Dylan Farrow Fires Back At Woody Allen’s Denial Of Sex Abuse Claims

Says she was not coached by her mother Mia Farrow, as estranged father claims

  • Share
  • Read Later

Dylan Farrow denied Woody Allen’s claims Friday that she was coached by her mother to say she was sexually assaulted, responding to Allen shortly after he published an uncompromising denial of allegations he molested his adopted daughter.

Farrow said that Allen’s letter, published Friday in the New York Times, consists of “the latest rehash of the same legalese, distortions, and outright lies he has leveled at me for the past 20 years,” reports The Hollywood Reporter.

In his letter, Allen said Mia Farrow vindictively coached her daughter during her breakup with the star director and actor, arguing that Mia manipulated her daughter to seek revenge against Allen.

Dylan Farrow responded: “Once again, Woody Allen is attacking me and my family in an effort to discredit and silence me – but nothing he says or writes can change the truth. For 20 years, I have never wavered in describing what he did to me. I will carry the memories of surviving these experiences for the rest of my life.”

Allen said in his Friday letter he will no longer be commenting on the case. “Enough people have been hurt,” he wrote.

[The Hollywood Reporter]

94 comments
MaryOperagloves
MaryOperagloves

it would be public-spirited for MIa and Dylan to undertake lie-detectors,hypnosis, narco-analysis and psychological testing. Truth would be established and their captive audience could MOVE ON from unsubstantiated accusations, and denials from Allen, verified by many polygraphs.

The greatest obstacle to finding Dylan credible is Mia.

DaveInfinger
DaveInfinger

I see a lot of people who don't celebrate Christmas also believe Woody Allen. I believe the girl. She has no reason to bring this up right now except the fact she was molested. I can only believe a molester would defend a pervert who married his wife's daughter. If that doesn't send off alarm bells then you probably think OJ is innocent too.

JamesHall
JamesHall

What a celebrity brat. Poor thing. How much is her book advance money?

114sp
114sp

Let me add to what Annie wrote this is Dylan's response that was left out of the article however included in the original court document.


Allen vs. Farrow

"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."

Dylan you have been vindicated long ago ... but Woody continues to try to lie to exonerate himself.

Sorry woody none of the courts upheld your claim and threw it out! 

AnnieLogan
AnnieLogan

Woody seem to have forgotten that his Mia manipulated Dylan lie didn't work in the custody case because the Judge didn't believe him, and neither did the judges in the Appeals.  The Judge in the Custody case had this to say about Allen:


"his trial strategy has been to separate his children from their brothers and sister; to turn the children against their mother; to divide adopted children from biological children; to incite the family against their household help; and to set household employees against each other. His
self-absorption, his lack of judgement and his commitment to the continuation of his divisive assault, thereby impeding the healing of the injuries that he has already caused, warrant a careful monitoring of his future contact with the children." 

Sounds like the man who got to hear all of the testimony and see all the evidence decided that Woody Allen was the manipulator and not Mia Farrow. I'm sure the Judge was not surprised when he read that Allen had Moses speak out an publicly in support of his father and say his his sister his lying-way to pit brother against sister Woody!

windyplayer
windyplayer

Woody's letter to the New York Times shows his true colors: petty, self-absorbed, vindictive, and misogynistic.He dismisses Mia as the crazy, raging, jealous cast-off lover (an old cliché) who basically ruined the "blissful early stages of a happy relationship with the woman he'd go on to marry." In comments sections, there's been a lot of back-and-forth about whether Mr. Allen was a father (or father figure to Soon-Yi), but that's beside the point. The point is that he was sexually involved with his partner's daughter, and that his partner's daughter was the sister of his own children. He expresses no remorse or even self-reflection about what he did, or even expresses how traumatizing this might have been for any for Mia or for any of her children.

The reason I believe Dylan Farrow is that she has nothing to gain.The custody battle is long over; she is a 27-year old woman who has gone on and created a completely normal life for herself; it's therefore reasonable to assume that she can sort out what was real and what wasn't real. I'm sure she knew when she penned her letter that she would be dismissed by some as a liar, as someone manipulated, as her mother's pawn.

We will never know exactly what happened in the attic...but does that really matter? Dylan found her father's attentions and his behavior uncomfortable, threatening and ultimately traumatizing.Whether or not he actually "molested" her, she felt molested. If he was a less narcissistic individual, he would have recognized that his behavior was not welcomed by his child, he would have received help to learn appropriate boundaries, and he would have apologized to her.Instead, to this day, his child wants nothing to do with him.As a child who was abused by her own mother, I can tell you this: it takes a lot of bad behavior from a parent for a child to walk away, it really does, because even children who are abused by their parents want to love their parents. We walk away for self-preservation, not out of vindictiveness.

Every child wants to be able to fell that they are just like everyone else; their parents loved them unconditionally, their emotional needs were met, that they mattered to their parents more than their parents mattered to themselves.However, if you can't do that, the next best thing is to be honest; your parent treated you like an object in order to fulfill their own needs. And if you need to tell it to the whole world, so be it.

andreaofsanfrancisco
andreaofsanfrancisco

At the risk of sounding contradictory here, I have to say that I've read Dylan's letter and I believe her, but I also think everyone is innocent until proven guilty.  Allen must face the court of public opinion, however, and people may vote with their wallets and choose not to see movies made by a man who may be a sexual child abuser.  He is a huge talent.  Perhaps he has revealed himself in his films.  I saw Match Point (2005) recently.  Spoiler alert.  This film is no comedy.  The protagonist in the film gets away with a terrible crime against someone.  He does have to live with his guilt which is a sort of punishment.  In real life, Allen made "an honest woman" of Soon Yi by marrying her.  There are elements of her in his film of 2009, Whatever Works, though he has Larry David play his part (that of the lecherous older man taking advantage of the naive young woman). 

MSD2178
MSD2178

You know what Dylan  Farrow?  If you want to provide a voice for the abused, sue Woody Allen for compensation. Even if he was never charged you can sue him in civil court. Your suing him will be more powerful for victims rather than you trying to get as many different publications publish your side of the story. You cannot make Hollywood a big multi-billion dollar industry to turn against him for the simple reason that he was never charged. ( Note I don't say he was not guilty, I say he was not charged. There is nothing they can do there expect draw their own personal opinion.) You also don't make any specific requests as to what you want Hollywood to do? You were his daughter not his employee that you can, for example, ask  SAG-AFTRA  to look into the abuse  , take action and /or implement rules or be angry that they let you down by not investigating.  You have won the public opinion, so what is it that you want? Also, what I find troubling is that you never show any concern for his two daughters. If someone has gone through the abuse and hell you say you have been through wouldn't you be even a little bit concerned that he was able to adopt two  daughter? How about pressing for child services to interview both his daughters? What is your point in all of this? Yes, he was accused of molesting you when you were seven by your mother and apparently by you, now you have spoken and now what? Please, deal with it the right way. Do something instead of crying, pointing fingers or responding, otherwise just go away and lead your life in peace, now that you have published your side of the story. If you cannot deal with the anger get some help.

114sp
114sp

1. The elusive polygraph conducted privately by Allen not court appointed.. why? Polygraphs are not admissible in court for their false positive and negative results.  You would be better off shaking a crazy 8 ball.


2. Mia never refused a polygraph, she was never asked.


3. Soon-Yi did not have a valid relationship with woody and family growing up. FALSE 

"Family Law – Reasonable Visitation: The Consolation Prize
Allen v. Farrow (New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division 1994) p. 585"
 
"Action: Allen (P) brought an action to obtain custody of or increased visitation with three infant children.
History: Lower court awarded custody of the three children and attorney’s fees to Farrow (R).
 
Issue: May the adoptive father and/or biological father obtain increased visitation rights or custody of children when father is known to have had a sexual relationship with one child and is alleged to have had an inappropriate relationship with another child?
 

Facts: Allen admitted having an affair with the children’s sister Soon-Yi Previn and was alleged to have sexually abused one of the three children.  Moses (male, adopted in 1980).  *Dylan (female, adopted in 1985).  Satchel (male, biological in 1986).  Allen displayed naked pictures of Soon-Yi in his apartment.
 

P argued: Allen denied allegations of sexually abusing Dylan, but claimed his attention was paternal in nature.  Allen suggested that Farrow engaged in a campaign to alienate Allen from the children and to defeat Allen’s legal rights to the children.  Allen claimed that granting him custody would allow him to counteract the alleged “detrimental psychological effects” of Farrow’s manipulation of the children’s perception of Allen and to provide them with a more stable atmosphere.
 

R argued:  Allen’s interest in Farrow’s children was not consistent.  Allen did not show a genuine parental interest in or for the children’s welfare, but that any interest he did show was inappropriate and harmful—particularly toward Dylan in a sexual nature and toward Satchel of a physical harm character.  Farrow claimed that Allen’s sexual relationship with Soon-Yi had detrimental effects on all of the children.
 

Court findings:  Although no conclusive determination was made, expert testimony “suggest[ed] that the abuse did occur.”  Allen’s relationship with Soon-Yi was unacceptable.  The three children should not be exposed to Allen and Soon-Yi’s relationship.  Allen may see the children, but in a therapeutic context.  Allen needed supervision while with the children and lacked parenting skills.  Allen placed inappropriate emphasis on his own wants and needs and minimized and even ignored those of his children.  Furthermore, Allen was unable to understand the impact that his words and actions had on the emotional well being of the children. "


3. Woody's claims that Dylan's accusations were a product of fantasy and thought disorder. FALSE

Allen VS Farrow

"Unlike the court at IAS, we do not consider the conclusions reached by Doctors Coates and Schultz and by the Yale-New Haven team, to be totally unpersuasive. While the tendency of Dylan to withdraw into a fantasy and the inconsistencies in her account of the events of August 4, 1992, noted particularly by the Yale-New Haven team, must be taken into account in the evaluation of these serious allegations, the testimony given at trial by the individuals caring for the children that day, the videotape of Dylan made by Ms. Farrow the following day and the accounts of Dylan's behavior toward Mr. Allen both before and after the alleged instance of abuse, suggest that the abuse did occur."  


"Leventhal himself later admitted, in sworn testimony in the custody case, that he made several mistakes during the course of the investigation. One of those was his false characterization of Dylan’s active imagination as a thought disorder." VF.



FURTHERMORE:


Judge Wilk in his verdict: Allen vs. Farrow

" Unlike Yale New Haven, I was not persuaded that the videotape of Dylan was the product of leading questions." 

4. Moses says, he knows molestation did not take place: FALSE how would he know he was not there when the witnesses saw what happened and they never recanted their story? 


"On August 2, 1992 Allen traveled to Ms. Farrows ct.
vacation home to spend time with his children. " Ms. Farrow had previously instructed Ms. Goteke that Mr. Allen was not to be left alone with Dylan and Satchel."

During this time Mia was not home.

"For a period of fifteen or twenty minutes during the afternoon, Ms Groteke was unable to locate Mr. Allen or Dylan.After looking for them in the house she assumed they were outside with the others, But neither Berg nor Stickland was with Mr. Allen or Dylan. Ms. Groteke made no mention of this to Ms. Farrow on August 4th.

During a different portion of the day, Ms. Stickland went to the television room in search of one of Ms. Pascal children. She observed Mr. Allen kneeling in front of Dylan with his head on her lap facing her body. Dylan was sitting on the couch staring vacantly at the television set.

After Ms. farrow returned home, Ms Berge noticed that Dylan was not wearing any under sundress. She told Ms. Farrow, who asked Ms. Groteke to put underpants on Dylan. Ms. stickland testified that during the evening of August 4, she told Ms. Pascal, "I have seen something at Mia's that day that was bothering me." She revealed what she had seen in the television room."

 "On august 5th Ms. Pascal telephoned s. Farrow to tell her what Ms. Stickland had observed.
Ms. Farrow testified that after she hung up the telephone, she asked Dylan, who was sitting next to her, whether it was true that daddy had his face in her lap yesterday." ms. Farrow testified:

"Dylan said yes. And then she said that she didn't like it one bit, no, he was breathing into her, into her legs, she said.and that he was holding her around the waist and I said, why didn't you get up and she said she tried to but that he put his hands underneath her and touched her. and she showed me where ....her behind."

"Uncomfort­able with Mr. Allen's inappropriate behavior toward Dylan and because he believed that her concerns were not being taken seriously enough by Dr. Schultz and Dr. Coates, Ms Farrow videotaped Dylan's statements. Over the next 24 hours, Dylan told Ms. Farrow that she has been with Mr. Allen in the attic and that he touched her privates with his finger.

After Dylan's first comments, Ms Farrow telephoned her attorney for guidance. She was advised to bring Dylan's to her local pediatrician, which she did immediately. Dylan did not repeat the accusation of sexual  abuse during this visit and Ms. farrow was advised to return with Dylan on the following day. On the trip home , she explained to her mother that she did not like talking about her privates.  "


" Unlike Yale New Haven, I was not persuaded that the videotape of Dylan was the product of leading questions."


The second upheld the 1st courts decision.

ttiema
ttiema

How many adopted girls grow up and marry their father's? What kind of love makes you want to marry your father?

See the pattern of behavior, no polygraph, just look at the behavior. How many men grow up and marry their adopted mother's?

It does not make sense.

cathytoo
cathytoo

This sad situation has gone on too long and too far. Lots of untruths. First of all...Woody Allen DID take a polygraph 20 years ago and passed. Mia refused. Woody did not fool around with his adopted daughter, a child at the time. Soon-Yi was the adopted of Andre Preven and she was over 20 at the time. Mia was 19 when she lost her virginity to Frank Sinatra who was 49. She married him at 20. She went on to break up the marriage of Andre and Dory Previn who had three children. She went on record last August (for no reason whatsoever) that she and Frank "never split up". Further, she claimed that Ronan was NOT Woody's biological child but Franks. Where does she set her moral compass? It is also on record that she went on a vindictive rampage after she discovered the affair between Woody and Soon-Yi. I 100% believe that Dylan believes she was abused sexually. I believe that she was influenced by her mother. I do not believe that Woody was fool enough to take a 7 year old child away from a house filled with people to sexually abuse her in a tiny attic closet. It just doesn't make any sense. It's all ugly, distorted, dysfunctional and sad. Everyone suffers.

inspoken
inspoken

@DaveInfinger  I disagree, I think you're a pervert & you are trying to hide it by pointing the finger at others.  Get away from me!

114sp
114sp

@AnnieLogan  

Yep and here is the thing about Moses it is very sad. However it explains how bitter and hurt Moses was in this whole mess that Woody caused.

 Allen vs. Farrow

"Moses interactions appear to be superficial and more a response to Moses desire for a father--in a family where Mr. Previn was the father of the other six children---than an authentic effort to develop a relationship with the child. When Moses asked, in 1994, if Mr. Allen would be his father, he said "sure" but for years did nothing to make that a reality.
 

They spent time playing baseball, chess and fishing. Mr. Allen encouraged Moses to play the clarinet. There is no evidence however, that Mr. Allen used any of their shared areas of interest as a foundation upon which to develop a deeper relationship with his son. What little he offered--a baseball catch some games of chess, adoption papers---was enough to encourage Moses to dream of more, but insufficient to justify a claim for custody.

After learning of his father's affair with his sister, Moses handed to Mr. Allen a letter that he had written,
It states:

".......You can't force me to live with you....You have done a horrible unforgivable, needy, ugly, stupid thing... about seeing me for lunch, you can just forget about that... we didn't do anything wrong. ...All you did is spoil the little ones, Dylan and Satchel... Every one knows not to have an affair with your son's sister. I don't consider you my father anymore.
It was a great feeling having a father, but you smashed that feeling and dream with a single act... I HOPE YOU ARE PROUD TO CRUSH YOUR SONS DREAM
."

Mr. Allen's response to this letter by attempting to wrest custody of Moses from his mother. His rational is that the letter was generated by Ms. Farrow. Moses told Dr. Brodzinsky that he wrote the letter and that he did not intend for it to be seen by his mother."


Mia you have been exonerated and vindicated in your son's and Woody's accusations.


 

Infoczar
Infoczar

@schulkie21  lol - Woody didn't sexually abuse Mia - it was Dylan who's life was damaged. wow

RodniaNelan
RodniaNelan

@windyplayer an appropriate response by Woody would have begun with I love my child and it grieves my heart that she feels this happened to her, would have continued to express concern for Dylan, and would have stopped their. Allen seems way more interested in maintaining his image and playing to an audience. He is a rich, powerful, untouchable man, yet he cares what peons like us think, over the state of his daughters emotional health. That says it all.

114sp
114sp

@MSD2178  

Personally his name has not been dragged in the mud enough.. he needs to be in prison.

PERIOD. Let him live what will be his short life there.

Infoczar
Infoczar

@MSD2178  I don't think she needs to do that. Let someone else pick up that cross and carry it - she has endured enough. This is more about her being able to reveal her truth as she continues to heal. It is up to anyone in Hollywood or anyone else in a vested interest in understanding incest abuse to decide how their conscience wishes to deal with Woody's pattern of deviant behavior. I personally don't think being a rich pseudo artist gives you a right to ruin other people's lives - particularly not a 7 year old's. 

MartinHarvey
MartinHarvey

@114sp  So, a court awarded sole custody of the children to the mother and made the father pay. Wow. That's damning evidence. Odd how despite the lengthy manifesto above, Woody was never charged. Oh, right, protecting the daughter. Convenient excuse. The prosecutor was reprimanded for his behavior in the investigation.


But really, all that matters is this; does anyone actually think that Woody was going to choose that place and time to molest his daughter? Long drive up, a house filled with people who hate him, and yeah, boy, can't wait to molest my seven year old daughter for the very first time. 


Sometimes, questions just aren't that difficult to answer.

MartinHarvey
MartinHarvey

@ttiema  It does not make sense that you can not figure out that Soon-Yi already had an adopted father. That father did not cease to exist simply because Woody and Mia were in a relationship. 


Again; Soon-Yi was adopted by Mia and Andre Previn. Andre Previn was/is Soon-Yi's adoptive father. Woody Allen was the guy who was in a relationship with her mother. Soon-Yi was old enough to understand the difference. 

alienlanes05
alienlanes05

@ttiema  You're stating incorrect facts. Allen married the adopted daughter of Mia Farrow and Andre Previn. Why is this so hard for people to understand? He was never Soon-Yi's father, nor did Allen live with her while he and Mia dated. 

writingspot
writingspot

@cathytoo  Now I know you after reading through the posting.  You appear to be a PR gun hired by Woody camp to be here to gross over his image.  Because you post so many.  Most of the posters only post one or two times.

mtstrauss
mtstrauss

@cathytoo  "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." -Maureen Orth, Vanity Fair (2/7/14)

Also it's possible for Mia to be a spiteful ex-lover and for Dylan to have been molested by Allen. Both could be true - the two are not mutually exclusive.

writingspot
writingspot

@cathytoo  Woody didn't take the polygraph administered by the court.  He took the polygraph by his own legal team, which was deemed inadmissible by the court.  Mia was never asked to take any polygraph by court that's why she didn't take.  


Woody had an intimate relationship with Mia and they were also career partner for 12 years.  So at that time, even he was not a legal father to Mia's children; he at least was a father figure.  So he was a father figure to Soon-Yi since she was 7 years old.


It was not decent and unacceptable to mess up with the daughter of your lover of 12 years.  


So cathytoo if you want to defend Woody you can, but please just make the facts correct.

inspoken
inspoken

@114sp  As an adult when he was able to unravel the web his mother made he is estranged from his mother & stood up for his Dad

114sp
114sp

@RodniaNelan @windyplayer 

Exactly I agree with you ! He would have said that if he was grieved at the loss of her in his life and had ANY love for her.  

To this day he still CANNOT be a father .. The courts were right.


Now CPS needs to make a visit to that house.

114sp
114sp

@MartinHarvey @114sp  

Get off that point Martin the prosecutor was cleared of any charges regarding code of conduct that was brought into question by Allen's attorneys.  Next. 

Bhwaaa really "Sometimes, questions just aren't that difficult to answer." Your answer was answered by the court at length.  Sorry, I'm not sorry you found the document to be too lengthy.. 


I think it is funny how people who support Allen can't support anything with facts in the case or proofs. Then when you show them the documents they clam up. Or they make personal attacks... 


1. I have no idea  that a long driveup has anything to do with anything?? 

2.One of the most important questions is why did he lie to police officers when asked if he had entered the closet or attic.


3. Why did he ask the officers not to impeach him if he agrees to a DNA test.

Why when asked to do a polygraph by officers he refused??? Instead he had his lawyer arranged one.( Mind you that I don't even place much value in polygraphs.) But he would not do a police one that is the point.

4. Why did Woody then during the adoption ....do this below??

Allen vs Farrow

"to negotiate a settlement
of their differences. In an effort to pacify Ms. Farrow, Mr Allen told
her that he was no longer seeing Soon-Yi. This was untrue. A temporary
arrangement enabled Mr. Allen to visit regularly with Dylan and
Satchel"(Ronan) "but they were not permitted to visit at his residence. "
"In Addition Ms. Farrow asked for his assurance that he would not seek
custody of Moses, Dylan or Satchel.
 

On Feburuary 3, 1992, both
parties signed documents in which was agreed that Mr. Allen would waive
custodial rights to Moses, Dylan, and Satchel if Farrow preceded him.
 

On the same day, Mr Allen signed a second document, which he did not
reveal to Ms. Farrow, in which he disavowed the waiver, claiming that it
was a product of duress and coercion and stating that "I have no
intention of abiding by it and have been advised that it will not hold
up legally and that at worst I can revoke it unilaterally at will."



Some questions need to be answered.



AnnieLogan
AnnieLogan

@MartinHarvey @114sp 

Would anyone have thought that Woody Allen would continue to have sex with his children's sister in the middle of a custody battle?  No sane person would do that-but Woody did.  The heart wants what the heart wants! LOL

Sometime it doesn't make sense to ask what a normal person would do in situation....especially when the person being discussed isn't normal.  

Taaffe
Taaffe

You're just completely missing the point. It doesn't matter if he was her adopted father or not. It doesn't matter if he lived in the same house or not. He was in a relationship with her mother for 12 years and had other legal children with that mother. He had sex with and married his own children's sister. Nobody cares if he says he was Soon Yi's father figure or not. That's only one of many reasons why the general public find this so appalling.

WoodyAllenIncestualRapist
WoodyAllenIncestualRapist

@alienlanes05 @ttiema 

He was her de facto step father. They began their "affair" her jr year of hgh school.

He was her mother's partner of 12 years and the father of 4 of her siblings.

The relationship is insestual and sexually abusive for Soon yi and the rest of the minor Farrow kids

mtstrauss
mtstrauss

@alienlanes05 @ttiema  Yes he's not Soon-Yi's father, but he was the father of both her sister and her brother. And when Allen started dating Mia, Soon-Yi was 10 years old.  So he knew her through her adolescent years. Illegal? No. Amoral? Maybe. Creepy? Definitely.

cathytoo
cathytoo

@writingspot I wish I was a hired gun for ANYINE!!! Sorry, but I am just a suburban housewife who has never posted on any site. But, I do feel strongly about this situation. I am posting just as if we were having a back and forth conversation. Just expressing myself here and, most likely, will not do so again.

114sp
114sp

@mtstrauss @cathytoo 

Good and most important point about that thank you. It is all coming out now with the new court docs. I think more is bound to come out of the wood work. This is not over.

cathytoo
cathytoo

@writingspot I'm not defending him...just believe his story. If he wanted to molest the child why pick a crowded house filled with the entire family. Why not wait until he was total alone with the child? Woody is definitely not crazy. Even when he began his relationship with Soon-Yi, it was in private.

cathytoo
cathytoo

@writingspot You are 100% correct. It is disgusting to mess around with the step daughter of your girlfriend of 12 years. It is disgusting to mess around with your mother's boyfriend. Soon-Yi was old enough to behave better. But, Woody did not abuse a child. Soon-Yi was at least 20 years old. There is enough bad behavior of everyone's plate, except for Dylan. She is the true victim whether at the hand of a vindictive mother or a child pedophile. Either way, the situation stinks.

RodniaNelan
RodniaNelan

@WoodyAllenIncestualRapist @alienlanes05@ttiemayes of all the responses to these accusations the ones that have creeped me out the most are the ones that go into immense technical detail to prove that Woody Allen seemingly violated no boundaries with regards to Soon Yi and that he had no responsibility to abstain from sexually molesting her, because he was not a blood relative, despite the fact that he absolutely was a father figure to her, as her mother's boyfriend. It seems to be as if they are protesting too much in order to defend their on impropriety, or their plans of impropriety. It has creeped me out every time I have read it, which has been quite a bit over the past week. To assert that you have no moral duty to abstain from fondling or photographing nude your girlfriend's teenaged daughter, just because you are not her father, step-father, adoptive father, or whatever....major, major creep factor there...that THIS MANY MEN exist who do not understand how this deplorable behavior.

RodniaNelan
RodniaNelan

@MichaelCohen1 @mtstrausswrong. Gay marriage has zero to do with pedophilia. Many predators priests and preachers have been prosecuted in the past couple decades than ever would have before then, because of activists talking about these crimes and bringing them into the light of day. Twenty years ago was when Allen was supposed to have molested Dylan and when was first known to have been exploiting Soon Yi, so not sure why you are pointing to that time as the age of morality.


MichaelCohen1
MichaelCohen1

@mtstrauss The New York Supreme Court ruled in 1994 (see Allen V Farrow Case Brief on google) that" Allen's relationship with Soon-Yi was UNACCEPTABLE.  However that was twenty years ago and things have changed such as gay marriage. In today crazy world nobody would care if you married your sister, daughter or your dog. But years ago there was still some moral standards.

mtstrauss
mtstrauss

@TimLieder @mtstrauss  Never said that he had a father/daughter relationship with Soon-Yi or that he was any sort of father figure. That's not the point. Just the idea of having an ongoing affair with your daughter's sister is pretty creepy. 

TimLieder
TimLieder

@mtstrauss No. He didn't. She was one of a dozen adopted children that he ignored. Not even Mia Farrow says that they had a father/daughter relationship.

AnnieLogan
AnnieLogan

@RodniaNelan @114sp@mtstrauss@cathytoo What I find strange is that Woody Allen is the one who is foaming at the mouth and is saying vengeful things about Farrow, while Mia really hasn't said much at all.  Her children are adults, and she is not responsible for what they say about Allen.  For goodness sakes, Dylan is a grown woman, who lives more than a 1000 miles away from Mia and has a husband and two kids. 

RodniaNelan
RodniaNelan

@114sp @mtstrauss@cathytooWhat I can't understand is how the 'spiteful ex-lover' label is being thrown around with no empathy for Mia in what he did to HER CHILD Soon Yi, and what he did to HER OTHER CHILDREN in his selfish pursuit of one of them, and in devastating their mother. Allen did not cheat on her with a stranger, he cheated on her with HER OWN VERY VERY YOUNG IMPRESSIONABLE CHILD.  A more disgusting act of immorality it would be hard to come up with, yet it is Farrow, not Allen, that is painted as spiteful and vindictive, while over and over I see Allen being given a pass for this incredibly immoral and despicable act.

AnnieLogan
AnnieLogan

@cathytoo He was never supposed to be alone with Dylan because he was already in therapy due to inappropriate behavior towards her.  Woody is crazy!  What sane man screws his children's sister in the middle of a custody battle? 

RodniaNelan
RodniaNelan

@MichaelCohen1 @cathytooamen to this Michael. Sex tourism and exploitation of minors is rife in Asian countries as well. The book is not written yet on Allen. God knows how many families he paid off in a similar manner that Michael Jackson has. Long after his death we will be hearing things...just as I expect that some will come out eventually about Michael Jackson too.

MichaelCohen1
MichaelCohen1

@cathytoo These rich men do not limit their sexual needs to their homes. I am sure he  sexually abused many young girls and had the money to cover it up. He loved to go to Europe where raping young girls is normal in many countries. Michael Jackson had young boys all over the place.

1964Nickel
1964Nickel

@cathytoo  Well, if you think a child can't be sexually abused in a place where a lot of people are, I can definitely state you're wrong. It happened to me once in the back of my grandfather's grocery store, while a parade was going on outside. 

114sp
114sp

@cathytoo  

Here is your answer:

Just released Allen Vs. Farrow : The second court doc.

"Within the month both parties retained counsel.." "to negotiate a settlement of their differences. In an effort to pacify Ms. Farrow, Mr Allen told her that the was no longer seeing SN-Yi. This was untrue. A temporary arrangement enabled Mr. Allen to visit regularly with Dylan and Satchel"(Ronan) "but they were not permitted to visit at his residence. "
 

"In Addition Ms. Farrow asked for his assurance that he would not seek custody of Moses, Dylan or Satchel.

On Feburuary 3, 1992, both
parties signed documents in which was agreed that Mr. Allen would waive custodial rights to Moses, Dylan, and Satchel if Farrow preceded him.
On the same day, Mr Allen signed a second document, which he did not reveal to Ms. Farrow, in which he disavowed the waiver, claiming that it was a product of duress and COERCION and stating that "I have no intention of abiding by it and have been advised that it will not hold up legally and that at worst I can revoke it unilaterally at will."


"at a birthday party for Dylan at her Connecticut home . Mr. Allen retired to the guest room for the night, Ms. Farrow affixed to his bathroom door, a note which called Mr. Allen a child Molester. the reference was to Soon-Yi."

"On August 2, 1992 Allen traveled to Ms. Farrows ct.
vacation home to spend time with his children. " Ms. Farrow had previously instructed Ms. Goteke that Mr. Allen was not to be left alone with Dylan and Satchel."

During this time Mia was not home.

"For a period of fifteen or twenty minutes during the afternoon, Ms Groteke was unable to locate Mr. Allen or Dylan.After looking for them in the house she assumed they were outside with the others, But neither Berg nor Stickland was with Mr. Allen or Dylan. Ms. Groteke made no mention of this to Ms. Farrow on August 4th.

During a different portion of the day, Ms. Stickland went to the television room in search of one of Ms. Pascal children. She observed Mr. Allen kneeling in front of Dylan with his head on her lap facing her body. Dylan was sitting on the couch staring vacantly at the television set.

After Ms. farrow returned home, Ms Berge noticed that Dylan was not wearing any under sundress. She told Ms. Farrow, who asked Ms. Groteke to put underpants on Dylan. Ms. stickland testified that during the evening of August 4, she told Ms. Pascal, "I have seen something at Mia's that day that was bothering me." She revealed what she had seen in the television room."

 "On august 5th Ms. Pascal telephoned s. Farrow to tell her what Ms. Stickland had observed.
Ms. Farrow testified that after she hung up the telephone, she asked Dylan, who was sitting next to her, whether it was true that daddy had his face in her lap yesterday." ms. Farrow testified:

"Dylan said yes. And then she said that she didn't like it one bit, no, he was breathing into her, into her legs, she said.and that he was holding her around the waist and I said, why didn't you get up and she said she tried to but that he put his hands underneath her and touched her. and she showed me where ....her behind."

"Uncomfort­able with Mr. Allen's inappropriate behavior toward Dylan and because he believed that her concerns were not being taken seriously enough by Dr. Schultz and Dr. Coates, Ms Farrow videotaped Dylan's statements. Over the next 24 hours, Dylan told Ms. Farrow that she has been with Mr. Allen in the attic and that he touched her privates with his finger.

After Dylan's first comments, Ms Farrow telephoned her attorney for guidance. She was advised to bring Dylan's to her local pediatrician, which she did immediately. Dylan did not repeat the accusation of sexual  abuse during this visit and Ms. farrow was advised to return with Dylan on the following day. On the trip home , she explained to her mother that she did not like talking about her privates.  "


" Unlike Yale New Haven, I was not persuaded that the videotape of Dylan was the product of leading questions." 

Upheld by the second court

RodniaNelan
RodniaNelan

@cathytoo The problem is that you do NOT know when his improper behavior with Soon Yi began. It was discovered when she was not underage, that does not mean at all that it did not begin when she was underage. All indicators, including Allens' old quote in people that his fantasy was a 'love nest of 15 12 year olds' point to his pursuit of Soon Yi beginning when she was underage...many, many predators seek out women with young female children to date so that they have access to their next victim. It is so sad to me to think what a young girl might think about a very famous, powerful man having interest in her. To manipulate and take advantage of that kind of naivete, just to fulfill one's perversion, is beyond disgusting.

WoodyAllenIncestualRapist
WoodyAllenIncestualRapist

@114sp @cathytoo 

Soonyi's affair w/ Allen started in her jr year in high school.

 I consider the relationship sexual molestation of soonyi, even though she should have known better.

If someone is a stepfather it should be illegal for them to have sex with their child until the child is 25, at least. Or how about just never?

114sp
114sp

@cathytoo  

No you are 100 percent Wrong! 
"It is disgusting to mess around with the step daughter of your girlfriend of 12 years."

It was not the step-daughter of his girlfriend. It was his children's sister his life partner's child. He knew her at 8 years old until then began his relationship with her when she was older. Woody will not admit to how old as evidenced in the movie "the wild man of blues."  doc.  


Now moving onto to Dylan and Allen's ridiculoous allegations which are clompletely unfounded.

Verdict Judge Wilk 

Allen vs. Farrow doc.

 "Unlike the court at IAS, we do not consider the conclusions reached by Doctors Coates and Schultz and by the Yale-New Haven team, to be totally unpersuasive. While the tendency of Dylan to withdraw into a fantasy and the inconsistencies in her account of the events of August 4, 1992, noted particularly by the Yale-New Haven team, must be taken into account in the evaluation of these serious allegations, the testimony given at trial by the individuals caring for the children that day, the videotape of Dylan made by Ms. Farrow the following day and the accounts of Dylan's behavior toward Mr. Allen both before and after the alleged instance of abuse, suggest that the abuse did occur." 


 "Dr. Leventhal himself later admitted, in SWORN testimony in the custody case, that he made several mistakes during the course of the investigation. One of those was his false characterization of Dylan’s active imagination as a thought disorder."  

The judge concluded inconclusive abuse based upon the doctor's MISTAKE of fantasies/ thought disorder.


The victim is Dylan at the hand of the molester Woody Allen.