all.html

I get it that people want reports of victims to be taken seriously. But the people being accused have rights too. It's just as absurd to think that every victim report is true as to believe every claim of innocence is true.

Edited February 9, 2014 by Jingthing

[Berkshire]

Woody speaks about this in the past.

I find him convincing.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/02/06/woody_allen_60_minutes_interview_watch_director_defend_himself_against_all.html

I get it that people want reports of victims to be taken seriously. But the people being accused have rights too. It's just as absurd to think that every victim report is true as to believe every claim of innocence is true.

It just seems like many of you are defending Woody because you admire his work. Or you believe him to be a creative genius. I wonder if you guys would be so quick to jump to his defense if he was just some strange old guy with a history of inappropriate behavior? Rhetorical question.

I don't know whether he in fact molested Dylan. But judging by his past behavior (e.g., having a sexual relationship with his partner/GF's daughter when she was still a teen), it certainly wouldn't be farfetched. There seems to be a pattern. Now whether someone should be judged based on a pattern of past behavior....well, don't we do that all the time?

[Scott]

There is a difference between people who are attracted to a sexually mature person, such as a teenager and one who is attracted to a prepubescent child.

I am certainly not trying to defend him, but simply trying to explain the behavior and in his case, he does not present the kind of profile that is common for a sex offender. It does not mean it couldn't have happened, it just makes it less likely.

As for his work, I have never been a big fan or Woody Allen's films. I've seen a few and they are simply not too my liking.

[geriatrickid]

This isn't about his art but about his morals. He had an relation with his adopted daughter, this makes him a sicko in my views anyhow.

She is not his adopted daughter. She is the adopted daughter of Andre Previn and Mia Farrow. She was an adult at the time of the relationship.

What two consenting adults choose to do is their own business.

[brewsterbudgen]

Woody speaks about this in the past.

I find him convincing.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/02/06/woody_allen_60_minutes_interview_watch_director_defend_himself_against_all.html

I get it that people want reports of victims to be taken seriously. But the people being accused have rights too. It's just as absurd to think that every victim report is true as to believe every claim of innocence is true.

It just seems like many of you are defending Woody because you admire his work. Or you believe him to be a creative genius. I wonder if you guys would be so quick to jump to his defense if he was just some strange old guy with a history of inappropriate behavior? Rhetorical question.

I don't know whether he in fact molested Dylan. But judging by his past behavior (e.g., having a sexual relationship with his partner/GF's daughter when she was still a teen), it certainly wouldn't be farfetched. There seems to be a pattern. Now whether someone should be judged based on a pattern of past behavior....well, don't we do that all the time?

And that is eaxctly the point. He has no history whatsoever of child molestation or inappropriate behaviour. How likely is that a man in his 60s would suddenly develop such behaviour?

[Jingthing]

He's not a middle American Methodist. He's culturally very different than the majority of Americans, being a certain kind of eccentric New York Jewish intellectual. To many people, that sets off their alarm bells. That's really sad.

[keemapoot]

Woody speaks about this in the past.

I find him convincing.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/02/06/woody_allen_60_minutes_interview_watch_director_defend_himself_against_all.html

I get it that people want reports of victims to be taken seriously. But the people being accused have rights too. It's just as absurd to think that every victim report is true as to believe every claim of innocence is true.

It just seems like many of you are defending Woody because you admire his work. Or you believe him to be a creative genius. I wonder if you guys would be so quick to jump to his defense if he was just some strange old guy with a history of inappropriate behavior? Rhetorical question.

I don't know whether he in fact molested Dylan. But judging by his past behavior (e.g., having a sexual relationship with his partner/GF's daughter when she was still a teen), it certainly wouldn't be farfetched. There seems to be a pattern. Now whether someone should be judged based on a pattern of past behavior....well, don't we do that all the time?

And that is eaxctly the point. He has no history whatsoever of child molestation or inappropriate behaviour. How likely is that a man in his 60s would suddenly develop such behaviour?

I'm not Jewish, but wouldn't be surprised if some of the condemnation is a result of anti-semitic views

Sent from my GT-N5100 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Jingthing]

I'm not Jewish, but wouldn't be surprised if some of the condemnation is a result of anti-semitic views

Sent from my GT-N5100 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Some of course probably is. He's a real character. The name Woody Allen is often used as a code word for JEW. He's not only a Jew but he's an uppity cheeky Jew. He makes fun of Christians in some of his films. To many, they probably feel he deserves to be punished. I prefer to think this is more about cultural misunderstanding. Woody's world is so alien to most Americans that they are too quick to paint him badly in other ways. Yes, I am biased towards Woody. His world is familiar to me. I am a natural part of Woody's loyal and admiring audience. I acknowledge he might have committed the crimes in question but don't think it is fair to assume that he is guilty based on the court of public opinion. I also think it is TOTALLY WRONG to paint him with a pedo brush based on his eye brow raising adult relationships.

Edited February 10, 2014 by Jingthing

[Ulysses G.]

I don't know whether he in fact molested Dylan. But judging by his past behavior (e.g., having a sexual relationship with his partner/GF's daughter when she was still a teen), it certainly wouldn't be farfetched.

Yes it would. Pedophiles are attracted to pre-pubesant children, not adult women.

[Jingthing]

I don't know whether he in fact molested Dylan. But judging by his past behavior (e.g., having a sexual relationship with his partner/GF's daughter when she was still a teen), it certainly wouldn't be farfetched.

Yes it would. Pedophiles are attracted to pre-pubesant children, not adult women.

It's funny how knee jerk hysterical hanging mobs fail to get that BASIC point.

On the actual accusation, bottom line at this point, is that it's always going to be a he said, she said situation.

If you believe the accuser, fine, but is that really fair, as it's not based on any actual hard evidence?

If this really happened, it's tragic and it's wrong Woody never faced charges for it.

But if this didn't happen, it's also very crappy that so many people are thinking unfairly that he's a pedo.

Edited February 10, 2014 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

Dictionaries are free online!

[Scott]

An off-topic post has been deleted. Please keep it civil. There are definitions available for those who do not understand some of the terms being used. Please use them.

[sceadugenga]

Woody Allen is high profile and his work is loved by many people.

He has defenders where many in his situation would not, and the girl has the opportunity to make her story public and have supporters where millions of abused children in the past have not.

The standard operating procedure for ALL thinking adult males these days should be "if it's not your kid restrict shows of affection to the very basics, one day it may come back to bite you on the arse".

[Jingthing]

Woody Allen is high profile and his work is loved by many people.

He has defenders where many in his situation would not, and the girl has the opportunity to make her story public and have supporters where millions of abused children in the past have not.

The standard operating procedure for ALL thinking adult males these days should be "if it's not your kid restrict shows of affection to the very basics, one day it may come back to bite you on the arse".

In the U.S. this kind of thing has reached hysterical proportions.

When I grew up teachers could (and did) pat students on the back for encouragement, even hug a distressed child.

Now, you're right, do that and the police might be calling.

[Berkshire]

I don't know whether he in fact molested Dylan. But judging by his past behavior (e.g., having a sexual relationship with his partner/GF's daughter when she was still a teen), it certainly wouldn't be farfetched.

Yes it would. Pedophiles are attracted to pre-pubesant children, not adult women.

It's funny how knee jerk hysterical hanging mobs fail to get that BASIC point.

On the actual accusation, bottom line at this point, is that it's always going to be a he said, she said situation.

If you believe the accuser, fine, but is that really fair, as it's not based on any actual hard evidence?

If this really happened, it's tragic and it's wrong Woody never faced charges for it.

But if this didn't happen, it's also very crappy that so many people are thinking unfairly that he's a pedo.

I think you guys have got me all wrong. I'm absolutely NOT 100% convinced that Woody is guilty. More like 50/50. But some of you guys seem to be 100% convinced that he's innocent of all allegations. How you arrive at that is beyond me--you would have to totally disregard the accuser to the point of calling her a complete liar (or delusional).

The point about Soon-Yi seems to only be relevant if you are on the accusing side. The defenders of Woody want none of that. Anyways, this whole topic is really not that huge a deal to me. I don't know Woody and he doesn't know me. My opinion matters zilch, just like you guys' opinions. Woody will never be prosecuted because the rich in America can hire high-powered lawyers and get away with this sort of thing--just like in most places. It'll be more of an embarrassment for him, nothing else.

[FiftyTwo]

I don't like any of his movies, arty rubbish IMHO.

But

Can't see him as a child molester (mind you, didn't see Rolf Harris as a child molester either).

Can see Mia Farrow as the evil ex-gf bitch from hell.

[Berkshire]

I don't like any of his movies, arty rubbish IMHO.

But

Can't see him as a child molester (mind you, didn't see Rolf Harris as a child molester either).

Can see Mia Farrow as the evil ex-gf bitch from hell.

Many Woody supporters would share your sentiments regarding Mia Farrow. But to be fair, if you were to have a relationship with any woman alive, and then started having relations with said woman's daughter....how would they react? Pretty much Mia-like I would imagine. Again, I'm not saying that in itself is proof that he molested the Dylan girl.

[FiftyTwo]

I don't like any of his movies, arty rubbish IMHO.

But

Can't see him as a child molester (mind you, didn't see Rolf Harris as a child molester either).

Can see Mia Farrow as the evil ex-gf bitch from hell.

Many Woody supporters would share your sentiments regarding Mia Farrow. But to be fair, if you were to have a relationship with any woman alive, and then started having relations with said woman's daughter....how would they react? Pretty much Mia-like I would imagine. Again, I'm not saying that in itself is proof that he molested the Dylan girl.

I agree, many women do seem to believe they are allowed to do and say anything after a failed relationship.

Not sure that makes it right though.

But in Mia's case, as she has previously played the teen, marriage wrecking whore, and cheated on Woody and lied about paternity of a child, it brings her to a new level of nastiness.

[ABCer]

There are always at least two sides to every story:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/01/27/the-woody-allen-allegations-not-so-fast.html

Two sides? I suppose some could view it as the side of a lying POS pervert pedophile and the side of victimized child. Don't know what happened, but I would err on the side of a victimized child rather than revictimize the child.

Far too many express posts leaving no time for posters to think.

So, now Woody Allen isn't as great an actor/director, - according to some. Utter bullshit!

So, now a man is a POS (?) pervert pedophile - according to some. Utter bullshit!

So, now a bitter, angry, non-event entity of about 30 all of a sudden becomes a 'victimized child'. Utter bullshit!

My way of thinking is - should have cried out her complaints next hour - if the offence had been there.

But 'remembering' all this after 20 years?.. How much does she want in settlement?

Oh, yes! - there are many more than two sides to every story today, especially in US, especially at Hollywood and especially when millions of $$$ can be potentially involved.

[Pakboong]

I really enjoyed Woody's last movie "Blue Jasmine". My understanding of his abilities has been a bit inflated for me by a childhood friend who has appeared in many of Woody's movies and she considers him an absolute god when it comes to movie making. I followed Woody's movies because of her and have seen them all. I don't really make an effort to mix his personal issues with his professional abilities.

[Jingthing]

Blue Jasmine is great! Also, it's fun to see Woody do different cities other than New York. This time, San Francisco!

[neverdie]

Far too many express posts leaving no time for posters to think.

So, now Woody Allen isn't as great an actor/director, - according to some. Utter bullshit!

.

So what you are saying here is that your opinion is the only correct opinion?

[bendejo]

I agree, many women do seem to believe they are allowed to do and say anything after a failed relationship.

Not sure that makes it right though.

But in Mia's case, as she has previously played the teen, marriage wrecking whore, and cheated on Woody and lied about paternity of a child, it brings her to a new level of nastiness.

I have the impression that within the world they live in (show biz) the accuser has an unsavory reputation, and to many this just another one of her projects.

I wondered about Woody being able to recruit talent for his movies when this started, but it didn't seem to hurt him. When Tracy Ullman, who tends to wear her lefty politics on her sleeve at times, appeared in one of his films I took that she was giving him an all-clear.

The way cases like this alleged one are handled is the victim is helped to get past it, and in the case of a very young child maybe the kid won't even remember it five years later. But it seems in this case it was nurtured, and the woman scorned created a household haunted by a looming monster. Regardless of whether the accusations are true, something needs to be said of how this woman, who had custody of the kids, dealt with getting the kids through the ordeal. Hey lady, your kid's an emotional basket case, why didn't you help her? The woman who sacrifices her kids to spite her husband, it's been done before. If her kid on MSNBC (funny how he started working there just as all this blew up, again) ends up losing his job over some mud-splattering regarding this, that'll be the second of her kids she injured in this ordeal. At least one got away.

[CaptHaddock]

I agree, many women do seem to believe they are allowed to do and say anything after a failed relationship.

Not sure that makes it right though.

But in Mia's case, as she has previously played the teen, marriage wrecking whore, and cheated on Woody and lied about paternity of a child, it brings her to a new level of nastiness.

I have the impression that within the world they live in (show biz) the accuser has an unsavory reputation, and to many this just another one of her projects.

I wondered about Woody being able to recruit talent for his movies when this started, but it didn't seem to hurt him. When Tracy Ullman, who tends to wear her lefty politics on her sleeve at times, appeared in one of his films I took that she was giving him an all-clear.

The way cases like this alleged one are handled is the victim is helped to get past it, and in the case of a very young child maybe the kid won't even remember it five years later. But it seems in this case it was nurtured, and the woman scorned created a household haunted by a looming monster. Regardless of whether the accusations are true, something needs to be said of how this woman, who had custody of the kids, dealt with getting the kids through the ordeal. Hey lady, your kid's an emotional basket case, why didn't you help her? The woman who sacrifices her kids to spite her husband, it's been done before. If her kid on MSNBC (funny how he started working there just as all this blew up, again) ends up losing his job over some mud-splattering regarding this, that'll be the second of her kids she injured in this ordeal. At least one got away.

You live in a fantasy world. This is not the way people work. If the allegations are true, and they might be, then the mother's behavior represents exemplary support for her daughter. In many cases of such abuse the mother fails to support the daughter.

As for the implicit endorsement of actors who work in his movies, actors, even the already famous ones, face an extreme level of competition. Of the members of Actors Equity, which membership already marks them as more or less successful since most wannabees never are permitted to join, 95% have annual incomes less than $50,000. So, below the level of Tom Cruise, actors are all desperate for work all the time. They won't think twice about the personal life of a director who might hire them. Roman Polanski is an admitted child rapist (drugged and raped a thirteen-year girl at a party, was found guilty in a trial and fled the US before sentencing.) He's also a successful movie director who has never had a difficult time finding actors to appear in his movies.

Celebrities all have a recognizable persona. Indeed the ability to construct and promote such a persona might the defining characteristic of celebrityhood. These personas give us a familiarity with the famous person, but the fact is that not only do we not know them, we can never know them. They are just strangers to us. You can go around making up narratives about how these personas live out the dramas they generate, but it is nothing but a fantasy of yours.