# Woody Allen Child Molester?



## longknife

[My search for Woody Allen came up negative, so I hope I'm not double posting[

I don't like the guy one bit, neither as an entertainer or individual. But, this article says a lot of things that question the latest accusations @ The Woody Allen Allegations: Not So Fast - The Daily Beast


----------



## Delta4Embassy

If the law ever gets involved I'll comment then. But I don't comment on mere accusations or allegations.


----------



## Mr. H.

The Statute of Limitations has long passed. But the truth will live forever.


----------



## hjmick

Why the question mark?


----------



## skye

I have no idea if Woody Allen is a molester  or not.

All I know is that Mia Farrow is one snake of an ex wife.


----------



## hjmick

skye said:


> I have no idea if Woody Allen is a molester  or not.
> 
> All I know is that Mia Farrow is one snake of an ex wife.




I could see that...


----------



## skye

hjmick said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea if Woody Allen is a molester  or not.
> 
> All I know is that Mia Farrow is one snake of an ex wife.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I could see that...
Click to expand...



she hates Allen so much...she wants to destroy him.....it's sickening to watch really!


----------



## koshergrl

If he molested my  kids and married one of our adopted kids, I'd want to ruin him too.

It's funny to see who will defend child molesters.


----------



## skye

koshergrl said:


> If he molested my  kids and married one of our adopted kids, I'd want to ruin him too.
> 
> It's funny to see who will defend child molesters.




Mia Farrow is a snake.


----------



## koshergrl

Of course. Women shouldn't out the men who molest their kids. They should just drive them to the clinic to get their abortions and shut the fuck up.
He married one of his kids, and another has come forward to say he molested hers. I don't think this is evidence of the evil nature of Farrow, but rather of Allen.


----------



## Connery

"More than 20 years ago, Farrow learned that Woody Allen, her partner who hinted at trouble by casting Mia in humiliating movie roles (a cuckolded narcissist in Hannah and Her Sisters?)  a guy she never lived with, and only rarely loved  was conducting a torrid affair with her adopted daughter, Soon-Yi Previn."

Mia Farrow gets her revenge on Woody Allen | New York Post

Just reading this makes my skin crawl.....


----------



## Truthseeker420

koshergrl said:


> Of course. Women shouldn't out the men who molest their kids. They should just drive them to the clinic to get their abortions and shut the fuck up.
> He married one of his kids, and another has come forward to say he molested hers. I don't think this is evidence of the evil nature of Farrow, but rather of Allen.



But she didn't accuse him of molestation until she found out about his sexual relationship with her 20 year old daughter.


----------



## skye

koshergrl said:


> Of course. Women shouldn't out the men who molest their kids. They should just drive them to the clinic to get their abortions and shut the fuck up.
> He married one of his kids, and another has come forward to say he molested hers. I don't think this is evidence of the evil nature of Farrow, but rather of Allen.




How many times you are going to charge the man?

Farrow wants revenge on her ex love...at any cost...shame on her!


----------



## Gracie

Woody Allen is a scumbag, banging his adoptive daughter. SCUM. BAG.
I hope Mia does destroy him but Hollywood seems to think it's A OK to fuck ones daughter even if she is an adoptive one.


----------



## Connery

skye said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course. Women shouldn't out the men who molest their kids. They should just drive them to the clinic to get their abortions and shut the fuck up.
> He married one of his kids, and another has come forward to say he molested hers. I don't think this is evidence of the evil nature of Farrow, but rather of Allen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How many times you are going to charge the man?
> 
> Farrow wants revenge on her ex love...at any cost...shame on her!
Click to expand...


Some wounds can never be healed. Moreover, you have no idea what goes on in this woman's heart. If someone had done this to my child who was entrusted to me I would never forgive myself. That feeling may manifest itself in hatred of the person who did this to my child.

No matter how you slice it, it does not leads to a mentally healthy situation.


----------



## Gracie

skye said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course. Women shouldn't out the men who molest their kids. They should just drive them to the clinic to get their abortions and shut the fuck up.
> He married one of his kids, and another has come forward to say he molested hers. I don't think this is evidence of the evil nature of Farrow, but rather of Allen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How many times you are going to charge the man?
> 
> Farrow wants revenge on her ex love...at any cost...shame on her!
Click to expand...


Shame on HER??? Are you serious? He FUCKED his adoptive daughter, fercrissakes! And yes, it can take many years for another child to finally not be too scared to say they were molested as well. Shame on HER????


----------



## skye

it's so unbelievable....everybody crucifying a man with hearsay...


I would  like to see you in his shoes....people are weird or ignorant or I don't what...


----------



## Gracie

Whatever.


----------



## Papageorgio

skye said:


> it's so unbelievable....everybody crucifying a man with hearsay...
> 
> 
> I would  like to see you in his shoes....people are weird or ignorant or I don't what...



Coming from someone that would crucify Mia Farrow on hearsay? 

I really don't care for Allen or his humor or movies.

Whether he has done what has been rumored, innocent until proven guilty.


----------



## skye

I should have been a defense lawyer!

I like to defend men from snake ex-wives!

I should have been a great one too!


----------



## Michelle420

Gracie said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course. Women shouldn't out the men who molest their kids. They should just drive them to the clinic to get their abortions and shut the fuck up.
> He married one of his kids, and another has come forward to say he molested hers. I don't think this is evidence of the evil nature of Farrow, but rather of Allen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How many times you are going to charge the man?
> 
> Farrow wants revenge on her ex love...at any cost...shame on her!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Shame on HER??? Are you serious? He FUCKED his adoptive daughter, fercrissakes! And yes, it can take many years for another child to finally not be too scared to say they were molested as well. Shame on HER????
Click to expand...


It's devastating to the whole family unit, the other kids grew up with her as a sister and then he marries his daughter ( in their eyes) his lover in his eyes what a confusing message.


----------



## Connery

skye said:


> I should have been a defense lawyer!
> 
> I like to defend men from snake ex-wives!
> 
> I should have been a great one too!




You did  a stellar job there skye!







​


----------



## skye

awwwwwwwwww............stop it LOL   ^^^^^^^


----------



## Michelle420

Papageorgio said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> it's so unbelievable....everybody crucifying a man with hearsay...
> 
> 
> I would  like to see you in his shoes....people are weird or ignorant or I don't what...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coming from someone that would crucify Mia Farrow on hearsay?
> 
> I really don't care for Allen or his humor or movies.
> 
> Whether he has done what has been rumored, innocent until proven guilty.
Click to expand...


Well we do know he married his adopted daughter. 

Here he is as her Dad






Here he is as her Husband  






Did Woody Allen Molest His Adopted Daughter 22 Years Ago?

On This Day In 1997, Woody Allen Marries His Adopted Step-Daughter Soon-Yi Previn | Today in History


----------



## AquaAthena

Gracie said:


> Woody Allen is a scumbag, banging his adoptive daughter. SCUM. BAG.
> I hope Mia does destroy him but Hollywood seems to think it's A OK to fuck ones daughter even if she is an adoptive one.



He is a miserable, talented person who once made this statement:



To love is to suffer. To avoid suffering one must not love. But then one suffers from not loving. Therefore, to love is to suffer and not to love is to suffer. To suffer is to suffer. To be happy is to love. To be happy, then, is to suffer. But suffering makes one unhappy. Therefore, to be unhappy one must love, or love to suffer, or suffer from too much happiness. *I hope youre getting this down. - Woody Allen*


----------



## Gracie

Fucking perv.


----------



## skye

ok go kill him ...stone him ...hang him.... all because of hearsay...

totally amazing!


----------



## Michelle420

poor family


----------



## Dr Grump

koshergrl said:


> If he molested my  kids and married one of our adopted kids, I'd want to ruin him too.
> 
> It's funny to see who will defend child molesters.



If he is indeed, a molester....


----------



## skye

Dr Grump said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> If he molested my  kids and married one of our adopted kids, I'd want to ruin him too.
> 
> It's funny to see who will defend child molesters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If he is indeed, a molester....
Click to expand...



sometimes the sheer hatred towards men in USA is amazing to me!


----------



## Gracie

Sometimes the sheer hatred of women doubting what another woman's children says when they claim they were molested by "daddy", is amazing to me.


----------



## Gracie

Roman Polanski raped a child too. Yet, hollywood idolizes him because he makes good movies. How fucked up is that?

Oh. Wait. Attorney Skye will defend him too because the girl claims it, Polanski ran to another country, but it is all heresay. Eye roll.


----------



## Michelle420

Gracie said:


> Sometimes the sheer hatred of women doubting what another woman's children says when they claim they were molested by "daddy", is amazing to me.



It's really a devastating situation for all involved. 

The fact that he married his adoptive daughter was emotionally damaging to all of his kids and selfish in his part regardless of how attracted he was to her, it should not have happened.

He helped raise her as a father figure and crossed the line imo.

Whether the new allegations are true I can certainly understand why all of his children feel anger toward him.


----------



## skye

Gracie said:


> Roman Polanski raped a child too. Yet, hollywood idolizes him because he makes good movies. How fucked up is that?
> 
> Oh. Wait. Attorney Skye will defend him too because the girl claims it, Polanski ran to another country, but it is all heresay. Eye roll.



... you that seem to be so sure  about their sexual relationship ......tell me dear, were you under the bed?


----------



## koshergrl

Hmmm..he marries one kid...and then another comes forward to say he molested them too...

But probably the kid is lying and Woody is a saint.

You got it. What a sleeze.


----------



## Connery

drifter said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sometimes the sheer hatred of women doubting what another woman's children says when they claim they were molested by "daddy", is amazing to me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's really a devastating situation for all involved.
> 
> The fact that he married his adoptive daughter was emotionally damaging to all of his kids and selfish in his part regardless of how attracted he was to her, it should not have happened.
> 
> He helped raise her as a father figure and crossed the line imo.
> 
> Whether the new allegations are true I can certainly understand why all of his children feel anger toward him.
Click to expand...


I agree I do not know how anyone can have a healthy perspective about the various roles Allen played in the household.

His actions were reprehensible.


----------



## Dr Grump

Gracie said:


> Sometimes the sheer hatred of women doubting what another woman's children says when they claim they were molested by "daddy", is amazing to me.



I think asking for, and getting, evidence is the key...


----------



## skye

Dr Grump said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sometimes the sheer hatred of women doubting what another woman's children says when they claim they were molested by "daddy", is amazing to me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think asking for, and getting, evidence is the key...
Click to expand...


they want to hang him without any evidence here... losers!


----------



## Connery

skye said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Roman Polanski raped a child too. Yet, hollywood idolizes him because he makes good movies. How fucked up is that?
> 
> Oh. Wait. Attorney Skye will defend him too because the girl claims it, Polanski ran to another country, but it is all heresay. Eye roll.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ... you that seem to be so sure  about their sexual relationship ......tell me dear, were you under the bed?
Click to expand...


While one issue is that is  evidentiary in nature the other issue is that is the negative emotional impact Allen played on all involved. There is no defense for that in any civilized world. The imbalance of power alone and how that may compel a child to be fearful and mistrust close relationships can manifest itself  in chronic jealously, fear of being close, phantom memories etc etc. That is a life sentence no child should endure and then it is carried into adult relationships packed with mood swing and unpredictability.

Defend him all you want......it takes a special type of individual to see the goodness in him. I know I do not possess that quality to see beyond the devastation he laid in the family unit.


----------



## Gracie

skye said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Roman Polanski raped a child too. Yet, hollywood idolizes him because he makes good movies. How fucked up is that?
> 
> Oh. Wait. Attorney Skye will defend him too because the girl claims it, Polanski ran to another country, but it is all heresay. Eye roll.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ... you that seem to be so sure  about their sexual relationship ......tell me dear, were you under the bed?
Click to expand...



Were YOU? Why would you doubt a child raised by that perv after the perv married his SISTER? Methinks it is because you dislike Mia so much and not because of anything else.


----------



## Gracie

Methinks the loser here is the one defending a perv.


----------



## Michelle420

Gracie said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Roman Polanski raped a child too. Yet, hollywood idolizes him because he makes good movies. How fucked up is that?
> 
> Oh. Wait. Attorney Skye will defend him too because the girl claims it, Polanski ran to another country, but it is all heresay. Eye roll.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ... you that seem to be so sure  about their sexual relationship ......tell me dear, were you under the bed?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Were YOU? Why would you doubt a child raised by that perv after the perv married his SISTER? Methinks it is because you dislike Mia so much and not because of anything else.
Click to expand...


Right and the kids are hurt, confused and angry by what Woody already did do by marrying their sister.

I don't know if the latest allegation is true or not, but given what they have already been through it is not surprising that the children are mad at him.

I hope he didn't do it but I am not quick to condemn his kid for coming out about it (maybe the kid got confused by dad marrying her sister)  , if he did do it I hope that justice is served.


----------



## skye

Connery said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Roman Polanski raped a child too. Yet, hollywood idolizes him because he makes good movies. How fucked up is that?
> 
> Oh. Wait. Attorney Skye will defend him too because the girl claims it, Polanski ran to another country, but it is all heresay. Eye roll.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ... you that seem to be so sure  about their sexual relationship ......tell me dear, were you under the bed?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> While one issue is that is an evidentiary nature the other issue is that is the negative emotional impact Allen played on all involved. There is no defense for that in any civilized world. The imbalance of power alone and how that may compel a child to be fearful and mistrust close relationships can manifest itself  in chronic jealously, fear of being close, phantom memories etc etc. That is a life sentence no child should endure, and then it is carried into adult relationships packed with mood swing and unpredictability.
> 
> *Defend him all you want......it takes a special type of individual to see the goodness in him. I know I do not possess that quality to see beyond the devastation he laid in family unit. *
Click to expand...



I do respect your opinion Connery, but all I see here is a revengeful   Mia Farrow seeking vengeance   now because Woody Allen  has a chance to win an Oscar...that is all I see ...the perfect timing...it is tragic that this snake of a woman can not let go. It is all fabrications and she is involving her whole family...what a pathetic creature!


----------



## skye

Gracie said:


> Methinks the loser here is the one defending a perv.



am I a perv?????

Kinky!


----------



## Gracie

Tolja. She keeps focusing on Mia. Not anything or anyone else.
I see a pathetic creature and it ain't Mia. And she has reading comprehension skill problems as well.


----------



## Gracie

It's pretty damn sad a perv is nominated to win an oscar. I hope he is boo'd off the stage.


----------



## Connery

skye said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> ... you that seem to be so sure  about their sexual relationship ......tell me dear, were you under the bed?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> While one issue is that is an evidentiary nature the other issue is that is the negative emotional impact Allen played on all involved. There is no defense for that in any civilized world. The imbalance of power alone and how that may compel a child to be fearful and mistrust close relationships can manifest itself  in chronic jealously, fear of being close, phantom memories etc etc. That is a life sentence no child should endure, and then it is carried into adult relationships packed with mood swing and unpredictability.
> 
> *Defend him all you want......it takes a special type of individual to see the goodness in him. I know I do not possess that quality to see beyond the devastation he laid in family unit. *
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I do respect your opinion Connery,* but all I see here is a revengeful   Mia Farrow* seeking vengeance   now because Woody Allen  has a chance to win an Oscar...that is all I see ...the perfect timing...it is tragic that this snake of a woman can not let go. It is all fabrications and she is involving her whole family...what a pathetic creature!
Click to expand...


That is all you see.

What you do not want to see is how his actions ruined the souls of these children...one example is something I cited before *chronic jealousy* it eats at and destroys beautiful things, relationships, self image, hopes for the future. I do not live in your skin, I do not see things through the lens you do. I am horrified by his acts and justifiably so,  in our society, many times it is not the person that is looked up to and relied upon it is what the person stands for; the role they have taken on. Allen more than failed, he abused a trust that was given him with Farrow's kids.


----------



## Sherry

drifter said:


> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> it's so unbelievable....everybody crucifying a man with hearsay...
> 
> 
> I would  like to see you in his shoes....people are weird or ignorant or I don't what...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coming from someone that would crucify Mia Farrow on hearsay?
> 
> I really don't care for Allen or his humor or movies.
> 
> Whether he has done what has been rumored, innocent until proven guilty.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well we do know he married his adopted daughter.
> 
> Here he is as her Dad
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here he is as her Husband
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did Woody Allen Molest His Adopted Daughter 22 Years Ago?
> 
> On This Day In 1997, Woody Allen Marries His Adopted Step-Daughter Soon-Yi Previn | Today in History
Click to expand...


Looking at the young Soon-Yi sitting on his lap makes my skin crawl wondering if he was sexually attracted to her even then...it is completely taboo in our culture to act on feelings that one might have toward a child. Mia certainly isn't responsible in any way for him pursuing her as a young woman. In my opinion, he took advantage of her love for him...and that is so fucking warped. He abused her on every level possible, and as a mother, I would be heartbroken if my daughter was deceived into believing that such a relationship was healthy...so I would have a hard time faulting Mia for her bitterness.


----------



## tinydancer

Woody Allen falling in love and marrying his very own adopted daughte/step daughter gives me the freaking creeps. 

Let's face it. No Happy Thanksgiving meals together ever again with the rest of the family. 

Sheesh.


----------



## skye

I want proof

I want  to see proof that this man is guilty

and until I see hard evidence of his guilt....Woody Allen is an innocent man.

That's the law.


----------



## Gracie

http://guardianlv.com/2014/02/woody-allen-vs-roman-polanski-for-most-abominable-sexual-abuse/

Of course the two girls are lying. Skye says so. Their mothers are snakes according to Skye.



> Dylan Farrow tells the story of a powerful director who was just &#8220;nominated for his latest Oscar,&#8221; but who also got away with sexually abusing his adopted daughter multiple times when she was just seven years old.
> 
> &#8220;Imagine a world that celebrates her torment,&#8221; Dylan Farrow said.
> 
> Comedy writer Jenny Johnson tweeted after the news broke that Farrow finally decided to share her traumatic experience, mentioning that she hopes this letter will &#8220;convince Hollywood to stop kissing Woody Allen&#8217;s ass,&#8221; but many celebrities including actors Adam Baldwin and Lena Dunham reacted after Dylan Farrow ended her written pledge.


----------



## skye

Gracie said:


> http://guardianlv.com/2014/02/woody-allen-vs-roman-polanski-for-most-abominable-sexual-abuse/
> 
> Of course the two girls are lying. Skye says so. Their mothers are snakes according to Skye.




where is the proof ..... people can lie you know?

prove it!


----------



## Dr Grump

Gracie said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Roman Polanski raped a child too. Yet, hollywood idolizes him because he makes good movies. How fucked up is that?
> 
> Oh. Wait. Attorney Skye will defend him too because the girl claims it, Polanski ran to another country, but it is all heresay. Eye roll.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ... you that seem to be so sure  about their sexual relationship ......tell me dear, were you under the bed?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Were YOU? Why would you doubt a child raised by that perv after the perv married his SISTER? Methinks it is because you dislike Mia so much and not because of anything else.
Click to expand...


Dylan is a she not a he. They are both adopted and are not blood relatives. I don't find what Allen did to be the best by any stretch, yet almost 20 years later they are still together...shrug...


----------



## Connery

skye said:


> I want proof
> 
> I want  to see proof that this man is guilty
> 
> and until I see hard evidence of his guilt....Woody Allen is an innocent man.
> 
> That's the law.



Are you capable of seeing the devastation wreaked upon the family or at least address my comments in answer to your post?


----------



## Michelle420

Gracie said:


> Tolja. She keeps focusing on Mia. Not anything or anyone else.
> I see a pathetic creature and it ain't Mia. And she has reading comprehension skill problems as well.



Right, it was Dylan Farrow his daughter who wrote the open letter not Mia.



> After a custody hearing denied my father visitation rights, my mother declined to pursue criminal charges, despite findings of probable cause by the State of Connecticut  due to, in the words of the prosecutor, the fragility of the child victim. Woody Allen was never convicted of any crime. That he got away with what he did to me haunted me as I grew up. I was stricken with guilt that I had allowed him to be near other little girls. I was terrified of being touched by men. I developed an eating disorder. I began cutting myself. That torment was made worse by Hollywood. All but a precious few (my heroes) turned a blind eye. Most found it easier to accept the ambiguity, to say, who can say what happened, to pretend that nothing was wrong. Actors praised him at awards shows. Networks put him on TV. Critics put him in magazines. Each time I saw my abusers face  on a poster, on a t-shirt, on television  I could only hide my panic until I found a place to be alone and fall apart.





> What if it had been your child, Cate Blanchett? Louis CK? Alec Baldwin? What if it had been you, Emma Stone? Or you, Scarlett Johansson? You knew me when I was a little girl, Diane Keaton. Have you forgotten me?
> 
> Woody Allen is a living testament to the way our society fails the survivors of sexual assault and abuse.
> 
> So imagine your seven-year-old daughter being led into an attic by Woody Allen. Imagine she spends a lifetime stricken with nausea at the mention of his name. Imagine a world that celebrates her tormenter.



http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/02/01/an-open-letter-from-dylan-farrow/


----------



## Sherry

There are two separate issues here...he "seduced" one of the children into marriage, and now another one of the children is making allegations that she was molested. For the first one, the proof is clear. That leads me to give credence to the other one. Do I think it's enough to immediately jump to a guilty verdict?? No, but I certainly wouldn't accuse someone of making it up either unless they had a history of lying. The man obviously has issues with boundaries, and he finds ways to justify them.


----------



## skye

Dr Grump said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> ... you that seem to be so sure  about their sexual relationship ......tell me dear, were you under the bed?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Were YOU? Why would you doubt a child raised by that perv after the perv married his SISTER? Methinks it is because you dislike Mia so much and not because of anything else.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dylan is a she not a he. They are both adopted and are not blood relatives. I don't find what Allen did to be the best by any stretch, yet almost 20 years later they are still together...shrug...
Click to expand...



It's no use Dr Grump...Hollywood propaganda has brained washed these people 

Fortunately the courts don't care much about Hollywoodland silliness.


----------



## Connery

skye said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Were YOU? Why would you doubt a child raised by that perv after the perv married his SISTER? Methinks it is because you dislike Mia so much and not because of anything else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dylan is a she not a he. They are both adopted and are not blood relatives. I don't find what Allen did to be the best by any stretch, yet almost 20 years later they are still together...shrug...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> It's no use Dr Grump...Hollywood propaganda has brained washed these people
> 
> Fortunately the courts don't care much about Hollywoodland silliness.
Click to expand...


A total failure at seriously discussing this issue. You are hiding behind you own pride and refusal of understand/discuss how Allen has effected this family.


----------



## tinydancer

I can't imagine how Mia Farrow kept her cool all these years. Woody wouldn't have made it out of the living room alive past me.

Can you imagine the scene?

"Honey, I don't love you anymore. I'm in love with our daughter"

OR worse yet...

"Mommy, Daddy proposed to me and I accepted"

Holy freaking toledo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'd be flying off the top ropes and dealing out pain baby.


----------



## skye

Connery said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> I want proof
> 
> I want  to see proof that this man is guilty
> 
> and until I see hard evidence of his guilt....Woody Allen is an innocent man.
> 
> That's the law.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you capable of seeing the devastation wreaked upon the family or at least address my comments in answer to your post?
Click to expand...



The "devastation" is a self created devastation  Connery!   they are whipping up their misery...all because Mia Farrow hates her ex partner... she can not prove shit .... all we have here is hearsay and the courts are not going to go for that!


----------



## Sherry

Dr Grump said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> ... you that seem to be so sure  about their sexual relationship ......tell me dear, were you under the bed?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Were YOU? Why would you doubt a child raised by that perv after the perv married his SISTER? Methinks it is because you dislike Mia so much and not because of anything else.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dylan is a she not a he. They are both adopted and are not blood relatives. I don't find what Allen did to be the best by any stretch, yet almost 20 years later they are still together...shrug...
Click to expand...


He was a father figure, which is just as strong as blood relations on an emotional level. There's probably a unique term for it, but I'd compare it to Stockholm syndrome...she loved, admired and respect him, which made it easy for him to manipulate her to believing that loving each other as man and woman, even though they'd been father and daughter, was perfectly acceptable. Seriously FITH.


----------



## Gracie

Connery said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> I want proof
> 
> I want  to see proof that this man is guilty
> 
> and until I see hard evidence of his guilt....Woody Allen is an innocent man.
> 
> That's the law.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you capable of seeing the devastation wreaked upon the family or at least address my comments in answer to your post?
Click to expand...


No. All she can see is Mia, the snake.


----------



## Michelle420

Connery said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> Dylan is a she not a he. They are both adopted and are not blood relatives. I don't find what Allen did to be the best by any stretch, yet almost 20 years later they are still together...shrug...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's no use Dr Grump...Hollywood propaganda has brained washed these people
> 
> Fortunately the courts don't care much about Hollywoodland silliness.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A total failure at seriously discussing this issue. You are hiding behind you own pride and refusal of understand/discuss how Allen has effected this family.
Click to expand...


Actions have consequences.

If Woody would have left the family and married a young girl of legal age, well they may have still felt mad or hurt but to marry someone who was raised in the family as your child, that's a whole different kind of devastation to the family unit.

Woody while  busy writing his scripts has not really made any attempt to repair that damage with his kids, his behavior had a long term effect on them.


----------



## skye

Gracie said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> I want proof
> 
> I want  to see proof that this man is guilty
> 
> and until I see hard evidence of his guilt....Woody Allen is an innocent man.
> 
> That's the law.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you capable of seeing the devastation wreaked upon the family or at least address my comments in answer to your post?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No. All she can see is Mia, the snake.
Click to expand...



I can see others snakes too!!!


 nah love ya'


----------



## Sherry

skye said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Were YOU? Why would you doubt a child raised by that perv after the perv married his SISTER? Methinks it is because you dislike Mia so much and not because of anything else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dylan is a she not a he. They are both adopted and are not blood relatives. I don't find what Allen did to be the best by any stretch, yet almost 20 years later they are still together...shrug...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> It's no use Dr Grump...Hollywood propaganda has brained washed these people
> 
> Fortunately the courts don't care much about Hollywoodland silliness.
Click to expand...


What Hollywood propoganda?? Have you ever known a victim of sexual abuse, or perhaps a perpetrator??


----------



## Gracie

skye said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> I want proof
> 
> I want  to see proof that this man is guilty
> 
> and until I see hard evidence of his guilt....Woody Allen is an innocent man.
> 
> That's the law.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you capable of seeing the devastation wreaked upon the family or at least address my comments in answer to your post?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The "devastation" is a self created devastation  Connery!   they are whipping up their misery...all because Mia Farrow hates her ex partner... she can not prove shit .... all we have here is hearsay and the courts are not going to go for that!
Click to expand...


Again focusing her hatred on Mia. Save yer breath with this one.


----------



## Connery

skye said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> I want proof
> 
> I want  to see proof that this man is guilty
> 
> and until I see hard evidence of his guilt....Woody Allen is an innocent man.
> 
> That's the law.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you capable of seeing the devastation wreaked upon the family or at least address my comments in answer to your post?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The "devastation" is a self created devastation  Connery!   they are whipping up their misery...all because Mia Farrow hates her ex partner... she can not prove shit .... all we have here is hearsay and the courts are not going to go for that!
Click to expand...



No skye here is an excerpt, "Allen was investigated on child molestation claims for the 1992 accusation in Connecticut but prosecutors elected not to charge him.

The handling of the investigation was criticized after Litchfield County state attorney Frank S. Maco said in a press conference that he believed there was "probable cause'' to charge Allen but decided against prosecution partly to avoid a traumatic trial for the young girl".

 The Australian

What do you have to say now or are you still dodging the issue.


----------



## Dr Grump

Connery said:


> A total failure at seriously discussing this issue. You are hiding behind you own pride and refusal of understand/discuss how Allen has effected this family.



As long as they are happy why does it matter? Why should they have to sacrifice their future and their happiness to satiate the norm or status quo that society has put on them. Were they related? No. Were they consenting adults? Yes. Was Farrow betrayed? Yes, but I'm sure she has instigated betrayals in her own life as have we all. At the end of the day it was a judgement call. Dylan Farrow was a basketcase long before Allen took up Soon Yi. As were quite a few of the other children. Interestingly, the most normal down to earth - and uber intelligent - sibling is the one - and only one - that is Allen and Farrow's natural son, Ronan. But even now, Farrow is saying Allen might not be his father and that Frank Sinatra might be (to be fair he does look a bit like Sinatra). However, just to show how (mal?)adjusted Ronan is, he did recently famously tweet "Happy father's day -- or as they call it in my family, happy brother-in-law's day."


----------



## Gracie

Dr Grump said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> A total failure at seriously discussing this issue. You are hiding behind you own pride and refusal of understand/discuss how Allen has effected this family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As long as they are happy why does it matter? Why should they have to sacrifice their future and their happiness to satiate the norm or status quo that society has put on them. Were they related? No. Were they consenting adults? Yes. Was Farrow betrayed? Yes, but I'm sure she has instigated betrayals in her own life as have we all. At the end of the day it was a judgement call. Dylan Farrow was a basketcase long before Allen took up Soon Yi. As were quite a few of the other children. Interestingly, the most normal down to earth - and uber intelligent - sibling is the one - and only one - that is Allen and Farrow's natural son, Ronan. But even now, Farrow is saying Allen might not be his father and that Frank Sinatra might be (to be fair he does look a bit like Sinatra). However, just to show how (mal?)adjusted Ronan is, he did recently famously tweet "Happy father's day -- or as they call it in my family, happy brother-in-law's day."
Click to expand...


Because he FUCKED his other 7 year old daughter, that's why!!!


----------



## skye

Connery said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you capable of seeing the devastation wreaked upon the family or at least address my comments in answer to your post?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The "devastation" is a self created devastation  Connery!   they are whipping up their misery...all because Mia Farrow hates her ex partner... she can not prove shit .... all we have here is hearsay and the courts are not going to go for that!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No skye here is an excerpt, "Allen was investigated on child molestation claims for the 1992 accusation in Connecticut but prosecutors elected not to charge him.
> 
> The handling of the investigation was criticized after Litchfield County state attorney Frank S. Maco said in a press conference that he believed there was "probable cause'' to charge Allen but decided against prosecution partly to avoid a traumatic trial for the young girl".
> 
> The Australian
> 
> What do you have to say now or are you still dodging the issue.
Click to expand...




I can not say he is to blame until I see some evidence.

I am stubborn that way.


----------



## Connery

Dr Grump said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> A total failure at seriously discussing this issue. You are hiding behind you own pride and refusal of understand/discuss how Allen has effected this family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *As long as they are happy why does it matter?*
Click to expand...


Your presumption is groundless.

Stick with skye you two will make a great legal team. However, I suggest you get malpractice insurance _and plenty of it_.


----------



## Gracie

oy


----------



## Michelle420

Gracie said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> A total failure at seriously discussing this issue. You are hiding behind you own pride and refusal of understand/discuss how Allen has effected this family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As long as they are happy why does it matter? Why should they have to sacrifice their future and their happiness to satiate the norm or status quo that society has put on them. Were they related? No. Were they consenting adults? Yes. Was Farrow betrayed? Yes, but I'm sure she has instigated betrayals in her own life as have we all. At the end of the day it was a judgement call. Dylan Farrow was a basketcase long before Allen took up Soon Yi. As were quite a few of the other children. Interestingly, the most normal down to earth - and uber intelligent - sibling is the one - and only one - that is Allen and Farrow's natural son, Ronan. But even now, Farrow is saying Allen might not be his father and that Frank Sinatra might be (to be fair he does look a bit like Sinatra). However, just to show how (mal?)adjusted Ronan is, he did recently famously tweet "Happy father's day -- or as they call it in my family, happy brother-in-law's day."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because he FUCKED his other 7 year old daughter, that's why!!!
Click to expand...


I'd say it matters because the children were adopted and if they were troubled already then Woody's behavior made it worse. As an adult he should know that it would be traumatizing to the other kids and give mixed messages.

Why should it matter because the other kids feelings matter not just woody's feelings.


----------



## Sherry

Dr Grump said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> A total failure at seriously discussing this issue. You are hiding behind you own pride and refusal of understand/discuss how Allen has effected this family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As long as they are happy why does it matter? Why should they have to sacrifice their future and their happiness to satiate the norm or status quo that society has put on them. Were they related? No. Were they consenting adults? Yes. Was Farrow betrayed? Yes, but I'm sure she has instigated betrayals in her own life as have we all. At the end of the day it was a judgement call. Dylan Farrow was a basketcase long before Allen took up Soon Yi. As were quite a few of the other children. Interestingly, the most normal down to earth - and uber intelligent - sibling is the one - and only one - that is Allen and Farrow's natural son, Ronan. But even now, Farrow is saying Allen might not be his father and that Frank Sinatra might be (to be fair he does look a bit like Sinatra). However, just to show how (mal?)adjusted Ronan is, he did recently famously tweet "Happy father's day -- or as they call it in my family, happy brother-in-law's day."
Click to expand...


Just because it happened 20 years ago, doesn't mean he's exempt from moral judgment...and most people would determine that what he did with his daughter as immoral at the very least, and criminal if he was physical with her when she was a minor. It also speaks to his character, which is why most people wouldn't dismiss further allegations. A rational approach would be to take the stance of wanting all the facts before accusing either side of lying. These sort of accusations can be damaging if false, but I think people who would fervently side with the accused either have been falsely accused themselves, or know someone who has...so their passion is based on projection.


----------



## Connery

skye said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> The "devastation" is a self created devastation  Connery!   they are whipping up their misery...all because Mia Farrow hates her ex partner... she can not prove shit .... all we have here is hearsay and the courts are not going to go for that!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No skye here is an excerpt, "Allen was investigated on child molestation claims for the 1992 accusation in Connecticut but prosecutors elected not to charge him.
> 
> The handling of the investigation was criticized after Litchfield County state attorney Frank S. Maco said in a press conference that he believed there was "probable cause'' to charge Allen but decided against prosecution partly to avoid a traumatic trial for the young girl".
> 
> The Australian
> 
> What do you have to say now or are you still dodging the issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can not say he is to blame until I see some evidence.
> 
> I am stubborn that way.
Click to expand...


The prosecutor stated there was probable cause. Probable cause defined is as follows: "*Probable cause is a level of reasonable belief, based on facts that can be articulated*, that is required ... to arrest and prosecute a person in criminal court. Before a person can be ... arrested and prosecuted, the... police and prosecutor must possess enough facts that would lead a reasonable person to believe that the claim or charge is true" 

probable cause legal definition of probable cause. probable cause synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

They did not pursue the case although they  had enough to do so. Perhaps they should have, you simply wish to ignore this and run with your own obfuscated view of reality and deny this even existed. The statute of limitations have run he will never be prosecuted on that charge, nevertheless, those facts do exist and should not be ignored.


----------



## skye

How can you be convict with no evidence but  only  hearsay? how? No Court would allow that.


ok I'm out of here.. I said all I had to say! 

Good night y'all!


----------



## Sherry

skye said:


> How can you be convict with no evidence but  only  hearsay? how? No Court would allow that.
> 
> 
> ok I'm out of here.. I said all I had to say!
> 
> Good night y'all!



I hope you come back tomorrow and say that you were seriously stoned out of your fucking mind and just being an agitator.


----------



## Gracie

Do you have kids? What if your daughter said your boyfriend was bonking her at 7 years old. Would you DEMAND EVIDENCE or believe your DAUGHTER? Probably demand evidence from what I gather of your posts. You just don't get it.


----------



## tinydancer

Dr Grump said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> A total failure at seriously discussing this issue. You are hiding behind you own pride and refusal of understand/discuss how Allen has effected this family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As long as they are happy why does it matter? Why should they have to sacrifice their future and their happiness to satiate the norm or status quo that society has put on them. Were they related? No. Were they consenting adults? Yes. Was Farrow betrayed? Yes, but I'm sure she has instigated betrayals in her own life as have we all. At the end of the day it was a judgement call. Dylan Farrow was a basketcase long before Allen took up Soon Yi. As were quite a few of the other children. Interestingly, the most normal down to earth - and uber intelligent - sibling is the one - and only one - that is Allen and Farrow's natural son, Ronan. But even now, Farrow is saying Allen might not be his father and that Frank Sinatra might be (to be fair he does look a bit like Sinatra). However, just to show how (mal?)adjusted Ronan is, he did recently famously tweet "Happy father's day -- or as they call it in my family, happy brother-in-law's day."
Click to expand...


Oh Ronan despises Woody and stands with his sister Dylan and his mother.

I love this shot he took at Woody.

*Although the scenario of Dylan Farrow&#8217;s sexual abuse is different from Geimer&#8217;s, Ronan Farrow, the son of Woody Allen and Mia Farrow tweeted right after his father received a lifetime achievement award during the Golden Globes, asking whether &#8220;the part where a woman publicly confirmed he molested her at age seven&#8221; came &#8220;before of after Annie Hall.&#8221;*

http://guardianlv.com/2014/02/woody-allen-vs-roman-polanski-for-most-abominable-sexual-abuse/


----------



## Dr Grump

Gracie said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> A total failure at seriously discussing this issue. You are hiding behind you own pride and refusal of understand/discuss how Allen has effected this family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As long as they are happy why does it matter? Why should they have to sacrifice their future and their happiness to satiate the norm or status quo that society has put on them. Were they related? No. Were they consenting adults? Yes. Was Farrow betrayed? Yes, but I'm sure she has instigated betrayals in her own life as have we all. At the end of the day it was a judgement call. Dylan Farrow was a basketcase long before Allen took up Soon Yi. As were quite a few of the other children. Interestingly, the most normal down to earth - and uber intelligent - sibling is the one - and only one - that is Allen and Farrow's natural son, Ronan. But even now, Farrow is saying Allen might not be his father and that Frank Sinatra might be (to be fair he does look a bit like Sinatra). However, just to show how (mal?)adjusted Ronan is, he did recently famously tweet "Happy father's day -- or as they call it in my family, happy brother-in-law's day."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because he FUCKED his other 7 year old daughter, that's why!!!
Click to expand...


Links to evidence. Take your time...


----------



## Dr Grump

Connery said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> A total failure at seriously discussing this issue. You are hiding behind you own pride and refusal of understand/discuss how Allen has effected this family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *As long as they are happy why does it matter?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your presumption is groundless.
> 
> Stick with skye you two will make a great legal team. However, I suggest you get malpractice insurance _and plenty of it_.
Click to expand...



Well at the time they were happy. Let's see, some on this board have tried and convicted him on no evidence, and you want me to get malpractice insurance?? Riiighhtt...


----------



## Gracie

And this is why pervs continue to be pervs. Because people like you exist.


----------



## Dr Grump

Sherry said:


> Just because it happened 20 years ago, doesn't mean he's exempt from moral judgment...and most people would determine that what he did with his daughter as immoral at the very least, and criminal if he was physical with her when she was a minor. It also speaks to his character, which is why most people wouldn't dismiss further allegations. A rational approach would be to take the stance of wanting all the facts before accusing either side of lying. These sort of accusations can be damaging if false, but I think people who would fervently side with the accused either have been falsely accused themselves, or know someone who has...so their passion is based on projection.



You won't get any disagreement with me if he did it. I'm not even arguing that.


----------



## Sherry

Is anyone contesting the evidence that he married his daughter?? This would hold at least some degree of sway with most people.


----------



## Dr Grump

Gracie said:


> Do you have kids? What if your daughter said your boyfriend was bonking her at 7 years old. Would you DEMAND EVIDENCE or believe your DAUGHTER? Probably demand evidence from what I gather of your posts. You just don't get it.



I subscribe to Vanity Fair and there was a good article on the whole situation a few months ago. Here is the online link - pretty sure you don't have to subscribe...

Exclusive: Mia Farrow and Eight of Her Children Speak Out on Their Lives, Frank Sinatra, and the Scandals They?ve Endured | Vanity Fair


----------



## Dr Grump

Sherry said:


> Is anyone contesting the evidence that he married his daughter?? This would hold at least some degree of sway with most people.



He married his step daughter. Absolutely. But the 'step' part is important.


----------



## Dr Grump

Gracie said:


> And this is why pervs continue to be pervs. Because people like you exist.



I think peodophiles should be locked up and the key thrown away...









....after they've been convicted.

And while you're sitting in your cage throwing around crap, I'll just say the Russian, Chinese, Indonesian, Egyptian and Saudi Arabian justice systems are what they are because people like you exist...

Shrug....


----------



## Sherry

Dr Grump said:


> Sherry said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is anyone contesting the evidence that he married his daughter?? This would hold at least some degree of sway with most people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He married his step daughter. Absolutely. But the 'step' part is important.
Click to expand...


No it's not, and that is very insulting to diminish the healthy and loving relationships between adoptive parents and their adopted children who develop the same emotional bonds as biological parents and children.


----------



## Connery

Dr Grump said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> *As long as they are happy why does it matter?*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your presumption is groundless.
> 
> Stick with skye you two will make a great legal team. However, I suggest you get malpractice insurance _and plenty of it_.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Well at the time they were happy. Let's see, some on this board have tried and convicted him on no evidence, and *you want me to get malpractice insurance*?? Riiighhtt...
Click to expand...


What I would like is for you and skye is to stop speaking out of your respective asses and deal with the facts that have already been presented. This is not a courtroom, this is a message board and the statute of limitations has passed in any event. Although there was probable cause to prosecute Allen, that option was not exercised in favor of avoiding  a traumatic trial for the young girl.You both have refused to figure that information in your discussion. yea malpractice insurance...even the best attorneys have that just in case they fuck up.


----------



## tinydancer

You know for many a year Mia Farrow has just been living with this heartache. I cannot imagine finding my daughter's naked pictures in my husband's possession. Let alone realizing that it was Woody who took them.


----------



## Gracie

She has lived a very quiet life, too. I see why.
Meanwhile..Creepy Allen and Disgusting Polanski are hailed in Hollywood. Shame on THEM, not on Mia.


----------



## tinydancer

For anyone who hasn't read Dylan's open letter here's part of it.

*Whats your favorite Woody Allen movie? 

Before you answer, you should know: when I was seven years old, Woody Allen took me by the hand and led me into a dim, closet-like attic on the second floor of our house. He told me to lay on my stomach and play with my brothers electric train set. 


Then he sexually assaulted me. He talked to me while he did it, whispering that I was a good girl, that this was our secret, promising that wed go to Paris and Id be a star in his movies. I remember staring at that toy train, focusing on it as it traveled in its circle around the attic. 

To this day, I find it difficult to look at toy trains.

For as long as I could remember, my father had been doing things to me that I didnt like. I didnt like how often he would take me away from my mom, siblings and friends to be alone with him.

 I didnt like it when he would stick his thumb in my mouth. I didnt like it when I had to get in bed with him under the sheets when he was in his underwear. I didnt like it when he would place his head in my naked lap and breathe in and breathe out. 

I would hide under beds or lock myself in the bathroom to avoid these encounters, but he always found me. These things happened so often, so routinely, so skillfully hidden from a mother that would have protected me had she known, that I thought it was normal. 

I thought this was how fathers doted on their daughters. But what he did to me in the attic felt different. I couldnt keep the secret anymore.

When I asked my mother if her dad did to her what Woody Allen did to me, I honestly did not know the answer. I also didnt know the firestorm it would trigger.

 I didnt know that my father would use his sexual relationship with my sister to cover up the abuse he inflicted on me.*






Here's the link for the rest of the letter.

http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/20...from-dylan-farrow/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0


----------



## Gracie

Said in my best Skye voice: That snake Mia put it all in her head. That nasty Mia. How dare she. Where is the evidence? Mean ol Mia is just jealous he is nominated for an oscar. Dylan is a liar. Woody Allen is just the BEST.

*spit*


----------



## Politico

Gracie said:


> Woody Allen is a scumbag, banging his adoptive daughter. SCUM. BAG.
> I hope Mia does destroy him but Hollywood seems to think it's A OK to fuck ones daughter even if she is an adoptive one.



Yeah I bet Mia revels how pure she is whenever she looks at Frank's kid.


----------



## Katzndogz

Woody Allen's preference for children is the worst kept secret in Hollywood.  

If I knew a perv molested my daughter, I'd be the snake wrapped around his neck for the rest of his life.


----------



## Noomi

koshergrl said:


> If he molested my  kids and married one of our adopted kids, I'd want to ruin him too.
> 
> It's funny to see who will defend child molesters.



Soon Yi wasn't his adopted daughter, but its still damned creepy to know that he married her. Makes you shiver.


----------



## Noomi

He waited until she grew up, screwed her, then married her. No one could look at this photo without feeling sick inside.


----------



## tinydancer

Noomi said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> If he molested my  kids and married one of our adopted kids, I'd want to ruin him too.
> 
> It's funny to see who will defend child molesters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soon Yi wasn't his adopted daughter, but its still damned creepy to know that he married her. Makes you shiver.
Click to expand...


Soon Yi was a step daughter. Father was Andre Previn. Step daughter/adopted daughter .....yikes.

It's altogether too creepy.


----------



## Noomi

tinydancer said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> If he molested my  kids and married one of our adopted kids, I'd want to ruin him too.
> 
> It's funny to see who will defend child molesters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soon Yi wasn't his adopted daughter, but its still damned creepy to know that he married her. Makes you shiver.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Soon Yi was a step daughter. Father was Andre Previn. Step daughter/adopted daughter .....yikes.
> 
> It's altogether too creepy.
Click to expand...


Not sure if I believe Dylan though. It could have been planted in her head from a very young age by a vengeful Mia Farrow, who knows? But the fact that Allen raised Mia's adopted daughter and then married her really makes you wonder - what is it about Woody Allen and children?


----------



## NoNukes

skye said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> If he molested my  kids and married one of our adopted kids, I'd want to ruin him too.
> 
> It's funny to see who will defend child molesters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mia Farrow is a snake.
Click to expand...


Mentally unstable.


----------



## Esmeralda

skye said:


> I have no idea if Woody Allen is a molester  or not.
> 
> All I know is that Mia Farrow is one snake of an ex wife.



They were never married.

It is extrordinarily creepy that he had a sexual affair with the daughter of his long time girlfriend, a young woman he had known as his girlfriend's daughter since she was child.  Then he marries her. It's really creepy that he did that.

I don't know how whatever kind of 'ex' Mia is to him affects what her now fully grown, adult child says about him.  The now adult girl is her own person, not controlled by her mother.  

I tend to think that if this young woman, who was a child when the alledged abuse took place, is now, so many years later and now she is a adult, still contending the abuse did happen, I tend to believe her.  Yes, it is hard to believe, except for the creep factor in the relationship with his now wife: only 18 then, his girlfriend's daughter, and about 40 years younger.  Creepy x 3.


----------



## Esmeralda

NoNukes said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> If he molested my  kids and married one of our adopted kids, I'd want to ruin him too.
> 
> It's funny to see who will defend child molesters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mia Farrow is a snake.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Mentally unstable.
Click to expand...


How do we know that it isn't Woody Allen who is mentally unstable?  Are there any other instances or examples in Mia Farrow's life that might suggest mental instability?


----------



## Noomi

Esmeralda said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea if Woody Allen is a molester  or not.
> 
> All I know is that Mia Farrow is one snake of an ex wife.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They were never married.
> 
> It is extrordinarily creepy that he had a sexual affair with the daughter of his long time girlfriend, a young woman he had known as his girlfriend's daughter since she was child.  Then he marries her. It's really creepy that he did that.
> 
> I don't know how whatever kind of 'ex' Mia is to him affects what her now fully grown, adult child says about him.  The now adult girl is her own person, not controlled by her mother.
> 
> I tend to think that if this young woman, who was a child when the alledged abuse took place, is now, so many years later and now she is a adult, still contending the abuse did happen, I tend to believe her.  Yes, it is hard to believe, except for the creep factor in the relationship with his now wife: only 18 then, his girlfriend's daughter, and about 40 years younger.  Creepy x 3.
Click to expand...


Yep. He lived with her, probably made her breakfast in the morning, tucked her in at night, read her bedtime stories, drove her to school, helped her with her homework...all the while waiting, waiting until she became of legal age, and then he began to have sex with her.

That is what a pedophile does - grooms the victim until the victim trusts them, then takes advantage of them. Soon Yi had been groomed by Allen for years.


----------



## Esmeralda

Noomi said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Soon Yi wasn't his adopted daughter, but its still damned creepy to know that he married her. Makes you shiver.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soon Yi was a step daughter. Father was Andre Previn. Step daughter/adopted daughter .....yikes.
> 
> It's altogether too creepy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not sure if I believe Dylan though. It could have been planted in her head from a very young age by a vengeful Mia Farrow, who knows? But the fact that Allen raised Mia's adopted daughter and then married her really makes you wonder - what is it about Woody Allen and children?
Click to expand...


Every time there has been a new woman in his life, she has been years younger than the one before, until he ends up marrying one that is about 40 years younger.  That's mental stability?


----------



## tinydancer

Dylan even talks about how she was grilled over and over and over and that her version of events never changed. 

And hasn't to this day. This is the line that tugged at my heart from her open letter. 

* I thought this was how fathers doted on their daughters. But what he did to me in the attic felt different. I couldn&#8217;t keep the secret anymore.*


----------



## tinydancer

What's killing me is the few that are thinking Mia Farrow is the "snake" in all of this.

Hell's bells if I found my daughter's naked photos that my live in boyfriend took and kept of Soon Yi; found out that Woody wanted to marry our step daughter that we raised together; and then had my other daughter Dylan tell me what "daddy" did.....I'd be having a Lorena Bobbit moment. 

I'd hit that cutlery drawer so fast Woody wouldn't stand a chance.


----------



## NoNukes

Esmeralda said:


> NoNukes said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> Mia Farrow is a snake.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mentally unstable.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do we know that it isn't Woody Allen who is mentally unstable?  Are there any other instances or examples in Mia Farrow's life that might suggest mental instability?
Click to expand...


They both probably are.

people who have dealt with Farrow have commented on her mental instability.


----------



## Dr Grump

Connery said:


> What I would like is for you and skye is to stop speaking out of your respective asses and deal with the facts that have already been presented. This is not a courtroom, this is a message board and the statute of limitations has passed in any event. Although there was probable cause to prosecute Allen, that option was not exercised in favor of avoiding  a traumatic trial for the young girl.You both have refused to figure that information in your discussion. yea malpractice insurance...even the best attorneys have that just in case they fuck up.




I never said it was a court room. You and Skye are bringing it up, not me. I find what he did creepy. Have never said otherwise. My only points are these: 
1) When he got together with Soon Yi she was an adult
2) There is no proof that he molested Dylan...yet.

That is all I have said. Nothing more, nothing less.

He is a creepy guy. I read a biography and somebody more or less said to him that he had to stop being a leading man. It was getting less and less credible that people would suspend disbelief that somebody hot like Scarlett Johannson would fall for him. He got very upset and basically said BS and that it was very believable. He is living in la-la land. 

In saying that, Blue Jasmine was a great movie...


----------



## Esmeralda

Gracie said:


> It's pretty damn sad a perv is nominated to win an oscar. I hope he is boo'd off the stage.



Do people think this is coming out now because he is nominated for an Oscar?  Surely in the past 22 years he's been nominated for other Oscars?


----------



## Esmeralda

drifter said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's no use Dr Grump...Hollywood propaganda has brained washed these people
> 
> Fortunately the courts don't care much about Hollywoodland silliness.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A total failure at seriously discussing this issue. You are hiding behind you own pride and refusal of understand/discuss how Allen has effected this family.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actions have consequences.
> 
> If Woody would have left the family and married a young girl of legal age, well they may have still felt mad or hurt but to marry someone who was raised in the family as your child, that's a whole different kind of devastation to the family unit.
> 
> Woody while  busy writing his scripts has not really made any attempt to repair that damage with his kids, his behavior had a long term effect on them.
Click to expand...


When a father marries a woman the same age as his own children, or only a little older, it does affect the children.  Very much so. I've seen enough of that to know, especially if his kids are 17, 18, and so on.  The new wife is mid 20s, and the teenage kids are really freaked out about it and feel embarrasment and shame, plus they feel he's neglecting his own children to marry (and have a sexual relationship) with someone nearly their own age.  It's very confusing for them, really messes with their heads and their emotions.


----------



## Esmeralda

drifter said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> As long as they are happy why does it matter? Why should they have to sacrifice their future and their happiness to satiate the norm or status quo that society has put on them. Were they related? No. Were they consenting adults? Yes. Was Farrow betrayed? Yes, but I'm sure she has instigated betrayals in her own life as have we all. At the end of the day it was a judgement call. Dylan Farrow was a basketcase long before Allen took up Soon Yi. As were quite a few of the other children. Interestingly, the most normal down to earth - and uber intelligent - sibling is the one - and only one - that is Allen and Farrow's natural son, Ronan. But even now, Farrow is saying Allen might not be his father and that Frank Sinatra might be (to be fair he does look a bit like Sinatra). However, just to show how (mal?)adjusted Ronan is, he did recently famously tweet "Happy father's day -- or as they call it in my family, happy brother-in-law's day."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because he FUCKED his other 7 year old daughter, that's why!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'd say it matters because the children were adopted and if they were troubled already then Woody's behavior made it worse. As an adult he should know that it would be traumatizing to the other kids and give mixed messages.
> 
> Why should it matter because the other kids feelings matter not just woody's feelings.
Click to expand...


I agree with this and others who are saying the same. He was/is the adult.  He should have made much better choices.  Any parent, step parent, or someone in the role of parent has to put their needs and desires second to those of the children if it is going to harm the children.  His behavior was very psychologically damaging to the whole family, all those kids.


----------



## Sarah G

Esmeralda said:


> drifter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because he FUCKED his other 7 year old daughter, that's why!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd say it matters because the children were adopted and if they were troubled already then Woody's behavior made it worse. As an adult he should know that it would be traumatizing to the other kids and give mixed messages.
> 
> Why should it matter because the other kids feelings matter not just woody's feelings.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I agree with this and others who are saying the same. He was/is the adult.  He should have made much better choices.  Any parent, step parent, or someone in the role of parent has to put their needs and desires second to those of the children if it is going to harm the children.  His behavior was very psychologically damaging to the whole family, all those kids.
Click to expand...


He is definately creepy taking this opportunity with his daughter.  

Mia may still be angry, I probably would be too.  His alleged biological child is pretty pissed, Mia won't even Acknowledge that Ronan is his.



> Dylan Farrow's open-letter was precipitated by Allen being honored at the Golden Globes with the Cecil B. DeMille lifetime achievement award. Allen didn't attend as he largely abstains from awards shows. But during the telecast's tribute, Ronan Farrow tweeted: "Missed the Woody Allen tribute - did they put the part where a woman publicly confirmed he molested her at age 7 before or after Annie Hall?"
> 
> Ronan Farrow is the lone biological child of Allen and Mia Farrow, though Farrow has said her former husband Frank Sinatra could be his father. Ronan Farrow is estranged from Allen.
> 
> A rebuke followed last week when Robert Weide, director of the PBS "American Masters" documentary on Allen, argued in a lengthy account on the Daily Beast that many were unaware of the facts of Allen's relationship with Previn and that the incident with Dylan Farrow was unproven.
> 
> Dylan Farrow, who said she now lives happily married in Florida under another name, urged people not to forget
> 
> Mia Farrow's daughter resurrects Woody Allen molestation claim | Fox News


----------



## BDBoop

longknife said:


> [My search for Woody Allen came up negative, so I hope I'm not double posting[
> 
> I don't like the guy one bit, neither as an entertainer or individual. But, this article says a lot of things that question the latest accusations @ The Woody Allen Allegations: Not So Fast - The Daily Beast


Brilliant article to start this thread with. Thank you.

I believe that Mia has lied to herself for so long, she now believes the lies to be truth, and so do at least two of her children.


----------



## BDBoop

skye said:


> it's so unbelievable....everybody crucifying a man with hearsay...
> 
> 
> I would  like to see you in his shoes....people are weird or ignorant or I don't what...



I read the entire article before posting. Yes, I used to be disgusted by the two of them (Woody and Soon-yi) - but what I thought I knew was not the reality of the matter, which the author addresses in his first handful of points.


----------



## BDBoop

Gracie said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> A total failure at seriously discussing this issue. You are hiding behind you own pride and refusal of understand/discuss how Allen has effected this family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As long as they are happy why does it matter? Why should they have to sacrifice their future and their happiness to satiate the norm or status quo that society has put on them. Were they related? No. Were they consenting adults? Yes. Was Farrow betrayed? Yes, but I'm sure she has instigated betrayals in her own life as have we all. At the end of the day it was a judgement call. Dylan Farrow was a basketcase long before Allen took up Soon Yi. As were quite a few of the other children. Interestingly, the most normal down to earth - and uber intelligent - sibling is the one - and only one - that is Allen and Farrow's natural son, Ronan. But even now, Farrow is saying Allen might not be his father and that Frank Sinatra might be (to be fair he does look a bit like Sinatra). However, just to show how (mal?)adjusted Ronan is, he did recently famously tweet "Happy father's day -- or as they call it in my family, happy brother-in-law's day."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because he FUCKED his other 7 year old daughter, that's why!!!
Click to expand...


OMG NO he did NOT! There was no anal or vaginal trauma.


----------



## BDBoop

tinydancer said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> If he molested my  kids and married one of our adopted kids, I'd want to ruin him too.
> 
> It's funny to see who will defend child molesters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soon Yi wasn't his adopted daughter, but its still damned creepy to know that he married her. Makes you shiver.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Soon Yi was a step daughter. Father was Andre Previn. Step daughter/adopted daughter .....yikes.
> 
> It's altogether too creepy.
Click to expand...


Not step. Never even lived under the same roof.


----------



## BDBoop

Fron the linked article in the OP:


> #1: Soon-Yi was Woody&#8217;s daughter. False.
> 
> #2:* Soon-Yi was Woody&#8217;s step-daughter. False.
> 
> #3:* Soon-Yi was Woody and Mia&#8217;s adopted daughter. False. Soon-Yi was the adopted daughter of Mia Farrow and André Previn. Her full name was Soon-Yi Farrow Previn.
> 
> #4:* Woody and Mia were married. False.
> 
> #5:* Woody and Mia lived together. False. Woody lived in his apartment on Fifth Ave. Mia and her kids lived on Central Park West. In fact, Woody never once stayed over night at Mia&#8217;s apartment in 12 years.
> 
> #6:* Woody and Mia had a common-law marriage. False. New York State does not recognize common law marriage. Even in states that do, a couple has to cohabitate for a certain number of years.
> 
> #7:* Soon-Yi viewed Woody as a father figure. False. Soon-Yi saw Woody as her mother&#8217;s boyfriend. Her father figure was her adoptive father, André Previn.
> 
> #8: Soon-Yi was underage when she and Woody started having relations. False. She was either 19 or 21. (Her year of birth in Korea was undocumented, but believed to be either 1970 or &#8217;72.)
> 
> #9:* Soon-Yi was borderline retarded. Ha! She&#8217;s smart as a whip, has a degree from Columbia University and speaks more languages than you.
> 
> #10:* Woody was grooming Soon-Yi from an early age to be his child bride. Oh, come on! According to court documents and Mia&#8217;s own memoir, until 1990 (when Soon-Yi was 18 or 20), Woody &#8220;had little to do with any of the Previn children, (but) had the least to do with Soon-Yi&#8221; so Mia encouraged him to spend more time with her. Woody started taking her to basketball games, and the rest is tabloid history. So he hardly &#8220;had his eye on her&#8221; from the time she was a child.


----------



## Sarah G

BDBoop said:


> Fron the linked article in the OP:
> 
> 
> 
> #1: Soon-Yi was Woodys daughter. False.
> 
> #2:* Soon-Yi was Woodys step-daughter. False.
> 
> #3:* Soon-Yi was Woody and Mias adopted daughter. False. Soon-Yi was the adopted daughter of Mia Farrow and André Previn. Her full name was Soon-Yi Farrow Previn.
> 
> #4:* Woody and Mia were married. False.
> 
> #5:* Woody and Mia lived together. False. Woody lived in his apartment on Fifth Ave. Mia and her kids lived on Central Park West. In fact, Woody never once stayed over night at Mias apartment in 12 years.
> 
> #6:* Woody and Mia had a common-law marriage. False. New York State does not recognize common law marriage. Even in states that do, a couple has to cohabitate for a certain number of years.
> 
> #7:* Soon-Yi viewed Woody as a father figure. False. Soon-Yi saw Woody as her mothers boyfriend. Her father figure was her adoptive father, André Previn.
> 
> #8: Soon-Yi was underage when she and Woody started having relations. False. She was either 19 or 21. (Her year of birth in Korea was undocumented, but believed to be either 1970 or 72.)
> 
> #9:* Soon-Yi was borderline retarded. Ha! Shes smart as a whip, has a degree from Columbia University and speaks more languages than you.
> 
> #10:* Woody was grooming Soon-Yi from an early age to be his child bride. Oh, come on! According to court documents and Mias own memoir, until 1990 (when Soon-Yi was 18 or 20), Woody had little to do with any of the Previn children, (but) had the least to do with Soon-Yi so Mia encouraged him to spend more time with her. Woody started taking her to basketball games, and the rest is tabloid history. So he hardly had his eye on her from the time she was a child.
Click to expand...


Would you feel comfortable leaving your little girl with him?  You seem to be defending him vehemently for some strange reason.


----------



## Sunshine

Connery said:


> "More than 20 years ago, Farrow learned that Woody Allen, her partner who hinted at trouble by casting Mia in humiliating movie roles (a cuckolded narcissist in Hannah and Her Sisters?)  a guy she never lived with, and only rarely loved  was conducting a torrid affair with her adopted daughter, Soon-Yi Previn."
> 
> Mia Farrow gets her revenge on Woody Allen | New York Post
> 
> Just reading this makes my skin crawl.....



Over the years, I treated more than a few perps.  They always claimed they were innocent.  I always had the skin crawling sensation.  Some people say they have you summed up when you walk in.  I never owned to such extraordinary powers.  But there were some........


----------



## Sunshine

skye said:


> I should have been a defense lawyer!
> 
> I like to defend men from snake ex-wives!
> 
> I should have been a great one too!



Not really.  All a lawyer has is her reputation and lawyers who defend these types of cases end up with the same bad reputation as their clients.  There was a time when lawyers refused to defend a guilty person.  Now the courts will not allow that and if you get appointed you have to crawl into the gutter with them.  I find that a rather sad commentary on our system of jurisprudence.


----------



## Sunshine

skye said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> I want proof
> 
> I want  to see proof that this man is guilty
> 
> and until I see hard evidence of his guilt....Woody Allen is an innocent man.
> 
> That's the law.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you capable of seeing the devastation wreaked upon the family or at least address my comments in answer to your post?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The "devastation" is a self created devastation  Connery!   they are whipping up their misery...all because Mia Farrow hates her ex partner... she can not prove shit .... all we have here is hearsay and the courts are not going to go for that!
Click to expand...


What, in this case, would you consider 'proof'?


----------



## Sunshine

Sherry said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Were YOU? Why would you doubt a child raised by that perv after the perv married his SISTER? Methinks it is because you dislike Mia so much and not because of anything else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dylan is a she not a he. They are both adopted and are not blood relatives. I don't find what Allen did to be the best by any stretch, yet almost 20 years later they are still together...shrug...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He was a father figure, which is just as strong as blood relations on an emotional level. There's probably a unique term for it, but I'd compare it to Stockholm syndrome...she loved, admired and respect him, which made it easy for him to manipulate her to believing that loving each other as man and woman, even though they'd been father and daughter, was perfectly acceptable. Seriously FITH.
Click to expand...


It doesn't even have to be a 'father figure.'  Victims of people in authority who sexually abuse them present much the same as incest victims.  The anorexia and self mutilation are both classic symptoms of a person who has been incested.


----------



## Sunshine

Gracie said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> I want proof
> 
> I want  to see proof that this man is guilty
> 
> and until I see hard evidence of his guilt....Woody Allen is an innocent man.
> 
> That's the law.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you capable of seeing the devastation wreaked upon the family or at least address my comments in answer to your post?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No. All she can see is Mia, the snake.
Click to expand...


Unsuccessful women are often jealous of successful women.


----------



## BDBoop

Sarah G said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fron the linked article in the OP:
> 
> 
> 
> #1: Soon-Yi was Woodys daughter. False.
> 
> #2:* Soon-Yi was Woodys step-daughter. False.
> 
> #3:* Soon-Yi was Woody and Mias adopted daughter. False. Soon-Yi was the adopted daughter of Mia Farrow and André Previn. Her full name was Soon-Yi Farrow Previn.
> 
> #4:* Woody and Mia were married. False.
> 
> #5:* Woody and Mia lived together. False. Woody lived in his apartment on Fifth Ave. Mia and her kids lived on Central Park West. In fact, Woody never once stayed over night at Mias apartment in 12 years.
> 
> #6:* Woody and Mia had a common-law marriage. False. New York State does not recognize common law marriage. Even in states that do, a couple has to cohabitate for a certain number of years.
> 
> #7:* Soon-Yi viewed Woody as a father figure. False. Soon-Yi saw Woody as her mothers boyfriend. Her father figure was her adoptive father, André Previn.
> 
> #8: Soon-Yi was underage when she and Woody started having relations. False. She was either 19 or 21. (Her year of birth in Korea was undocumented, but believed to be either 1970 or 72.)
> 
> #9:* Soon-Yi was borderline retarded. Ha! Shes smart as a whip, has a degree from Columbia University and speaks more languages than you.
> 
> #10:* Woody was grooming Soon-Yi from an early age to be his child bride. Oh, come on! According to court documents and Mias own memoir, until 1990 (when Soon-Yi was 18 or 20), Woody had little to do with any of the Previn children, (but) had the least to do with Soon-Yi so Mia encouraged him to spend more time with her. Woody started taking her to basketball games, and the rest is tabloid history. So he hardly had his eye on her from the time she was a child.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Would you feel comfortable leaving your little girl with him?  You seem to be defending him vehemently for some strange reason.
Click to expand...


There are facts. I provided the facts. She was not his adopted daughter, or his stepdaughter.

I have serious doubts that he molested the seven year-old. There is no allegation that he raped her.

I myself lived what everybody is accusing Woody of. My mom remarried when I was four. He was my stepdad. He adopted me in fifth grade, molested me in sixth. My mom found pictures ... So it stopped after seven months - the 'hands-on' stuff, anyway. 

She stayed with him.

What happened to me was completely different than what happened with Soon-yi, as I posted. But everybody is trying to paint her story to look like mine.

It wasn't. He was not her adoptive father, her stepfather, her mom's live-in. He never even did overnighters at Mia's.

I read and responded to the article in the OP. it feels like Skye is the only other person who actually did the same.


----------



## Sunshine

Connery said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you capable of seeing the devastation wreaked upon the family or at least address my comments in answer to your post?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The "devastation" is a self created devastation  Connery!   they are whipping up their misery...all because Mia Farrow hates her ex partner... she can not prove shit .... all we have here is hearsay and the courts are not going to go for that!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No skye here is an excerpt, "Allen was investigated on child molestation claims for the 1992 accusation in Connecticut but prosecutors elected not to charge him.
> 
> The handling of the investigation was criticized after Litchfield County state attorney Frank S. Maco said in a press conference that he believed there was "probable cause'' to charge Allen but decided against prosecution partly to avoid a traumatic trial for the young girl".
> 
> The Australian
> 
> What do you have to say now or are you still dodging the issue.
Click to expand...


I really think that is a cop out.  In most cases prosecution of the perp is the only closure the victim ever gets.   A child having to testify is traumatic, but it is even more traumatic for her/his perp to walk free with no repercussions whatsoever.


----------



## Sunshine

skye said:


> How can you be convict with no evidence but  only  hearsay? how? No Court would allow that.
> 
> 
> ok I'm out of here.. I said all I had to say!
> 
> Good night y'all!



Well, you aren't such a good lawyer.  Many times all the jury has to go on is what the victim 'says.'  Call it what you like.  The jury is the 'trier of fact' and is there to decide who is lying. Most abuse cases have no physical (circumstantial) evidence, especially if time has passed.  But in any court in America, testimony is evidence.  Your attitude is why there are so many victims of abuse who will not step up to prosecute their abusers.


----------



## Papageorgio

BDBoop said:


> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fron the linked article in the OP:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Would you feel comfortable leaving your little girl with him?  You seem to be defending him vehemently for some strange reason.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There are facts. I provided the facts. She was not his adopted daughter, or his stepdaughter.
> 
> I have serious doubts that he molested the seven year-old. There is no allegation that he raped her.
> 
> I myself lived what everybody is accusing Woody of. My mom remarried when I was four. He was my stepdad. He adopted me in fifth grade, molested me in sixth. My mom found pictures ... So it stopped after seven months - the 'hands-on' stuff, anyway.
> 
> She stayed with him.
> 
> What happened to me was completely different than what happened with Soon-yi, as I posted. But everybody is trying to paint her story to look like mine.
> 
> It wasn't. He was not her adoptive father, her stepfather, her mom's live-in. He never even did overnighters at Mia's.
> 
> I read and responded to the article in the OP. it feels like Skye is the only other person who actually did the same.
Click to expand...


BD, I have no clue to what the truth is or isn't in this story. 

I can't say for sure, I wasn't there, I find Allen to be creepy and that was before all this occurred. I believe that there is not enough evidence to say yes or no, and in cases like this, it is not right to destroy a person over accusations that cannot be proved. 

Railroading a guy you think maybe guilty is wrong.


----------



## Sunshine

Dr Grump said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> *As long as they are happy why does it matter?*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your presumption is groundless.
> 
> Stick with skye you two will make a great legal team. However, I suggest you get malpractice insurance _and plenty of it_.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Well at the time they were happy. Let's see, some on this board have tried and convicted him on no evidence, and you want me to get malpractice insurance?? Riiighhtt...
Click to expand...


There was a time when Jeffrey Dahmer was happy too.  Before he was caught.


----------



## Sunshine

Dr Grump said:


> Sherry said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is anyone contesting the evidence that he married his daughter?? This would hold at least some degree of sway with most people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He married his step daughter. Absolutely. But the 'step' part is important.
Click to expand...


Yes, it is important because the step parent occupies a place as an authority figure in the child's life not unlike that of a parent.  The role is not dissimilar at all, and boundary violations by the step are as serious and traumatic as those of a parent.


----------



## Esmeralda

I don&#8217;t know, one way or the other, whether he abused his 7 year old adopted daughter.  Using reason, I find the fact she is telling the same story 20 some years later indicates there is truth in it.  Also, I find it very disturbing that a man would have a hidden affair with the 18 or 19 year old daughter of his girlfriend, a young woman 40 years younger than himself.  It&#8217;s disturbing because of the relationship, especially as she grew up from a child to a young woman with him as her mother&#8217;s long term boyfriend.  And he was the father of her siblings.  It&#8217;s disturbing simply because he was her mother&#8217;s boyfriend. And it&#8217;s disturbing he is 40 years older and possibly her first sexual relationship.  

I think it is odd that people are so willing to believe that it is Mia Farrow who is the one who is mentally disturbed and give no credence whatsoever to the idea it is Allen who is disturbed. 

The article in the OP is written by a virtual FRIEND of Allen&#8217;s, someone who has worked closely with him for years and is in regular friendly, contact with him.  Hardly an unbiased source.  He is making a big deal out of things that are not.  I never thought Soon-Yi was his adopted child. I never thought she was under 18.  I never thought he and Mia were married.  And I do remember reading they didn&#8217;t live together, though he spent many nights, many, in Farrow&#8217;s apartment with her in her bed.  One of the examples the author of the article uses to confirm Allen is a good guy is that he was allowed to adopt 2 more children with Soon Yi.  People with that amount of wealth, position and fame are NEVER turned down when adopting.  To suggest he wasn&#8217;t the adult father figure because they didn&#8217;t actually live full time in the same apartment is absurd.  Whether she was his adopted child or not, whether he and Farrow were married, matters not.  He was the man who was the older, adult, male role model to those kids most of the time for many years, 10 or 15 I believe. We have a photo of him with a very young (9-10 year old?) Soon-Yi on his knee.  In our culture, it is not common and not well accepted that a man so much older and so close to a father figure should start a sexual relationship with a young woman like that, especially as she is his girlfriend&#8217;s daughter.  

I never thought she was unintelligent: I knew she was a university student. I never thought he groomed her. None of that matters. That he, given his position in that household, and that her siblings were his own biological or adopted children, what he did was wrong, very, very wrong. Selfish, immature, perverted, and in no way was he thinking of the emotional welfare of any of those kids.  He is not a nice man.

So why should we automatically assume he is being victimized by a scorned woman?  Why accept automatically that she is the one with mental issues? I don&#8217;t get it. If anyone is messed up, he is.  This article in the OP is NOT looking for truth but looking to defend Allen. It is done rather cleverly, but it is propaganda in favor of Allen and against Farrow.  I think most people with open minds would see that the propaganda is quite transparent.  Allen is the very innocent victim.  Mia and her kids are the ones who are so very messed up. Black. White. No gray areas.  It's a complex situation. It is simply not that simple.


----------



## jillian

Dr Grump said:


> Sherry said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is anyone contesting the evidence that he married his daughter?? This would hold at least some degree of sway with most people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He married his step daughter. Absolutely. But the 'step' part is important.
Click to expand...


to be fair she wasn't his step daughter. he wasn't married to mia farrow and never lived with her. they actually had apartments on opposite sides of central park. 

so while it was sleazy, it wasn't illegal and i think farrow more than extracted her pound of flesh at the time. she tortured him.

as for these current allegations, the police rejected them then


----------



## Dr Grump

Sunshine said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sherry said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is anyone contesting the evidence that he married his daughter?? This would hold at least some degree of sway with most people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He married his step daughter. Absolutely. But the 'step' part is important.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, it is important because the step parent occupies a place as an authority figure in the child's life not unlike that of a parent.  The role is not dissimilar at all, and boundary violations by the step are as serious and traumatic as those of a parent.
Click to expand...


I was wrong. He wasn't even her step father. Read the link that Longknife put up and Boop reiterated. Then talk to me. Seriously, there are some FACTs in there that need addressing before you talk any more on the subject. Otherwise, those giving Woody a hard time are starting to look a little silly...


----------



## jillian

Dr Grump said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> He married his step daughter. Absolutely. But the 'step' part is important.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, it is important because the step parent occupies a place as an authority figure in the child's life not unlike that of a parent.  The role is not dissimilar at all, and boundary violations by the step are as serious and traumatic as those of a parent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I was wrong. He wasn't even her step father. Read the link that Longknife put up and Boop reiterated. Then talk to me. Seriously, there are some FACTs in there that need addressing before you talk any more on the subject. Otherwise, those giving Woody a hard time are starting to look a little silly...
Click to expand...



actually i said it, too.


----------



## Dr Grump

jillian said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sherry said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is anyone contesting the evidence that he married his daughter?? This would hold at least some degree of sway with most people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He married his step daughter. Absolutely. But the 'step' part is important.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> to be fair&#8230; she wasn't his step daughter. he wasn't married to mia farrow and never lived with her. they actually had apartments on opposite sides of central park.
> 
> so while it was sleazy, it wasn't illegal and i think farrow more than extracted her pound of flesh at the time. she tortured him.
> 
> as for these current allegations, the police rejected them then&#8230;
Click to expand...


As did the psychiatrists. A couple of things mentioned in the link:

1) So the notoriously claustrophobic Allen decided - on a visit to Frog Hallow, when Mia was super pissed at him over Soon Yi, and there were Nannies in the house and other kids - decided to take Dylan up to the attic for five minutes and touch her inappropriately? Really? Even the nannies say they cant' remember it happening.
2) And yeah, a 55 year old Allen sleeping with a 19/21 year old (they are not sure what year she was born) is kinda creepy. Of course a 50 year old Sinatra marrying and sleeping with a 21 year old Mia is not...because the age difference is only 29 years instead of 34/36 years...


----------



## BDBoop

jillian said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, it is important because the step parent occupies a place as an authority figure in the child's life not unlike that of a parent.  The role is not dissimilar at all, and boundary violations by the step are as serious and traumatic as those of a parent.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was wrong. He wasn't even her step father. Read the link that Longknife put up and Boop reiterated. Then talk to me. Seriously, there are some FACTs in there that need addressing before you talk any more on the subject. Otherwise, those giving Woody a hard time are starting to look a little silly...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> actually i said it, too.
Click to expand...


Sorry, the sock drawer is in utter chaos.


----------



## jillian

Dr Grump said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> He married his step daughter. Absolutely. But the 'step' part is important.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> to be fair she wasn't his step daughter. he wasn't married to mia farrow and never lived with her. they actually had apartments on opposite sides of central park.
> 
> so while it was sleazy, it wasn't illegal and i think farrow more than extracted her pound of flesh at the time. she tortured him.
> 
> as for these current allegations, the police rejected them then
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As did the psychiatrists. A couple of things mentioned in the link:
> 
> 1) So the notoriously claustrophobic Allen decided - on a visit to Frog Hallow, when Mia was super pissed at him over Soon Yi, and there were Nannies in the house and other kids - decided to take Dylan up to the attic for five minutes and touch her inappropriately? Really? Even the nannies say they cant' remember it happening.
> 2) And yeah, a 55 year old Allen sleeping with a 19/21 year old (they are not sure what year she was born) is kinda creepy. Of course a 50 year old Sinatra marrying and sleeping with a 21 year old Mia is not...
Click to expand...


exactly.  

and i doubt the allegations have become more reliable over time.


----------



## JoeB131

koshergrl said:


> If he molested my  kids and married one of our adopted kids, I'd want to ruin him too.
> 
> It's funny to see who will defend child molesters.



Well, most of us demand something called "proof" first.  

You might have heard of it. 

Incidently, I think that what he did with Soon-Yi was creepy enough. But it wasn't a crime.  

Conneticutt State Police investigated the incident and didnt' find any evidence.  

But fuck it, let's hang him because I'm still mad that _Annie Hall _beat out _Star Wars _for best picture in 1977.


----------



## BDBoop

JoeB131 said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> If he molested my  kids and married one of our adopted kids, I'd want to ruin him too.
> 
> It's funny to see who will defend child molesters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, most of us demand something called "proof" first.
> 
> You might have heard of it.
> 
> Incidently, I think that what he did with Soon-Yi was creepy enough. But it wasn't a crime.
> 
> Conneticutt State Police investigated the incident and didnt' find any evidence.
> 
> *But fuck it, let's hang him because I'm still mad that Annie Hall beat out Star Wars for best picture in 1977.*
Click to expand...


/jaw drops

I know, right?! ME TOO!!


----------



## Esmeralda

Dr Grump said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> He married his step daughter. Absolutely. But the 'step' part is important.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> to be fair she wasn't his step daughter. he wasn't married to mia farrow and never lived with her. they actually had apartments on opposite sides of central park.
> 
> so while it was sleazy, it wasn't illegal and i think farrow more than extracted her pound of flesh at the time. she tortured him.
> 
> as for these current allegations, the police rejected them then
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As did the psychiatrists. A couple of things mentioned in the link:
> 
> 1) So the notoriously claustrophobic Allen decided - on a visit to Frog Hallow, when Mia was super pissed at him over Soon Yi, and there were Nannies in the house and other kids - decided to take Dylan up to the attic for five minutes and touch her inappropriately? Really? Even the nannies say they cant' remember it happening.
> 2) And yeah, a 55 year old Allen sleeping with a 19/21 year old (they are not sure what year she was born) is kinda creepy. Of course a 50 year old Sinatra marrying and sleeping with a 21 year old Mia is not...because the age difference is only 29 years instead of 34/36 years...
Click to expand...


The nannies were paid employees of Allen; even the author of the cited article admits to this.  The fact Sinatra was a creep has no bearing on this.  Mia was the one exploited.  There is no logical connection to make to Allen.


----------



## JoeB131

tinydancer said:


> What's killing me is the few that are thinking Mia Farrow is the "snake" in all of this.
> 
> Hell's bells if I found my daughter's naked photos that my live in boyfriend took and kept of Soon Yi; found out that Woody wanted to marry our step daughter that we raised together; and then had my other daughter Dylan tell me what "daddy" did.....I'd be having a Lorena Bobbit moment.
> 
> I'd hit that cutlery drawer so fast Woody wouldn't stand a chance.



Except Woody had nothing to do with the raising of Soon-Yi.  She wasn't his stepdaughter. He really spent no time with her until she was an adult. 

But again, please don't let things called "Facts" get in your way.


----------



## JoeB131

Connery said:


> "More than 20 years ago, Farrow learned that Woody Allen, her partner who hinted at trouble by casting Mia in humiliating movie roles (a cuckolded narcissist in Hannah and Her Sisters?)  a guy she never lived with, and only rarely loved  was conducting a torrid affair with her adopted daughter, Soon-Yi Previn."
> 
> Mia Farrow gets her revenge on Woody Allen | New York Post
> 
> Just reading this makes my skin crawl.....



As it should.  THere was a lot of dysfunction in that "family".  

I'm still not buying the molestation accusations, though.


----------



## Dr Grump

Esmeralda said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> to be fair she wasn't his step daughter. he wasn't married to mia farrow and never lived with her. they actually had apartments on opposite sides of central park.
> 
> so while it was sleazy, it wasn't illegal and i think farrow more than extracted her pound of flesh at the time. she tortured him.
> 
> as for these current allegations, the police rejected them then
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As did the psychiatrists. A couple of things mentioned in the link:
> 
> 1) So the notoriously claustrophobic Allen decided - on a visit to Frog Hallow, when Mia was super pissed at him over Soon Yi, and there were Nannies in the house and other kids - decided to take Dylan up to the attic for five minutes and touch her inappropriately? Really? Even the nannies say they cant' remember it happening.
> 2) And yeah, a 55 year old Allen sleeping with a 19/21 year old (they are not sure what year she was born) is kinda creepy. Of course a 50 year old Sinatra marrying and sleeping with a 21 year old Mia is not...because the age difference is only 29 years instead of 34/36 years...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The nannies were paid employees of Allen; even the author of the cited article admits to this.  The fact Sinatra was a creep has no bearing on this.  Mia was the one exploited.  There is no logical connection to make to Allen.
Click to expand...


He paid the bills but doesn't mean they were on his side. Or anybody's for that matter.

Mia exploited? Is that why she says that she was still bonking Ole Blue Eyes when he was 71 and she was 42? 

And you can say all you like about 'rich people allowed to adopt' to which I call BS. Conventional adoptions in the US - even for the rich - are a hard sell. Soon Yi and Allen would have been vetted - and I'd suggest doubly so due to the notoriety of their relationship and the accusations by Dylan - and yet still adopted two girls.


----------



## JoeB131

tinydancer said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> If he molested my  kids and married one of our adopted kids, I'd want to ruin him too.
> 
> It's funny to see who will defend child molesters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soon Yi wasn't his adopted daughter, but its still damned creepy to know that he married her. Makes you shiver.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Soon Yi was a step daughter. Father was Andre Previn. Step daughter/adopted daughter .....yikes.
> 
> It's altogether too creepy.
Click to expand...


No, she wasn't his "Stepdaughter".  

She was her mother's boyfriend. 

Yes, it's creepy, but if you are going to hang a man, hang him for what he actually did.  

Mia Farrow was someone who dated older men and men who could advance her career...  

and she was really surprised that her adopted daughter followed her lead?


----------



## Esmeralda

JoeB131 said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> What's killing me is the few that are thinking Mia Farrow is the "snake" in all of this.
> 
> Hell's bells if I found my daughter's naked photos that my live in boyfriend took and kept of Soon Yi; found out that Woody wanted to marry our step daughter that we raised together; and then had my other daughter Dylan tell me what "daddy" did.....I'd be having a Lorena Bobbit moment.
> 
> I'd hit that cutlery drawer so fast Woody wouldn't stand a chance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except Woody had nothing to do with the raising of Soon-Yi.  She wasn't his stepdaughter. *He really spent no time with her until she was an adult.*
Click to expand...


That is patently untrue.


----------



## Esmeralda

Dr Grump said:


> Esmeralda said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> As did the psychiatrists. A couple of things mentioned in the link:
> 
> 1) So the notoriously claustrophobic Allen decided - on a visit to Frog Hallow, when Mia was super pissed at him over Soon Yi, and there were Nannies in the house and other kids - decided to take Dylan up to the attic for five minutes and touch her inappropriately? Really? Even the nannies say they cant' remember it happening.
> 2) And yeah, a 55 year old Allen sleeping with a 19/21 year old (they are not sure what year she was born) is kinda creepy. Of course a 50 year old Sinatra marrying and sleeping with a 21 year old Mia is not...because the age difference is only 29 years instead of 34/36 years...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The nannies were paid employees of Allen; even the author of the cited article admits to this.  The fact Sinatra was a creep has no bearing on this.  Mia was the one exploited.  There is no logical connection to make to Allen.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He paid the bills but doesn't mean they were on his side. Or anybody's for that matter.
> 
> Mia exploited? Is that why she says that she was still bonking Ole Blue Eyes when he was 71 and she was 42?
> 
> And you can say all you like about 'rich people allowed to adopt' to which I call BS. Conventional adoptions in the US - even for the rich - are a hard sell. Soon Yi and Allen would have been vetted - and I'd suggest doubly so due to the notoriety of their relationship and the accusations by Dylan - and yet still adopted two girls.
Click to expand...


You don't read very well.  Selective reading maybe.  Mia was joking about having a relationship with Sinatra when she was 42.  

If you were a nanny working for Allen, would you testify against him?  These nannies are usually ladies from 3rd world countries and their work visa depends on their job. In fact, it's possible he gave them extra to testify in favor of him.  

The adoptions I am referring to are foreign adoptions, and the rich usually  have no problem adopting, getting any child they want as fast as they want.  I've looked into adoption at one time myself.  No one as old as Allen would normally be allowed an adoption, except he is filthy rich, famous, and, in a sense, therefore powerful.  In the US, wealthy people like him don't go though agencies like the rest of us. They do private adoptions. They get a lawyer who does them and he finds a woman who is interested in a private adoption and will give up her baby to someone like Allen and Soon Yi because the kid will be raised in wealth with every advantage. The birth mother will get a nice bit of cash too, one way or another.


----------



## editec

Mr. H. said:


> The Statute of Limitations has long passed. But the truth will live forever.



I think there is a special dispensation of SoL when it comes to child abuse, Mr H.

Were that not the case the charges against all those priests would never have been pursued.


----------



## freedombecki

longknife said:


> [My search for Woody Allen came up negative, so I hope I'm not double posting[
> 
> I don't like the guy one bit, neither as an entertainer or individual. But, this article says a lot of things that question the latest accusations @ The Woody Allen Allegations: Not So Fast - The Daily Beast



Just because dating his stepdaughter when he was married broke his wife's heart and led to divorce in the last century absolves Woody Allen from indiscriminate sex with a minor child according to the Daily Beast? 

 The world deserves a break from reading about Woody Allen's latest attention-grabber taboo. imloho


----------



## Theowl32

Lets see if there is anywhere near the level of disgust. 


http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/20...e=blogs&_php=true&_type=blogs&_php=true&_r=1&


Whats your favorite Woody Allen movie? Before you answer, you should know: when I was seven years old, *Woody Allen took me by the hand and led me into a dim, closet-like attic on the second floor of our house. He told me to lay on my stomach and play with my brothers electric train set. Then he sexually assaulted me. He talked to me while he did it, whispering that I was a good girl, that this was our secret, promising that wed go to Paris and Id be a star in his movies. I remember staring at that toy train, focusing on it as it traveled in its circle around the attic.* To this day, I find it difficult to look at toy trains.

For as long as I could remember, my father had been doing things to me that I didnt like.* I didnt like how often he would take me away from my mom, siblings and friends to be alone with him.* I didnt like it when he would stick his thumb in my mouth. I didnt like it when I had to get in bed with him under the sheets when he was in his underwear. I didnt like it when he would place his head in my naked lap and breathe in and breathe out. I would hide under beds or lock myself in the bathroom to avoid these encounters, but he always found me. These things happened so often, so routinely, so skillfully hidden from a mother that would have protected me had she known, that I thought it was normal. I thought this was how fathers doted on their daughters. But what he did to me in the attic felt different. I couldnt keep the secret anymore.

When I asked my mother if her dad did to her what Woody Allen did to me, I honestly did not know the answer. I also didnt know the firestorm it would trigger. I didnt know that my father would use his sexual relationship with my sister to cover up the abuse he inflicted on me. I didnt know that he would accuse my mother of planting the abuse in my head and call her a liar for defending me. I didnt know that I would be made to recount my story over and over again, to doctor after doctor, pushed to see if Id admit I was lying as part of a legal battle I couldnt possibly understand. At one point, my mother sat me down and told me that I wouldnt be in trouble if I was lying  that I could take it all back. I couldnt. It was all true. But sexual abuse claims against the powerful stall more easily. There were experts willing to attack my credibility. There were doctors willing to gaslight an abused child.


----------



## Luddly Neddite

skye said:


> I have no idea if Woody Allen is a molester  or not.
> 
> All I know is that Mia Farrow is one snake of an ex wife.



I wonder how one would "know" that unless one lives with her/them. 

My point is, none of us can know what really went on.


----------



## koshergrl

A man who marries his daughter is a pervert and a pig. There's no question about it.


----------



## Connery

JoeB131 said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> "More than 20 years ago, Farrow learned that Woody Allen, her partner who hinted at trouble by casting Mia in humiliating movie roles (a cuckolded narcissist in Hannah and Her Sisters?)  a guy she never lived with, and only rarely loved  was conducting a torrid affair with her adopted daughter, Soon-Yi Previn."
> 
> Mia Farrow gets her revenge on Woody Allen | New York Post
> 
> Just reading this makes my skin crawl.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As it should.  THere was a lot of dysfunction in that "family".
> 
> I'm still not buying the molestation accusations, though.
Click to expand...


When I make these decisions I like to weigh as much fact as possible and  hear from the person who was part of the investigation/prosecution, "Allen was investigated on child molestation claims for the 1992 accusation in Connecticut but prosecutors elected not to charge him.

The handling of the investigation was criticized after *Litchfield County state attorney Frank S. Maco said in a press conference that he believed there was "probable cause''* to charge Allen but decided against prosecution partly to avoid a traumatic trial for the young girl".

 The Australian

The above is what I weigh as well. There are many reasons for not prosecuting I look at the totality of the circumstances and events regarding a person. 

Then the final question: Would I let this man be a role model for my child or any children? The answer is no.


----------



## Sarah G

Connery said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> "More than 20 years ago, Farrow learned that Woody Allen, her partner who hinted at trouble by casting Mia in humiliating movie roles (a cuckolded narcissist in Hannah and Her Sisters?)  a guy she never lived with, and only rarely loved  was conducting a torrid affair with her adopted daughter, Soon-Yi Previn."
> 
> Mia Farrow gets her revenge on Woody Allen | New York Post
> 
> Just reading this makes my skin crawl.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As it should.  THere was a lot of dysfunction in that "family".
> 
> I'm still not buying the molestation accusations, though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When I make these decisions I like to weigh as much fact as possible and  hear from the person who was part of the investigation/prosecution, "Allen was investigated on child molestation claims for the 1992 accusation in Connecticut but prosecutors elected not to charge him.
> 
> The handling of the investigation was criticized after *Litchfield County state attorney Frank S. Maco said in a press conference that he believed there was "probable cause''* to charge Allen but decided against prosecution partly to avoid a traumatic trial for the young girl".
> 
> The Australian
> 
> The above is what I weigh as well. There are many reasons for not prosecuting I look at the totality of the circumstances and events regarding a person.
> 
> Then the final question: Would I let this man be a role model for my child or any children? The answer is no.
Click to expand...


That last is the thing.  Nobody knows what happened back then but her bringing it up again lets us know we have to be more careful who we leave our kids with.  

The fact that he was also with his 20 year old "daughter-like" woman is strange as well.  They're still together and have other adopted kids.  There is something wrong with him.

I also hope Dylan finds peace and that she is extreme in her protection of her own kids.


----------



## jillian

Connery said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> "More than 20 years ago, Farrow learned that Woody Allen, her partner who hinted at trouble by casting Mia in humiliating movie roles (a cuckolded narcissist in Hannah and Her Sisters?)  a guy she never lived with, and only rarely loved  was conducting a torrid affair with her adopted daughter, Soon-Yi Previn."
> 
> Mia Farrow gets her revenge on Woody Allen | New York Post
> 
> Just reading this makes my skin crawl.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As it should.  THere was a lot of dysfunction in that "family".
> 
> I'm still not buying the molestation accusations, though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When I make these decisions I like to weigh as much fact as possible and  hear from the person who was part of the investigation/prosecution, "Allen was investigated on child molestation claims for the 1992 accusation in Connecticut but prosecutors elected not to charge him.
> 
> The handling of the investigation was criticized after *Litchfield County state attorney Frank S. Maco said in a press conference that he believed there was "probable cause''* to charge Allen but decided against prosecution partly to avoid a traumatic trial for the young girl".
> 
> The Australian
> 
> The above is what I weigh as well. There are many reasons for not prosecuting I look at the totality of the circumstances and events regarding a person.
> 
> Then the final question: Would I let this man be a role model for my child or any children? The answer is no.
Click to expand...


but there is only one reason to start this noise again after the statute of limitations ran... and one week after he got an award for lifetime achievement.

having probable cause is different from thinking you can prove a case beyond a reasonable doubt.

and, to me, this, from your link, is more important:



> A disciplinary panel found that Maco may have prejudiced an ongoing custody battle between Allen and Mia Farrow by making an accusation without formal charges.
> 
> Months before Mr Maco's press conference, a team of child abuse specialists from Yale-New Haven Hospital were brought in to the case and concluded that the child had not been molested.



and no one cared about trauma to these kids when mia farrow changed her kids names


----------



## Silhouette

Theowl32 said:


> ...At one point, my mother sat me down and told me that I wouldnt be in trouble if I was lying  that I could take it all back. I couldnt. It was all true. But sexual abuse claims against the powerful stall more easily. There were experts willing to attack my credibility. There were doctors willing to gaslight an abused child.



Yep.  Gaslighting...

..."What you see right in front of your face, isn't really true.  It's not really happening the way you think.  It never happened at all...and everyone agrees...and if you disagree, you are an outcase...bad..."  [see my signature]...

There is nothing more psychologically abusive than being told your real experiences don't exist; and getting some gaslighter to get an entire cabal together to agree to remake the reality that actually is, because of their own discomfort with confronting it head on.

Will there be a Woody Allen postage stamp next?


----------



## tinydancer

BDBoop said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> As long as they are happy why does it matter? Why should they have to sacrifice their future and their happiness to satiate the norm or status quo that society has put on them. Were they related? No. Were they consenting adults? Yes. Was Farrow betrayed? Yes, but I'm sure she has instigated betrayals in her own life as have we all. At the end of the day it was a judgement call. Dylan Farrow was a basketcase long before Allen took up Soon Yi. As were quite a few of the other children. Interestingly, the most normal down to earth - and uber intelligent - sibling is the one - and only one - that is Allen and Farrow's natural son, Ronan. But even now, Farrow is saying Allen might not be his father and that Frank Sinatra might be (to be fair he does look a bit like Sinatra). However, just to show how (mal?)adjusted Ronan is, he did recently famously tweet "Happy father's day -- or as they call it in my family, happy brother-in-law's day."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because he FUCKED his other 7 year old daughter, that's why!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OMG NO he did NOT! There was no anal or vaginal trauma.
Click to expand...


Link to proof of statement please.


----------



## Truthseeker420

Sarah G said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fron the linked article in the OP:
> 
> 
> 
> #1: Soon-Yi was Woodys daughter. False.
> 
> #2:* Soon-Yi was Woodys step-daughter. False.
> 
> #3:* Soon-Yi was Woody and Mias adopted daughter. False. Soon-Yi was the adopted daughter of Mia Farrow and André Previn. Her full name was Soon-Yi Farrow Previn.
> 
> #4:* Woody and Mia were married. False.
> 
> #5:* Woody and Mia lived together. False. Woody lived in his apartment on Fifth Ave. Mia and her kids lived on Central Park West. In fact, Woody never once stayed over night at Mias apartment in 12 years.
> 
> #6:* Woody and Mia had a common-law marriage. False. New York State does not recognize common law marriage. Even in states that do, a couple has to cohabitate for a certain number of years.
> 
> #7:* Soon-Yi viewed Woody as a father figure. False. Soon-Yi saw Woody as her mothers boyfriend. Her father figure was her adoptive father, André Previn.
> 
> #8: Soon-Yi was underage when she and Woody started having relations. False. She was either 19 or 21. (Her year of birth in Korea was undocumented, but believed to be either 1970 or 72.)
> 
> #9:* Soon-Yi was borderline retarded. Ha! Shes smart as a whip, has a degree from Columbia University and speaks more languages than you.
> 
> #10:* Woody was grooming Soon-Yi from an early age to be his child bride. Oh, come on! According to court documents and Mias own memoir, until 1990 (when Soon-Yi was 18 or 20), Woody had little to do with any of the Previn children, (but) had the least to do with Soon-Yi so Mia encouraged him to spend more time with her. Woody started taking her to basketball games, and the rest is tabloid history. So he hardly had his eye on her from the time she was a child.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Would you feel comfortable leaving your little girl with him?  You seem to be defending him vehemently for some strange reason.
Click to expand...


Hell no ! There is something creepy about a man who has sex and marries a young lady who he previously had an authoritarian relationship when she was a child,whatever that relationship,especially as a father figure.


----------



## Connery

jillian said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> As it should.  THere was a lot of dysfunction in that "family".
> 
> I'm still not buying the molestation accusations, though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When I make these decisions I like to weigh as much fact as possible and  hear from the person who was part of the investigation/prosecution, "Allen was investigated on child molestation claims for the 1992 accusation in Connecticut but prosecutors elected not to charge him.
> 
> The handling of the investigation was criticized after *Litchfield County state attorney Frank S. Maco said in a press conference that he believed there was "probable cause''* to charge Allen but decided against prosecution partly to avoid a traumatic trial for the young girl".
> 
> The Australian
> 
> The above is what I weigh as well. There are many reasons for not prosecuting I look at the totality of the circumstances and events regarding a person.
> 
> Then the final question: Would I let this man be a role model for my child or any children? The answer is no.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> but there is only one reason to start this noise again after the statute of limitations ran... and one week after he got an award for lifetime achievement.
> 
> having probable cause is different from thinking you can prove a case beyond a reasonable doubt.
> 
> and, to me, this, from your link, is more important:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A disciplinary panel found that Maco may have prejudiced an ongoing custody battle between Allen and Mia Farrow by making an accusation without formal charges.
> 
> Months before Mr Maco's press conference, a team of child abuse specialists from Yale-New Haven Hospital were brought in to the case and concluded that the child had not been molested.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> and no one cared about trauma to these kids when mia farrow changed her kids names
Click to expand...

For a custody battle different standards. Further, you will need to provide those reports in order to rely upon them.


----------



## Michelle420

I don't know whether he molested the 7 yr old or not, but I know he married the little girl that was considered a sibling to his child and Mia Farows children. When you are viewed as a father figure by kids and then you marry one of them, it gives mixed messages to the other kids.

It is possible that Dylan got confused because of what Woody did with Soon Yi. But I don't blame Mia for that, I blame Woody for making choices that effect the entire family unit and not facing how his behavior and actions impact everyone else involved,

It's well known that he went to psychotherapy for 30 years prior to his relationship with Soon Yi. I would say he's got some issues and has now created issues for the kids that grew up around him. I have no idea whether he molested the kid or not but he did create some anger and hurt from those kids.


----------



## tinydancer

JoeB131 said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> What's killing me is the few that are thinking Mia Farrow is the "snake" in all of this.
> 
> Hell's bells if I found my daughter's naked photos that my live in boyfriend took and kept of Soon Yi; found out that Woody wanted to marry our step daughter that we raised together; and then had my other daughter Dylan tell me what "daddy" did.....I'd be having a Lorena Bobbit moment.
> 
> I'd hit that cutlery drawer so fast Woody wouldn't stand a chance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except Woody had nothing to do with the raising of Soon-Yi.  She wasn't his stepdaughter. He really spent no time with her until she was an adult.
> 
> But again, please don't let things called "Facts" get in your way.
Click to expand...


Really. Nothing to do with Soon Yi as a child?








* On This Day In 1997, Woody Allen Marries His Adopted Step-Daughter Soon-Yi Previn
Posted on December 24, 2012 by awjphotography*

http://rememberinghistory.wordpress...ies-his-adopted-step-daughter-soon-yi-previn/


----------



## tinydancer

jillian said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> As it should.  THere was a lot of dysfunction in that "family".
> 
> I'm still not buying the molestation accusations, though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When I make these decisions I like to weigh as much fact as possible and  hear from the person who was part of the investigation/prosecution, "Allen was investigated on child molestation claims for the 1992 accusation in Connecticut but prosecutors elected not to charge him.
> 
> The handling of the investigation was criticized after *Litchfield County state attorney Frank S. Maco said in a press conference that he believed there was "probable cause''* to charge Allen but decided against prosecution partly to avoid a traumatic trial for the young girl".
> 
> The Australian
> 
> The above is what I weigh as well. There are many reasons for not prosecuting I look at the totality of the circumstances and events regarding a person.
> 
> Then the final question: Would I let this man be a role model for my child or any children? The answer is no.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> but there is only one reason to start this noise again after the statute of limitations ran... and one week after he got an award for lifetime achievement.
> 
> having probable cause is different from thinking you can prove a case beyond a reasonable doubt.
> 
> and, to me, this, from your link, is more important:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A disciplinary panel found that Maco may have prejudiced an ongoing custody battle between Allen and Mia Farrow by making an accusation without formal charges.
> 
> Months before Mr Maco's press conference, a team of child abuse specialists from Yale-New Haven Hospital were brought in to the case and concluded that the child had not been molested.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> and no one cared about trauma to these kids when mia farrow changed her kids names
Click to expand...


The noise started last November. Vanity Fair . 

Mia Farrow?s Story: On Frank Sinatra, Battling Scandal, and Raising Her Family | Vanity Fair

Golden Globes were held on January 12. 2014.

And what trauma to the children for changing the names? They hate Woody and want nothing to do with him ever in their lives.


----------



## koshergrl

They were going to charge Woody back in the 90s, when Mia first found out about the abuse. There was enough to charge him..but she opted not to put her daughter through it.

The girl is an adult now, and not as fragile,and is speaking out against not just sexual predation of children, but against the people who defend it or ignore it.

Woody's a puke, but Hollywood loves men who sexually exploit children..and so do a lot of non-Hollywoodies.


----------



## Sarah G

tinydancer said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> What's killing me is the few that are thinking Mia Farrow is the "snake" in all of this.
> 
> Hell's bells if I found my daughter's naked photos that my live in boyfriend took and kept of Soon Yi; found out that Woody wanted to marry our step daughter that we raised together; and then had my other daughter Dylan tell me what "daddy" did.....I'd be having a Lorena Bobbit moment.
> 
> I'd hit that cutlery drawer so fast Woody wouldn't stand a chance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except Woody had nothing to do with the raising of Soon-Yi.  She wasn't his stepdaughter. He really spent no time with her until she was an adult.
> 
> But again, please don't let things called "Facts" get in your way.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really. Nothing to do with Soon Yi as a child?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> * On This Day In 1997, Woody Allen Marries His Adopted Step-Daughter Soon-Yi Previn
> Posted on December 24, 2012 by awjphotography*
> 
> On This Day In 1997, Woody Allen Marries His Adopted Step-Daughter Soon-Yi Previn | Today in History
Click to expand...


Oh my god...


----------



## Michelle420

> Ronan Farrow later said:
> 
> "He's my father married to my sister. That makes me his son and his brother-in-law. That is such a moral transgression. I cannot see him. I cannot have a relationship with my father and be morally consistent...I lived with all these adopted children, so they are my family. To say Soon-Yi was not my sister is an insult to all adopted children."



neo-neocon » Blog Archive » Either/or: Ronan Farrow?s father


----------



## Dr Grump

Esmeralda said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> What's killing me is the few that are thinking Mia Farrow is the "snake" in all of this.
> 
> Hell's bells if I found my daughter's naked photos that my live in boyfriend took and kept of Soon Yi; found out that Woody wanted to marry our step daughter that we raised together; and then had my other daughter Dylan tell me what "daddy" did.....I'd be having a Lorena Bobbit moment.
> 
> I'd hit that cutlery drawer so fast Woody wouldn't stand a chance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except Woody had nothing to do with the raising of Soon-Yi.  She wasn't his stepdaughter. *He really spent no time with her until she was an adult.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is patently untrue.
Click to expand...


Prove it...


----------



## Dr Grump

Esmeralda said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Esmeralda said:
> 
> 
> 
> The nannies were paid employees of Allen; even the author of the cited article admits to this.  The fact Sinatra was a creep has no bearing on this.  Mia was the one exploited.  There is no logical connection to make to Allen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He paid the bills but doesn't mean they were on his side. Or anybody's for that matter.
> 
> Mia exploited? Is that why she says that she was still bonking Ole Blue Eyes when he was 71 and she was 42?
> 
> And you can say all you like about 'rich people allowed to adopt' to which I call BS. Conventional adoptions in the US - even for the rich - are a hard sell. Soon Yi and Allen would have been vetted - and I'd suggest doubly so due to the notoriety of their relationship and the accusations by Dylan - and yet still adopted two girls.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You don't read very well.  Selective reading maybe.  Mia was joking about having a relationship with Sinatra when she was 42.
> 
> If you were a nanny working for Allen, would you testify against him?  These nannies are usually ladies from 3rd world countries and their work visa depends on their job. In fact, it's possible he gave them extra to testify in favor of him.
> 
> The adoptions I am referring to are foreign adoptions, and the rich usually  have no problem adopting, getting any child they want as fast as they want.  I've looked into adoption at one time myself.  No one as old as Allen would normally be allowed an adoption, except he is filthy rich, famous, and, in a sense, therefore powerful.  In the US, wealthy people like him don't go though agencies like the rest of us. They do private adoptions. They get a lawyer who does them and he finds a woman who is interested in a private adoption and will give up her baby to someone like Allen and Soon Yi because the kid will be raised in wealth with every advantage. The birth mother will get a nice bit of cash too, one way or another.
Click to expand...


She was not joking. In both Longknive's link and the Vanity Fair piece she was deadly serious.

One of the adoptions was from China and the other is from Texas. How au fait are you with US adoption laws?

And yes, if you read the piece, the Nannies didn't really seem to care about where he was from.

That aside, you did also read where when they made the Golden Globe tribute to him they had to get permission from Farrow to use her clip from the Purple Rose of Cairo for the tribute and she gave it. Don't you find that weird? Or that she gave a character reference to Roman Polanski the other person who seems to be a person who is being chastised on this thread.


----------



## koshergrl

Soo...the fabulous left is now making the argument that the answer to child pedophilia is to prevent people from adopting?

You think this is an adoption issue?

More evidence of laws being changed to accomodate the most criminal and depraved among us.


----------



## Dr Grump

Noomi said:


> He waited until she grew up, screwed her, then married her. No one could look at this photo without feeling sick inside.



You do know that that is his adopted daughter, not Soon Yi?


----------



## koshergrl

And that means it's AOK to have sex with her?

Did you read what his adopted son said? He said that as adopted children, they feel like a family, and that the fact that his DAD married his SISTER is too bizarre for him, and he sees it as a blow against adoption that is going to reverberate amongst adopted families.

When you adopt a child into your home, let's hope you aren't adopting them with an eye towards one day screwing them. Let's try to avoid actually embracing that, though we certainly know it happens.


----------



## Dr Grump

koshergrl said:


> Soo...the fabulous left is now making the argument that the answer to child pedophilia is to prevent people from adopting?
> 
> You think this is an adoption issue?
> 
> More evidence of laws being changed to accomodate the most criminal and depraved among us.



Allie, you have rarely ever given proof of any thing she believe in any post. You just turn up,  state things as fact, and then move on. As long as your giving the left crap you dont' appear to give a crap about facts. Carry on...


----------



## koshergrl

Dr Grump said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He waited until she grew up, screwed her, then married her. No one could look at this photo without feeling sick inside.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do know that that is his adopted daughter, not Soon Yi?
Click to expand...

 
That's great!


----------



## koshergrl

So it's okay to have sex with your WIFE'S adopted children....

Got it.


----------



## Michelle420

Here he is with her as a father figure, His son saw them all as a family unit, he views Soon yi as his sister, it was devastating to the family unit what Woody did.






The History of New York Scandals - Woody Allen&rsquo;s Affair With Soon-Yi -- New York Magazine


----------



## Michelle420

koshergrl said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He waited until she grew up, screwed her, then married her. No one could look at this photo without feeling sick inside.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do know that that is his adopted daughter, not Soon Yi?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's great!
Click to expand...


The link says the picture is a young soon yi : Woody Allen and a (young) Soon-Yi Previn

On This Day In 1997, Woody Allen Marries His Adopted Step-Daughter Soon-Yi Previn | Today in History


----------



## Dr Grump

koshergrl said:


> So it's okay to have sex with your WIFE'S adopted children....
> 
> Got it.



If she is a consenting adult? Absolutely. Does it sound and look creepy? Yes.

Let me ask you this. Let's fast forward a few years. Let's say for shits and giggles two people get together. He is 35 she is 35, The wife has a 15 year old daughter. Five years later they split  up. 20 years later the husband runs into the daughter again. She is now 40 and he 60. They hook up. Is that an issue?


----------



## Dr Grump

drifter said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> You do know that that is his adopted daughter, not Soon Yi?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's great!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The link says the picture is a young soon yi : Woody Allen and a (young) Soon-Yi Previn
> 
> On This Day In 1997, Woody Allen Marries His Adopted Step-Daughter Soon-Yi Previn | Today in History
Click to expand...


This is why I don't trust blogs because they don't use the same vetting system as traditional newspapers. They don't have the same standard. That is not Soon Yi. For a start she has completely different features and look at how old Allen is. That aside, here are some pics of Bechet....including the one above..

bechet dumaine allen - Bing Images


----------



## Sarah G

Dr Grump said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> So it's okay to have sex with your WIFE'S adopted children....
> 
> Got it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If she is a consenting adult? Absolutely. Does it sound and look creepy? Yes.
> 
> Let me ask you this. Let's fast forward a few years. Let's say for shits and giggles two people get together. He is 35 she is 35, The wife has a 15 year old daughter. Five years later they split  up. 20 years later the husband runs into the daughter again. She is now 40 and he 60. They hook up. Is that an issue?
Click to expand...


Yes it is an issue, she was once his daughter.  Maybe you don't have kids and this kind of thing seems like nothing you'd ever object to but yes Woody Allen is creepy looking sitting there with that kid on his lap, he is creepy for hooking up with his other daughter when she was 20 and he was 50.  

Aren't there enough other young girls out there for him?  He has to have the ones who are relatives?


----------



## Michelle420

Dr Grump said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> So it's okay to have sex with your WIFE'S adopted children....
> 
> Got it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If she is a consenting adult? Absolutely. Does it sound and look creepy? Yes.
> 
> Let me ask you this. Let's fast forward a few years. Let's say for shits and giggles two people get together. He is 35 she is 35, The wife has a 15 year old daughter. Five years later they split  up. 20 years later the husband runs into the daughter again. She is now 40 and he 60. They hook up. Is that an issue?
Click to expand...


I think the point is there were other kids in the family unit effected hurt and angry over what happened.

They lash out and Woody shouldn't be surprised by it.

Actions have consequences, he did adopt two of those kids and he is supposedly the biological father of Ronan. 

As a parent I would expect him to be more discerning in how his actions and behavior is going to effect the family unit over the long haul.

Whether or not he molested his adoptive daughter Dylan one would think he would want to work on the relationship with her and work on healing it. He adopted her and she is confused about his choices.

If he did molest her then it makes it so much worse but even if he didn't why doesn't he try to repair the damage done in the mixed messages he caused?

He went to psychotherapy for 30 yrs. He understands how things effect people.


----------



## jillian

drifter said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> So it's okay to have sex with your WIFE'S adopted children....
> 
> Got it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If she is a consenting adult? Absolutely. Does it sound and look creepy? Yes.
> 
> Let me ask you this. Let's fast forward a few years. Let's say for shits and giggles two people get together. He is 35 she is 35, The wife has a 15 year old daughter. Five years later they split  up. 20 years later the husband runs into the daughter again. She is now 40 and he 60. They hook up. Is that an issue?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think the point is there were other kids in the family unit effected hurt and angry over what happened.
> 
> They lash out and Woody shouldn't be surprised by it.
> 
> Actions have consequences, he did adopt two of those kids and he is supposedly the biological father of Ronan.
> 
> As a parent I would expect him to be more discerning in how his actions and behavior is going to effect the family unit over the long haul.
> 
> Whether or not he molested his adoptive daughter Dylan one would think he would want to work on the relationship with her and work on healing it. He adopted her and she is confused about his choices.
> 
> If he did molest her then it makes it so much worse but even if he didn't why doesn't he try to repair the damage done in the mixed messages he caused?
> 
> He went to psychotherapy for 30 yrs. He understands how things effect people.
Click to expand...


the point is their "hurt" doesn't make him a child molester.

there is no relationship. farrow made sure of that. or was changing their names and keeping him from visting just kidding?


----------



## jillian

Sarah G said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> So it's okay to have sex with your WIFE'S adopted children....
> 
> Got it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If she is a consenting adult? Absolutely. Does it sound and look creepy? Yes.
> 
> Let me ask you this. Let's fast forward a few years. Let's say for shits and giggles two people get together. He is 35 she is 35, The wife has a 15 year old daughter. Five years later they split  up. 20 years later the husband runs into the daughter again. She is now 40 and he 60. They hook up. Is that an issue?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes it is an issue, she was once his daughter.  Maybe you don't have kids and this kind of thing seems like nothing you'd ever object to but yes Woody Allen is creepy looking sitting there with that kid on his lap, he is creepy for hooking up with his other daughter when she was 20 and he was 50.
> 
> Aren't there enough other young girls out there for him?  He has to have the ones who are relatives?
Click to expand...


sarah, she was never his daugher. she was andre previn and mia farrow's daughter. he didn't even live with them.


----------



## Dr Grump

Sarah G said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> So it's okay to have sex with your WIFE'S adopted children....
> 
> Got it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If she is a consenting adult? Absolutely. Does it sound and look creepy? Yes.
> 
> Let me ask you this. Let's fast forward a few years. Let's say for shits and giggles two people get together. He is 35 she is 35, The wife has a 15 year old daughter. Five years later they split  up. 20 years later the husband runs into the daughter again. She is now 40 and he 60. They hook up. Is that an issue?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes it is an issue, she was once his daughter.  Maybe you don't have kids and this kind of thing seems like nothing you'd ever object to but yes Woody Allen is creepy looking sitting there with that kid on his lap, he is creepy for hooking up with his other daughter when she was 20 and he was 50.
> 
> Aren't there enough other young girls out there for him?  He has to have the ones who are relatives?
Click to expand...


And Sinatra hooked up with Mia when she was 21 and he 50. Oona Oneil was 18 and Chaplin 50. They had 8 kids. And?

And once again, Soon Yi was never his daughter. Not even step.


----------



## Michelle420

jillian said:


> drifter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> If she is a consenting adult? Absolutely. Does it sound and look creepy? Yes.
> 
> Let me ask you this. Let's fast forward a few years. Let's say for shits and giggles two people get together. He is 35 she is 35, The wife has a 15 year old daughter. Five years later they split  up. 20 years later the husband runs into the daughter again. She is now 40 and he 60. They hook up. Is that an issue?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think the point is there were other kids in the family unit effected hurt and angry over what happened.
> 
> They lash out and Woody shouldn't be surprised by it.
> 
> Actions have consequences, he did adopt two of those kids and he is supposedly the biological father of Ronan.
> 
> As a parent I would expect him to be more discerning in how his actions and behavior is going to effect the family unit over the long haul.
> 
> Whether or not he molested his adoptive daughter Dylan one would think he would want to work on the relationship with her and work on healing it. He adopted her and she is confused about his choices.
> 
> If he did molest her then it makes it so much worse but even if he didn't why doesn't he try to repair the damage done in the mixed messages he caused?
> 
> He went to psychotherapy for 30 yrs. He understands how things effect people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the point is their "hurt" doesn't make him a child molester.
> 
> there is no relationship. farrow made sure of that. or was changing their names and keeping him from visting just kidding?
Click to expand...


He is rich and if he really cared he would have continued to pursue having a relationship with his biological son and his two children he did adopt with her.

He went to therapy for 30 yrs, are you saying that his kids who lash out don't deserve any effort at his repairing the damage caused by what he did?

He is an intellectual and he understands psychology. If he is not guilty why not reach out and offer to do therapy with his kids?

There are a lot of things he could do, he is the ADULT they were the kids who were effected.

I haven't said he is guilty of molesting the 7 yr old or not.

But Dylan his daughter that he did adopt said it and at the same token you don't know if it's true or not either.

You are not her or Woody they are the only two who know the truth.

At any rate he could be doing more to fix things and his lack of care is pretty telling in my opinion.


----------



## Michelle420

Dr Grump said:


> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> If she is a consenting adult? Absolutely. Does it sound and look creepy? Yes.
> 
> Let me ask you this. Let's fast forward a few years. Let's say for shits and giggles two people get together. He is 35 she is 35, The wife has a 15 year old daughter. Five years later they split  up. 20 years later the husband runs into the daughter again. She is now 40 and he 60. They hook up. Is that an issue?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes it is an issue, she was once his daughter.  Maybe you don't have kids and this kind of thing seems like nothing you'd ever object to but yes Woody Allen is creepy looking sitting there with that kid on his lap, he is creepy for hooking up with his other daughter when she was 20 and he was 50.
> 
> Aren't there enough other young girls out there for him?  He has to have the ones who are relatives?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And Sinatra hooked up with Mia when she was 21 and he 50. Oona Oneil was 18 and Chaplin 50. They had 8 kids. And?
> 
> And once again, Soon Yi was never his daughter. Not even step.
Click to expand...


Mia wasn't his girlfriends adopted daughter and sister to his biological son either.


----------



## Michelle420

jillian said:


> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> If she is a consenting adult? Absolutely. Does it sound and look creepy? Yes.
> 
> Let me ask you this. Let's fast forward a few years. Let's say for shits and giggles two people get together. He is 35 she is 35, The wife has a 15 year old daughter. Five years later they split  up. 20 years later the husband runs into the daughter again. She is now 40 and he 60. They hook up. Is that an issue?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes it is an issue, she was once his daughter.  Maybe you don't have kids and this kind of thing seems like nothing you'd ever object to but yes Woody Allen is creepy looking sitting there with that kid on his lap, he is creepy for hooking up with his other daughter when she was 20 and he was 50.
> 
> Aren't there enough other young girls out there for him?  He has to have the ones who are relatives?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> sarah, she was never his daugher. she was andre previn and mia farrow's daughter. he didn't even live with them.
Click to expand...


Pictures don't lie they all went out to events as a family and the kids received mixed messages by his behavior and choices he made.


----------



## jillian

drifter said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drifter said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think the point is there were other kids in the family unit effected hurt and angry over what happened.
> 
> They lash out and Woody shouldn't be surprised by it.
> 
> Actions have consequences, he did adopt two of those kids and he is supposedly the biological father of Ronan.
> 
> As a parent I would expect him to be more discerning in how his actions and behavior is going to effect the family unit over the long haul.
> 
> Whether or not he molested his adoptive daughter Dylan one would think he would want to work on the relationship with her and work on healing it. He adopted her and she is confused about his choices.
> 
> If he did molest her then it makes it so much worse but even if he didn't why doesn't he try to repair the damage done in the mixed messages he caused?
> 
> He went to psychotherapy for 30 yrs. He understands how things effect people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the point is their "hurt" doesn't make him a child molester.
> 
> there is no relationship. farrow made sure of that. or was changing their names and keeping him from visting just kidding?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He is rich and if he really cared he would have continued to pursue having a relationship with his biological son and his two children he did adopt with her.
> 
> He went to therapy for 30 yrs, are you saying that his kids who lash out don't deserve any effort at his repairing the damage caused by what he did?
> 
> He is an intellectual and he understands psychology. If he is not guilty why not reach out and offer to do therapy with his kids?
> 
> There are a lot of things he could do, he is the ADULT they were the kids who were effected.
> 
> I haven't said he is guilty of molesting the 7 yr old or not.
> 
> But Dylan his daughter that he did adopt said it and at the same token you don't know if it's true or not either.
> 
> You are not her or Woody they are the only two who know the truth.
> 
> At any rate he could be doing more to fix things and his lack of care is pretty telling in my opinion.
Click to expand...


his money is irrelevant. she had gloria alred trashing his name constantly. he had a new life and a new child. do you think he wanted them continuing to defame him?

again, there was nothing to fix. you are welcome to think otherwise. but perhaps you shoudl have actually been there when she dragged him through court proceedings in two states.


----------



## Michelle420

jillian said:


> drifter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> the point is their "hurt" doesn't make him a child molester.
> 
> there is no relationship. farrow made sure of that. or was changing their names and keeping him from visting just kidding?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He is rich and if he really cared he would have continued to pursue having a relationship with his biological son and his two children he did adopt with her.
> 
> He went to therapy for 30 yrs, are you saying that his kids who lash out don't deserve any effort at his repairing the damage caused by what he did?
> 
> He is an intellectual and he understands psychology. If he is not guilty why not reach out and offer to do therapy with his kids?
> 
> There are a lot of things he could do, he is the ADULT they were the kids who were effected.
> 
> I haven't said he is guilty of molesting the 7 yr old or not.
> 
> But Dylan his daughter that he did adopt said it and at the same token you don't know if it's true or not either.
> 
> You are not her or Woody they are the only two who know the truth.
> 
> At any rate he could be doing more to fix things and his lack of care is pretty telling in my opinion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> his money is irrelevant. she had gloria alred trashing his name constantly. he had a new life and a new child. do you think he wanted them continuing to defame him?
> 
> again, there was nothing to fix. you are welcome to think otherwise. but perhaps you shoudl have actually been there when she dragged him through court proceedings in two states.
Click to expand...



They are adults now and he can reach out any time he wants to.

He knows that actions choices and behaviors effect others. 

If he wanted to he could offer to do therapy with Dylan as a gesture to work through some of this.

He was the adult and she was the child and she may have become confused by his going off with Soon Yi. But he did adopt Dylan and as her father he should reach out and work on healing things regardless, he is her Dad.


----------



## Dr Grump

drifter said:


> Mia wasn't his girlfriends adopted daughter and sister to his biological son either.



And?


----------



## Gracie

He's probably boinking the two adoptive kids he and Soon Yi have. Ol Soon Si is getting pretty hagard looking...time to groom a new daughter for being a new wife.


----------



## Sarah G

Dr Grump said:


> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> If she is a consenting adult? Absolutely. Does it sound and look creepy? Yes.
> 
> Let me ask you this. Let's fast forward a few years. Let's say for shits and giggles two people get together. He is 35 she is 35, The wife has a 15 year old daughter. Five years later they split  up. 20 years later the husband runs into the daughter again. She is now 40 and he 60. They hook up. Is that an issue?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes it is an issue, she was once his daughter.  Maybe you don't have kids and this kind of thing seems like nothing you'd ever object to but yes Woody Allen is creepy looking sitting there with that kid on his lap, he is creepy for hooking up with his other daughter when she was 20 and he was 50.
> 
> Aren't there enough other young girls out there for him?  He has to have the ones who are relatives?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And Sinatra hooked up with Mia when she was 21 and he 50. Oona Oneil was 18 and Chaplin 50. They had 8 kids. And?
> 
> And once again, Soon Yi was never his daughter. Not even step.
Click to expand...


Emotionally they were family.  Frank and Mia weren't Father/Daughter at any time.  I don't think you are getting the family connection vs just a regular old May/December relationship.


----------



## Michelle420

Dr Grump said:


> drifter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Mia wasn't his girlfriends adopted daughter and sister to his biological son either.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And?
Click to expand...


The comparison isn't the same because he didn't have a family unit with other peoples relationships and feelings intertwined.

It was just Mia and Frank dating big difference.


----------



## Gracie

Oh, and Hollywood or the celebs starring in his movies are not saying a word. DOLLAR SIGNS for them. Just like Polanski. So they will keep their mouths shut.


----------



## Dr Grump

drifter said:


> I think the point is there were other kids in the family unit effected hurt and angry over what happened.
> 
> They lash out and Woody shouldn't be surprised by it.
> 
> Actions have consequences, he did adopt two of those kids and he is supposedly the biological father of Ronan.
> 
> As a parent I would expect him to be more discerning in how his actions and behavior is going to effect the family unit over the long haul.
> 
> Whether or not he molested his adoptive daughter Dylan one would think he would want to work on the relationship with her and work on healing it. He adopted her and she is confused about his choices.
> 
> If he did molest her then it makes it so much worse but even if he didn't why doesn't he try to repair the damage done in the mixed messages he caused?
> 
> He went to psychotherapy for 30 yrs. He understands how things effect people.



I agree with a lot of what you say, Drifter. There are two main issues:

1) Did he molest is 7 year old daughter? Yes or no? People here are saying he did with no evidence.
2) Did he have the right to have a relationship with his girlfriend's daughter. Morally, most would say no. Me? I don't really care as long as they are consenting adults. Do I find it weird, bordering on repugnant, that he did? Yes. But at the end of the day it is none of our business.

So, if he did molest his 7 year old daughter, throw him in the clink, but please give us evidence.


----------



## Sunshine

koshergrl said:


> They were going to charge Woody back in the 90s, when Mia first found out about the abuse. There was enough to charge him..but she opted not to put her daughter through it.
> 
> The girl is an adult now, and not as fragile,and is speaking out against not just sexual predation of children, but against the people who defend it or ignore it.
> 
> Woody's a puke, but Hollywood loves men who sexually exploit children..and so do a lot of non-Hollywoodies.



Judges' motives are not always what they claim.  When I was in nursing school one of my psych rotations included a 'survivors' group - teenage girls who had been raped/abused.  One of them was a judge's daughter.  She could not get justice because his friends would not prosecute him.  I think this judge was just waving his man card.  Children can and do go through trials like this all the time.  It is the only way in America to get justice and closure for them.  And clearly this girl does not have closure or she wouldn't have brought it up.


----------



## Sunshine

drifter said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> So it's okay to have sex with your WIFE'S adopted children....
> 
> Got it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If she is a consenting adult? Absolutely. Does it sound and look creepy? Yes.
> 
> Let me ask you this. Let's fast forward a few years. Let's say for shits and giggles two people get together. He is 35 she is 35, The wife has a 15 year old daughter. Five years later they split  up. 20 years later the husband runs into the daughter again. She is now 40 and he 60. They hook up. Is that an issue?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think the point is there were other kids in the family unit effected hurt and angry over what happened.
> 
> They lash out and Woody shouldn't be surprised by it.
> 
> Actions have consequences, he did adopt two of those kids and he is supposedly the biological father of Ronan.
> 
> As a parent I would expect him to be more discerning in how his actions and behavior is going to effect the family unit over the long haul.
> 
> Whether or not he molested his adoptive daughter Dylan one would think he would want to work on the relationship with her and work on healing it. He adopted her and she is confused about his choices.
> 
> If he did molest her then it makes it so much worse but even if he didn't why doesn't he try to repair the damage done in the mixed messages he caused?
> 
> He went to psychotherapy for 30 yrs. He understands how things effect people.
Click to expand...


People often go into therapy for the purpose of learning how to 'fix' everyone around them.  They fail to realize that they are the one needing fixed.


----------



## tinydancer

Dr Grump said:


> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He waited until she grew up, screwed her, then married her. No one could look at this photo without feeling sick inside.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do know that that is his adopted daughter, not Soon Yi?
Click to expand...


Are you claiming that baby girl on his lap is Dylan?



My how she changed over the years.


----------



## Gracie

tinydancer said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He waited until she grew up, screwed her, then married her. No one could look at this photo without feeling sick inside.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do know that that is his adopted daughter, not Soon Yi?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you claiming that baby girl on his lap is Dylan?
> 
> 
> 
> My how she changed over the years.
Click to expand...



Perv and Soon Yi have adopted two girls I believe. And that is what Dr Grump is saying. That kid on his lap is one of the adopted girls. NOT Soon Yi. Not Dylan. His NEW adopted child.


----------



## Gracie

And from the looks of that pic, her body language is "Aiyyy. Get me away from him".


----------



## jillian

Gracie said:


> And from the looks of that pic, her body language is "Aiyyy. Get me away from him".



not what i'm seeing at all.

but i guess you can impose anything you want on an innocuous picture when you're making baseless accusations.


----------



## jillian

Sarah G said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes it is an issue, she was once his daughter.  Maybe you don't have kids and this kind of thing seems like nothing you'd ever object to but yes Woody Allen is creepy looking sitting there with that kid on his lap, he is creepy for hooking up with his other daughter when she was 20 and he was 50.
> 
> Aren't there enough other young girls out there for him?  He has to have the ones who are relatives?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Sinatra hooked up with Mia when she was 21 and he 50. Oona Oneil was 18 and Chaplin 50. They had 8 kids. And?
> 
> And once again, Soon Yi was never his daughter. Not even step.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Emotionally they were family.  Frank and Mia weren't Father/Daughter at any time.  I don't think you are getting the family connection vs just a regular old May/December relationship.
Click to expand...


they didn't live together.


----------



## Gracie

Yup. I sure can.


----------



## Sunshine

I don't think she looks comfortable either.  She looks like she is holding the bar to hold herself away from him.


----------



## tinydancer

Gracie said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> You do know that that is his adopted daughter, not Soon Yi?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you claiming that baby girl on his lap is Dylan?
> 
> 
> 
> My how she changed over the years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Perv and Soon Yi have adopted two girls I believe. And that is what Dr Grump is saying. That kid on his lap is one of the adopted girls. NOT Soon Yi. Not Dylan. His NEW adopted child.
Click to expand...


I linked directly to the article that had that picture as Soon Yi. 

By the way, I just found the actual court documents denying Woody Allen any and all visitation rights with the children.

And the Court is scathing in their review of his relationship with Soon Yi and believe that there was a case to be made on the molestation of Dylan.

Check this out. Oh man this is killer.

* As we noted above, Mr. Allen maintains that Ms. Farrow's allegations concerning the sexual abuse of Dylan were fabricated by Ms. Farrow both as a result of her rage over his relationship with Ms. Previn and as part of her continued plan to alienate him from his children.

 However, our review of the record militates against a finding that Ms. Farrow fabricated the allegations without any basis.

 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.*

YOWZAH!

ALLEN v. FARROW | Leagle.com


----------



## tinydancer

The Court also found this. Basically they say Woody is an asshole. 

*In January of 1992, Mr. Allen took the photographs of Ms. Previn, which were discovered on the mantelpiece in his apartment by Ms. Farrow and were introduced into evidence at the IAS proceeding.

 Mr. Allen in his trial testimony stated that he took the photos at Ms. Previn's suggestion and that he considered them erotic and not pornographic.


 We have viewed the photographs and do not share Mr. Allen's characterization of them. We find the fact that Mr. Allen took them at a time when he was formally assuming a legal responsibility for two of Ms. Previn's siblings to be totally unacceptable. 

The distinction Mr. Allen makes between Ms. Farrow's other children and Dylan, Satchel and Moses is lost on this Court.

 The children themselves do not draw the same distinction that Mr. Allen does.

 This is sadly demonstrated by the profound effect his relationship with Ms. Previn has had on the entire family. 

Allen's testimony that the photographs of Ms. Previn "were taken, as I said before, between two consenting adults wanting to do this" demonstrates a chosen ignorance of his and Ms. Previn's relationships to Ms. Farrow, his three children and Ms. Previn's other siblings.

 His continuation of the relationship, viewed in the best possible light, shows a distinct absence of judgment.

 It demonstrates to this Court Mr. Allen's tendency to place inappropriate emphasis on his own wants and needs and to minimize and even ignore those of his children. 

At the very minimum, it demonstrates an absence of any parenting skills.

*

Shazaam!

http://www.leagle.com/decision/1994524197AD2d327_1461


----------



## tinydancer

jillian said:


> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> And Sinatra hooked up with Mia when she was 21 and he 50. Oona Oneil was 18 and Chaplin 50. They had 8 kids. And?
> 
> And once again, Soon Yi was never his daughter. Not even step.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Emotionally they were family.  Frank and Mia weren't Father/Daughter at any time.  I don't think you are getting the family connection vs just a regular old May/December relationship.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> they didn't live together.
Click to expand...


Court records / Allen vs Farrow.

* Certain salient facts concerning both Mr. Allen's and Ms. Farrow's relationships to their children and to each other are not disputed. 

Review of these facts in an objective manner and the conclusions that flow from them, demonstrate that the determination of the IAS Court as to both custody and visitation is amply supported by the record before this Court.

From the inception of Mr. Allen's relationship with Ms. Farrow in 1980, until a few months after the adoption of Dylan O'Sullivan Farrow on June 11, 1985, Mr. Allen wanted nothing to do with Ms. Farrow's children. 

Although Mr. Allen and Ms. Farrow attempted for approximately six months to have a child of their own, Mr. Allen did so apparently only after Ms. Farrow promised to assume full responsibility for the child. 

Following the adoption however, Mr. Allen became interested in developing a relationship with the newly adopted Dylan.

 While previously he rarely spent time in the respondent's apartment, after the adoption of Dylan he went to the respondent's Manhattan apartment more often, visited Ms. Farrow's Connecticut home and even accompanied the Farrow family on vacations to Europe.

 Allen also developed a relationship with Moses Farrow, who had been adopted by the respondent in 1980 and was seven years old at the time of Dylan's adoption. However, Allen remained distant from Farrow's other six children.*

ALLEN v. FARROW | Leagle.com


----------



## Sunshine

tinydancer said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you claiming that baby girl on his lap is Dylan?
> 
> 
> 
> My how she changed over the years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perv and Soon Yi have adopted two girls I believe. And that is what Dr Grump is saying. That kid on his lap is one of the adopted girls. NOT Soon Yi. Not Dylan. His NEW adopted child.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I linked directly to the article that had that picture as Soon Yi.
> 
> By the way, I just found the actual court documents denying Woody Allen any and all visitation rights with the children.
> 
> And the Court is scathing in their review of his relationship with Soon Yi and believe that there was a case to be made on the molestation of Dylan.
> 
> Check this out. Oh man this is killer.
> 
> * As we noted above, Mr. Allen maintains that Ms. Farrow's allegations concerning the sexual abuse of Dylan were fabricated by Ms. Farrow both as a result of her rage over his relationship with Ms. Previn and as part of her continued plan to alienate him from his children.
> 
> However, our review of the record militates against a finding that Ms. Farrow fabricated the allegations without any basis.
> 
> 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.*
> 
> YOWZAH!
> 
> ALLEN v. FARROW | Leagle.com
Click to expand...


I think her description of watching the train while he molested her is dead on.  Most of the victims I have worked with developed ways to dissociate themselves from the situation in real time and also to entirely suppress their abuse with the memories coming back years later.  Many remember their own abuse when they, themselves, have children.  Her eating disorder and self mutilation are also classic signs.  Unfortunately, most courts will not accept this as 'evidence.'  But those two symptoms are classic symptoms of incest victims.  

I think the system (the judge) copped out on this girl.  The only thing worse than rape is betrayal.  And the judge betrayed her by not allowing the prosecution to take place..


----------



## freedombecki

Dr Grump said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> So it's okay to have sex with your WIFE'S adopted children....
> 
> Got it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If she is a consenting adult? Absolutely. Does it sound and look creepy? Yes.
> 
> Let me ask you this. Let's fast forward a few years. Let's say for shits and giggles two people get together. He is 35 she is 35, The wife has a 15 year old daughter. Five years later they split up. 20 years later the husband runs into the daughter again. She is now 40 and he 60. They hook up. Is that an issue?
Click to expand...


Dr. Grump, I think you're really trying to understand Americans, I really do, but incest is what it is.


----------



## jillian

Gracie said:


> Yup. I sure can.



thanks for the heads up.


----------



## JoeB131

koshergrl said:


> A man who marries his daughter is a pervert and a pig. There's no question about it.



She wasn't his daughter. 

Or his Stepdaughter.


----------



## Noomi

koshergrl said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Noomi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He waited until she grew up, screwed her, then married her. No one could look at this photo without feeling sick inside.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do know that that is his adopted daughter, not Soon Yi?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's great!
Click to expand...


Soon Yi was that young, once. And he was waiting until she aged enough to screw her.


----------



## Michelle420

jillian said:


> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> And Sinatra hooked up with Mia when she was 21 and he 50. Oona Oneil was 18 and Chaplin 50. They had 8 kids. And?
> 
> And once again, Soon Yi was never his daughter. Not even step.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Emotionally they were family.  Frank and Mia weren't Father/Daughter at any time.  I don't think you are getting the family connection vs just a regular old May/December relationship.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> they didn't live together.
Click to expand...


Yet, he procreated with Mia one biological child (ronan) and managed to adopt Dylan ( He is her adoptive father and that is how she viewed him as a child).

Which still emphasizes a family unit message to the other children growing up around the relationship of Mia & Woody.

It is still a mixed and confusing message for the kids (back then) and now and it really damaged the family unit.

He could at least be willing to do therapy with his children to try and repair some hurt that resulted from his behavior and actions.

Short of that, why should he be surprised at the anger, and hurt from what they perceive as betrayal?


----------



## JoeB131

Connery said:


> [quo
> 
> When I make these decisions I like to weigh as much fact as possible and  hear from the person who was part of the investigation/prosecution, "Allen was investigated on child molestation claims for the 1992 accusation in Connecticut but prosecutors elected not to charge him.
> 
> The handling of the investigation was criticized after *Litchfield County state attorney Frank S. Maco said in a press conference that he believed there was "probable cause''* to charge Allen but decided against prosecution partly to avoid a traumatic trial for the young girl".
> 
> The Australian
> 
> The above is what I weigh as well. There are many reasons for not prosecuting I look at the totality of the circumstances and events regarding a person.
> 
> Then the final question: Would I let this man be a role model for my child or any children? The answer is no.



No, I would not want this man to be a role-model to anyone. 

Really, I don't even think he's a good person and I think he's an overrated director. 

All that said, there was no physical evidence of abuse and frankly, a lot of dysfunction in that family.  

A couple in Texas was recently released from prison because 20 years ago, during the "Satanic Panic", they were convicted of child abuse that now every agrees never happened. 

Another point.  If Allen were a pedophile, why haven't other people come forward?


----------



## freedombecki

JoeB131 said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> A man who marries his daughter is a pervert and a pig. There's no question about it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She wasn't his daughter.
> 
> Or his Stepdaughter.
Click to expand...


If she was his wife's daughter, he was a father figure and as such, a stepfather. To put a wedge between a mother and daughter using sex is lower than snake snot.


----------



## jillian

freedombecki said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> A man who marries his daughter is a pervert and a pig. There's no question about it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She wasn't his daughter.
> 
> Or his Stepdaughter.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If she was his wife's daughter, he was a father figure and as such, a stepfather. To put a wedge between a mother and daughter using sex is lower than snake snot.
Click to expand...


they weren't married.
they didn't live together.

you're welcome, becki


----------



## koshergrl

His kids with Farrow, and Soon Yi, have the same mother.

So his wife is his son's sister.


----------



## koshergrl

Which is why the kids don't talk to him.

That and the unfortunate raping that went on.


----------



## Michelle420

jillian said:


> freedombecki said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> She wasn't his daughter.
> 
> Or his Stepdaughter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If she was his wife's daughter, he was a father figure and as such, a stepfather. To put a wedge between a mother and daughter using sex is lower than snake snot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> they weren't married.
> they didn't live together.
> 
> you're welcome, becki
Click to expand...


They did procreate and had a son together, they did adopt two kids together, they were for all practical purposes a family unit together for 12 years !

The mess is a choice he made, he acted on his desire and the consequences are the kids feel angry and hurt over it.

Nobody knows if he molested Dylan or not, only Woody and Dylan know.

But everyone knows that his choices effected the rest of the family and those feelings of anger are why his adult kids like Ronan blog about it and he has no care for how they feel, even though he is their father.


----------



## Dr Grump

freedombecki said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> So it's okay to have sex with your WIFE'S adopted children....
> 
> Got it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If she is a consenting adult? Absolutely. Does it sound and look creepy? Yes.
> 
> Let me ask you this. Let's fast forward a few years. Let's say for shits and giggles two people get together. He is 35 she is 35, The wife has a 15 year old daughter. Five years later they split up. 20 years later the husband runs into the daughter again. She is now 40 and he 60. They hook up. Is that an issue?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dr. Grump, I think you're really trying to understand Americans, I really do, but incest is what it is.
Click to expand...


Not even close. But nice try...


----------



## JoeB131

freedombecki said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> A man who marries his daughter is a pervert and a pig. There's no question about it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She wasn't his daughter.
> 
> Or his Stepdaughter.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If she was his wife's daughter, he was a father figure and as such, a stepfather. To put a wedge between a mother and daughter using sex is lower than snake snot.
Click to expand...


Except she was never "his wife".  

She was his girlfriend. 

Now, yeah, is it creepy. Um, yeah, kind of.  

But how about this.  Mia Farrow had already kind of set an example that the way a woman gets ahead in life is by seducing older famous men.   

She was 21 when she married a 50 year old Frank Sinatra. 

She was 25 when she got involved with 41 year old Andre Previn (Soon-Yi's adopotive father), who himself was married to Dory Langan.  

In short, "Get married to an older man, even he's involved with someone else, that's the way to get ahead".


----------



## JoeB131

koshergrl said:


> Which is why the kids don't talk to him.
> 
> That and the unfortunate raping that went on.



Depends... His sone Moses has recently reconciled with him and called on Farrow and his siblings to cut the shit out.


----------



## Gracie

JoeB131 said:


> freedombecki said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> She wasn't his daughter.
> 
> Or his Stepdaughter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If she was his wife's daughter, he was a father figure and as such, a stepfather. To put a wedge between a mother and daughter using sex is lower than snake snot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Except she was never "his wife".
> 
> She was his girlfriend.
> 
> Now, yeah, is it creepy. Um, yeah, kind of.
> 
> But how about this.  Mia Farrow had already kind of set an example that the way a woman gets ahead in life is by seducing older famous men.
> 
> She was 21 when she married a 50 year old Frank Sinatra.
> 
> She was 25 when she got involved with 41 year old Andre Previn (Soon-Yi's adopotive father), who himself was married to Dory Langan.
> 
> In short, "Get married to an older man, even he's involved with someone else, that's the way to get ahead".
Click to expand...


Which has no bearing on Allen sexually molesting his children.


----------



## koshergrl

That's awesome.

Meanwhile, his wife and his kids are siblings.


----------



## Michelle420

JoeB131 said:


> freedombecki said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> She wasn't his daughter.
> 
> Or his Stepdaughter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If she was his wife's daughter, he was a father figure and as such, a stepfather. To put a wedge between a mother and daughter using sex is lower than snake snot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Except she was never "his wife".
> 
> She was his girlfriend.
> 
> Now, yeah, is it creepy. Um, yeah, kind of.
> 
> But how about this.  Mia Farrow had already kind of set an example that the way a woman gets ahead in life is by seducing older famous men.
> 
> She was 21 when she married a 50 year old Frank Sinatra.
> 
> She was 25 when she got involved with 41 year old Andre Previn (Soon-Yi's adopotive father), who himself was married to Dory Langan.
> 
> In short, "Get married to an older man, even he's involved with someone else, that's the way to get ahead".
Click to expand...


It;s not about the age difference between Woody and Soon Yi, it is about the damage the relationship caused in the family unit and why his other kids are so upset.

He was with Mia for 12 yrs, Soon Yi was 10 when he came into the family. Ronan  (woody's son) see's Soon as his sister and it was upsetting to him to see his dad leave his mother for his sister.

Additionally Mia & Woody did adopt Dylan together so they were committed parents together.

Woody entered the relationship with Mia's daughter while still fronting as Mia's boyfriend and while the other children were still seeing Soon Yi as their sister.

When Mia discovered the naked photos Woody took of Soon Yi that is when the relationship ended.

If Woody had just met some young gal somewhere else and left the family it would have been less damaging then forming a romantic/sexual relation ship with the daughter of your girlfriend whom you have helped raise since she was 10.


----------



## JoeB131

Gracie said:


> [
> 
> Which has no bearing on Allen sexually molesting his children.



I agree. 

Too bad no one could ever prove he did, eh?


----------



## koshergrl

Wrong. They opted not to pursue it. The DA was willing.


----------



## Esmeralda

JoeB131 said:


> freedombecki said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> She wasn't his daughter.
> 
> Or his Stepdaughter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If she was his wife's daughter, he was a father figure and as such, a stepfather. To put a wedge between a mother and daughter using sex is lower than snake snot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Except she was never "his wife".
> 
> She was his girlfriend.
> 
> Now, yeah, is it creepy. Um, yeah, kind of.
> 
> But how about this.  Mia Farrow had already kind of set an example that the way a woman gets ahead in life is by seducing older famous men.
> 
> She was 21 when she married a 50 year old Frank Sinatra.
> 
> She was 25 when she got involved with 41 year old Andre Previn (Soon-Yi's adopotive father), who himself was married to Dory Langan.
> 
> In short, "Get married to an older man, even he's involved with someone else, that's the way to get ahead".
Click to expand...


She was a girlfriend for about 12 years, so he was in those children's lives, including Soon Yi, for many years and went on family vacations with them, even if he didn't live in the same apartment in NY. 

If Mia got involved with Sinatra at 21, she was an adult, a successful actress at that time. As far as Preven, the difference between 25 and 18 is huge. Also, Mia did not get involved with an older man who was her mother's boyfriend and who was the father of her siblings. Huge difference. 

Soon Yi was an 18 year old college student. And Allen's own children's sister by adoption, a child who had grown up with his own children in the same home and as their sister. Creepy, incest, inappropriate, taboo....all come to mind. And a very, very difficult thing for the kids to deal with. 

In any case, I don't blame Soon Yi, and I don't think her mother set any kind of "example" that allows or supports Allen getting involved in a sexual relationship with a young woman who is his girlfriend's daughter and his children's sibling. Also, you suggest the young Mia "seduced" the older men. Seriously? She seduced them? Not the other way around? Both of those men were very rich, famous, mature and sophisticated and probably were used to lots of women who are 'willing' if not pursuing them. They can be seduced by a young, probably somewhat inexperienced woman? Give me a break.  You also seem to suggest it was Soon Yi who seduced Allen, something I find highly ludicrous.

Mia may not have been Allen's wife, but they were involved for at least 10 years, adopted children together, and went on family vacations together. Far, far more than just a 'girlfriend.'

I do wonder why people make excuses for and defend Allen. I like his films. I didn't stop watching them 21 years ago when all this occurred. I didn't pay much attention to all of it, but I didn't disbelieve or believe entirely in any side as far as the molestation, and I definitely didn't approve, from my own moral perspective, his relationship with Soon Yi. However, I separate the art from the artist. If we didn't do that, we would have to set aside at least 50% of the art currently in our museums and libraries. Michelangelo had corpses stolen from the morgue and dissected him, yet he is deeply admired around the world for his artwork. Just one example.  However, I would draw the line at some point, probably murder, in separating the art from the artist.

I think people on here would not defend such a man if he were in your personal world.  For example, say your sister was involved in a long term relationship with a man who didn't want to get married, who didn't want to live together and didn't want to have anything to do with her children? Would you think he was a great guy? And later on, during a relationship that lasts 12 years, he agrees to adopt 2 children with her and have another one biologically, but still doesn't live with or be a full time father for them. Great guy, huh? And then, after 12 years together, he begins an affair with one of her children, a young woman who is only 18 and still in college, probably her first sexual experience, and he is 35 or more years older than her, a child who has grown up with this man as her mother's boyfriend and her siblings father? You'd think this was all hunky dory? I doubt it. 

It is because of this kind of behavior in him that allegations of some kind of inappropriate sexual contact with one of the children cannot be ignored. He has no moral compass. He likes young woman. He does what pleases himself without concern for how it affects the children. An amoral man who suits himself without respect for how his actions will damage others, especially young children or a young woman like Soon Yi. Someone mentioned she is looking rather haggard now. I agree. She is not that old but is looking it. I imagine he doesn't treat her very well.


----------



## JoeB131

drifter said:


> [
> 
> It;s not about the age difference between Woody and Soon Yi, it is about the damage the relationship caused in the family unit and why his other kids are so upset.
> 
> He was with Mia for 12 yrs, Soon Yi was 10 when he came into the family. Ronan  (woody's son) see's Soon as his sister and it was upsetting to him to see his dad leave his mother for his sister.
> 
> Additionally Mia & Woody did adopt Dylan together so they were committed parents together.
> 
> Woody entered the relationship with Mia's daughter while still fronting as Mia's boyfriend and while the other children were still seeing Soon Yi as their sister.
> 
> When Mia discovered the naked photos Woody took of Soon Yi that is when the relationship ended.
> 
> If Woody had just met some young gal somewhere else and left the family it would have been less damaging then forming a romantic/sexual relation ship with the daughter of your girlfriend whom you have helped raise since she was 10.



Except that Soon-Yi's father was a guy named Andre Previn, who says of his daughter today, "That person does not exist".  

Swell guy.  

This would be the same Andre  Previn who dumped his wife to run off with Mia Farrow.  

Before she dumped him to go off with Woody Allen and he went off with a fourth wife.


----------



## Michelle420

JoeB131 said:


> drifter said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> 
> It;s not about the age difference between Woody and Soon Yi, it is about the damage the relationship caused in the family unit and why his other kids are so upset.
> 
> He was with Mia for 12 yrs, Soon Yi was 10 when he came into the family. Ronan  (woody's son) see's Soon as his sister and it was upsetting to him to see his dad leave his mother for his sister.
> 
> Additionally Mia & Woody did adopt Dylan together so they were committed parents together.
> 
> Woody entered the relationship with Mia's daughter while still fronting as Mia's boyfriend and while the other children were still seeing Soon Yi as their sister.
> 
> When Mia discovered the naked photos Woody took of Soon Yi that is when the relationship ended.
> 
> If Woody had just met some young gal somewhere else and left the family it would have been less damaging then forming a romantic/sexual relation ship with the daughter of your girlfriend whom you have helped raise since she was 10.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except that Soon-Yi's father was a guy named Andre Previn, who says of his daughter today, "That person does not exist".
> 
> Swell guy.
> 
> This would be the same Andre  Previn who dumped his wife to run off with Mia Farrow.
> 
> Before she dumped him to go off with Woody Allen and he went off with a fourth wife.
Click to expand...


That only means male father figures have failed her in society. It does not exonerate Woody from his choices and behavior.


----------



## Gracie

Off topic for a sec....

I'd like to bitch slap Mia just for running off with such a nerdy fugly dude as ....puke...Woody Allen. Just....ewwwwwwww. What WAS she thinking? Sheesh.


----------



## JoeB131

Esmeralda said:


> [
> 
> She was a girlfriend of for about 10 or 15 years, so he was in those children's lives, including Soon Yi, for many years and went on family vacations with them, even if he didn't live in the same apartment in NY.
> 
> If Mia got involved with Sinatra at 21, she was an adult, a successful actress at that time.  As far as her and Preven, the difference between 25 and 18 is huge.  Also, Mia did not get involved with an older man who was her mother's boyfriend and who was the father of her siblings.  Huge difference.
> 
> Soon Yi was an 18 year old college student.  And  Allen's own children's sister by adoption, a child who had grown up with his own children in the same home and as their sister.  Creepy, incest, inappropriate, taboo....all come to mind.  And a very, very difficult thing for the kids to deal with.
> 
> In any case, I don't blame Soon Yi, and I don't think her mother set any kind of "example" that allows or supports Allen getting involved in a sexual relationship with a young woman who is his girlfriend's daughter and his children's sibbling.  Also, you suggest the young Mia "seduced" the older men. Seriously?  She seduced them? Not the other way around? Both of those men were very rich, famous, mature and sophisticated and probably had had hundreds of women after them.  They can be seduced by a young, inexperienced woman? Give me a break.
> 
> Mia may not have been Allen's wife, but they were involved for at least 10 years, adopted children together, and went on family vacations together. Far, far more than just a 'girlfriend.'



Soon-Yi may have been as old as 21 when Allen started diddling with her.  We really don't know because the "Kid-Mart" in Korea Farrow and Previn got her from didn't keep very good records. 

And, sorry, I don't think being involved with a woman makes you responsible for someone else's kids.  

But let's get back on point here.  This isn't about his relationship with Soon-Yi.  If you want me to say, "Yeah, that's a little creepy", I'd probably agree.  It is.   but everyone involved was a grownup.  

The question is whether Dylan was molested or not.  Or if she was merely brainwashed (a term that Allen and Farrow's son Moses uses to describe the atmosphere in that house) to repeat a story so often she thinks it's true.


----------



## Sunshine

freedombecki said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> So it's okay to have sex with your WIFE'S adopted children....
> 
> Got it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If she is a consenting adult? Absolutely. Does it sound and look creepy? Yes.
> 
> Let me ask you this. Let's fast forward a few years. Let's say for shits and giggles two people get together. He is 35 she is 35, The wife has a 15 year old daughter. Five years later they split up. 20 years later the husband runs into the daughter again. She is now 40 and he 60. They hook up. Is that an issue?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dr. Grump, I think you're really trying to understand Americans, I really do, but incest is what it is.
Click to expand...


Depending on the state.  Sex with your first cousin is not incest in California, but it is incest in Kentucky.


----------



## Michelle420

JoeB131 said:


> Esmeralda said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> 
> She was a girlfriend of for about 10 or 15 years, so he was in those children's lives, including Soon Yi, for many years and went on family vacations with them, even if he didn't live in the same apartment in NY.
> 
> If Mia got involved with Sinatra at 21, she was an adult, a successful actress at that time.  As far as her and Preven, the difference between 25 and 18 is huge.  Also, Mia did not get involved with an older man who was her mother's boyfriend and who was the father of her siblings.  Huge difference.
> 
> Soon Yi was an 18 year old college student.  And  Allen's own children's sister by adoption, a child who had grown up with his own children in the same home and as their sister.  Creepy, incest, inappropriate, taboo....all come to mind.  And a very, very difficult thing for the kids to deal with.
> 
> In any case, I don't blame Soon Yi, and I don't think her mother set any kind of "example" that allows or supports Allen getting involved in a sexual relationship with a young woman who is his girlfriend's daughter and his children's sibbling.  Also, you suggest the young Mia "seduced" the older men. Seriously?  She seduced them? Not the other way around? Both of those men were very rich, famous, mature and sophisticated and probably had had hundreds of women after them.  They can be seduced by a young, inexperienced woman? Give me a break.
> 
> Mia may not have been Allen's wife, but they were involved for at least 10 years, adopted children together, and went on family vacations together. Far, far more than just a 'girlfriend.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soon-Yi may have been as old as 21 when Allen started diddling with her.  We really don't know because the "Kid-Mart" in Korea Farrow and Previn got her from didn't keep very good records.
> 
> And, sorry, I don't think being involved with a woman makes you responsible for someone else's kids.
> 
> But let's get back on point here.  This isn't about his relationship with Soon-Yi.  If you want me to say, "Yeah, that's a little creepy", I'd probably agree.  It is.   but everyone involved was a grownup.
> 
> The question is whether Dylan was molested or not.  Or if she was merely brainwashed (a term that Allen and Farrow's son Moses uses to describe the atmosphere in that house) to repeat a story so often she thinks it's true.
Click to expand...


He fathered one of those kids with Mia (ronan) and he adopted Dylan with Mia.

Yes that makes him responsible as a father figure.

Well the question was already answered : Nobody knows if she was molested or not.

If she wasn't then we can assume she is still confused and angry about what happened when Woody left the family with her adopted sister.

If she was then nobody will ever know except her and Woody and it is certainly an injustice for her.

Short of that, people can only speculate.

Which leads us to what kind of character does Woody have?

I'd say, shady and shitty.


----------



## koshergrl

His kids are his wife's siblings.

Ew.

Yup, I'd say marrying your kids' sister that you've known since she was 10 would put you in the running for the presigious "Probably Raped Own Daughter" award.

The courts believed there was enough evidence there to pursue it.


----------



## tinydancer

JoeB131 said:


> freedombecki said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> She wasn't his daughter.
> 
> Or his Stepdaughter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If she was his wife's daughter, he was a father figure and as such, a stepfather. To put a wedge between a mother and daughter using sex is lower than snake snot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Except she was never "his wife".
> 
> She was his girlfriend.
> 
> Now, yeah, is it creepy. Um, yeah, kind of.
> 
> But how about this.  Mia Farrow had already kind of set an example that the way a woman gets ahead in life is by seducing older famous men.
> 
> She was 21 when she married a 50 year old Frank Sinatra.
> 
> She was 25 when she got involved with 41 year old Andre Previn (Soon-Yi's adopotive father), who himself was married to Dory Langan.
> 
> In short, "Get married to an older man, even he's involved with someone else, that's the way to get ahead".
Click to expand...


Oh bite me. You just displayed "extreme ignorance". Mia Farrow never had to marry a soul to get ahead. 

She could have Hollywood on a silver platter if she had wanted to. You obviously don't know who her parents were. 

Mia starred in probably the hottest ground breaking show at the time Peyton Place. And went on to star in movies. Her humanitarian efforts consume her now. 

She's no flake. 

* Farrow has appeared in more than 50 films and won numerous awards, including a Golden Globe award, received seven additional Golden Globe nominations, three BAFTA nominations and a best actress award at the San Sebastian International Film Festival.

 Farrow is also known for her extensive humanitarian work as a UNICEF Goodwill Ambassador. She is involved in humanitarian activities in Darfur, Chad, and the Central African Republic. In 2008, 

Time magazine named her one of the most influential people in the world.*

Mia Farrow - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## tinydancer

JoeB131 said:


> Esmeralda said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> 
> She was a girlfriend of for about 10 or 15 years, so he was in those children's lives, including Soon Yi, for many years and went on family vacations with them, even if he didn't live in the same apartment in NY.
> 
> If Mia got involved with Sinatra at 21, she was an adult, a successful actress at that time.  As far as her and Preven, the difference between 25 and 18 is huge.  Also, Mia did not get involved with an older man who was her mother's boyfriend and who was the father of her siblings.  Huge difference.
> 
> Soon Yi was an 18 year old college student.  And  Allen's own children's sister by adoption, a child who had grown up with his own children in the same home and as their sister.  Creepy, incest, inappropriate, taboo....all come to mind.  And a very, very difficult thing for the kids to deal with.
> 
> In any case, I don't blame Soon Yi, and I don't think her mother set any kind of "example" that allows or supports Allen getting involved in a sexual relationship with a young woman who is his girlfriend's daughter and his children's sibbling.  Also, you suggest the young Mia "seduced" the older men. Seriously?  She seduced them? Not the other way around? Both of those men were very rich, famous, mature and sophisticated and probably had had hundreds of women after them.  They can be seduced by a young, inexperienced woman? Give me a break.
> 
> Mia may not have been Allen's wife, but they were involved for at least 10 years, adopted children together, and went on family vacations together. Far, far more than just a 'girlfriend.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soon-Yi may have been as old as 21 when Allen started diddling with her.  We really don't know because the "Kid-Mart" in Korea Farrow and Previn got her from didn't keep very good records.
> 
> And, sorry, I don't think being involved with a woman makes you responsible for someone else's kids.
> 
> But let's get back on point here.  This isn't about his relationship with Soon-Yi.  If you want me to say, "Yeah, that's a little creepy", I'd probably agree.  It is.   but everyone involved was a grownup.
> 
> The question is whether Dylan was molested or not.  Or if she was merely brainwashed (a term that Allen and Farrow's son Moses uses to describe the atmosphere in that house) to repeat a story so often she thinks it's true.
Click to expand...


The court that awarded Farrow custody in Allen vs Farrow basically called Allen a scumbucket and a freaking creepy dad to be diddling Soon Yi. 

I put up the link and the Court's commentary on Allen earlier in the thread. It's not flattering. 

And the court did not agree that it was impossible that Dylan had been molested. And they stated that.


----------



## Michelle420

tinydancer said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Esmeralda said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> 
> She was a girlfriend of for about 10 or 15 years, so he was in those children's lives, including Soon Yi, for many years and went on family vacations with them, even if he didn't live in the same apartment in NY.
> 
> If Mia got involved with Sinatra at 21, she was an adult, a successful actress at that time.  As far as her and Preven, the difference between 25 and 18 is huge.  Also, Mia did not get involved with an older man who was her mother's boyfriend and who was the father of her siblings.  Huge difference.
> 
> Soon Yi was an 18 year old college student.  And  Allen's own children's sister by adoption, a child who had grown up with his own children in the same home and as their sister.  Creepy, incest, inappropriate, taboo....all come to mind.  And a very, very difficult thing for the kids to deal with.
> 
> In any case, I don't blame Soon Yi, and I don't think her mother set any kind of "example" that allows or supports Allen getting involved in a sexual relationship with a young woman who is his girlfriend's daughter and his children's sibbling.  Also, you suggest the young Mia "seduced" the older men. Seriously?  She seduced them? Not the other way around? Both of those men were very rich, famous, mature and sophisticated and probably had had hundreds of women after them.  They can be seduced by a young, inexperienced woman? Give me a break.
> 
> Mia may not have been Allen's wife, but they were involved for at least 10 years, adopted children together, and went on family vacations together. Far, far more than just a 'girlfriend.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soon-Yi may have been as old as 21 when Allen started diddling with her.  We really don't know because the "Kid-Mart" in Korea Farrow and Previn got her from didn't keep very good records.
> 
> And, sorry, I don't think being involved with a woman makes you responsible for someone else's kids.
> 
> But let's get back on point here.  This isn't about his relationship with Soon-Yi.  If you want me to say, "Yeah, that's a little creepy", I'd probably agree.  It is.   but everyone involved was a grownup.
> 
> The question is whether Dylan was molested or not.  Or if she was merely brainwashed (a term that Allen and Farrow's son Moses uses to describe the atmosphere in that house) to repeat a story so often she thinks it's true.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The court that awarded Farrow custody in Allen vs Farrow basically called Allen a scumbucket and a freaking creepy dad to be diddling Soon Yi.
> 
> I put up the link and the Court's commentary on Allen earlier in the thread. It's not flattering.
> 
> And the court did not agree that it was impossible that Dylan had been molested. And they stated that.
Click to expand...


That was a lot of research work, thanks for posting it.


----------



## tinydancer

koshergrl said:


> His kids are his wife's siblings.
> 
> Ew.
> 
> Yup, I'd say marrying your kids' sister that you've known since she was 10 would put you in the running for the presigious "Probably Raped Own Daughter" award.
> 
> The courts believed there was enough evidence there to pursue it.



Exactly.


----------



## jillian

drifter said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Soon-Yi may have been as old as 21 when Allen started diddling with her.  We really don't know because the "Kid-Mart" in Korea Farrow and Previn got her from didn't keep very good records.
> 
> And, sorry, I don't think being involved with a woman makes you responsible for someone else's kids.
> 
> But let's get back on point here.  This isn't about his relationship with Soon-Yi.  If you want me to say, "Yeah, that's a little creepy", I'd probably agree.  It is.   but everyone involved was a grownup.
> 
> The question is whether Dylan was molested or not.  Or if she was merely brainwashed (a term that Allen and Farrow's son Moses uses to describe the atmosphere in that house) to repeat a story so often she thinks it's true.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The court that awarded Farrow custody in Allen vs Farrow basically called Allen a scumbucket and a freaking creepy dad to be diddling Soon Yi.
> 
> I put up the link and the Court's commentary on Allen earlier in the thread. It's not flattering.
> 
> And the court did not agree that it was impossible that Dylan had been molested. And they stated that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That was a lot of research work, thanks for posting it.
Click to expand...


the court didn't like allen.

that isn't child molestation.

so what research?

THIS is the appellate decision:

http://www.leagle.com/decision/1995352215AD2d137_1310

and this was the basis for the decision not to foster therapeutic visitation between allen and dylan



> both Dr. Bird and Dr. Moreau concur that Dylan remains deeply resistant to visitation with petitioner and that it would not be in the child's best interest to force her to see him. Dr. Moreau, whose selection by the court was unopposed by Allen, clearly had no connection to either party or, indeed, any preconceived views. She undertook an exhaustive investigation into the matter, interviewing everyone who had any relevant information to impart and examining all of the pertinent reports and trial transcripts. The fact that, at the conclusion of Dr. Moreau's evaluation, her opinion did not support the implementation of a program of therapeutic visitation until, at a minimum, Allen had terminated his relationship with Soon-Yi does not render her lacking in impartiality. Rather, she simply did not agree with petitioner's position.



NOTHING ABOUT SEXUAL MISCONDUCT.


----------



## Political Junky

skye said:


> I have no idea if Woody Allen is a molester  or not.
> 
> All I know is that Mia Farrow is one snake of an ex wife.


Farrow was never married to Woody Allen.


----------



## jillian

Political Junky said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea if Woody Allen is a molester  or not.
> 
> All I know is that Mia Farrow is one snake of an ex wife.
> 
> 
> 
> Farrow was never married to Woody Allen.
Click to expand...


isn't it odd that people keep saying they were married? their apartments faced each other across central park. that was it.


----------



## Michelle420

jillian said:


> drifter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> The court that awarded Farrow custody in Allen vs Farrow basically called Allen a scumbucket and a freaking creepy dad to be diddling Soon Yi.
> 
> I put up the link and the Court's commentary on Allen earlier in the thread. It's not flattering.
> 
> And the court did not agree that it was impossible that Dylan had been molested. And they stated that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That was a lot of research work, thanks for posting it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the court didn't like allen.
> 
> that isn't child molestation.
> 
> so what research?
> 
> THIS is the appellate decision:
> 
> ALLEN v. FARROW | Leagle.com
> 
> and this was the basis for the decision not to foster therapeutic visitation between allen and dylan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> both Dr. Bird and Dr. Moreau concur that Dylan remains deeply resistant to visitation with petitioner and that it would not be in the child's best interest to force her to see him. Dr. Moreau, whose selection by the court was unopposed by Allen, clearly had no connection to either party or, indeed, any preconceived views. She undertook an exhaustive investigation into the matter, interviewing everyone who had any relevant information to impart and examining all of the pertinent reports and trial transcripts. The fact that, at the conclusion of Dr. Moreau's evaluation, her opinion did not support the implementation of a program of therapeutic visitation until, at a minimum, Allen had terminated his relationship with Soon-Yi does not render her lacking in impartiality. Rather, she simply did not agree with petitioner's position.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> NOTHING ABOUT SEXUAL MISCONDUCT.
Click to expand...


The links Tinydancer posted , I assumed she had to research to find those court documents.

The psychological damage done to the family, is because of Woody's behavior and choices.

It  has been said several times nobody knows if he molested dylan or not.

So we moved onto a discussion about the damage that was done to the family based on choices woody made.

You can join or not.

There's not really much anyone can say about the molestation except opinions and speculation.

Yes the court frowned on Woody's behavior and so did the children who received mixed messages from their dad's choice to marry their adopted sister.




> In 1990 at about the same time that the parties were growing distant from each other and expressing their concerns about the other's relationship with their youngest children, Mr. Allen began acknowledging Farrow's daughter Soon-Yi Previn. Previously he treated Ms. Previn in the same way he treated Ms. Farrow's other children from her prior marriage, rarely even speaking to them. In September of 1991 Ms. Previn began to attend Drew College in New Jersey. In December 1991 two events coincided. Mr. Allen's adoptions of Dylan and Moses were finalized and Mr. Allen began his sexual relationship with their sister Soon-Yi Previn.
> 
> In January of 1992, Mr. Allen took the photographs of Ms. Previn, which were discovered on the mantelpiece in his apartment by Ms. Farrow and were introduced into evidence at the IAS proceeding. Mr. Allen in his trial testimony stated that he took the photos at Ms. Previn's suggestion and that he considered them erotic and not pornographic.
> 
> We have viewed the photographs and do not share Mr. Allen's characterization of them. We find the fact that Mr. Allen took them at a time when he was formally assuming a legal responsibility for two of Ms. Previn's siblings to be totally unacceptable.
> 
> The distinction Mr. Allen makes between Ms. Farrow's other children and Dylan, Satchel and Moses is lost on this Court. The children themselves do not draw the same distinction that Mr. Allen does.
> 
> This is sadly demonstrated by the profound effect his relationship with Ms. Previn has had on the entire family.
> 
> Allen's testimony that the photographs of Ms. Previn "were taken, as I said before, between two consenting adults wanting to do this" demonstrates a chosen ignorance of his and Ms. Previn's relationships to Ms. Farrow, his three children and Ms. Previn's other siblings.
> 
> His continuation of the relationship, viewed in the best possible light, shows a distinct absence of judgment. It demonstrates to this Court Mr. Allen's tendency to place inappropriate emphasis on his own wants and needs and to minimize and even ignore those of his children. At the very minimum, it demonstrates an absence of any parenting skills.



ALLEN v. FARROW | Leagle.com


----------



## Sarah G

koshergrl said:


> His kids are his wife's siblings.
> 
> Ew.
> 
> Yup, I'd say marrying your kids' sister that you've known since she was 10 would put you in the running for the presigious "Probably Raped Own Daughter" award.
> 
> The courts believed there was enough evidence there to pursue it.



Family doesn't just consist of blood relatives.  There is a family unit that is more inclusive and he was definately over the line.

Then the next point is if he could have sex with the sister of his adopted kids, it isn't a stretch that he might have molested his 7 year old.

Who is the little Asian girl on his lap, btw?


----------



## jillian

drifter said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drifter said:
> 
> 
> 
> That was a lot of research work, thanks for posting it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the court didn't like allen.
> 
> that isn't child molestation.
> 
> so what research?
> 
> THIS is the appellate decision:
> 
> ALLEN v. FARROW | Leagle.com
> 
> and this was the basis for the decision not to foster therapeutic visitation between allen and dylan
> 
> 
> 
> NOTHING ABOUT SEXUAL MISCONDUCT.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The links Tinydancer posted , I assumed she had to research to find those court documents.
> 
> The psychological damage done to the family, is because of Woody's behavior and choices.
> 
> It  has been said several times nobody knows if he molested dylan or not.
> 
> So we moved onto a discussion about the damage that was done to the family based on choices woody made.
> 
> You can join or not.
> 
> There's not really much anyone can say about the molestation except opinions and speculation.
> 
> Yes the court frowned on Woody's behavior and so did the children who received mixed messages from their dad's choice to marry their adopted sister.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In 1990 at about the same time that the parties were growing distant from each other and expressing their concerns about the other's relationship with their youngest children, Mr. Allen began acknowledging Farrow's daughter Soon-Yi Previn. Previously he treated Ms. Previn in the same way he treated Ms. Farrow's other children from her prior marriage, rarely even speaking to them. In September of 1991 Ms. Previn began to attend Drew College in New Jersey. In December 1991 two events coincided. Mr. Allen's adoptions of Dylan and Moses were finalized and Mr. Allen began his sexual relationship with their sister Soon-Yi Previn.
> 
> In January of 1992, Mr. Allen took the photographs of Ms. Previn, which were discovered on the mantelpiece in his apartment by Ms. Farrow and were introduced into evidence at the IAS proceeding. Mr. Allen in his trial testimony stated that he took the photos at Ms. Previn's suggestion and that he considered them erotic and not pornographic.
> 
> We have viewed the photographs and do not share Mr. Allen's characterization of them. We find the fact that Mr. Allen took them at a time when he was formally assuming a legal responsibility for two of Ms. Previn's siblings to be totally unacceptable.
> 
> The distinction Mr. Allen makes between Ms. Farrow's other children and Dylan, Satchel and Moses is lost on this Court. The children themselves do not draw the same distinction that Mr. Allen does.
> 
> This is sadly demonstrated by the profound effect his relationship with Ms. Previn has had on the entire family.
> 
> Allen's testimony that the photographs of Ms. Previn "were taken, as I said before, between two consenting adults wanting to do this" demonstrates a chosen ignorance of his and Ms. Previn's relationships to Ms. Farrow, his three children and Ms. Previn's other siblings.
> 
> His continuation of the relationship, viewed in the best possible light, shows a distinct absence of judgment. It demonstrates to this Court Mr. Allen's tendency to place inappropriate emphasis on his own wants and needs and to minimize and even ignore those of his children. At the very minimum, it demonstrates an absence of any parenting skills.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ALLEN v. FARROW | Leagle.com
Click to expand...


i don't think anyone is arguing that it wasn't creepy.

but like i said. nothing about child molestation.

so i'm not quite sure what you are trying to say. can you explain?


----------



## Michelle420

It's sad, not much else to contribute about this, moving on.


----------



## Esmeralda

JoeB131 said:


> Esmeralda said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> 
> She was a girlfriend of for about 10 or 15 years, so he was in those children's lives, including Soon Yi, for many years and went on family vacations with them, even if he didn't live in the same apartment in NY.
> 
> If Mia got involved with Sinatra at 21, she was an adult, a successful actress at that time.  As far as her and Preven, the difference between 25 and 18 is huge.  Also, Mia did not get involved with an older man who was her mother's boyfriend and who was the father of her siblings.  Huge difference.
> 
> Soon Yi was an 18 year old college student.  And  Allen's own children's sister by adoption, a child who had grown up with his own children in the same home and as their sister.  Creepy, incest, inappropriate, taboo....all come to mind.  And a very, very difficult thing for the kids to deal with.
> 
> In any case, I don't blame Soon Yi, and I don't think her mother set any kind of "example" that allows or supports Allen getting involved in a sexual relationship with a young woman who is his girlfriend's daughter and his children's sibbling.  Also, you suggest the young Mia "seduced" the older men. Seriously?  She seduced them? Not the other way around? Both of those men were very rich, famous, mature and sophisticated and probably had had hundreds of women after them.  They can be seduced by a young, inexperienced woman? Give me a break.
> 
> Mia may not have been Allen's wife, but they were involved for at least 10 years, adopted children together, and went on family vacations together. Far, far more than just a 'girlfriend.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soon-Yi may have been as old as 21 when Allen started diddling with her.  We really don't know because the "Kid-Mart" in Korea Farrow and Previn got her from didn't keep very good records.
> 
> And, sorry, I don't think being involved with a woman makes you responsible for someone else's kids.
> 
> But let's get back on point here.  This isn't about his relationship with Soon-Yi.  If you want me to say, "Yeah, that's a little creepy", I'd probably agree.  It is.   but everyone involved was a grownup.
> 
> The question is whether Dylan was molested or not.  Or *if she was merely brainwashed (a term that Allen and Farrow's son Moses uses to describe the atmosphere in that house) *to repeat a story so often she thinks it's true.
Click to expand...


This is what these people always claim.  We don't know. I'm saying he is an amoral man, which lends credence to Dylan's story. Also, it is 21 years later, she is in her late 20s and still telling the same story. She is an adult, no longer under her mother's influence, etc.  And still telling the same story. That lends credence to the story.


----------



## Michelle420

jillian said:


> drifter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> the court didn't like allen.
> 
> that isn't child molestation.
> 
> so what research?
> 
> THIS is the appellate decision:
> 
> ALLEN v. FARROW | Leagle.com
> 
> and this was the basis for the decision not to foster therapeutic visitation between allen and dylan
> 
> 
> 
> NOTHING ABOUT SEXUAL MISCONDUCT.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The links Tinydancer posted , I assumed she had to research to find those court documents.
> 
> The psychological damage done to the family, is because of Woody's behavior and choices.
> 
> It  has been said several times nobody knows if he molested dylan or not.
> 
> So we moved onto a discussion about the damage that was done to the family based on choices woody made.
> 
> You can join or not.
> 
> There's not really much anyone can say about the molestation except opinions and speculation.
> 
> Yes the court frowned on Woody's behavior and so did the children who received mixed messages from their dad's choice to marry their adopted sister.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In 1990 at about the same time that the parties were growing distant from each other and expressing their concerns about the other's relationship with their youngest children, Mr. Allen began acknowledging Farrow's daughter Soon-Yi Previn. Previously he treated Ms. Previn in the same way he treated Ms. Farrow's other children from her prior marriage, rarely even speaking to them. In September of 1991 Ms. Previn began to attend Drew College in New Jersey. In December 1991 two events coincided. Mr. Allen's adoptions of Dylan and Moses were finalized and Mr. Allen began his sexual relationship with their sister Soon-Yi Previn.
> 
> In January of 1992, Mr. Allen took the photographs of Ms. Previn, which were discovered on the mantelpiece in his apartment by Ms. Farrow and were introduced into evidence at the IAS proceeding. Mr. Allen in his trial testimony stated that he took the photos at Ms. Previn's suggestion and that he considered them erotic and not pornographic.
> 
> We have viewed the photographs and do not share Mr. Allen's characterization of them. We find the fact that Mr. Allen took them at a time when he was formally assuming a legal responsibility for two of Ms. Previn's siblings to be totally unacceptable.
> 
> The distinction Mr. Allen makes between Ms. Farrow's other children and Dylan, Satchel and Moses is lost on this Court. The children themselves do not draw the same distinction that Mr. Allen does.
> 
> This is sadly demonstrated by the profound effect his relationship with Ms. Previn has had on the entire family.
> 
> Allen's testimony that the photographs of Ms. Previn "were taken, as I said before, between two consenting adults wanting to do this" demonstrates a chosen ignorance of his and Ms. Previn's relationships to Ms. Farrow, his three children and Ms. Previn's other siblings.
> 
> His continuation of the relationship, viewed in the best possible light, shows a distinct absence of judgment. It demonstrates to this Court Mr. Allen's tendency to place inappropriate emphasis on his own wants and needs and to minimize and even ignore those of his children. At the very minimum, it demonstrates an absence of any parenting skills.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ALLEN v. FARROW | Leagle.com
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> i don't think anyone is arguing that it wasn't creepy.
> 
> but like i said. nothing about child molestation.
> 
> so i'm not quite sure what you are trying to say. can you explain?
Click to expand...


I am saying that if Dylan made up the allegation it is because she is still angry about her dad leaving the family and marrying her adopted sister.

If Woody made an effort to explore family therapy with her, maybe some of the psychological damage done could be healed.

If Woody did molest her I guess then that no healing s going to take place.

I don't understand why Woody has not tried to extend the offer of therapy or work at trying to repair things with Dylan who he did adopt and with Ronan who is his biological son. 

He is their father and made the commitment to them, so I am saying that their anger isn't surprising, and if he wanted to he could reach out but I don;t see any signs of that and that is pretty sad.


----------



## Esmeralda

jillian said:


> Political Junky said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea if Woody Allen is a molester  or not.
> 
> All I know is that Mia Farrow is one snake of an ex wife.
> 
> 
> 
> Farrow was never married to Woody Allen.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> isn't it odd that people keep saying they were married? their apartments faced each other across central park. that was it.
Click to expand...


I don't think it is odd at all that people are confused about whether or not they were legally married.  He lived in a separate apartment because he refused to take on his responsibilities as a full time father, because he is quintessentially selfish and egocentric.  They were involved for 12 years, in a very complicated relationship. They have a biological child and two adopted children together.  He took family vacations with them. He spent time in her NY apartment, with the children, and her vacation home, on Long Island I think.  It's not a typical relationship, but resembles a marriage far more than it resembles any other kind of relationship. To discount that is very disengenuous.


----------



## jillian

Esmeralda said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Political Junky said:
> 
> 
> 
> Farrow was never married to Woody Allen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> isn't it odd that people keep saying they were married? their apartments faced each other across central park. that was it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't think it is odd at all that people are confused about whether or not they were legally married.  He lived in a separate apartment because he refused to take on his responsibilities as a full time father, because he is quintessentially selfish and egocentric.  They were involved for 12 years, in a very complicated relationship. They have a biological child and two adopted children together.  He took family vacations with them. He spent time in her NY apartment, with the children, and her vacation home, on Long Island I think.  It's not a typical relationship, but resembles a marriage far more than it resembles any other kind of relationship. To discount that is very disengenuous.
Click to expand...


they never claimed to be married at all, legally or otherwise. any confusion is in the mind of the observer.

you have no idea why they didn't live together. you're surmising. and i find that making up motives when you have no basis is kind of silly.

no one is claiming he was a nice guy.

and this discussion surfacing again after how many years? is what is disingenuous.


----------



## Esmeralda

My, my aren't you a snarky one.  At least when it comes to addressing me.  Wonder where that comes from.


----------



## jillian

drifter said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drifter said:
> 
> 
> 
> The links Tinydancer posted , I assumed she had to research to find those court documents.
> 
> The psychological damage done to the family, is because of Woody's behavior and choices.
> 
> It  has been said several times nobody knows if he molested dylan or not.
> 
> So we moved onto a discussion about the damage that was done to the family based on choices woody made.
> 
> You can join or not.
> 
> There's not really much anyone can say about the molestation except opinions and speculation.
> 
> Yes the court frowned on Woody's behavior and so did the children who received mixed messages from their dad's choice to marry their adopted sister.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ALLEN v. FARROW | Leagle.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i don't think anyone is arguing that it wasn't creepy.
> 
> but like i said&#8230;. nothing about child molestation.
> 
> so i'm not quite sure what you are trying to say. can you explain?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am saying that if Dylan made up the allegation it is because she is still angry about her dad leaving the family and marrying her adopted sister.
> 
> If Woody made an effort to explore family therapy with her, maybe some of the psychological damage done could be healed.
> 
> If Woody did molest her I guess then that no healing s going to take place.
> 
> I don't understand why Woody has not tried to extend the offer of therapy or work at trying to repair things with Dylan who he did adopt and with Ronan who is his biological son.
> 
> He is their father and made the commitment to them, so I am saying that their anger isn't surprising, and if he wanted to he could reach out but I don;t see any signs of that and that is pretty sad.
Click to expand...


if dylan is still angry it is because her mother changed woody allen's children's names to spite him and spewed bile about him. a healthy mother who cared about her kids wouldn't have changed their names after they were old enough to know those names. and a healthy mother would have encouraged the therapeutic visitation that allen requested. 

so if dylan is still unhealthy, whose fault is that?

whatever commitment he made, he tried to fulfill&#8230; yes, he was a creep. but he didn't abuse her. heir mother kibboshed the effort to ease some of the anger. i have sympathy for the children. and i think farrow is an angry shrew who hurt her children.

just my opinion.


----------



## Michelle420

jillian said:


> drifter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> i don't think anyone is arguing that it wasn't creepy.
> 
> but like i said&#8230;. nothing about child molestation.
> 
> so i'm not quite sure what you are trying to say. can you explain?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am saying that if Dylan made up the allegation it is because she is still angry about her dad leaving the family and marrying her adopted sister.
> 
> If Woody made an effort to explore family therapy with her, maybe some of the psychological damage done could be healed.
> 
> If Woody did molest her I guess then that no healing s going to take place.
> 
> I don't understand why Woody has not tried to extend the offer of therapy or work at trying to repair things with Dylan who he did adopt and with Ronan who is his biological son.
> 
> He is their father and made the commitment to them, so I am saying that their anger isn't surprising, and if he wanted to he could reach out but I don;t see any signs of that and that is pretty sad.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> if dylan is still angry it is because her mother changed woody allen's children's names to spite him and spewed bile about him. a healthy mother who cared about her kids wouldn't have changed their names after they were old enough to know those names. and a healthy mother would have encouraged the therapeutic visitation that allen requested.
> 
> so if dylan is still unhealthy, whose fault is that?
> 
> whatever commitment he made, he tried to fulfill&#8230; tyes, he was a creep. but he didn't abuse her. heir mother kibboshed that. i have sympathy for the children. and i think farrow is an angry shrew who hurt her children.
> 
> just my opinion.
Click to expand...


Well my opinion is that regardless of how he may feel about Mia, that his kids are adults now and since he did make the commitment by adopting Dylan and since Ronan is his son, he should make the effort to go to therapy with them for their mental health.

He can do that for his part, he can't control what Mia does, but he can do the right thing himself.

The choices he made to enter the relationship with Soon Yi caused damge and whether Mia made it worse or not does not take away Woody's responsibility to his own kids.

I think we agree on that we both have sympathy for the children.

That's about all I can say.


----------



## tinydancer

jillian said:


> drifter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> The court that awarded Farrow custody in Allen vs Farrow basically called Allen a scumbucket and a freaking creepy dad to be diddling Soon Yi.
> 
> I put up the link and the Court's commentary on Allen earlier in the thread. It's not flattering.
> 
> And the court did not agree that it was impossible that Dylan had been molested. And they stated that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That was a lot of research work, thanks for posting it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the court didn't like allen.
> 
> that isn't child molestation.
> 
> so what research?
> 
> THIS is the appellate decision:
> 
> ALLEN v. FARROW | Leagle.com
> 
> and this was the basis for the decision not to foster therapeutic visitation between allen and dylan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> both Dr. Bird and Dr. Moreau concur that Dylan remains deeply resistant to visitation with petitioner and that it would not be in the child's best interest to force her to see him. Dr. Moreau, whose selection by the court was unopposed by Allen, clearly had no connection to either party or, indeed, any preconceived views. She undertook an exhaustive investigation into the matter, interviewing everyone who had any relevant information to impart and examining all of the pertinent reports and trial transcripts. The fact that, at the conclusion of Dr. Moreau's evaluation, her opinion did not support the implementation of a program of therapeutic visitation until, at a minimum, Allen had terminated his relationship with Soon-Yi does not render her lacking in impartiality. Rather, she simply did not agree with petitioner's position.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> NOTHING ABOUT SEXUAL MISCONDUCT.
Click to expand...


I see you're like Whoopi Goldberg. It wasn't a molestation molestation. Just like Polanski's wasn't a rape rape. 



Dylan said it happened and has maintained her version of events over many a year. I don't know if it happened or not. None of us do.


----------



## tinydancer

jillian said:


> drifter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> i don't think anyone is arguing that it wasn't creepy.
> 
> but like i said. nothing about child molestation.
> 
> so i'm not quite sure what you are trying to say. can you explain?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am saying that if Dylan made up the allegation it is because she is still angry about her dad leaving the family and marrying her adopted sister.
> 
> If Woody made an effort to explore family therapy with her, maybe some of the psychological damage done could be healed.
> 
> If Woody did molest her I guess then that no healing s going to take place.
> 
> I don't understand why Woody has not tried to extend the offer of therapy or work at trying to repair things with Dylan who he did adopt and with Ronan who is his biological son.
> 
> He is their father and made the commitment to them, so I am saying that their anger isn't surprising, and if he wanted to he could reach out but I don;t see any signs of that and that is pretty sad.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> if dylan is still angry it is because her mother changed woody allen's children's names to spite him and spewed bile about him. a healthy mother who cared about her kids wouldn't have changed their names after they were old enough to know those names. and a healthy mother would have encouraged the therapeutic visitation that allen requested.
> 
> so if dylan is still unhealthy, whose fault is that?
> 
> whatever commitment he made, he tried to fulfill yes, he was a creep. but he didn't abuse her. heir mother kibboshed the effort to ease some of the anger. i have sympathy for the children. and i think farrow is an angry shrew who hurt her children.
> 
> just my opinion.
Click to expand...


Wow. Just wow. 

If Farrow had wanted to really screw Woody over she would have pressed charges. I can't believe you are blathering on about name changes making the children angry.

Did it ever occur to you just freaking once that it seemed pretty strange to the other children that "Daddy" was marrying their sister?

Just once?


----------



## freedombecki

jillian said:


> freedombecki said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> She wasn't his daughter.
> 
> Or his Stepdaughter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If she was his wife's daughter, he was a father figure and as such, a stepfather. To put a wedge between a mother and daughter using sex is lower than snake snot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> they weren't married.
> they didn't live together.
> 
> you're welcome, becki
Click to expand...

Thank you so kindly, Jillian. Welcome back to USMB, and hope your sabbatical put oxygen back into your dear life.


----------



## Dr Grump

drifter said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drifter said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am saying that if Dylan made up the allegation it is because she is still angry about her dad leaving the family and marrying her adopted sister.
> 
> If Woody made an effort to explore family therapy with her, maybe some of the psychological damage done could be healed.
> 
> If Woody did molest her I guess then that no healing s going to take place.
> 
> I don't understand why Woody has not tried to extend the offer of therapy or work at trying to repair things with Dylan who he did adopt and with Ronan who is his biological son.
> 
> He is their father and made the commitment to them, so I am saying that their anger isn't surprising, and if he wanted to he could reach out but I don;t see any signs of that and that is pretty sad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> if dylan is still angry it is because her mother changed woody allen's children's names to spite him and spewed bile about him. a healthy mother who cared about her kids wouldn't have changed their names after they were old enough to know those names. and a healthy mother would have encouraged the therapeutic visitation that allen requested.
> 
> so if dylan is still unhealthy, whose fault is that?
> 
> whatever commitment he made, he tried to fulfill tyes, he was a creep. but he didn't abuse her. heir mother kibboshed that. i have sympathy for the children. and i think farrow is an angry shrew who hurt her children.
> 
> just my opinion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well my opinion is that regardless of how he may feel about Mia, that his kids are adults now and since he did make the commitment by adopting Dylan and since Ronan is his son, he should make the effort to go to therapy with them for their mental health.
> 
> He can do that for his part, he can't control what Mia does, but he can do the right thing himself.
> 
> The choices he made to enter the relationship with Soon Yi caused damge and whether Mia made it worse or not does not take away Woody's responsibility to his own kids.
> 
> I think we agree on that we both have sympathy for the children.
> 
> That's about all I can say.
Click to expand...


Ronan seems fine
Moses seems fine
The other kids as far as we know are fine

None of them talk about therapy.
Only Dylan...and maybe she needs it....because of what did or didn't happen..


----------



## BDBoop

It doesn't matter how many times you echo "adopted stepdaughter." HE never adopted her, nor was she his stepdaughter.


----------



## Michelle420

Dr Grump said:


> drifter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> if dylan is still angry it is because her mother changed woody allen's children's names to spite him and spewed bile about him. a healthy mother who cared about her kids wouldn't have changed their names after they were old enough to know those names. and a healthy mother would have encouraged the therapeutic visitation that allen requested.
> 
> so if dylan is still unhealthy, whose fault is that?
> 
> whatever commitment he made, he tried to fulfill tyes, he was a creep. but he didn't abuse her. heir mother kibboshed that. i have sympathy for the children. and i think farrow is an angry shrew who hurt her children.
> 
> just my opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well my opinion is that regardless of how he may feel about Mia, that his kids are adults now and since he did make the commitment by adopting Dylan and since Ronan is his son, he should make the effort to go to therapy with them for their mental health.
> 
> He can do that for his part, he can't control what Mia does, but he can do the right thing himself.
> 
> The choices he made to enter the relationship with Soon Yi caused damge and whether Mia made it worse or not does not take away Woody's responsibility to his own kids.
> 
> I think we agree on that we both have sympathy for the children.
> 
> That's about all I can say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ronan seems fine
> Moses seems fine
> The other kids as far as we know are fine
> 
> None of them talk about therapy.
> Only Dylan...and maybe she needs it....because of what did or didn't happen..
Click to expand...


I posted the quote from Ronan and he seems mad.

I think Woody could reach out more at fixing things.


----------



## freedombecki

koshergrl said:


> Of course. Women shouldn't out the men who molest their kids. They should just drive them to the clinic to get their abortions and shut the fuck up.
> He married one of his kids, and another has come forward to say he molested hers. I don't think this is evidence of the evil nature of Farrow, but rather of Allen.





Connery said:


> "More than 20 years ago, Farrow learned that Woody Allen, her partner who hinted at trouble by casting Mia in humiliating movie roles (a cuckolded narcissist in &#8220;Hannah and Her Sisters&#8217;&#8217;?) &#8212; a guy she never lived with, and only rarely loved &#8212; was conducting a torrid affair with her adopted daughter, Soon-Yi Previn."
> 
> Mia Farrow gets her revenge on Woody Allen | New York Post
> 
> Just reading this makes my skin crawl.....





Sherry said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sherry said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is anyone contesting the evidence that he married his daughter?? This would hold at least some degree of sway with most people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He married his step daughter. Absolutely. But the 'step' part is important.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No it's not, and that is very insulting to diminish the healthy and loving relationships between adoptive parents and their adopted children who develop the same emotional bonds as biological parents and children.
Click to expand...




 Here is a small treatise of a person who was abused as a child and wrote a book on her multiple personality dissociation caused by it:

 &#8220;As a child I had been taken to see Dr Bradshaw on countless occasions; it was in his surgery that Billy had first discovered Lego. As I was growing up, I also saw Dr Robinson, the marathon runner. Now that I was living back at home, he was again my GP. When Mother bravely told him I was undergoing treatment for MPD/DID as a result of childhood sexual abuse, he buried his head in hands and wept.
Child abuse will always re-emerge, no matter how many years go by. We read of cases of people who have come forward after thirty or forty years to say they were abused as children in care homes by wardens, schoolteachers, neighbours, fathers, priests. The Catholic Church in the United States in the last decade has paid out hundreds of millions of dollars in compensation for 'acts of sodomy and depravity towards children', to quote one information-exchange web-site. Why do these ageing people make the abuse public so late in their lives? To seek attention? No, it's because deep down there is a wound they need to bring out into the clean air before it can heal. 
Many clinicians miss signs of abuse in children because they, as decent people, do not want to find evidence of what Dr Ross suggests is 'a sick society that has grown sicker, and the abuse of children more bizarre'. 
(Note: this was written in the UK many years before the revelations of Jimmy Savile's widespread abuse, which included some ritual abuse)&#8221; 
&#8213; Alice Jamieson, _Today I'm Alice: Nine Personalities, One Tortured Mind _
  tags: abuse, child-sexual-abuse, denial, dissociation, dissociative, dissociative-identity-disorder, incest, mental-health, mental-illness, mpd, multiple-personality-disorder, paedophiles, pedophilia, ritual-abuse, savile, sexual-abuse, sexually-transmitted-infections, society-denial, split-personality, survivor, trauma, victim


----------



## tinydancer

BDBoop said:


> It doesn't matter how many times you echo "adopted stepdaughter." HE never adopted her, nor was she his stepdaughter.



Oh bite me. 

That's idiotic. Woody was considered their father by the most important people in this sorry case. The children. They all thought of Woody as "Daddy".

"Daddy" was banging their sister. That's all I need to know to put him in the "creep father file".


----------



## tinydancer

An interesting read to be sure. 

*
June 8, 1993
Allen Loses to Farrow in Bitter Custody Battle
By PETER MARKS

Describing Woody Allen as a "self-absorbed, untrustworthy and insensitive" father, a judge in Manhattan yesterday rejected his attempt to win custody of his three children and awarded custody to their mother, Mia Farrow. 

 In a scathing 33-page decision, Acting Justice Elliott Wilk of State Supreme Court denounced Mr. Allen for carrying on an affair with one of Ms. Farrow's daughters, trying to pit family members against one another and lacking knowledge of the most basic aspects of his children's lives.

The judge also denied Mr. Allen immediate visiting rights with his 7-year-old daughter, Dylan Farrow. Last summer Ms. Farrow accused the 57-year-old film maker of molesting the child. 

Justice Wilk said it was unlikely that Mr. Allen could be prosecuted for sexual abuse based on the evidence. But while a team of experts concluded that Dylan was not abused, the judge said he found the evidence inconclusive. *

AND for you Mia haters out there, the Justice differs with you. 

*  Justice Wilk, however, had few unkind words for Ms. Farrow, whom he commended as a caring and loving mother who had tried to protect her children from what he characterized as Mr. Allen's manipulativeness and insensitivity. 

"Ms. Farrow's principal shortcoming with respect to responsible parenting appears to have been her continued relationship with Mr. Allen," he wrote.

On the other hand, Justice Wilk portrayed Mr. Allen as devious, hurtful and unreliable, a father who did not know the names of his son's teachers -- or even which children shared which bedrooms in Ms. Farrow's apartment. Mr. Allen lived in a separate apartment on the other side of Central Park.

Referring to what Dylan's own psychotherapist called Mr. Allen's inappropriately intense behavior toward the little girl, the justice said it was unclear whether Mr. Allen could ever develop "the insight and judgment necessary for him to relate to Dylan appropriately." *

AND

* The justice said he considered Mr. Allen's affair with Soon-Yi Farrow Previn -- and his inability to comprehend the impact the romance was having on the other children in the Farrow household -- further evidence of his deficiencies as a parent.

 "Having isolated Soon-Yi from her family, he left her with no visible support system," Justice Wilk wrote. *

Allen Loses to Farrow in Bitter Custody Battle

'nuff said


----------



## Dr Grump

drifter said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drifter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well my opinion is that regardless of how he may feel about Mia, that his kids are adults now and since he did make the commitment by adopting Dylan and since Ronan is his son, he should make the effort to go to therapy with them for their mental health.
> 
> He can do that for his part, he can't control what Mia does, but he can do the right thing himself.
> 
> The choices he made to enter the relationship with Soon Yi caused damge and whether Mia made it worse or not does not take away Woody's responsibility to his own kids.
> 
> I think we agree on that we both have sympathy for the children.
> 
> That's about all I can say.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ronan seems fine
> Moses seems fine
> The other kids as far as we know are fine
> 
> None of them talk about therapy.
> Only Dylan...and maybe she needs it....because of what did or didn't happen..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I posted the quote from Ronan and he seems mad.
> 
> I think Woody could reach out more at fixing things.
Click to expand...


Ronan doesn't want to know him. And Ronan isn't that mad. Check out the Vanity Fair article everybody is talking about. He seems pretty well adjusted IMO...


----------



## Michelle420

Dr Grump said:


> drifter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ronan seems fine
> Moses seems fine
> The other kids as far as we know are fine
> 
> None of them talk about therapy.
> Only Dylan...and maybe she needs it....because of what did or didn't happen..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I posted the quote from Ronan and he seems mad.
> 
> I think Woody could reach out more at fixing things.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ronan doesn't want to know him. And Ronan isn't that mad. Check out the Vanity Fair article everybody is talking about. He seems pretty well adjusted IMO...
Click to expand...


Check out his twitter, he seems mad at him.

We will just have to disagree Dr Grump


----------



## Dr Grump

tinydancer said:


> An interesting read to be sure.
> 
> *
> June 8, 1993
> Allen Loses to Farrow in Bitter Custody Battle
> By PETER MARKS
> 
> Describing Woody Allen as a "self-absorbed, untrustworthy and insensitive" father, a judge in Manhattan yesterday rejected his attempt to win custody of his three children and awarded custody to their mother, Mia Farrow.
> 
> In a scathing 33-page decision, Acting Justice Elliott Wilk of State Supreme Court denounced Mr. Allen for carrying on an affair with one of Ms. Farrow's daughters, trying to pit family members against one another and lacking knowledge of the most basic aspects of his children's lives.
> 
> The judge also denied Mr. Allen immediate visiting rights with his 7-year-old daughter, Dylan Farrow. Last summer Ms. Farrow accused the 57-year-old film maker of molesting the child.
> 
> Justice Wilk said it was unlikely that Mr. Allen could be prosecuted for sexual abuse based on the evidence. But while a team of experts concluded that Dylan was not abused, the judge said he found the evidence inconclusive. *
> 
> AND for you Mia haters out there, the Justice differs with you.
> 
> *  Justice Wilk, however, had few unkind words for Ms. Farrow, whom he commended as a caring and loving mother who had tried to protect her children from what he characterized as Mr. Allen's manipulativeness and insensitivity.
> 
> "Ms. Farrow's principal shortcoming with respect to responsible parenting appears to have been her continued relationship with Mr. Allen," he wrote.
> 
> On the other hand, Justice Wilk portrayed Mr. Allen as devious, hurtful and unreliable, a father who did not know the names of his son's teachers -- or even which children shared which bedrooms in Ms. Farrow's apartment. Mr. Allen lived in a separate apartment on the other side of Central Park.
> 
> Referring to what Dylan's own psychotherapist called Mr. Allen's inappropriately intense behavior toward the little girl, the justice said it was unclear whether Mr. Allen could ever develop "the insight and judgment necessary for him to relate to Dylan appropriately." *
> 
> AND
> 
> * The justice said he considered Mr. Allen's affair with Soon-Yi Farrow Previn -- and his inability to comprehend the impact the romance was having on the other children in the Farrow household -- further evidence of his deficiencies as a parent.
> 
> "Having isolated Soon-Yi from her family, he left her with no visible support system," Justice Wilk wrote. *
> 
> Allen Loses to Farrow in Bitter Custody Battle
> 
> 'nuff said



Sounds like a biased judge using his own personal opinion than judging on the facts. As for the last sentence "having isolated Soon Yi"... here we are 20 years later and they're still together.

'nuff said?


----------



## Dr Grump

drifter said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drifter said:
> 
> 
> 
> I posted the quote from Ronan and he seems mad.
> 
> I think Woody could reach out more at fixing things.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ronan doesn't want to know him. And Ronan isn't that mad. Check out the Vanity Fair article everybody is talking about. He seems pretty well adjusted IMO...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Check out his twitter, he seems mad at him.
> 
> We will just have to disagree Dr Grump
Click to expand...


Could be, but they seem to pick their moments...


----------



## Michelle420

Dr Grump said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> An interesting read to be sure.
> 
> *
> June 8, 1993
> Allen Loses to Farrow in Bitter Custody Battle
> By PETER MARKS
> 
> Describing Woody Allen as a "self-absorbed, untrustworthy and insensitive" father, a judge in Manhattan yesterday rejected his attempt to win custody of his three children and awarded custody to their mother, Mia Farrow.
> 
> In a scathing 33-page decision, Acting Justice Elliott Wilk of State Supreme Court denounced Mr. Allen for carrying on an affair with one of Ms. Farrow's daughters, trying to pit family members against one another and lacking knowledge of the most basic aspects of his children's lives.
> 
> The judge also denied Mr. Allen immediate visiting rights with his 7-year-old daughter, Dylan Farrow. Last summer Ms. Farrow accused the 57-year-old film maker of molesting the child.
> 
> Justice Wilk said it was unlikely that Mr. Allen could be prosecuted for sexual abuse based on the evidence. But while a team of experts concluded that Dylan was not abused, the judge said he found the evidence inconclusive. *
> 
> AND for you Mia haters out there, the Justice differs with you.
> 
> *  Justice Wilk, however, had few unkind words for Ms. Farrow, whom he commended as a caring and loving mother who had tried to protect her children from what he characterized as Mr. Allen's manipulativeness and insensitivity.
> 
> "Ms. Farrow's principal shortcoming with respect to responsible parenting appears to have been her continued relationship with Mr. Allen," he wrote.
> 
> On the other hand, Justice Wilk portrayed Mr. Allen as devious, hurtful and unreliable, a father who did not know the names of his son's teachers -- or even which children shared which bedrooms in Ms. Farrow's apartment. Mr. Allen lived in a separate apartment on the other side of Central Park.
> 
> Referring to what Dylan's own psychotherapist called Mr. Allen's inappropriately intense behavior toward the little girl, the justice said it was unclear whether Mr. Allen could ever develop "the insight and judgment necessary for him to relate to Dylan appropriately." *
> 
> AND
> 
> * The justice said he considered Mr. Allen's affair with Soon-Yi Farrow Previn -- and his inability to comprehend the impact the romance was having on the other children in the Farrow household -- further evidence of his deficiencies as a parent.
> 
> "Having isolated Soon-Yi from her family, he left her with no visible support system," Justice Wilk wrote. *
> 
> Allen Loses to Farrow in Bitter Custody Battle
> 
> 'nuff said
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds like a biased judge using his own personal opinion than judging on the facts. As for the last sentence "having isolated Soon Yi"... here we are 20 years later and they're still together.
> 
> 'nuff said?
Click to expand...


I don't think anyone has even once said they wouldn't stay together.

I think people have mostly discussed the effects it had on the family unit and the other kids.

The judge seemed to find him not suitable as a father figure.

Him staying married to Mia's adopted daughter and sister to woody's biological son, really doesn't change that opinion.


----------



## Michelle420

Dr Grump said:


> drifter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ronan doesn't want to know him. And Ronan isn't that mad. Check out the Vanity Fair article everybody is talking about. He seems pretty well adjusted IMO...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Check out his twitter, he seems mad at him.
> 
> We will just have to disagree Dr Grump
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Could be, but they seem to pick their moments...
Click to expand...


Well kids will do that to their parents.

I just wish Woody would have an interest in trying to heal the situation.

Oh Well


----------



## Dr Grump

drifter said:


> I don't think anyone has even once said they wouldn't stay together.
> 
> I think people have mostly discussed the effects it had on the family unit and the other kids.
> 
> The judge seemed to find him not suitable as a father figure.
> 
> Him staying married to Mia's adopted daughter and sister to woody's biological son, really doesn't change that opinion.



Oh, he'd never get father of the year - far too self absorbed, just like Steve Jobs...

The issue here, is a pedo. That aside, some are finding him guilty of being one based on flimsy evidence to say the least.


----------



## Michelle420

Dr Grump said:


> drifter said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think anyone has even once said they wouldn't stay together.
> 
> I think people have mostly discussed the effects it had on the family unit and the other kids.
> 
> The judge seemed to find him not suitable as a father figure.
> 
> Him staying married to Mia's adopted daughter and sister to woody's biological son, really doesn't change that opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, he'd never get father of the year - far too self absorbed, just like Steve Jobs...
> 
> The issue here, is a pedo. That aside, some are finding him guilty of being one based on flimsy evidence to say the least.
Click to expand...


Yeah well like Jillian said, I have sympathy for all the kids.

It's just a bad situation and we agree he is self-absorbed.


----------



## RosieS

Allen Dershowitz, famous lawyer, said he represented the Farrows, Mia and Dylan, and offered to settle this supposed "assault" quietly.

This is what Dershowitz meant by "quietly":

Farrow lawyers demanded $7 million, Allen says - Baltimore Sun

Dershowitz and  associates wear the same kind of suits as my Italian relatives.

But if my Italian relatives did what Dershowitz did; it would mean off to prison for extortion.

Dershowitz does it and it is legal.

$7 million is an awful lot of revenge, rage and doubt.

Have you seen Ronin Darrow? He is a blonde version of Frank Sinatra. Sinatra' s offspring say if he is related they will happily accept him into their family.

There is not a drop of Woody Allen in that young man - so just how desperately clingy was Farrow? Enuff to foist off Sinatra's  kid as Allen's?

It is all a very sick situation, undoubtedly.

Regards from Rosie


----------



## Michelle420

RosieS said:


> Allen Dershowitz, famous lawyer, said he represented the Farrows, Mia and Dylan, and offered to settle this supposed "assault" quietly.
> 
> This is what Dershowitz meant by "quietly":
> 
> Farrow lawyers demanded $7 million, Allen says - Baltimore Sun
> 
> Dershowitz and  associates wear the same kind of suits as my Italian relatives.
> 
> But if my Italian relatives did what Dershowitz did; it would mean off to prison for extortion.
> 
> Dershowitz does it and it is legal.
> 
> $7 million is an awful lot of revenge, rage and doubt.
> 
> Have you seen Ronin Darrow? He is a blonde version of Frank Sinatra. Sinatra' s offspring say if he is related they will happily accept him into their family.
> 
> There is not a drop of Woody Allen in that young man - so just how desperately clingy was Farrow? Enuff to foist off Sinatra's  kid as Allen's?
> 
> It is all a very sick situation, undoubtedly.
> 
> Regards from Rosie



It's sad for the kids about both the parents behaviors.


----------



## freedombecki

tinydancer said:


> An interesting read to be sure.
> 
> *
> June 8, 1993
> Allen Loses to Farrow in Bitter Custody Battle
> By PETER MARKS
> 
> Describing Woody Allen as a "self-absorbed, untrustworthy and insensitive" father, a judge in Manhattan yesterday rejected his attempt to win custody of his three children and awarded custody to their mother, Mia Farrow.
> 
> In a scathing 33-page decision, Acting Justice Elliott Wilk of State Supreme Court denounced Mr. Allen for carrying on an affair with one of Ms. Farrow's daughters, trying to pit family members against one another and lacking knowledge of the most basic aspects of his children's lives.
> 
> The judge also denied Mr. Allen immediate visiting rights with his 7-year-old daughter, Dylan Farrow. Last summer Ms. Farrow accused the 57-year-old film maker of molesting the child.
> 
> Justice Wilk said it was unlikely that Mr. Allen could be prosecuted for sexual abuse based on the evidence. But while a team of experts concluded that Dylan was not abused, the judge said he found the evidence inconclusive. *
> 
> AND for you Mia haters out there, the Justice differs with you.
> 
> *Justice Wilk, however, had few unkind words for Ms. Farrow, whom he commended as a caring and loving mother who had tried to protect her children from what he characterized as Mr. Allen's manipulativeness and insensitivity.
> 
> "Ms. Farrow's principal shortcoming with respect to responsible parenting appears to have been her continued relationship with Mr. Allen," he wrote.
> 
> On the other hand, Justice Wilk portrayed Mr. Allen as devious, hurtful and unreliable, a father who did not know the names of his son's teachers -- or even which children shared which bedrooms in Ms. Farrow's apartment. Mr. Allen lived in a separate apartment on the other side of Central Park.
> 
> Referring to what Dylan's own psychotherapist called Mr. Allen's inappropriately intense behavior toward the little girl, the justice said it was unclear whether Mr. Allen could ever develop "the insight and judgment necessary for him to relate to Dylan appropriately." *
> 
> AND
> 
> *The justice said he considered Mr. Allen's affair with Soon-Yi Farrow Previn -- and his inability to comprehend the impact the romance was having on the other children in the Farrow household -- further evidence of his deficiencies as a parent.
> 
> "Having isolated Soon-Yi from her family, he left her with no visible support system," Justice Wilk wrote. *
> 
> Allen Loses to Farrow in Bitter Custody Battle
> 
> 'nuff said





> *The justice said he considered Mr. Allen's affair with Soon-Yi Farrow Previn -- and his inability to comprehend the impact the romance was having on the other children in the Farrow household -- further evidence of his deficiencies as a parent.
> 
> "Having isolated Soon-Yi from her family, he left her with no visible support system," Justice Wilk wrote. *


 Quoting from your link, the two passages about the justice's statement is consistent with the asocial aspect of pedophilia.

America is a sadder place on account of this celebrity using his star power to excuse himself from accountability for his moral crime against his children Soon-Yi and Dylan, not to mention the confusion he inflicted on the other children in the family whom he horrified with his perversion. I hope those children realize from that justice's statement that someone, and in particular a man, in the human race cares for them and cares for them deeply. Little girls who are abused can grow up very bitter toward the father who abused them. I had such a friend in junior high. Her description of her life around lecherous male relatives was something I didn't quite understand for 10 years.


----------



## Gracie

> There is not a drop of Woody Allen in that young man - so just how desperately clingy was Farrow? Enuff to foist off Sinatra's kid as Allen's?



And perhaps she told him and Allen was ok with it.


----------



## RosieS

Gracie said:


> There is not a drop of Woody Allen in that young man - so just how desperately clingy was Farrow? Enuff to foist off Sinatra's kid as Allen's?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And perhaps she told him and Allen was ok with it.
Click to expand...


Perhaps. 

But beyond doubt there is enuff sick in the head behavior on all sides for three or four families worth.

I cannot see any child growing up normal given those parents.

Regards from Rosie


----------



## tinydancer

RosieS said:


> Allen Dershowitz, famous lawyer, said he represented the Farrows, Mia and Dylan, and offered to settle this supposed "assault" quietly.
> 
> This is what Dershowitz meant by "quietly":
> 
> Farrow lawyers demanded $7 million, Allen says - Baltimore Sun
> 
> Dershowitz and  associates wear the same kind of suits as my Italian relatives.
> 
> But if my Italian relatives did what Dershowitz did; it would mean off to prison for extortion.
> 
> Dershowitz does it and it is legal.
> 
> $7 million is an awful lot of revenge, rage and doubt.
> 
> Have you seen Ronin Darrow? He is a blonde version of Frank Sinatra. Sinatra' s offspring say if he is related they will happily accept him into their family.
> 
> There is not a drop of Woody Allen in that young man - so just how desperately clingy was Farrow? Enuff to foist off Sinatra's  kid as Allen's?
> 
> It is all a very sick situation, undoubtedly.
> 
> Regards from Rosie



That article you gave a link to only has Woody's claim that Dershowitz demanded hush money. And that would be very strange to have "hush money" considering this was wildly all out in the open. All hell was breaking loose with this scandal with Soon Li. 

Just an interesting tid bit. 

* Sinatra wanted Woody Allen to stop bullying Mia Farrow

Frank Sinatra was looking out for Mia Farrow when she was embroiled in a long custody battle with Woody Allen in the early 90s after his relationship with Soon-Yi was discovered.

In his new book, Taking the Stand, high-powered lawyer Alan Dershowitz, who represented Farrow in her case, reveals that Sinatra personally called him to offer his help.

Dershowitz writes of Sinatras call, He immediately got down to business. I love Mia. We were married, you know. Shes a great girl. Woodys trying to bully her. He cant be allowed to get away with that. What can I do to help?

Dershowitz says he responded that he had it under control, to which Sinatra added, Well, beyond the legal case, what can I do to call Woody off?

Aware of Sinatras tough-guy reputation, Dershowitz says, I nervously told him to leave it to the lawyers, and that any approach to Woody Allen would be used against Mia and would likely backfire.*

Sinatra wanted Woody Allen to stop ?bullying? Mia Farrow | Page Six


----------



## tinydancer

RosieS said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is not a drop of Woody Allen in that young man - so just how desperately clingy was Farrow? Enuff to foist off Sinatra's kid as Allen's?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And perhaps she told him and Allen was ok with it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Perhaps.
> 
> But beyond doubt there is enuff sick in the head behavior on all sides for three or four families worth.
> 
> I cannot see any child growing up normal given those parents.
> 
> Regards from Rosie
Click to expand...


Rosie think about Farrow here.

 I thought she kept herself very civil considering the circumstances. 

 If I had found out that my long term boyfriend/common law kinda husband and father to my children was banging my daughter, like I said last night, I would have had a Lorena Bobbit moment.

Woody would never have had a Woody ever again in his life if you catch my drift. 

I can't blame Mia Farrow for being royally pissed off.


----------



## tinydancer

freedombecki said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course. Women shouldn't out the men who molest their kids. They should just drive them to the clinic to get their abortions and shut the fuck up.
> He married one of his kids, and another has come forward to say he molested hers. I don't think this is evidence of the evil nature of Farrow, but rather of Allen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> "More than 20 years ago, Farrow learned that Woody Allen, her partner who hinted at trouble by casting Mia in humiliating movie roles (a cuckolded narcissist in Hannah and Her Sisters?)  a guy she never lived with, and only rarely loved  was conducting a torrid affair with her adopted daughter, Soon-Yi Previn."
> 
> Mia Farrow gets her revenge on Woody Allen | New York Post
> 
> Just reading this makes my skin crawl.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sherry said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> He married his step daughter. Absolutely. But the 'step' part is important.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No it's not, and that is very insulting to diminish the healthy and loving relationships between adoptive parents and their adopted children who develop the same emotional bonds as biological parents and children.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a small treatise of a person who was abused as a child and wrote a book on her multiple personality dissociation caused by it:
> 
> As a child I had been taken to see Dr Bradshaw on countless occasions; it was in his surgery that Billy had first discovered Lego. As I was growing up, I also saw Dr Robinson, the marathon runner. Now that I was living back at home, he was again my GP. When Mother bravely told him I was undergoing treatment for MPD/DID as a result of childhood sexual abuse, he buried his head in hands and wept.
> Child abuse will always re-emerge, no matter how many years go by. We read of cases of people who have come forward after thirty or forty years to say they were abused as children in care homes by wardens, schoolteachers, neighbours, fathers, priests. The Catholic Church in the United States in the last decade has paid out hundreds of millions of dollars in compensation for 'acts of sodomy and depravity towards children', to quote one information-exchange web-site. Why do these ageing people make the abuse public so late in their lives? To seek attention? No, it's because deep down there is a wound they need to bring out into the clean air before it can heal.
> Many clinicians miss signs of abuse in children because they, as decent people, do not want to find evidence of what Dr Ross suggests is 'a sick society that has grown sicker, and the abuse of children more bizarre'.
> (Note: this was written in the UK many years before the revelations of Jimmy Savile's widespread abuse, which included some ritual abuse)
> &#8213; Alice Jamieson, _Today I'm Alice: Nine Personalities, One Tortured Mind _
> tags: abuse, child-sexual-abuse, denial, dissociation, dissociative, dissociative-identity-disorder, incest, mental-health, mental-illness, mpd, multiple-personality-disorder, paedophiles, pedophilia, ritual-abuse, savile, sexual-abuse, sexually-transmitted-infections, society-denial, split-personality, survivor, trauma, victim
Click to expand...


The Saville case is so appalling. Perfect example of so many turning a blind eye including the BBC and the law because of the fame and fortune of the pedophile. 

Another example is the case of the Lostprophet singer. Again, fans were reporting him and yet the law did not move in on him because of fame and fortune. The police are now being investigated.

Ian Watkins: Police probed over earlier allegations as Lostprophets singer sentenced to 35 years for child sex offences - Crime - UK - The Independent

And then of course we have the outrageous situation of so many in Hollywood supporting Roman Polanski. I still had television when I was watching the View (only two channels and it was the View or CBC kids programming.)

I almost fell off the couch when Whoopi Goldberg actually said that the Polanski situation really wasn't like a "rape rape".

Aye carumba!


----------



## RosieS

tinydancer said:


> RosieS said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> And perhaps she told him and Allen was ok with it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps.
> 
> But beyond doubt there is enuff sick in the head behavior on all sides for three or four families worth.
> 
> I cannot see any child growing up normal given those parents.
> 
> Regards from Rosie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Rosie think about Farrow here.
> 
> I thought she kept herself very civil considering the circumstances.
> 
> If I had found out that my long term boyfriend/common law kinda husband and father to my children was banging my daughter, like I said last night, I would have had a Lorena Bobbit moment.
> 
> Woody would never have had a Woody ever again in his life if you catch my drift.
> 
> I can't blame Mia Farrow for being royally pissed off.
Click to expand...


Having had a HUGE custody battle over my youngest, which I won - there are a couple of things you can never do.

You must never use your children as a weapon against your ex.

And you must never turn your child against the other parent.

If the other parent is such a lousy person, your child will come to learn it by theirself. But the other parent may treat the child wonderfully during visitation - and your kid deserves that chance.

Making the split about $7 million; turning the children against him over Soon-Yi and her adult choices; and particularly using Dylan as a weapon and screwing over Dylan's mind badly -

I cannot see a single thing Mia Farrow did on behalf of the wellbeing  of her kids.

And for that she really is a lowbellied snake. It is all about what is best for children - not about 20 years of unrelenting venom. That is just sick.

Regards from Rosie


----------



## Gracie

Wrong, Rosie. But you are entitled to your opinion.

Try reading Tiny Dancers post again. Post # 272..and especially the quote she did of Sherrys post. READ IT.

Then again..I can't make you see anything other than what you wish to see.


----------



## tinydancer

RosieS said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RosieS said:
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps.
> 
> But beyond doubt there is enuff sick in the head behavior on all sides for three or four families worth.
> 
> I cannot see any child growing up normal given those parents.
> 
> Regards from Rosie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosie think about Farrow here.
> 
> I thought she kept herself very civil considering the circumstances.
> 
> If I had found out that my long term boyfriend/common law kinda husband and father to my children was banging my daughter, like I said last night, I would have had a Lorena Bobbit moment.
> 
> Woody would never have had a Woody ever again in his life if you catch my drift.
> 
> I can't blame Mia Farrow for being royally pissed off.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Having had a HUGE custody battle over my youngest, which I won - there are a couple of things you can never do.
> 
> You must never use your children as a weapon against your ex.
> 
> And you must never turn your child against the other parent.
> 
> If the other parent is such a lousy person, your child will come to learn it by theirself. But the other parent may treat the child wonderfully during visitation - and your kid deserves that chance.
> 
> Making the split about $7 million; turning the children against him over Soon-Yi and her adult choices; and particularly using Dylan as a weapon and screwing over Dylan's mind badly -
> 
> I cannot see a single thing Mia Farrow did on behalf of the wellbeing  of her kids.
> 
> And for that she really is a lowbellied snake. It is all about what is best for children - not about 20 years of unrelenting venom. That is just sick.
> 
> Regards from Rosie
Click to expand...


Give me the proof that Dershowitz demanded 7 million. And I'm not going to take Allen's word for it. 

And as far as the other children learning about Woody, for crying out loud he was openly having an affair with their sister, you know, the daughter of their mother.

And prove to me 20 years of unrelenting venom. You can't. You know why? Because it's not there.

Your statement:

* I cannot see a single thing Mia Farrow did on behalf of the wellbeing  of her kids.*

The Justice could. That's why she got custody.

And the best thing she ever did for the children was to allow them their own decision as to whether or not they wanted to hang with "Daddy" and their sister aka "Daddy's new wife."

If you can't discern who the fucked up one here is well, so be it.


----------



## RosieS

Gracie said:


> Wrong, Rosie. But you are entitled to your opinion.
> 
> Try reading Tiny Dancers post again. Post # 272..and especially the quote she did of Sherrys post. READ IT.
> 
> Then again..I can't make you see anything other than what you wish to see.



Well, ya know, Gracie, I was abused as a kid every which way by both parents except sexually.

Dylan complained of a sexual assault. I was sexually assaulted at age 8 by a male babysitter.
Assault is less than rape but it is molestation.

I have direct experience in ALL of this as a survivor. I was not expected, by psychologists, to actually survive the abuse.

I also taught elementary school in the inner city and taught future teachers  at my alma mater as well. Always available to kids who were hurting like I once was.

Plus my custody experience above.

So I will.stack up my life against anyone's.

Wrong?

Not in any aspect whatsoever.

Thankfully you don't HAVE to understand how far off the mark you are - and for that I am grateful you don't.

Ya know?

Regards from Rosie


----------



## RosieS

tinydancer said:


> RosieS said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Rosie think about Farrow here.
> 
> I thought she kept herself very civil considering the circumstances.
> 
> If I had found out that my long term boyfriend/common law kinda husband and father to my children was banging my daughter, like I said last night, I would have had a Lorena Bobbit moment.
> 
> Woody would never have had a Woody ever again in his life if you catch my drift.
> 
> I can't blame Mia Farrow for being royally pissed off.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Having had a HUGE custody battle over my youngest, which I won - there are a couple of things you can never do.
> 
> You must never use your children as a weapon against your ex.
> 
> And you must never turn your child against the other parent.
> 
> If the other parent is such a lousy person, your child will come to learn it by theirself. But the other parent may treat the child wonderfully during visitation - and your kid deserves that chance.
> 
> Making the split about $7 million; turning the children against him over Soon-Yi and her adult choices; and particularly using Dylan as a weapon and screwing over Dylan's mind badly -
> 
> I cannot see a single thing Mia Farrow did on behalf of the wellbeing  of her kids.
> 
> And for that she really is a lowbellied snake. It is all about what is best for children - not about 20 years of unrelenting venom. That is just sick.
> 
> Regards from Rosie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Give me the proof that Dershowitz demanded 7 million. And I'm not going to take Allen's word for it.
> 
> And as far as the other children learning about Woody, for crying out loud he was openly having an affair with their sister, you know, the daughter of their mother.
> 
> And prove to me 20 years of unrelenting venom. You can't. You know why? Because it's not there.
> 
> Your statement:
> 
> * I cannot see a single thing Mia Farrow did on behalf of the wellbeing  of her kids.*
> 
> The Justice could. That's why she got custody.
> 
> And the best thing she ever did for the children was to allow them their own decision as to whether or not they wanted to hang with "Daddy" and their sister aka "Daddy's new wife."
> 
> If you can't discern who the fucked up one here is well, so be it.
Click to expand...


Dershowitz never argued the amount and he said he tried to end it quietly just TONITE on Piers Morgan on CNN.

Moses is hanging with Daddy now and is estranged from Mommy Dearest.

Judges are mistaken often - and the truth was back then mothers practically had to be murderesses to lose custody. It was presumed children were better off with mothers when young.

No longer. Fathers have rights and rarely lose visitation since child support is mandatory.

If you can't discern who had the venom that screwed up the kids, then too bad.

Regards from Rosie
.


----------



## Gracie

RosieS said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong, Rosie. But you are entitled to your opinion.
> 
> Try reading Tiny Dancers post again. Post # 272..and especially the quote she did of Sherrys post. READ IT.
> 
> Then again..I can't make you see anything other than what you wish to see.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, ya know, Gracie, I was abused as a kid every which way by both parents except sexually.
> 
> Dylan complained of a sexual assault. I was sexually assaulted at age 8 by a male babysitter.
> Assault is less than rape but it is molestation.
> 
> I have direct experience in ALL of this as a survivor. I was not expected, by psychologists, to actually survive the abuse.
> 
> I also taught elementary school in the inner city and taught future teachers  at my alma mater as well. Always available to kids who were hurting like I once was.
> 
> Plus my custody experience above.
> 
> So I will.stack up my life against anyone's.
> 
> Wrong?
> 
> Not in any aspect whatsoever.
> 
> Thankfully you don't HAVE to understand how far off the mark you are - and for that I am grateful you don't.
> 
> Ya know?
> 
> Regards from Rosie
Click to expand...


Really. So...since you experienced it yourself EXCEPT for the sexual part...I must not know of what I speak, eh?
Got news for ya. My dad was awesome. I loved him dearly. He treated me as his daughter and loved me too. However, he was a wimp. My MOTHER sexually abused me. Yes, my MOTHER. On her own daughter. (quick, someone archive this. GREAT weapon for later! Eye roll).

That perv fucked his daughter, molested his other daughter and Mia did what she could but she, too, couldn't do much any more than Dad could. Rock, hard place. Was Mia a wimp? No clue. Don't care. I choose to believe the now grown children. If you wanna believe that fucking ugly perv, knock yourself out.


----------



## tinydancer

RosieS said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RosieS said:
> 
> 
> 
> Having had a HUGE custody battle over my youngest, which I won - there are a couple of things you can never do.
> 
> You must never use your children as a weapon against your ex.
> 
> And you must never turn your child against the other parent.
> 
> If the other parent is such a lousy person, your child will come to learn it by theirself. But the other parent may treat the child wonderfully during visitation - and your kid deserves that chance.
> 
> Making the split about $7 million; turning the children against him over Soon-Yi and her adult choices; and particularly using Dylan as a weapon and screwing over Dylan's mind badly -
> 
> I cannot see a single thing Mia Farrow did on behalf of the wellbeing  of her kids.
> 
> And for that she really is a lowbellied snake. It is all about what is best for children - not about 20 years of unrelenting venom. That is just sick.
> 
> Regards from Rosie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Give me the proof that Dershowitz demanded 7 million. And I'm not going to take Allen's word for it.
> 
> And as far as the other children learning about Woody, for crying out loud he was openly having an affair with their sister, you know, the daughter of their mother.
> 
> And prove to me 20 years of unrelenting venom. You can't. You know why? Because it's not there.
> 
> Your statement:
> 
> * I cannot see a single thing Mia Farrow did on behalf of the wellbeing  of her kids.*
> 
> The Justice could. That's why she got custody.
> 
> And the best thing she ever did for the children was to allow them their own decision as to whether or not they wanted to hang with "Daddy" and their sister aka "Daddy's new wife."
> 
> If you can't discern who the fucked up one here is well, so be it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dershowitz never argued the amount and he said he tried to end it quietly just TONITE on Piers Morgan on CNN.
> 
> Moses is hanging with Daddy now and is estranged from Mommy Dearest.
> 
> Judges are mistaken often - and the truth was back then mothers practically had to be murderesses to lose custody. It was presumed children were better off with mothers when young.
> 
> No longer. Fathers have rights and rarely lose visitation since child support is mandatory.
> 
> If you can't discern who had the venom that screwed up the kids, then too bad.
> 
> Regards from Rosie
> .
Click to expand...


Oh bite me 

Saying he wanted to end the scandalous situation as quietly as possible is a far far far cry from the claim that Dershowitz was attempting to extort millions from Woody.

Give me a freaking break. Oh and by the way all the children including Dylan are fine and well and successful in their own right.

They are not screwed up. I don't know where you are getting that bullshit from. 

I don't consider being pissed at your dad for having an affair with your sister and then marrying her "screwed up".

If they weren't pissed off, then I'd be worried. And to call Mia Farrow Mommy Dearest? Kiss my ass. 

That's outrageous.


----------



## Dr Grump

Gracie said:


> That perv fucked his daughter, molested his other daughter and Mia did what she could but she, too, couldn't do much any more than Dad could. Rock, hard place. Was Mia a wimp? No clue. Don't care. I choose to believe the now grown children. If you wanna believe that fucking ugly perv, knock yourself out.




It wasn't his daughter.
There is not proof he molested the other

You would have been great for the prosecution during the Salem Witch Trials./

"She's a witch!"
"How do you know?"
"Cause I say so."

Piss weak argument Gracie...


----------



## BDBoop

RosieS said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong, Rosie. But you are entitled to your opinion.
> 
> Try reading Tiny Dancers post again. Post # 272..and especially the quote she did of Sherrys post. READ IT.
> 
> Then again..I can't make you see anything other than what you wish to see.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, ya know, Gracie, I was abused as a kid every which way by both parents except sexually.
> 
> Dylan complained of a sexual assault. I was sexually assaulted at age 8 by a male babysitter.
> Assault is less than rape but it is molestation.
> 
> I have direct experience in ALL of this as a survivor. I was not expected, by psychologists, to actually survive the abuse.
> 
> I also taught elementary school in the inner city and taught future teachers  at my alma mater as well. Always available to kids who were hurting like I once was.
> 
> Plus my custody experience above.
> 
> So I will.stack up my life against anyone's.
> 
> Wrong?
> 
> Not in any aspect whatsoever.
> 
> Thankfully you don't HAVE to understand how far off the mark you are - and for that I am grateful you don't.
> 
> Ya know?
> 
> Regards from Rosie
Click to expand...


I'm an "all of the above," myself. My sister and I read Mommie Dearest and pronounced the author a whiner.

I have no patience or forgiveness for perpetrators. Woody did a veritable shit-ton of damage. I just don't feel he should hang for that which he didn't do.


----------



## tinydancer

Dr Grump said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> That perv fucked his daughter, molested his other daughter and Mia did what she could but she, too, couldn't do much any more than Dad could. Rock, hard place. Was Mia a wimp? No clue. Don't care. I choose to believe the now grown children. If you wanna believe that fucking ugly perv, knock yourself out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It wasn't his daughter.
> There is not proof he molested the other
> 
> You would have been great for the prosecution during the Salem Witch Trials./
> 
> "She's a witch!"
> "How do you know?"
> "Cause I say so."
> 
> Piss weak argument Gracie...
Click to expand...


The children in the family thought of Woody as their Daddy. Parse words all you want. It does not take away from the fact that the children loved Woody and thought of him as their father in their lives all those years. 

So as Mia so wonderfully put it talking about Seamus.....

* Like all of Mia's children, he is neither encouraged nor discouraged from seeing Allen.

"He doesn't ask and we don't talk about it. But think how strange it is for him," Farrow said. "His sister is his step-mother? His father is his brother-in-law."*

Mia and Woody's Son Becomes a Marriage Counselor | Fox News

Sums it up nicely.


----------



## tinydancer

My husband isn't the biological father of either of my daughters. He's their step dad. I'd kill him if he had an affair and ran off to be married to either of them.

I cannot believe anyone is excusing this behavior just because Soon Yi wasn't Woody's biological daughter.

Wow, next time you guys defending Woody visit your therapist ask him to up the freaking voltage.


----------



## jon_berzerk

he has always given me the creeps


----------



## Dr Grump

tinydancer said:


> My husband isn't the biological father of either of my daughters. He's their step dad. I'd kill him if he had an affair and ran off to be married to either of them.
> 
> I cannot believe anyone is excusing this behavior just because Soon Yi wasn't Woody's biological daughter.
> 
> Wow, next time you guys defending Woody visit your therapist ask him to up the freaking voltage.



Even Soon Yi saw him as her mother's boyfriend. She had a father. Andre Previn.


----------



## thanatos144

skye said:


> I want proof
> 
> I want  to see proof that this man is guilty
> 
> and until I see hard evidence of his guilt....Woody Allen is an innocent man.
> 
> That's the law.



He married a girl raised as his daughter!  That alone is disgusting and makes him a nasty molester.  What's more sick is your blind defence of the monster 

tapatalk post


----------



## thanatos144

tinydancer said:


> My husband isn't the biological father of either of my daughters. He's their step dad. I'd kill him if he had an affair and ran off to be married to either of them.
> 
> I cannot believe anyone is excusing this behavior just because Soon Yi wasn't Woody's biological daughter.
> 
> Wow, next time you guys defending Woody visit your therapist ask him to up the freaking voltage.



Some people are twisted.  I could never see my stepdaughter as my lover. ... that's just fucking evil and people defending him are just gross 

tapatalk post


----------



## L.K.Eder

Sarah G said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> His kids are his wife's siblings.
> 
> Ew.
> 
> Yup, I'd say marrying your kids' sister that you've known since she was 10 would put you in the running for the presigious "Probably Raped Own Daughter" award.
> 
> The courts believed there was enough evidence there to pursue it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Family doesn't just consist of blood relatives.  There is a family unit that is more inclusive and he was definately over the line.
> 
> Then the next point is if he could have sex with the sister of his adopted kids, it isn't a stretch that he might have molested his 7 year old.
> 
> Who is the little Asian girl on his lap, btw?
Click to expand...


this little Asian girl on Allen's lap, which is presented as young soon-yi on a lot of smear sites








is Bechet Dumaine Allen.

Woody Allen and daughter Bechet Dumaine Allen attend San Antonio Spurs... | WireImage | 79675780





Woody Allen And Daughter Bechet Dumaine Allen Attend? Nachrichtenfoto | Getty Images Deutschland | 79675825


----------



## Theowl32

Silhouette said:


> Theowl32 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...At one point, my mother sat me down and told me that I wouldnt be in trouble if I was lying  that I could take it all back. I couldnt. It was all true. But sexual abuse claims against the powerful stall more easily. There were experts willing to attack my credibility. There were doctors willing to gaslight an abused child.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep.  Gaslighting...
> 
> ..."What you see right in front of your face, isn't really true.  It's not really happening the way you think.  It never happened at all...and everyone agrees...and if you disagree, you are an outcase...bad..."  [see my signature]...
> 
> There is nothing more psychologically abusive than being told your real experiences don't exist; and getting some gaslighter to get an entire cabal together to agree to remake the reality that actually is, because of their own discomfort with confronting it head on.
> 
> Will there be a Woody Allen postage stamp next?
Click to expand...


Yeap, and Roman Polanski is on that list, along with Michael Jackson. 

Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.


----------



## Sallow

Theowl32 said:


> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Theowl32 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...At one point, my mother sat me down and told me that I wouldnt be in trouble if I was lying  that I could take it all back. I couldnt. It was all true. But sexual abuse claims against the powerful stall more easily. There were experts willing to attack my credibility. There were doctors willing to gaslight an abused child.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep.  Gaslighting...
> 
> ..."What you see right in front of your face, isn't really true.  It's not really happening the way you think.  It never happened at all...and everyone agrees...and if you disagree, you are an outcase...bad..."  [see my signature]...
> 
> There is nothing more psychologically abusive than being told your real experiences don't exist; and getting some gaslighter to get an entire cabal together to agree to remake the reality that actually is, because of their own discomfort with confronting it head on.
> 
> Will there be a Woody Allen postage stamp next?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeap, and Roman Polanski is on that list, along with Michael Jackson.
> 
> Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.
Click to expand...


Funny..I don't remember Woody Allen attending a State of the Union, like say, Ted Nugent. Or getting an award from Rick Santorum for helping kids, like say, Sandusky.

And as Allen has been convicted of nothing, you are taking this account at face value to be true. Given his relationship with Mia Farrow, it makes it all the more suspicious.


----------



## Noomi

^Doesn't matter who it is. Soon Yi was that young once, and she was being groomed.


----------



## L.K.Eder

Noomi said:


> ^Doesn't matter who it is. Soon Yi was that young once, and she was being groomed.



ah, now it does not matter.


----------



## Sallow

thanatos144 said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> I want proof
> 
> I want  to see proof that this man is guilty
> 
> and until I see hard evidence of his guilt....Woody Allen is an innocent man.
> 
> That's the law.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *He married a girl raised as his daughter!*  That alone is disgusting and makes him a nasty molester.  What's more sick is your blind defence of the monster
> 
> tapatalk post
Click to expand...


You mean like Ted Nugent?


----------



## thanatos144

Sallow said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> I want proof
> 
> I want  to see proof that this man is guilty
> 
> and until I see hard evidence of his guilt....Woody Allen is an innocent man.
> 
> That's the law.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *He married a girl raised as his daughter!*  That alone is disgusting and makes him a nasty molester.  What's more sick is your blind defence of the monster
> 
> tapatalk post
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You mean like Ted Nugent?
Click to expand...


Your so fucking stupid 

tapatalk post


----------



## jillian

thanatos144 said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *He married a girl raised as his daughter!*  That alone is disgusting and makes him a nasty molester.  What's more sick is your blind defence of the monster
> 
> tapatalk post
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You mean like Ted Nugent?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your so fucking stupid
> 
> tapatalk post
Click to expand...


truth hurts, huh?



> He had a relationship with a 17-year old Hawaiian girl when he was 30. He became her legal guardian in order to comply with laws regarding relationships with minors.



Ted Nugent Artistfacts

now aren't you embarrassed?

or is it all ok because nugent is an obama-deranged nutcase?


----------



## thanatos144

jillian said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> You mean like Ted Nugent?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your so fucking stupid
> 
> tapatalk post
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> truth hurts, huh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He had a relationship with a 17-year old Hawaiian girl when he was 30. He became her legal guardian in order to comply with laws regarding relationships with minors.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ted Nugent Artistfacts
> 
> now aren't you embarrassed?
> 
> or is it all ok because nugent is an obama-deranged nutcase?
Click to expand...


First not the same thing as raising a girl then marrying her he just used a legal loop hole and yes it is fucking gross

tapatalk post


----------



## thanatos144

Is it because Allen makes pretentious shity movies that make you guys forgive him molesting a 7 year old? 

tapatalk post


----------



## thanatos144

Also find it funny you guys think it is fine if a person rapes a child but marrying a 17 year old is not..... warped logic 

tapatalk post


----------



## JoeB131

tinydancer said:


> [
> 
> Oh bite me. You just displayed "extreme ignorance". Mia Farrow never had to marry a soul to get ahead.
> 
> She could have Hollywood on a silver platter if she had wanted to. You obviously don't know who her parents were.
> 
> Mia starred in probably the hottest ground breaking show at the time Peyton Place. And went on to star in movies. Her humanitarian efforts consume her now.
> 
> She's no flake.
> 
> * Farrow has appeared in more than 50 films and won numerous awards, including a Golden Globe award, received seven additional Golden Globe nominations, three BAFTA nominations and a best actress award at the San Sebastian International Film Festival.
> 
> Farrow is also known for her extensive humanitarian work as a UNICEF Goodwill Ambassador. She is involved in humanitarian activities in Darfur, Chad, and the Central African Republic. In 2008,
> 
> Time magazine named her one of the most influential people in the world.*
> 
> Mia Farrow - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Mia Farrow is a horrible actress. 

Seriously, the thing I remember her for was "Rosemary's Baby", a movie that should have ended the careers of everyone involved.  

And like most actresses, the minute she gets too old to look at, Hollywood was done with her.


----------



## JoeB131

thanatos144 said:


> Also find it funny you guys think it is fine if a person rapes a child but marrying a 17 year old is not..... warped logic
> 
> tapatalk post



no one thought it was okay to rape a child. 

We just don't think that we should take the word of a crazy jilted actress at face value when there was a complete lack of other evidence. 

And shit, I don't even LIKE Woody Allen.  But I don't like people getting accused of things they didn't do for other agendas.


----------



## thanatos144

JoeB131 said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> 
> Oh bite me. You just displayed "extreme ignorance". Mia Farrow never had to marry a soul to get ahead.
> 
> She could have Hollywood on a silver platter if she had wanted to. You obviously don't know who her parents were.
> 
> Mia starred in probably the hottest ground breaking show at the time Peyton Place. And went on to star in movies. Her humanitarian efforts consume her now.
> 
> She's no flake.
> 
> * Farrow has appeared in more than 50 films and won numerous awards, including a Golden Globe award, received seven additional Golden Globe nominations, three BAFTA nominations and a best actress award at the San Sebastian International Film Festival.
> 
> Farrow is also known for her extensive humanitarian work as a UNICEF Goodwill Ambassador. She is involved in humanitarian activities in Darfur, Chad, and the Central African Republic. In 2008,
> 
> Time magazine named her one of the most influential people in the world.*
> 
> Mia Farrow - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mia Farrow is a horrible actress.
> 
> Seriously, the thing I remember her for was "Rosemary's Baby", a movie that should have ended the careers of everyone involved.
> 
> And like most actresses, the minute she gets too old to look at, Hollywood was done with her.
Click to expand...


Wtf does your opinion of her acting have to do with Allen molesting her kids? 

tapatalk post


----------



## thanatos144

JoeB131 said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Also find it funny you guys think it is fine if a person rapes a child but marrying a 17 year old is not..... warped logic
> 
> tapatalk post
> 
> 
> 
> 
> no one thought it was okay to rape a child.
> 
> We just don't think that we should take the word of a crazy jilted actress at face value when there was a complete lack of other evidence.
> 
> And shit, I don't even LIKE Woody Allen.  But I don't like people getting accused of things they didn't do for other agendas.
Click to expand...


It was the child who said it moron 

tapatalk post


----------



## JoeB131

thanatos144 said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> 
> Oh bite me. You just displayed "extreme ignorance". Mia Farrow never had to marry a soul to get ahead.
> 
> She could have Hollywood on a silver platter if she had wanted to. You obviously don't know who her parents were.
> 
> Mia starred in probably the hottest ground breaking show at the time Peyton Place. And went on to star in movies. Her humanitarian efforts consume her now.
> 
> She's no flake.
> 
> * Farrow has appeared in more than 50 films and won numerous awards, including a Golden Globe award, received seven additional Golden Globe nominations, three BAFTA nominations and a best actress award at the San Sebastian International Film Festival.
> 
> Farrow is also known for her extensive humanitarian work as a UNICEF Goodwill Ambassador. She is involved in humanitarian activities in Darfur, Chad, and the Central African Republic. In 2008,
> 
> Time magazine named her one of the most influential people in the world.*
> 
> Mia Farrow - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mia Farrow is a horrible actress.
> 
> Seriously, the thing I remember her for was "Rosemary's Baby", a movie that should have ended the careers of everyone involved.
> 
> And like most actresses, the minute she gets too old to look at, Hollywood was done with her.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wtf does your opinion of her acting have to do with Allen molesting her kids?
> 
> tapatalk post
Click to expand...


Because, honestly, you guys don't have any evidence he did...  but that's okay.  

Honestly, the woman was a flake who slept around  Hollywood until it got tired of her.


----------



## thanatos144

JoeB131 said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Mia Farrow is a horrible actress.
> 
> Seriously, the thing I remember her for was "Rosemary's Baby", a movie that should have ended the careers of everyone involved.
> 
> And like most actresses, the minute she gets too old to look at, Hollywood was done with her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wtf does your opinion of her acting have to do with Allen molesting her kids?
> 
> tapatalk post
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because, honestly, you guys don't have any evidence he did...  but that's okay.
> 
> Honestly, the woman was a flake who slept around  Hollywood until it got tired of her.
Click to expand...


Again you fucking idiot it was the child who said he molested her.  You are a sick fuck 

tapatalk post


----------



## JoeB131

thanatos144 said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wtf does your opinion of her acting have to do with Allen molesting her kids?
> 
> tapatalk post
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because, honestly, you guys don't have any evidence he did...  but that's okay.
> 
> Honestly, the woman was a flake who slept around  Hollywood until it got tired of her.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again you fucking idiot it was the child who said he molested her.  You are a sick fuck
> 
> tapatalk post
Click to expand...


No, it was a child who was coached by a crazy woman, but there was no physical evidence found to back it up.


----------



## freedombecki

JoeB131 said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because, honestly, you guys don't have any evidence he did... but that's okay.
> 
> Honestly, the woman was a flake who slept around Hollywood until it got tired of her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again you fucking idiot it was the child who said he molested her. You are a sick fuck
> 
> tapatalk post
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, it was a child who was coached by a crazy woman, but there was no physical evidence found to back it up.
Click to expand...

You're taking advantage of records sealed to protect a child from further damages. The justice knew things in those sealed records only medical tests would show, imloho.


----------



## Theowl32

Sallow said:


> Theowl32 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Silhouette said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep.  Gaslighting...
> 
> ..."What you see right in front of your face, isn't really true.  It's not really happening the way you think.  It never happened at all...and everyone agrees...and if you disagree, you are an outcase...bad..."  [see my signature]...
> 
> There is nothing more psychologically abusive than being told your real experiences don't exist; and getting some gaslighter to get an entire cabal together to agree to remake the reality that actually is, because of their own discomfort with confronting it head on.
> 
> Will there be a Woody Allen postage stamp next?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeap, and Roman Polanski is on that list, along with Michael Jackson.
> 
> Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Funny..I don't remember Woody Allen attending a State of the Union, like say, Ted Nugent. Or getting an award from Rick Santorum for helping kids, like say, Sandusky.
> 
> And as Allen has been convicted of nothing, you are taking this account at face value to be true. Given his relationship with Mia Farrow, it makes it all the more suspicious.
Click to expand...


Liberals are so pathetic. Such hypocrites. Especially this asshole. I guess we should wait around to see if he sues for defamation of character. I mean would there be a such a thing as libel if this was totally false?

Oh, and Roman Polanski was convicted, and he is still a big liberal hero. Still. You fucking blob.  

Have to say that when, as an adult, I saw Mr. Allen's MANHATTAN, I was shocked at the portrayal of a middle-aged man having a sexual relationship with a high school student. How that somehow got overlooked at the time of the movie's release is pretty much beyond me.  I couldn't watch it. It certainly didn't seem brilliant - merely sick, perverted and disturbed. Guess none of this is a surprise coming from a guy who went on to marry his 21 year-old daughter after probably having had a sexual relationship with her who knows how many years prior. The statute of limitations on a crime with a child victim should be extended.


----------



## JoeB131

freedombecki said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again you fucking idiot it was the child who said he molested her. You are a sick fuck
> 
> tapatalk post
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, it was a child who was coached by a crazy woman, but there was no physical evidence found to back it up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You're taking advantage of records sealed to protect a child from further damages. The justice knew things in those sealed records only medical tests would show, imloho.
Click to expand...


The things that are on the record is that Farrow took Dylan to two doctors, neither of whom could find physical evidence of abuse.  

So what you really have is the word of an easily manipulated child who is being raised in an environment that another one of her sons described as "Brainwashing".  

_



			Moses Farrow, now 36, and an accomplished photographer, has been estranged from Mia for several years. During a recent conversation, he spoke of finally seeing the reality of Frog Hollow and used the term brainwashing without hesitation. He recently reestablished contact with Allen and is currently enjoying a renewed relationship with him and Soon-Yi.
		
Click to expand...

_
Now, frankly, I think both Farrow and Allen are genuinely unpleasent people, and I have no use for either one of them.  I'm sorry that any children had to be raised by them, as they are going to keep the psychotherapy industry afloat for years. 

But in terms of justice and law, no evidence means exactly that- NO EVIDENCE.  

You don't convict people if you want them to be guilty.  Isn't this the kind of thing you "conservatives" always complain that "Statists" want to do?


----------



## editec

Oh boy..another USMB right wing lynch mob.

*Graphic Image Deleted*

Not a pretty sight.


----------



## thanatos144

JoeB131 said:


> freedombecki said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, it was a child who was coached by a crazy woman, but there was no physical evidence found to back it up.
> 
> 
> 
> You're taking advantage of records sealed to protect a child from further damages. The justice knew things in those sealed records only medical tests would show, imloho.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The things that are on the record is that Farrow took Dylan to two doctors, neither of whom could find physical evidence of abuse.
> 
> So what you really have is the word of an easily manipulated child who is being raised in an environment that another one of her sons described as "Brainwashing".
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> Moses Farrow, now 36, and an accomplished photographer, has been estranged from Mia for several years. During a recent conversation, he spoke of finally seeing the reality of Frog Hollow and used the term brainwashing without hesitation. He recently reestablished contact with Allen and is currently enjoying a renewed relationship with him and Soon-Yi.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> _
> Now, frankly, I think both Farrow and Allen are genuinely unpleasent people, and I have no use for either one of them.  I'm sorry that any children had to be raised by them, as they are going to keep the psychotherapy industry afloat for years.
> 
> But in terms of justice and law, no evidence means exactly that- NO EVIDENCE.
> 
> You don't convict people if you want them to be guilty.  Isn't this the kind of thing you "conservatives" always complain that "Statists" want to do?
Click to expand...


Your talking out of your ass again.  Seeing his track record it is more then believable.  The fact that the court didn't think they would get a conviction isn't the same as saying a sick fuck who would marry his own stepdaughter Is innocent 

tapatalk post


----------



## Delta4Embassy

Theowl32 said:


> Lets see if there is anywhere near the level of disgust.
> 
> 
> http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/20...e=blogs&_php=true&_type=blogs&_php=true&_r=1&
> 
> 
> Whats your favorite Woody Allen movie? Before you answer, you should know: when I was seven years old, *Woody Allen took me by the hand and led me into a dim, closet-like attic on the second floor of our house. He told me to lay on my stomach and play with my brothers electric train set. Then he sexually assaulted me. He talked to me while he did it, whispering that I was a good girl, that this was our secret, promising that wed go to Paris and Id be a star in his movies. I remember staring at that toy train, focusing on it as it traveled in its circle around the attic.* To this day, I find it difficult to look at toy trains.
> 
> For as long as I could remember, my father had been doing things to me that I didnt like.* I didnt like how often he would take me away from my mom, siblings and friends to be alone with him.* I didnt like it when he would stick his thumb in my mouth. I didnt like it when I had to get in bed with him under the sheets when he was in his underwear. I didnt like it when he would place his head in my naked lap and breathe in and breathe out. I would hide under beds or lock myself in the bathroom to avoid these encounters, but he always found me. These things happened so often, so routinely, so skillfully hidden from a mother that would have protected me had she known, that I thought it was normal. I thought this was how fathers doted on their daughters. But what he did to me in the attic felt different. I couldnt keep the secret anymore.
> 
> When I asked my mother if her dad did to her what Woody Allen did to me, I honestly did not know the answer. I also didnt know the firestorm it would trigger. I didnt know that my father would use his sexual relationship with my sister to cover up the abuse he inflicted on me. I didnt know that he would accuse my mother of planting the abuse in my head and call her a liar for defending me. I didnt know that I would be made to recount my story over and over again, to doctor after doctor, pushed to see if Id admit I was lying as part of a legal battle I couldnt possibly understand. At one point, my mother sat me down and told me that I wouldnt be in trouble if I was lying  that I could take it all back. I couldnt. It was all true. But sexual abuse claims against the powerful stall more easily. There were experts willing to attack my credibility. There were doctors willing to gaslight an abused child.



Sandusky was brought to trial and convicted.

Allen hasn't even been charged.

Before passing judgement on a non-issue basing everything on ALLEGATIONS, (which by the by were refuted by law enforcement) I'd examine what your personal motivations are. Not you OP, am speaking generally since many have seemed to make up their minds on nothing more than a claim.


----------



## JoeB131

Theowl32 said:


> [
> 
> Liberals are so pathetic. Such hypocrites. Especially this asshole. I guess we should wait around to see if he sues for defamation of character. I mean would there be a such a thing as libel if this was totally false?
> 
> Oh, and Roman Polanski was convicted, and he is still a big liberal hero. Still. You fucking blob.
> 
> Have to say that when, as an adult, I saw Mr. Allen's MANHATTAN, I was shocked at the portrayal of a middle-aged man having a sexual relationship with a high school student. How that somehow got overlooked at the time of the movie's release is pretty much beyond me.  I couldn't watch it. It certainly didn't seem brilliant - merely sick, perverted and disturbed. Guess none of this is a surprise coming from a guy who went on to marry his 21 year-old daughter after probably having had a sexual relationship with her who knows how many years prior. The statue of limitations on a crime with a child victim should be extended.



What does that have to do with your point? 

Ted Nugent is a big conservative hero, and he likes them young.  

I don't like Woody Allen, I think his relationship with the Previn Girl was kind of creepy, but as far as I can tell, there's no crime involved here. 

And a lot of men have gotten their lives ruined because someone in a divorce decided to up the ante by convincing kids to lie.


----------



## JoeB131

thanatos144 said:


> [
> 
> 
> 
> Your talking out of your ass again.  Seeing his track record it is more then believable.  The fact that the court didn't think they would get a conviction isn't the same as saying a sick fuck who would marry his own stepdaughter Is innocent
> 
> tapatalk post



Hey, dumbass, she wasn't his "Stepdaughter".  

He wasn't married to her, he never adopted or assumed parental authority over any of her kids with Andre Previn. 

so all you have is a jerk who married a girl who was a lot younger than he was... 

Which a lot of these folks in Hollywood do.  

Again, we don't convict people because  we "want" them to be guilty. 

We use something called "evidence".


----------



## Theowl32

I could have sworn there was at least one witness. The nanny, and I also think there were others that claimed molestation. 

I do find it rather funny though how the left wingers give him the benefit of the doubt. That is what I find hilarious. 

Yahoo!

In the letter, published in its entirety online, Farrow described how the alleged abuse was "skillfully hidden."

"That he got away with what he did to me haunted me as I grew up," she wrote. "I was stricken with guilt that I had allowed him to be near other little girls. I was terrified of being touched by men. I developed an eating disorder. I began cutting myself."

The claims, which first surfaced in Vanity Fair in 1992, were brought into stark relief again last month when Allen received a lifetime achievement award at the Gold Globes.

"A woman has publicly detailed Woody Allen's molestation of her at age 7," Mia Farrow wrote on Twitter. "GoldenGlobe tribute showed contempt for her & all abuse survivors."

*"Missed the Woody Allen tribute," Ronan Farrow, Allen and Mia Farrow's son and MSNBC host, wrote on Twitter. "Did they put the part where a woman publicly confirmed he molested her at age 7 before or after Annie Hall?"*


----------



## L.K.Eder

Theowl32 said:


> I could have sworn there was at least one witness. The nanny, and I also think there were others that claimed molestation.
> 
> I do find it rather funny though how the left wingers give him the benefit of the doubt. That is what I find hilarious.
> 
> Yahoo!
> 
> In the letter, published in its entirety online, Farrow described how the alleged abuse was "skillfully hidden."
> 
> "That he got away with what he did to me haunted me as I grew up," she wrote. "I was stricken with guilt that I had allowed him to be near other little girls. I was terrified of being touched by men. I developed an eating disorder. I began cutting myself."
> 
> The claims, which first surfaced in Vanity Fair in 1992, were brought into stark relief again last month when Allen received a lifetime achievement award at the Gold Globes.
> 
> "A woman has publicly detailed Woody Allen's molestation of her at age 7," Mia Farrow wrote on Twitter. "GoldenGlobe tribute showed contempt for her & all abuse survivors."
> 
> *"Missed the Woody Allen tribute," Ronan Farrow, Allen and Mia Farrow's son and MSNBC host, wrote on Twitter. "Did they put the part where a woman publicly confirmed he molested her at age 7 before or after Annie Hall?"*



explain how this is a leftwing/rightwing issue.


----------



## Theowl32

L.K.Eder said:


> Theowl32 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I could have sworn there was at least one witness. The nanny, and I also think there were others that claimed molestation.
> 
> I do find it rather funny though how the left wingers give him the benefit of the doubt. That is what I find hilarious.
> 
> Yahoo!
> 
> In the letter, published in its entirety online, Farrow described how the alleged abuse was "skillfully hidden."
> 
> "That he got away with what he did to me haunted me as I grew up," she wrote. "I was stricken with guilt that I had allowed him to be near other little girls. I was terrified of being touched by men. I developed an eating disorder. I began cutting myself."
> 
> The claims, which first surfaced in Vanity Fair in 1992, were brought into stark relief again last month when Allen received a lifetime achievement award at the Gold Globes.
> 
> "A woman has publicly detailed Woody Allen's molestation of her at age 7," Mia Farrow wrote on Twitter. "GoldenGlobe tribute showed contempt for her & all abuse survivors."
> 
> *"Missed the Woody Allen tribute," Ronan Farrow, Allen and Mia Farrow's son and MSNBC host, wrote on Twitter. "Did they put the part where a woman publicly confirmed he molested her at age 7 before or after Annie Hall?"*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> explain how this is a leftwing/rightwing issue.
Click to expand...


It isn't, other than it is mainly left wingers giving him the benefit of the doubt. 

That is what I said, I am not sure if you have any ability to distinguish the difference. 

Or, perhaps that it is a coincidence that mainly left wingers that yell things like innocent till proven guilty for Woody Allen. Was ted Nugent convicted of anything? What? I looked up stuff. 

But, he is a gun advocate......so.....

The lefties bring up his name. Notice they did not even address the Roman Polanski conviction. Want me to cite the support he gets from Hollywood left wing kooks? 

Thought not.


----------



## L.K.Eder

Theowl32 said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Theowl32 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I could have sworn there was at least one witness. The nanny, and I also think there were others that claimed molestation.
> 
> I do find it rather funny though how the left wingers give him the benefit of the doubt. That is what I find hilarious.
> 
> Yahoo!
> 
> In the letter, published in its entirety online, Farrow described how the alleged abuse was "skillfully hidden."
> 
> "That he got away with what he did to me haunted me as I grew up," she wrote. "I was stricken with guilt that I had allowed him to be near other little girls. I was terrified of being touched by men. I developed an eating disorder. I began cutting myself."
> 
> The claims, which first surfaced in Vanity Fair in 1992, were brought into stark relief again last month when Allen received a lifetime achievement award at the Gold Globes.
> 
> "A woman has publicly detailed Woody Allen's molestation of her at age 7," Mia Farrow wrote on Twitter. "GoldenGlobe tribute showed contempt for her & all abuse survivors."
> 
> *"Missed the Woody Allen tribute," Ronan Farrow, Allen and Mia Farrow's son and MSNBC host, wrote on Twitter. "Did they put the part where a woman publicly confirmed he molested her at age 7 before or after Annie Hall?"*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> explain how this is a leftwing/rightwing issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It isn't, other than it is mainly left wingers giving him the benefit of the doubt.
> 
> That is what I said, I am not sure if you have any ability to distinguish the difference.
> 
> Or, perhaps that it is a coincidence that mainly left wingers that yell things like innocent till proven guilty for Woody Allen. Was ted Nugent convicted of anything? What? I looked up stuff.
> 
> But, he is a gun advocate......so.....
> 
> The lefties bring up his name. Notice they did not even address the Roman Polanski conviction. Want me to cite the support he gets from Hollywood left wing kooks?
> 
> Thought not.
Click to expand...


you should have stopped after "it isn't". the rest is dribble as usual.


----------



## Theowl32

L.K.Eder said:


> Theowl32 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> explain how this is a leftwing/rightwing issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It isn't, other than it is mainly left wingers giving him the benefit of the doubt.
> 
> That is what I said, I am not sure if you have any ability to distinguish the difference.
> 
> Or, perhaps that it is a coincidence that mainly left wingers that yell things like innocent till proven guilty for Woody Allen. Was ted Nugent convicted of anything? What? I looked up stuff.
> 
> But, he is a gun advocate......so.....
> 
> The lefties bring up his name. Notice they did not even address the Roman Polanski conviction. Want me to cite the support he gets from Hollywood left wing kooks?
> 
> Thought not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you should have stopped after "it isn't". the rest is dribble as usual.
Click to expand...


Ok we will agree then. It is just one of those bizarre coincidences that it is mainly left wingers in this thread, and demented left wing Hollywood morons that defend him. Of course, I do not remember them saying the same things for Sandusky before he was convicted. 


Oh never mind. 


The hypocrisy continues proudly among the know it alls on the left.


----------



## Sallow

Theowl32 said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Theowl32 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeap, and Roman Polanski is on that list, along with Michael Jackson.
> 
> Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Funny..I don't remember Woody Allen attending a State of the Union, like say, Ted Nugent. Or getting an award from Rick Santorum for helping kids, like say, Sandusky.
> 
> And as Allen has been convicted of nothing, you are taking this account at face value to be true. Given his relationship with Mia Farrow, it makes it all the more suspicious.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Liberals are so pathetic. Such hypocrites. Especially this asshole. I guess we should wait around to see if he sues for defamation of character. I mean would there be a such a thing as libel if this was totally false?
> 
> Oh, and Roman Polanski was convicted, and he is still a big liberal hero. Still. You fucking blob.
> 
> Have to say that when, as an adult, I saw Mr. Allen's MANHATTAN, I was shocked at the portrayal of a middle-aged man having a sexual relationship with a high school student. How that somehow got overlooked at the time of the movie's release is pretty much beyond me.  I couldn't watch it. It certainly didn't seem brilliant - merely sick, perverted and disturbed. Guess none of this is a surprise coming from a guy who went on to marry his 21 year-old daughter after probably having had a sexual relationship with her who knows how many years prior. The statue of limitations on a crime with a child victim should be extended.
Click to expand...


Seriously..I could care less about your taste in movies.

The point still stands.

Allen wasn't convicted of anything.

Nugent, who shit and pissed his pants to avoid Vietnam, who has admitted to having sex with really young girls, who adopted a young 17 year old to have sex with and who openly threatened the life of a president was invited to the SOTU by a Conservative Republican elected official.

Sandusky, a convicted sex offender, was given an award by a Conservative Republican elected official.


----------



## DGS49

As a long-time fan of the Neurotic New Yorker, I have followed not only his work but the bizzarre twists and turns of his life (music, marriages, relationships, kids, etc).

I was shocked and appalled by the accusations in the early 90's that he had molested one of the menagerie of adopted kids, and I was left unsatisfied by the non-resolution of that case.  The prosecutors declined to prosecute, but hinted that they had enough evidence to do so.  This is extremely unethical conduct by a prosecutor - but they are immune from suit.

The marriage to Sun-Yi just struck me as wierd, but ironic.  I recalled that Mia Farrow herself married Frank Sinatra when she was 21 and he was 50.  Further, she now hints that Sinatra "might have  been" the father of her son, conceived many years after she had divorced Sinatra.  Go figure.

Mia Farrow always struck me as a well-intentioned twit, with a desire to keep herself alive in the public sphere by whatever means she could, and with the morals of your typical barnyard animal.

Now the horrible accusations against Woodie are resurrected under circumstances that make one wonder WTF is going on here.

Thankfully, I found a lengthy, credible bit of writing on the whole affair.  It clarifies details, timelines, relationships, and most importantly, summarizes the results of the original investigation into the child molestation accusation.  Not surprisingly, neither Mia Farrow nor her accusing daughter come off as people one would like to have a beer with, and Woodie the victim of an unprovable-but-real slander.

Truly, there ought to be a Statute of Limitations on accusations of this type.  W.A. will go to his grave as "the guy who molested his wife's adopted daughter," when this is clearly not the case.

I have to warn you, this article is a little bit longer than most, but if you want to understand this thing, I recommend you read the whole thing.

The Woody Allen Allegations: Not So Fast - The Daily Beast


----------



## Theowl32

Sallow said:


> Theowl32 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Funny..I don't remember Woody Allen attending a State of the Union, like say, Ted Nugent. Or getting an award from Rick Santorum for helping kids, like say, Sandusky.
> 
> And as Allen has been convicted of nothing, you are taking this account at face value to be true. Given his relationship with Mia Farrow, it makes it all the more suspicious.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals are so pathetic. Such hypocrites. Especially this asshole. I guess we should wait around to see if he sues for defamation of character. I mean would there be a such a thing as libel if this was totally false?
> 
> Oh, and Roman Polanski was convicted, and he is still a big liberal hero. Still. You fucking blob.
> 
> Have to say that when, as an adult, I saw Mr. Allen's MANHATTAN, I was shocked at the portrayal of a middle-aged man having a sexual relationship with a high school student. How that somehow got overlooked at the time of the movie's release is pretty much beyond me.  I couldn't watch it. It certainly didn't seem brilliant - merely sick, perverted and disturbed. Guess none of this is a surprise coming from a guy who went on to marry his 21 year-old daughter after probably having had a sexual relationship with her who knows how many years prior. The statue of limitations on a crime with a child victim should be extended.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Seriously..I could care less about your taste in movies.
> 
> The point still stands.
> 
> Allen wasn't convicted of anything.
> 
> Nugent, who shit and pissed his pants to avoid Vietnam, who has admitted to having sex with really young girls, who adopted a young 17 year old to have sex with and who openly threatened the life of a president was invited to the SOTU by a Conservative Republican elected official.
> 
> Sandusky, a convicted sex offender, was given an award by a Conservative Republican elected official.
Click to expand...


Ted Nugent was convicted of child molestation?

17 years old, is a whole lot different than 7. 

Also, Soon Yi was adopted at the age of 7. Woody took nude photos of her at the age of 18 or so? He was in his 50s when they married when she was 21?

Yeah, nothing creepy about that. Nothing at all. I am sure Dylan is lying her ass off. Of course she is.


----------



## L.K.Eder

Theowl32 said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Theowl32 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals are so pathetic. Such hypocrites. Especially this asshole. I guess we should wait around to see if he sues for defamation of character. I mean would there be a such a thing as libel if this was totally false?
> 
> Oh, and Roman Polanski was convicted, and he is still a big liberal hero. Still. You fucking blob.
> 
> Have to say that when, as an adult, I saw Mr. Allen's MANHATTAN, I was shocked at the portrayal of a middle-aged man having a sexual relationship with a high school student. How that somehow got overlooked at the time of the movie's release is pretty much beyond me.  I couldn't watch it. It certainly didn't seem brilliant - merely sick, perverted and disturbed. Guess none of this is a surprise coming from a guy who went on to marry his 21 year-old daughter after probably having had a sexual relationship with her who knows how many years prior. The statue of limitations on a crime with a child victim should be extended.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seriously..I could care less about your taste in movies.
> 
> The point still stands.
> 
> Allen wasn't convicted of anything.
> 
> Nugent, who shit and pissed his pants to avoid Vietnam, who has admitted to having sex with really young girls, who adopted a young 17 year old to have sex with and who openly threatened the life of a president was invited to the SOTU by a Conservative Republican elected official.
> 
> Sandusky, a convicted sex offender, was given an award by a Conservative Republican elected official.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ted Nugent was convicted of child molestation?
> 
> 17 years old, is a whole lot different than 7.
> 
> Also, Soon Yi was adopted at the age of 7. Woody took nude photos of her at the age of 18 or so? He was in his 50s when they married when she was 21?
> 
> Yeah, nothing creepy about that. Nothing at all. I am sure Dylan is lying her ass off. Of course she is.
Click to expand...


of course it is creepy. does not prove that the accusations regarding the molestation of the then 7 year old are true.


----------



## Delta4Embassy

What I'm finidng suspect about this thing is how Allen isn't sueing the Farrow's making these allegations. If they're unfounded, sue. If they're not, then not sueing makes sense since a trial may substantiate them. If someone publicly accused me for child molestation I'd sue them into oblivion.


----------



## tinydancer

Sallow said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> I want proof
> 
> I want  to see proof that this man is guilty
> 
> and until I see hard evidence of his guilt....Woody Allen is an innocent man.
> 
> That's the law.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *He married a girl raised as his daughter!*  That alone is disgusting and makes him a nasty molester.  What's more sick is your blind defence of the monster
> 
> tapatalk post
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You mean like Ted Nugent?
Click to expand...


Was the young lady he wanted to marry his step daughter?

Big difference Sallow and you are really being a royal asshole here.

The mega difference is that Seamus for example, Woody Allen's biological son has now had to deal with the fact that his sister is his step mother and his father is now his brother in law.

There's a big difference. And this thread is about Woody Allen and I will report you in a heartbeat if you keep attempting to derail and or troll it. 

I'm sick of your bullshit.


----------



## L.K.Eder

tinydancer said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *He married a girl raised as his daughter!*  That alone is disgusting and makes him a nasty molester.  What's more sick is your blind defence of the monster
> 
> tapatalk post
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You mean like Ted Nugent?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Was the young lady he wanted to marry his step daughter?
> 
> Big difference Sallow and you are really being a royal asshole here.
> 
> The mega difference is that Seamus for example, Woody Allen's biological son has now had to deal with the fact that his sister is his step mother and his father is now his brother in law.
> 
> There's a big difference. And this thread is about Woody Allen and I will report you in a heartbeat if you keep attending to derail and or troll it.
> 
> I'm sick of your bullshit.
Click to expand...



you are the one who posted the wrong picture trying to smear woody allen. report that, retard


----------



## tinydancer

L.K.Eder said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> You mean like Ted Nugent?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Was the young lady he wanted to marry his step daughter?
> 
> Big difference Sallow and you are really being a royal asshole here.
> 
> The mega difference is that Seamus for example, Woody Allen's biological son has now had to deal with the fact that his sister is his step mother and his father is now his brother in law.
> 
> There's a big difference. And this thread is about Woody Allen and I will report you in a heartbeat if you keep attending to derail and or troll it.
> 
> I'm sick of your bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> you are the one who posted the wrong picture trying to smear woody allen. report that, retard
Click to expand...


Oh bite me. Look in the mirror and at all your liberal and progressive USMB buddies who smear conservatives on a daily basis.

I avoid smear sites like the plague. I picked up that picture from a "on this day in history" website. 

Report me if you find this offensive. I haven't even been dwelling on Dylan. I've been hammering away at Woody marrying his step daughter after he had an affair with her.


----------



## tinydancer

Theowl32 said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Theowl32 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I could have sworn there was at least one witness. The nanny, and I also think there were others that claimed molestation.
> 
> I do find it rather funny though how the left wingers give him the benefit of the doubt. That is what I find hilarious.
> 
> Yahoo!
> 
> In the letter, published in its entirety online, Farrow described how the alleged abuse was "skillfully hidden."
> 
> "That he got away with what he did to me haunted me as I grew up," she wrote. "I was stricken with guilt that I had allowed him to be near other little girls. I was terrified of being touched by men. I developed an eating disorder. I began cutting myself."
> 
> The claims, which first surfaced in Vanity Fair in 1992, were brought into stark relief again last month when Allen received a lifetime achievement award at the Gold Globes.
> 
> "A woman has publicly detailed Woody Allen's molestation of her at age 7," Mia Farrow wrote on Twitter. "GoldenGlobe tribute showed contempt for her & all abuse survivors."
> 
> *"Missed the Woody Allen tribute," Ronan Farrow, Allen and Mia Farrow's son and MSNBC host, wrote on Twitter. "Did they put the part where a woman publicly confirmed he molested her at age 7 before or after Annie Hall?"*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> explain how this is a leftwing/rightwing issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It isn't, other than it is mainly left wingers giving him the benefit of the doubt.
> 
> That is what I said, I am not sure if you have any ability to distinguish the difference.
> 
> Or, perhaps that it is a coincidence that mainly left wingers that yell things like innocent till proven guilty for Woody Allen. Was ted Nugent convicted of anything? What? I looked up stuff.
> 
> But, he is a gun advocate......so.....
> 
> The lefties bring up his name. Notice they did not even address the Roman Polanski conviction. Want me to cite the support he gets from Hollywood left wing kooks?
> 
> Thought not.
Click to expand...


It has always amazed me how the left will defend individuals like Polanski and Allen to the death.

I was watching the View the day Whoopi Goldberg uttered her famous words exonerating Roman Polanski.

*Well it really wasn't rape rape*

Holy toledo I almost stroked out. I thought I was having the big one. 

* 
Roman Polanski: backlash as Whoopi Goldberg says director didn't commit 'rape-rape'
Whoopi Goldberg is facing a fierce backlash after saying that film director Roman Polanski didn't commit "rape-rape" when he had unlawful sex with a 13-year-old girl.
*

Roman Polanski: backlash as Whoopi Goldberg says director didn't commit 'rape-rape' - Telegraph


----------



## L.K.Eder

tinydancer said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Was the young lady he wanted to marry his step daughter?
> 
> Big difference Sallow and you are really being a royal asshole here.
> 
> The mega difference is that Seamus for example, Woody Allen's biological son has now had to deal with the fact that his sister is his step mother and his father is now his brother in law.
> 
> There's a big difference. And this thread is about Woody Allen and I will report you in a heartbeat if you keep attending to derail and or troll it.
> 
> I'm sick of your bullshit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you are the one who posted the wrong picture trying to smear woody allen. report that, retard
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh bite me. Look in the mirror and at all your liberal and progressive USMB buddies who smear conservatives on a daily basis.
> 
> I avoid smear sites like the plague. I picked up that picture from a "on this day in history" website.
> 
> Report me if you find this offensive. I haven't even been dwelling on Dylan. I've been hammering away at Woody marrying his step daughter after he had an affair with her.
Click to expand...


yeah, i can see how you succeed at avoiding smear sites. great research there, lol.

i find you and most of your posts offensively lame and/or retarded. i will not report you though. that seems to be your thing, along with posting smears.


----------



## Delta4Embassy

Dunno if it came about because of Polanski, or existed prior, but coercive sex involving drugs and alcohol is "rape rape." At least now, here. Dunno what the statutes were in California back then. Assume he was charged with statutory rape. 

I'm willing to give Goldberg the benefit of the doubt though and explain her remark as there's statutory rape which is simply breaking a law that came arbitraily into existence, but where often no one complained who was actually involved, and there's rape where your victim's kicking and screaming. Latter being a completely seperate and more serious crime statutorily. 

As with (being fair (and moderate) as ever) that politician's use of 'legitimate rape' was illustrating this same sentiment, though not as well


----------



## tinydancer

L.K.Eder said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> you are the one who posted the wrong picture trying to smear woody allen. report that, retard
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh bite me. Look in the mirror and at all your liberal and progressive USMB buddies who smear conservatives on a daily basis.
> 
> I avoid smear sites like the plague. I picked up that picture from a "on this day in history" website.
> 
> Report me if you find this offensive. I haven't even been dwelling on Dylan. I've been hammering away at Woody marrying his step daughter after he had an affair with her.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> yeah, i can see how you succeed at avoiding smear sites. great research there, lol.
> 
> i find you and most of your posts offensively lame and/or retarded. i will not report you though. that seems to be your thing, along with posting smears.
Click to expand...


I couldn't care less what you think of me. And I really wasn't going to dwell on the issue of Dylan.

But I think I shall now because I just found something very interesting at a really wild and crazy right wing smear site called the New York Times.


----------



## tinydancer

The owl you were right about the babysitters. Note: The babysitter was so disturbed she told her employer who then phoned Mia Farrow.







*Archives 

Sitter Questions Allen Actions With Daughter
By PETER MARKS
Published: April 10, 1993

On the afternoon of Aug. 4, 1992, Alison Stickland, a baby sitter, was walking by the television room in Mia Farrow's summer home in Connecticut when, she testified yesterday, she looked in and noticed something strange.

There, sitting silently on the sofa, she said, was 7-year-old Dylan Farrow.

 The little girl, she said, was wearing a white dress and a blank expression.

 And kneeling before her in a way that bothered Ms. Stickland, she said, was the girl's father, Woody Allen.

"I got to the doorway, and Mr. Allen was on his knees in front of Dylan, with his head in her lap," said Ms. Stickland, a baby sitter for the children of one of Ms. Farrow's oldest friends, in testimony in State Supreme Court in Manhattan.

She said that his face was turned toward Dylan's body. 

Though the baby sitter testified she stood at the door for only seconds, what she said she she saw on Aug. 4 had a lasting impact on Mia Farrow and Woody Allen.

 A phone call from her employer, Casey Pascal, to Ms. Farrow the next morning, telling her what the baby sitter had said, was a factor in Ms. Farrow's decisions to question Dylan and eventually accuse Mr. Allen of sexually abusing the girl on that Tuesday in August.
*

Sitter Questions Allen Actions With Daughter - NYTimes.com


----------



## tinydancer

And this will send chills up your spine. Oh and you can tell any Woody defender to kiss your ass baby.

*But lawyers for Ms. Farrow, who say the Yale-New Haven report was incomplete and inaccurate, have continued to make the abuse allegations a focal point of their case.

 And yesterday, they called a succession of baby sitters and tutors -- three of whom were in Ms. Farrow's Bridgewater, Conn., home on Aug. 4 -- to try to bolster their claim.

 One of the child-care workers testified yesterday that Dylan had disappeared for 20 minutes that afternoon, and another said that she had seen the girl sitting on a couch next to Mr. Allen without any underpants on.*

Link to radical right wing smear site:






Sitter Questions Allen Actions With Daughter - NYTimes.com


----------



## Sunshine

freedombecki said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course. Women shouldn't out the men who molest their kids. They should just drive them to the clinic to get their abortions and shut the fuck up.
> He married one of his kids, and another has come forward to say he molested hers. I don't think this is evidence of the evil nature of Farrow, but rather of Allen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> "More than 20 years ago, Farrow learned that Woody Allen, her partner who hinted at trouble by casting Mia in humiliating movie roles (a cuckolded narcissist in &#8220;Hannah and Her Sisters&#8217;&#8217;?) &#8212; a guy she never lived with, and only rarely loved &#8212; was conducting a torrid affair with her adopted daughter, Soon-Yi Previn."
> 
> Mia Farrow gets her revenge on Woody Allen | New York Post
> 
> Just reading this makes my skin crawl.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sherry said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> He married his step daughter. Absolutely. But the 'step' part is important.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No it's not, and that is very insulting to diminish the healthy and loving relationships between adoptive parents and their adopted children who develop the same emotional bonds as biological parents and children.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a small treatise of a person who was abused as a child and wrote a book on her multiple personality dissociation caused by it:
> 
> &#8220;As a child I had been taken to see Dr Bradshaw on countless occasions; it was in his surgery that Billy had first discovered Lego. As I was growing up, I also saw Dr Robinson, the marathon runner. Now that I was living back at home, he was again my GP. When Mother bravely told him I was undergoing treatment for MPD/DID as a result of childhood sexual abuse, he buried his head in hands and wept.
> Child abuse will always re-emerge, no matter how many years go by. We read of cases of people who have come forward after thirty or forty years to say they were abused as children in care homes by wardens, schoolteachers, neighbours, fathers, priests. The Catholic Church in the United States in the last decade has paid out hundreds of millions of dollars in compensation for 'acts of sodomy and depravity towards children', to quote one information-exchange web-site. Why do these ageing people make the abuse public so late in their lives? To seek attention? No, it's because deep down there is a wound they need to bring out into the clean air before it can heal.
> Many clinicians miss signs of abuse in children because they, as decent people, do not want to find evidence of what Dr Ross suggests is 'a sick society that has grown sicker, and the abuse of children more bizarre'.
> (Note: this was written in the UK many years before the revelations of Jimmy Savile's widespread abuse, which included some ritual abuse)&#8221;
> &#8213; Alice Jamieson, _Today I'm Alice: Nine Personalities, One Tortured Mind _
> tags: abuse, child-sexual-abuse, denial, dissociation, dissociative, dissociative-identity-disorder, incest, mental-health, mental-illness, mpd, multiple-personality-disorder, paedophiles, pedophilia, ritual-abuse, savile, sexual-abuse, sexually-transmitted-infections, society-denial, split-personality, survivor, trauma, victim
Click to expand...


This is dead on.  And the one on here who claims to have been sexually abused, but doesn't believe the allegations can not scientifically generalize her own history of abuse, or lack thereof which I suspect, to another person.  This is a complex issue.  The mind does complex things for the organism to survive the trauma.


----------



## Sunshine

thanatos144 said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Also find it funny you guys think it is fine if a person rapes a child but marrying a 17 year old is not..... warped logic
> 
> tapatalk post
> 
> 
> 
> 
> no one thought it was okay to rape a child.
> 
> We just don't think that we should take the word of a crazy jilted actress at face value when there was a complete lack of other evidence.
> 
> And shit, I don't even LIKE Woody Allen.  But I don't like people getting accused of things they didn't do for other agendas.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It was the child who said it moron
> 
> tapatalk post
Click to expand...


JoeB is a puke, they all stick together~!


----------



## Sunshine

JoeB131 said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because, honestly, you guys don't have any evidence he did...  but that's okay.
> 
> Honestly, the woman was a flake who slept around  Hollywood until it got tired of her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again you fucking idiot it was the child who said he molested her.  You are a sick fuck
> 
> tapatalk post
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, it was a child who was coached by a crazy woman, but there was no physical evidence found to back it up.
Click to expand...



And what 'physical evidence' would you expect to find you disgusting puke?


----------



## Gracie

Well, y'all can believe what you want. I believe the kid. Nuff said.


----------



## Sunshine

Delta4Embassy said:


> What I'm finidng suspect about this thing is how Allen isn't sueing the Farrow's making these allegations. If they're unfounded, sue. If they're not, then not sueing makes sense since a trial may substantiate them. If someone publicly accused me for child molestation I'd sue them into oblivion.



Times have changed.  You mentioned the Sandusky case earlier.  Enough abuse victims have come forward in the ensuing years, that people, including the courts, give them an ear.  I don't think the judge in that case wanted to spare the child anything.  He wanted to spare the celebrity.


----------



## Sunshine

tinydancer said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *He married a girl raised as his daughter!*  That alone is disgusting and makes him a nasty molester.  What's more sick is your blind defence of the monster
> 
> tapatalk post
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You mean like Ted Nugent?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Was the young lady he wanted to marry his step daughter?
> 
> Big difference Sallow and you are really being a royal asshole here.
> 
> The mega difference is that Seamus for example, Woody Allen's biological son has now had to deal with the fact that his sister is his step mother and his father is now his brother in law.
> 
> There's a big difference. And this thread is about Woody Allen and I will report you in a heartbeat if you keep attempting to derail and or troll it.
> 
> *I'm sick of your bullshit. *
Click to expand...


We all are.


----------



## Sunshine

tinydancer said:


> Theowl32 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> explain how this is a leftwing/rightwing issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It isn't, other than it is mainly left wingers giving him the benefit of the doubt.
> 
> That is what I said, I am not sure if you have any ability to distinguish the difference.
> 
> Or, perhaps that it is a coincidence that mainly left wingers that yell things like innocent till proven guilty for Woody Allen. Was ted Nugent convicted of anything? What? I looked up stuff.
> 
> But, he is a gun advocate......so.....
> 
> The lefties bring up his name. Notice they did not even address the Roman Polanski conviction. Want me to cite the support he gets from Hollywood left wing kooks?
> 
> Thought not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It has always amazed me how the left will defend individuals like Polanski and Allen to the death.
> 
> I was watching the View the day Whoopi Goldberg uttered her famous words exonerating Roman Polanski.
> 
> *Well it really wasn't rape rape*
> 
> Holy toledo I almost stroked out. I thought I was having the big one.
> 
> *
> Roman Polanski: backlash as Whoopi Goldberg says director didn't commit 'rape-rape'
> Whoopi Goldberg is facing a fierce backlash after saying that film director Roman Polanski didn't commit "rape-rape" when he had unlawful sex with a 13-year-old girl.
> *
> 
> Roman Polanski: backlash as Whoopi Goldberg says director didn't commit 'rape-rape' - Telegraph
Click to expand...


Whoopi is an ignorant racist asshole.  She was on Leno the other day supporting Obamacare so 'all the people of Appalachia will have health care.'  Sheesh.


----------



## Sunshine

Delta4Embassy said:


> Dunno if it came about because of Polanski, or existed prior, but coercive sex involving drugs and alcohol is "rape rape." At least now, here. Dunno what the statutes were in California back then. Assume he was charged with statutory rape.
> 
> I'm willing to give Goldberg the benefit of the doubt though and explain her remark as there's statutory rape which is simply breaking a law that came arbitraily into existence, but where often no one complained who was actually involved, and there's rape where your victim's kicking and screaming. Latter being a completely seperate and more serious crime statutorily.
> 
> As with (being fair (and moderate) as ever) that politician's use of 'legitimate rape' was illustrating this same sentiment, though not as well



Statutory rape may not be forcible rape, but it is still rape.


----------



## Silhouette

Sunshine said:


> Statutory rape may not be forcible rape, but it is still rape.



It is considered a kin of forcible rape if the victim are/were addled on drugs.  It is aggravated also by presence of mental illness.  Often, the guy in my signature chose minor/teen orphaned victims who were suffering from both drug addiction and mental illness.

Often pedophiles will choose retarded or mentally ill children to approach for sex.  Easier that way.  They sometimes aren't even aware of what's going on, or are so desperate mentally that they latch onto any adult willing to give them the time of day.  Who's going to believe a retarded kid anyway, or one mentally ill?  The "imagined crime" will just be pinned on the victim's "delusions" and the perp gets off scott free.  

This is probably why some creeps rape very little children, so they cannot talk or don't know how to talk about what's going on with themselves.  Being very young is the ultimate state of vulnerability.  Such appears to be the case with the Woody Allen perversion.


----------



## RosieS

Woody Allen was not charged with anything, much less convicted of anything.

True pedophiles stack up victims like  empty beer cans - they molest for a lifetime and will not stop unless made to stop.

Sandusky had hundreds of victims - they could pick and choose the very best witnesses in order to convict him.

This thread is just another example of hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.

Will you scorned women carry on for 20 years like Mia Farrow? Will you suborn perjury from the help and twist your adopted daughter's fears of a tiny, dingy attic into your revenge fantasy?

No, because you most likely are not a sick twisted bitch like Mia Farrow.

Unless, of course,, you are.

Get over yourselves, ladies. No proof of being a pedo is still, 20+ years later, no proof of being a pedo.

Regards from Rosie


----------



## Theowl32

RosieS said:


> Woody Allen was not charged with anything, much less convicted of anything.
> 
> True pedophiles stack up victims like  empty beer cans - they molest for a lifetime and will not stop unless made to stop.
> 
> Sandusky had hundreds of victims - they could pick and choose the very best witnesses in order to convict him.
> 
> This thread is just another example of hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.
> 
> Will you scorned women carry on for 20 years like Mia Farrow? Will you suborn perjury from the help and twist your adopted daughter's fears of a tiny, dingy attic into your revenge fantasy?
> 
> No, because you most likely are not a sick twisted bitch like Mia Farrow.
> 
> Unless, of course,, you are.
> 
> Get over yourselves, ladies. No proof of being a pedo is still, 20+ years later, no proof of being a pedo.
> 
> Regards from Rosie



Just a question. 

Who did you vote for, Obama or Romney?

We already know, the person that thanked you is a staunch lefty. Figures on that one. Figures.


----------



## Sunshine

Silhouette said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> Statutory rape may not be forcible rape, but it is still rape.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is considered a kin of forcible rape if the victim are/were addled on drugs.  It is aggravated also by presence of mental illness.  Often, the guy in my signature chose minor/teen orphaned victims who were suffering from both drug addiction and mental illness.
> 
> Often pedophiles will choose retarded or mentally ill children to approach for sex.  Easier that way.  They sometimes aren't even aware of what's going on, or are so desperate mentally that they latch onto any adult willing to give them the time of day.  Who's going to believe a retarded kid anyway, or one mentally ill?  The "imagined crime" will just be pinned on the victim's "delusions" and the perp gets off scott free.
> 
> This is probably why some creeps rape very little children, so they cannot talk or don't know how to talk about what's going on with themselves.  Being very young is the ultimate state of vulnerability.  Such appears to be the case with the Woody Allen perversion.
Click to expand...



True, but I was speaking generally to Whoopasse's ignorant statement.  Well, they do believe the mentally retarded girls when they turn up pregnant.

Depending on state, there are several 'varieties' of rape which can be dealt with legally.  There is forcible rape, statutory rape, rape of a child (if that 11 year old consents, it is rape of a child, not statutory rape), rape of an incompetent person, rape by deception, etc.  There are special laws to address them all as well as prison rape, and staff who have sex with patients in mental facilities.


----------



## tinydancer

RosieS said:


> Woody Allen was not charged with anything, much less convicted of anything.
> 
> True pedophiles stack up victims like  empty beer cans - they molest for a lifetime and will not stop unless made to stop.
> 
> Sandusky had hundreds of victims - they could pick and choose the very best witnesses in order to convict him.
> 
> This thread is just another example of hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.
> 
> Will you scorned women carry on for 20 years like Mia Farrow? Will you suborn perjury from the help and twist your adopted daughter's fears of a tiny, dingy attic into your revenge fantasy?
> 
> No, because you most likely are not a sick twisted bitch like Mia Farrow.
> 
> Unless, of course,, you are.
> 
> Get over yourselves, ladies. No proof of being a pedo is still, 20+ years later, no proof of being a pedo.
> 
> Regards from Rosie



Rosie there are a million cases where the abuse is strictly a "family affair". Where the diddler keeps it "in house". And never strays from his or her "pet victim".

Farrow was blindsided by this according to testimony given under oath. One babysitter was so stressed out by what she witnessed she told her employer who in turn felt it necessary to alert Farrow.

Catch that oh pompous one? 

Timeline is important here. Two other child care individuals also testified . One that Dylan had gone missing on the day that Dylan remembered the molestation and another testified seeing Dylan with Woody on the couch with no underwear on.

Hello?

Now with all due respect, don't freaking lecture us on a discussion board over our opinions and our attempts to wrap our brains about a very serious accusation.

Get it? It's a discussion board. If you don't like the thread and you don't want to be part of the discussion, feel free to move on to another thread.


----------



## Sunshine

tinydancer said:


> RosieS said:
> 
> 
> 
> Woody Allen was not charged with anything, much less convicted of anything.
> 
> True pedophiles stack up victims like  empty beer cans - they molest for a lifetime and will not stop unless made to stop.
> 
> Sandusky had hundreds of victims - they could pick and choose the very best witnesses in order to convict him.
> 
> This thread is just another example of hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.
> 
> Will you scorned women carry on for 20 years like Mia Farrow? Will you suborn perjury from the help and twist your adopted daughter's fears of a tiny, dingy attic into your revenge fantasy?
> 
> No, because you most likely are not a sick twisted bitch like Mia Farrow.
> 
> Unless, of course,, you are.
> 
> Get over yourselves, ladies. No proof of being a pedo is still, 20+ years later, no proof of being a pedo.
> 
> Regards from Rosie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosie there are a million cases where the abuse is strictly a "family affair". Where the diddler keeps it "in house". And never strays from his or her "pet victim".
> 
> Farrow was blindsided by this according to testimony given under oath. One babysitter was so stressed out by what she witnessed she told her employer who in turn felt it necessary to alert Farrow.
> 
> Catch that oh pompous one?
> 
> Timeline is important here. Two other child care individuals also testified . One that Dylan had gone missing on the day that Dylan remembered the molestation and another testified
> seeing Dylan with Woody on the couch with no underwear on.
> 
> Hello?
> 
> Now with all due respect, don't freaking lecture us on a discussion board over our opinions and our attempts to wrap our brains about a very serious accusation.
> 
> Get it? It's a discussion board. If you don't like the thread and you don't want to be part of the discussion, feel free to move on to another thread.
Click to expand...


Many do keep it in the family.  And they also couch it in terms of 'teaching' that child or adolescent.  Multigenerational child sex abuse was rampant in one area of TN where I worked.  I didn't treat children, but I had several women with the oldest child being retarded and the rest being perfectly normal.  That one is just not that hard to figure out.


----------



## tinydancer

FYI I thought I should put this story up from People Magazine to battle back against the accusations that Farrow has been going nutso koo koo bye bye as a scorned woman for twenty years.  Hell's bells why do people make up crap?

Truth out.

* Unlike Allen, Mia Farrow has refrained from talking directly to the press.

 Which hasn't protected her from "revelations" in the New York tabloids&#8212;stories that she takes a number of tranquilizers and antidepressants, and that last Valentine's Day she presented Allen with a silk heart with a knife plunged into it.

 Soon-Yi also weighed in, accusing Farrow of being "hot-tempered." 

Last winter, says Doumanian, Allen told her that Farrow terrified him by threatening to commit suicide&#8212;leaving a note, then opening the balcony windows of his 20th-floor East Side duplex to suggest that she had jumped.

 (Dershowitz says Farrow is not taking prescription drugs and that he knows nothing of any suicide threats.) *

The War in the Trenches : People.com


----------



## Gracie

Like Delta mentioned....IF Allen is so innocent, why has he not sued Mia and Dylan? Possibly because he will be probed more on his perv ways and found guilty himself? Betcha.


----------



## jillian

tinydancer said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't matter how many times you echo "adopted stepdaughter." HE never adopted her, nor was she his stepdaughter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh bite me.
> 
> That's idiotic. Woody was considered their father by the most important people in this sorry case. The children. They all thought of Woody as "Daddy".
> 
> "Daddy" was banging their sister. That's all I need to know to put him in the "creep father file".
Click to expand...


Yes, why use words that actually apply when you can just say any unfounded, untrue thing you wish.


----------



## thanatos144

So it seems if the child is young enough some will forgive celebrities anything.


----------



## tinydancer

jillian said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't matter how many times you echo "adopted stepdaughter." HE never adopted her, nor was she his stepdaughter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh bite me.
> 
> That's idiotic. Woody was considered their father by the most important people in this sorry case. The children. They all thought of Woody as "Daddy".
> 
> "Daddy" was banging their sister. That's all I need to know to put him in the "creep father file".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, why use words that actually apply when you can just say any unfounded, untrue thing you wish.
Click to expand...


There is no doubt that Woody was having and affair with Mia's daughter Soon Yi. 

This is not debatable. 

And Soon Yi was sister to Mia's other children having been adopted at age seven by Mia and Andre Previn.

Again this is not debatable. 

So technically Seamus, Woody's biological son has Soon Yi as his step mother and Woody Allen is his father but now also his brother in law.

Pretty fucked up by anyone's standard but a whack job liberal.


----------



## skye

tinydancer said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh bite me.
> 
> That's idiotic. Woody was considered their father by the most important people in this sorry case. The children. They all thought of Woody as "Daddy".
> 
> "Daddy" was banging their sister. That's all I need to know to put him in the "creep father file".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, why use words that actually apply when you can just say any unfounded, untrue thing you wish.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is no doubt that Woody was having and affair with Mia's daughter Soon Yi.
> 
> This is not debatable.
> 
> And Soon Yi was sister to Mia's other children having been adopted at age seven by Mia and Andre Previn.
> 
> Again this is not debatable.
> 
> So technically Seamus, Woody's biological son has Soon Yi as his step mother and Woody Allen is his father but now also his brother in law.
> 
> Pretty fucked up.
Click to expand...


This thread is about Dylan NOT SOON YI!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Lord! you people are thick!


----------



## thanatos144

skye said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, why use words that actually apply when you can just say any unfounded, untrue thing you wish.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no doubt that Woody was having and affair with Mia's daughter Soon Yi.
> 
> This is not debatable.
> 
> And Soon Yi was sister to Mia's other children having been adopted at age seven by Mia and Andre Previn.
> 
> Again this is not debatable.
> 
> So technically Seamus, Woody's biological son has Soon Yi as his step mother and Woody Allen is his father but now also his brother in law.
> 
> Pretty fucked up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This thread is about Dylan NOT SOON YI!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> Lord! you people are thick!
Click to expand...


Dont like it when the pattern of his sick actions are shown?


----------



## thanatos144

tinydancer said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh bite me.
> 
> That's idiotic. Woody was considered their father by the most important people in this sorry case. The children. They all thought of Woody as "Daddy".
> 
> "Daddy" was banging their sister. That's all I need to know to put him in the "creep father file".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, why use words that actually apply when you can just say any unfounded, untrue thing you wish.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is no doubt that Woody was having and affair with Mia's daughter Soon Yi.
> 
> This is not debatable.
> 
> And Soon Yi was sister to Mia's other children having been adopted at age seven by Mia and Andre Previn.
> 
> Again this is not debatable.
> 
> So technically Seamus, Woody's biological son has Soon Yi as his step mother and Woody Allen is his father but now also his brother in law.
> 
> Pretty fucked up.
Click to expand...


Some people will forgive anything to a celebrity as if they are somehow above being perverted child molesters.


----------



## skye

thanatos144 said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no doubt that Woody was having and affair with Mia's daughter Soon Yi.
> 
> This is not debatable.
> 
> And Soon Yi was sister to Mia's other children having been adopted at age seven by Mia and Andre Previn.
> 
> Again this is not debatable.
> 
> So technically Seamus, Woody's biological son has Soon Yi as his step mother and Woody Allen is his father but now also his brother in law.
> 
> Pretty fucked up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This thread is about Dylan NOT SOON YI!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> Lord! you people are thick!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dont like it when the pattern of his sick actions are shown?
Click to expand...


The only pattern shown here is the one of your stupidity!


----------



## thanatos144

skye said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> This thread is about Dylan NOT SOON YI!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> Lord! you people are thick!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dont like it when the pattern of his sick actions are shown?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The only pattern shown here is the one of your stupidity!
Click to expand...


Would you remain blind if it was someone close to you he abused?


----------



## tinydancer

skye said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, why use words that actually apply when you can just say any unfounded, untrue thing you wish.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no doubt that Woody was having and affair with Mia's daughter Soon Yi.
> 
> This is not debatable.
> 
> And Soon Yi was sister to Mia's other children having been adopted at age seven by Mia and Andre Previn.
> 
> Again this is not debatable.
> 
> So technically Seamus, Woody's biological son has Soon Yi as his step mother and Woody Allen is his father but now also his brother in law.
> 
> Pretty fucked up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This thread is about Dylan NOT SOON YI!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> Lord! you people are thick!
Click to expand...


Unfortunately in this sordid tale, one cannot discuss Dylan without discussing Soon Yi because the events leading up to the scandal are intertwined.

AND with all due respect Skye, you must understand that Woody's most ardent fans and defenders bring up on a continual basis that the molestation charges are directly related to as the defenders put it "Mia Farrow is a woman scorned and fabricated the accusations". That's their defense of Woody. 

So you see, one cannot possibly discuss one issue without the other.


----------



## skye

thanatos144 said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Dont like it when the pattern of his sick actions are shown?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The only pattern shown here is the one of your stupidity!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Would you remain blind if it was someone close to you he abused?
Click to expand...


of course not!

if it's proven that the terrible deed was done I would certainly not remain blind!

otherwise I am not going to lynch  him just because I find him "creepy"...... he might be creepy but that doesn't mean he is a child molester.

in the absence of proof of his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, I am not going to ruin a life just to make Mia Farrow happy....in many cases lives have been destroyed for things they "probably did" but actually didn't do.


----------



## JoeB131

Sunshine said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again you fucking idiot it was the child who said he molested her.  You are a sick fuck
> 
> tapatalk post
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, it was a child who was coached by a crazy woman, but there was no physical evidence found to back it up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And what 'physical evidence' would you expect to find you disgusting puke?
Click to expand...


without getting too graphic, how about a broken hymen, vaginal or anal bruising, or any of the other physical signs you'd normally see in a legitimate case of this kind. 

YOu know, something called "Proof".   

Or we can just have an old fashioned witch burning. those always work out well.


----------



## Sallow

Gracie said:


> Like Delta mentioned....IF Allen is so innocent, why has he not sued Mia and Dylan? Possibly because he will be probed more on his perv ways and found guilty himself? Betcha.



To what end?

He's got more money then he'll ever spend in several lifetimes.

And he will never get them to shut up.

And it can also be asked why Mia never pressed charges.

She's been floating this story for a very long time.


----------



## JoeB131

Gracie said:


> Like Delta mentioned....IF Allen is so innocent, why has he not sued Mia and Dylan? Possibly because he will be probed more on his perv ways and found guilty himself? Betcha.



Statue of limitations have expired. They could produce FILM at this point and the couldn't touch him. 

More likely, he knows Dylan is damaged goods after being raised by a crazy woman, and just doesn't want to make it worse.


----------



## thanatos144

JoeB131 said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, it was a child who was coached by a crazy woman, but there was no physical evidence found to back it up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And what 'physical evidence' would you expect to find you disgusting puke?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> without getting too graphic, how about a broken hymen, vaginal or anal bruising, or any of the other physical signs you'd normally see in a legitimate case of this kind.
> 
> YOu know, something called "Proof".
> 
> Or we can just have an old fashioned witch burning. those always work out well.
Click to expand...

hey sick fuck you do know molesting doesn't always mean penetration right?


----------



## thanatos144

JoeB131 said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like Delta mentioned....IF Allen is so innocent, why has he not sued Mia and Dylan? Possibly because he will be probed more on his perv ways and found guilty himself? Betcha.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Statue of limitations have expired. They could produce FILM at this point and the couldn't touch him.
> 
> More likely, he knows Dylan is damaged goods after being raised by a crazy woman, and just doesn't want to make it worse.
Click to expand...


because all is better now that it has been decades right??? You make me want to puke.


----------



## RosieS

tinydancer said:


> RosieS said:
> 
> 
> 
> Woody Allen was not charged with anything, much less convicted of anything.
> 
> True pedophiles stack up victims like  empty beer cans - they molest for a lifetime and will not stop unless made to stop.
> 
> Sandusky had hundreds of victims - they could pick and choose the very best witnesses in order to convict him.
> 
> This thread is just another example of hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.
> 
> Will you scorned women carry on for 20 years like Mia Farrow? Will you suborn perjury from the help and twist your adopted daughter's fears of a tiny, dingy attic into your revenge fantasy?
> 
> No, because you most likely are not a sick twisted bitch like Mia Farrow.
> 
> Unless, of course,, you are.
> 
> Get over yourselves, ladies. No proof of being a pedo is still, 20+ years later, no proof of being a pedo.
> 
> Regards from Rosie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosie there are a million cases where the abuse is strictly a "family affair". Where the diddler keeps it "in house". And never strays from his or her "pet victim".
> 
> Farrow was blindsided by this according to testimony given under oath. One babysitter was so stressed out by what she witnessed she told her employer who in turn felt it necessary to alert Farrow.
> 
> Catch that oh pompous one?
> 
> Timeline is important here. Two other child care individuals also testified . One that Dylan had gone missing on the day that Dylan remembered the molestation and another testified seeing Dylan with Woody on the couch with no underwear on.
> 
> Hello?
> 
> Now with all due respect, don't freaking lecture us on a discussion board over our opinions and our attempts to wrap our brains about a very serious accusation.
> 
> Get it? It's a discussion board. If you don't like the thread and you don't want to be part of the discussion, feel free to move on to another thread.
Click to expand...


I will post how I choose, when I choose and where I choose, Oh Most Gullible One.

Not acting like a mod when you are not is also important here.

It is not my problem that you cannot recognize a pack of lies when you see it like the experienced hospital staff did.

And nothing you could ever write can make it a problem of yours that could make me care that you have it.

Like I said - get over yourself - or whomever it was youwant to cut the genitals off from.

Whichever you'd like to,  first.

Regards from Rosie


----------



## JoeB131

thanatos144 said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> And what 'physical evidence' would you expect to find you disgusting puke?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> without getting too graphic, how about a broken hymen, vaginal or anal bruising, or any of the other physical signs you'd normally see in a legitimate case of this kind.
> 
> YOu know, something called "Proof".
> 
> Or we can just have an old fashioned witch burning. those always work out well.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> hey sick fuck you do know molesting doesn't always mean penetration right?
Click to expand...


No, it doesn't.  But what she alleged should have involved that.  

So now we are back to the word of a brainwashed child raised by a crazy woman.  

Not really meeting much of a standard of proof here.


----------



## thanatos144

RosieS said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RosieS said:
> 
> 
> 
> Woody Allen was not charged with anything, much less convicted of anything.
> 
> True pedophiles stack up victims like  empty beer cans - they molest for a lifetime and will not stop unless made to stop.
> 
> Sandusky had hundreds of victims - they could pick and choose the very best witnesses in order to convict him.
> 
> This thread is just another example of hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.
> 
> Will you scorned women carry on for 20 years like Mia Farrow? Will you suborn perjury from the help and twist your adopted daughter's fears of a tiny, dingy attic into your revenge fantasy?
> 
> No, because you most likely are not a sick twisted bitch like Mia Farrow.
> 
> Unless, of course,, you are.
> 
> Get over yourselves, ladies. No proof of being a pedo is still, 20+ years later, no proof of being a pedo.
> 
> Regards from Rosie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosie there are a million cases where the abuse is strictly a "family affair". Where the diddler keeps it "in house". And never strays from his or her "pet victim".
> 
> Farrow was blindsided by this according to testimony given under oath. One babysitter was so stressed out by what she witnessed she told her employer who in turn felt it necessary to alert Farrow.
> 
> Catch that oh pompous one?
> 
> Timeline is important here. Two other child care individuals also testified . One that Dylan had gone missing on the day that Dylan remembered the molestation and another testified seeing Dylan with Woody on the couch with no underwear on.
> 
> Hello?
> 
> Now with all due respect, don't freaking lecture us on a discussion board over our opinions and our attempts to wrap our brains about a very serious accusation.
> 
> Get it? It's a discussion board. If you don't like the thread and you don't want to be part of the discussion, feel free to move on to another thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I will post how I choose, when I choose and where I choose, Oh Most Gullible One.
> 
> Not acting like a mod when you are not is also important here.
> 
> It is not my problem that you cannot recognize a pack of lies when you see it like the experienced hospital staff did.
> 
> And nothing you could ever write can make it a problem of yours that could make me care that you have it.
> 
> Like I said - get over yourself - or whomever it was youwant to cut the genitals off from.
> 
> Whichever you'd like to,  first.
> 
> Regards from Rosie
Click to expand...

None of what you posted is even remotely true.


----------



## thanatos144

JoeB131 said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> without getting too graphic, how about a broken hymen, vaginal or anal bruising, or any of the other physical signs you'd normally see in a legitimate case of this kind.
> 
> YOu know, something called "Proof".
> 
> Or we can just have an old fashioned witch burning. those always work out well.
> 
> 
> 
> hey sick fuck you do know molesting doesn't always mean penetration right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, it doesn't.  But what she alleged should have involved that.
> 
> So now we are back to the word of a brainwashed child raised by a crazy woman.
> 
> Not really meeting much of a standard of proof here.
Click to expand...

you dont know what was alleged .


----------



## JoeB131

thanatos144 said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like Delta mentioned....IF Allen is so innocent, why has he not sued Mia and Dylan? Possibly because he will be probed more on his perv ways and found guilty himself? Betcha.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Statue of limitations have expired. They could produce FILM at this point and the couldn't touch him.
> 
> More likely, he knows Dylan is damaged goods after being raised by a crazy woman, and just doesn't want to make it worse.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> because all is better now that it has been decades right??? You make me want to puke.
Click to expand...


Not saying it's better or worse, just stating WHAT THE LAW IS.  

In the law, we have a statue of limitations for a reason. 

LEGALLY- they didn't charge the man because they didn't have something called "evidence".


----------



## JoeB131

thanatos144 said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> hey sick fuck you do know molesting doesn't always mean penetration right?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, it doesn't.  But what she alleged should have involved that.
> 
> So now we are back to the word of a brainwashed child raised by a crazy woman.
> 
> Not really meeting much of a standard of proof here.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> you dont know what was alleged .
Click to expand...


Yeah, I do, actually.  

And it sounded like bullshit at the time.  You know, the kind of thing a woman says when she's been traded in for a newer model.


----------



## thanatos144

JoeB131 said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, it doesn't.  But what she alleged should have involved that.
> 
> So now we are back to the word of a brainwashed child raised by a crazy woman.
> 
> Not really meeting much of a standard of proof here.
> 
> 
> 
> you dont know what was alleged .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, I do, actually.
> 
> And it sounded like bullshit at the time.  You know, the kind of thing a woman says when she's been traded in for a newer model.
Click to expand...


link it


----------



## Dr Grump

Theowl32 said:


> Oh, and Roman Polanski was convicted, and he is still a big liberal hero. Still. You fucking blob.



Was that the same Roman Polanski who directed Farrow in Rosemary's Baby?
The same Polanski that Farrow gave a character reference for after he sued for defamation?


----------



## Dr Grump

Theowl32 said:


> I could have sworn there was at least one witness. The nanny, and I also think there were others that claimed molestation.
> 
> I do find it rather funny though how the left wingers give him the benefit of the doubt. That is what I find hilarious.
> 
> Yahoo!
> 
> In the letter, published in its entirety online, Farrow described how the alleged abuse was "skillfully hidden."
> 
> "That he got away with what he did to me haunted me as I grew up," she wrote. "I was stricken with guilt that I had allowed him to be near other little girls. I was terrified of being touched by men. I developed an eating disorder. I began cutting myself."
> 
> The claims, which first surfaced in Vanity Fair in 1992, were brought into stark relief again last month when Allen received a lifetime achievement award at the Gold Globes.
> 
> "A woman has publicly detailed Woody Allen's molestation of her at age 7," Mia Farrow wrote on Twitter. "GoldenGlobe tribute showed contempt for her & all abuse survivors."
> 
> *"Missed the Woody Allen tribute," Ronan Farrow, Allen and Mia Farrow's son and MSNBC host, wrote on Twitter. "Did they put the part where a woman publicly confirmed he molested her at age 7 before or after Annie Hall?"*




Did you miss the part where the guy who put together the GG tribute had to get Farrow's permission to use her image for the Purple Rose of Cairo clip and she did?


----------



## Dr Grump

Theowl32 said:


> The lefties bring up his name. Notice they did not even address the Roman Polanski conviction. *Want me to cite the support he gets from Hollywood left wing kooks? *
> 
> Thought not.



Like, er, Mia Farrow? From the link in the OP

_"Roman Polanski who, in 1977, pled guilty to unlawful intercourse with a thirteen-year-old girl in Los Angeles that year. The magazine published an article stating that in 1969, Polanski was seen fondling and hitting on a young model at Elaines restaurant in New York City on his way to the funeral of his late wife Sharon Tate, who had been brutally slain by the Manson family. One of the witnesses who testified on Polanskis behalf was Mia Farrow, who, Im told, remains friendly with the director to this day."_


----------



## Dr Grump

Delta4Embassy said:


> What I'm finidng suspect about this thing is how Allen isn't sueing the Farrow's making these allegations. If they're unfounded, sue. If they're not, then not sueing makes sense since a trial may substantiate them. If someone publicly accused me for child molestation I'd sue them into oblivion.



If you read the link in the OP you'll find that he doesn't even follow this stuff. He doesn't care. Doesn't have a computer or surf the internet. He totally ignores and doesn't give a shit. And yet here we are, 10 pages later..


----------



## Sunshine

thanatos144 said:


> So it seems if the child is young enough some will forgive celebrities anything.



I live in Nashville for 20 years.  People will try most anything to polish a turd.


----------



## Sunshine

skye said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> The only pattern shown here is the one of your stupidity!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Would you remain blind if it was someone close to you he abused?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> of course not!
> 
> if it's proven that the terrible deed was done I would certainly not remain blind!
> 
> otherwise I am not going to lynch  him just because I find him "creepy"...... he might be creepy but that doesn't mean he is a child molester.
> 
> in the absence of proof of his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, I am not going to ruin a life just to make Mia Farrow happy....in many cases lives have been destroyed for things they "probably did" but actually didn't do.
Click to expand...


Oh do tell how a very young child would 'prove' to you she had been molested.  God almighty!  I pray that you are no one's mother!


----------



## Sunshine

JoeB131 said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Statue of limitations have expired. They could produce FILM at this point and the couldn't touch him.
> 
> More likely, he knows Dylan is damaged goods after being raised by a crazy woman, and just doesn't want to make it worse.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> because all is better now that it has been decades right??? You make me want to puke.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not saying it's better or worse, just stating WHAT THE LAW IS.
> 
> In the law, we have a statue of limitations for a reason.
> 
> LEGALLY- they didn't charge the man because they didn't have something called "evidence".
Click to expand...



That 'reason' is not to allow perps to go free which is what you seem to think.


----------



## Dr Grump

tinydancer said:


> Unfortunately in this sordid tale, one cannot discuss Dylan without discussing Soon Yi because the events leading up to the scandal are intertwined.
> 
> AND with all due respect Skye, you must understand that Woody's most ardent fans and defenders bring up on a continual basis that the molestation charges are directly related to as the defenders put it "Mia Farrow is a woman scorned and fabricated the accusations". That's their defense of Woody.
> 
> So you see, one cannot possibly discuss one issue without the other.



Actually - on this thread - if you stopped frothing at the mouth for just one second, you will find very few Woody defenders. Most of us find him and the Soon Yi situation a little creepy, and most don't even like his movies (I think the odd one is OK). What we ARE defending is people saying libelous things about him without backing them up. You have found him guilty on the flimsiest of evidence. And that is pathetic.


----------



## jillian

Sunshine said:


> That 'reason' is not to allow perps to go free which is what you seem to think.



"perps" have to be charged first.

he wasn't. move on.

perhaps you should let reality be your guide occasionally.


----------



## freedombecki

JoeB131 said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, it doesn't. But what she alleged should have involved that.
> 
> So now we are back to the word of a brainwashed child raised by a crazy woman.
> 
> Not really meeting much of a standard of proof here.
> 
> 
> 
> you dont know what was alleged .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, I do, actually.
> 
> And it sounded like bullshit at the time. You know, the kind of thing a woman says when she's been traded in for a newer model.
Click to expand...

Oh, the woman scorned is a chattel that one trades when one is tired of her, which causes her to say certain predictable things?


----------



## Sunshine

jillian said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> That 'reason' is not to allow perps to go free which is what you seem to think.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "perps" have to be charged first.
> 
> he wasn't. move on.
> 
> perhaps you should let reality be your guide occasionally.
Click to expand...


You simply can't follow a legal discussion because you and JoeB get your legal knowledge from tabloids.  Oh, yea,  sweetie.


----------



## Sunshine

freedombecki said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> you dont know what was alleged .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, I do, actually.
> 
> And it sounded like bullshit at the time. You know, the kind of thing a woman says when she's been traded in for a newer model.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh, the woman scorned is a chattel that one trades when one is tired of her, which causes her to say certain predictable things?
Click to expand...


He is a racist, chauvinist pig.  I've had his number for years.


----------



## jillian

Sunshine said:


> freedombecki said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, I do, actually.
> 
> And it sounded like bullshit at the time. You know, the kind of thing a woman says when she's been traded in for a newer model.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, the woman scorned is a chattel that one trades when one is tired of her, which causes her to say certain predictable things?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He is a racist, chauvinist pig.  I've had his number for years.
Click to expand...



racist? chauvanist?

you really don't care what you say.

good to know absolutely nothing's changed.


----------



## Dr Grump

Sunshine said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> That 'reason' is not to allow perps to go free which is what you seem to think.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "perps" have to be charged first.
> 
> he wasn't. move on.
> 
> perhaps you should let reality be your guide occasionally.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You simply can't follow a legal discussion because you and JoeB get your legal knowledge from tabloids.  Oh, yea,  sweetie.
Click to expand...


She's a lawyer. You're not. That much is obvious.
You do realise you guys are coming across as the Pitchfork Brigade?


----------



## jillian

Sunshine said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> That 'reason' is not to allow perps to go free which is what you seem to think.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "perps" have to be charged first.
> 
> he wasn't. move on.
> 
> perhaps you should let reality be your guide occasionally.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You simply can't follow a legal discussion because you and JoeB get your legal knowledge from tabloids.  Oh, yea,  sweetie.
Click to expand...


the people who pay me know otherwise.

and you're still sub literate and bitter.

also good to know.


----------



## jillian

Dr Grump said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> "perps" have to be charged first.
> 
> he wasn't. move on.
> 
> perhaps you should let reality be your guide occasionally.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You simply can't follow a legal discussion because you and JoeB get your legal knowledge from tabloids.  Oh, yea,  sweetie.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> She's a lawyer. You're not. That much is obvious.
> You do realise you guys are coming across as the Pitchfork Brigade?
Click to expand...


they think he's a new york liberal jew so they have to trash him.

if he shot an unarmed black kid, they'd be all about that.


----------



## Sunshine

Most states have what  is called a 'statute of repose.'  Usually it lasts 1 year from age 18 to age 19 and it tolls the statute of limitation and gives children whose parents did not pursue an action on their behalf to pursue it on their own behalf.


----------



## thanatos144

jillian said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> You simply can't follow a legal discussion because you and JoeB get your legal knowledge from tabloids.  Oh, yea,  sweetie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She's a lawyer. You're not. That much is obvious.
> You do realise you guys are coming across as the Pitchfork Brigade?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> they think he's a new york liberal jew so they have to trash him.
> 
> if he shot an unarmed black kid, they'd be all about that.
Click to expand...


Jew hatred is more a democrat progressive thing.


----------



## tinydancer

Ok people you Woody wankers all.

What was Mia Farrow supposed to do when her babysitter's employer called her and told her of what she witnessed the day before?

Baby Dylan on the couch, Woody on his knees in front of her with his head ion Dylan's lap?

This is testimony. And it was what this babysitter reported to her employer because she found it so disturbing that started this firestorm.

What was Mia Farrow supposed to do?


----------



## Sunshine

jillian said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> "perps" have to be charged first.
> 
> he wasn't. move on.
> 
> perhaps you should let reality be your guide occasionally.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You simply can't follow a legal discussion because you and JoeB get your legal knowledge from tabloids.  Oh, yea,  sweetie.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the people who pay me know otherwise.
> 
> and you're still sub literate and bitter.
> 
> also good to know.
Click to expand...


Most of us do not take as kindly to child sexual abuse as you and Joe B do.  Also good to know.


----------



## Sunshine

tinydancer said:


> Ok people you Woody wankers all.
> 
> What was Mia Farrow supposed to do when her babysitter's employer called her and told her of what she witnessed the day before?
> 
> Baby Dylan on the couch, Woody on his knees in front of her with his head ion Dylan's lap?
> 
> This is testimony. And it was what this babysitter reported to her employer because she found it so disturbing that started this firestorm.
> 
> What was Mia Farrow supposed to do?



Yes, and it is ......tah dah......EVIDENCE!


----------



## tinydancer

jillian said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> You simply can't follow a legal discussion because you and JoeB get your legal knowledge from tabloids.  Oh, yea,  sweetie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She's a lawyer. You're not. That much is obvious.
> You do realise you guys are coming across as the Pitchfork Brigade?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> they think he's a new york liberal jew so they have to trash him.
> 
> if he shot an unarmed black kid, they'd be all about that.
Click to expand...


You've got to be kidding me.



Having a discussion on a discussion board about a hot topic that concerns Woody Allen's adopted daughter who claims he molested her now makes us all anti let me get this right....anti new york liberal jew.

Man you are one whacked out piece of work.


----------



## jillian

Sunshine said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> You simply can't follow a legal discussion because you and JoeB get your legal knowledge from tabloids.  Oh, yea,  sweetie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the people who pay me know otherwise.
> 
> and you're still sub literate and bitter.
> 
> also good to know.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Most of us do not take as kindly to child sexual abuse as you and Joe B do.  Also good to know.
Click to expand...


no. i don't take kindly to people slandering others with no evidence.

again, let reality be your guide not your rage


----------



## Sunshine

jillian said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> the people who pay me know otherwise.
> 
> and you're still sub literate and bitter.
> 
> also good to know.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most of us do not take as kindly to child sexual abuse as you and Joe B do.  Also good to know.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> no. i don't take kindly to people slandering others with no evidence.
> 
> again, let reality be your guide&#8230; not your rage
Click to expand...


It has, as has the EVIDENCE......!  The fact that you are too stupid to understand what has occurred is not my fault.  

That letter thing is a typical therapy technique used with abuse victims.  I have a friend who was raped by an uncle when she was 15.  She sent him such a letter unsealed to his place of work.  He was a local policeman.  

Dylan certainly could have pursued Allen on her own if California had a statute of repose for children and I would bet at least a cyber dollar that it does.  It's too bad she didn't have the legal knowledge to do it.  As it stands all she can do is this therapy technique which you pedophile defenders will quickly and openly ridicule.


----------



## tinydancer

When you have three baby sitters who all said under oath they witnessed disturbing behavior and obviously they had informed Ms. Farrow about the incidents at the time way before the court case, what was Mia to do.

Then couple this situation with finding pornographic pictures of her daughter on Woody's mantle piece and discovering her long time lover was having an affair with her daughter Woody Allen supporters tell me please what should Mia Farrow have done?


----------



## Sunshine

tinydancer said:


> *When you have three baby sitters who all said under oath they witnessed disturbing behavior* and obviously they had informed Ms. Farrow about the incidents at the time way before the court case, what was Mia to do.
> 
> Then couple this situation with finding pornographic pictures of her daughter on Woody's mantle piece and discovering her long time lover was having an affair with her daughter Woody Allen supporters tell me please what should Mia Farrow have done?




And that is...........tah dah.........EVIDENCE~!


----------



## skye

tinydancer said:


> When you have three baby sitters who all said under oath they witnessed disturbing behavior and obviously they had informed Ms. Farrow about the incidents at the time way before the court case, what was Mia to do.
> 
> Then couple this situation with finding pornographic pictures of her daughter on Woody's mantle piece and discovering her long time lover was having an affair with her daughter Woody Allen supporters tell me please what should Mia Farrow have done?



Mia Farrow should have taken Allen to court!


Who was stopping her?   Lack of evidence perhaps?


----------



## Sunshine

skye said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> When you have three baby sitters who all said under oath they witnessed disturbing behavior and obviously they had informed Ms. Farrow about the incidents at the time way before the court case, what was Mia to do.
> 
> Then couple this situation with finding pornographic pictures of her daughter on Woody's mantle piece and discovering her long time lover was having an affair with her daughter Woody Allen supporters tell me please what should Mia Farrow have done?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mia Farrow should have taken Allen to court!
> 
> 
> Who was stopping her?   Lack of evidence perhaps?
Click to expand...


3 babysitters testifying under oath about his behavior is ...........EVIDENCE!

I just never cease to be amazed at who will strut out to defend the perps.


----------



## skye

Sunshine said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> When you have three baby sitters who all said under oath they witnessed disturbing behavior and obviously they had informed Ms. Farrow about the incidents at the time way before the court case, what was Mia to do.
> 
> Then couple this situation with finding pornographic pictures of her daughter on Woody's mantle piece and discovering her long time lover was having an affair with her daughter Woody Allen supporters tell me please what should Mia Farrow have done?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mia Farrow should have taken Allen to court!
> 
> 
> Who was stopping her?   Lack of evidence perhaps?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 3 babysitters testifying under oath about his behavior is ...........EVIDENCE!
Click to expand...



Obviously it wasn't enough  solid  evidence to lynch Woody Allen!


----------



## freedombecki

Dr Grump said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> "perps" have to be charged first.
> 
> he wasn't. move on.
> 
> perhaps you should let reality be your guide occasionally.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You simply can't follow a legal discussion because you and JoeB get your legal knowledge from tabloids. Oh, yea,  sweetie.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> She's a lawyer. You're not. That much is obvious.
> You do realise you guys are coming across as the Pitchfork Brigade?
Click to expand...

So you're an ace at identification of _Juris Doctor_ in the USA? Keep yer day job, toots.


----------



## tinydancer

jillian said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> the people who pay me know otherwise.
> 
> and you're still sub literate and bitter.
> 
> also good to know.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most of us do not take as kindly to child sexual abuse as you and Joe B do.  Also good to know.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> no. i don't take kindly to people slandering others with no evidence.
> 
> again, let reality be your guide not your rage
Click to expand...


I've put up the testimony of the three care givers. I've put up the court papers where the Justice in question just tore Woody Allen a new orifce over his behaviors.

His reprehensible behavior with Soon Yi is undisputed. Previn considers Soon Yi dead. This whole family was devastated by Woody's selfish and devious actions. 

But let's take slander. Woody just has to launch a lawsuit to defend his name doesn't he now?

Dollars to donuts he won't.


----------



## thanatos144

skye said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> Mia Farrow should have taken Allen to court!
> 
> 
> Who was stopping her?   Lack of evidence perhaps?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3 babysitters testifying under oath about his behavior is ...........EVIDENCE!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Obviously it wasn't enough  solid  evidence to lynch Woody Allen!
Click to expand...


but enough so the rest of us can see the truth that he is a child molester that preys on family


----------



## Dr Grump

freedombecki said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> You simply can't follow a legal discussion because you and JoeB get your legal knowledge from tabloids. Oh, yea,  sweetie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She's a lawyer. You're not. That much is obvious.
> You do realise you guys are coming across as the Pitchfork Brigade?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So you're an ace at identification of _Juris Doctor_ in the USA? Keep yer day job, toots.
Click to expand...


Huh???


----------



## skye

thanatos144 said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 3 babysitters testifying under oath about his behavior is ...........EVIDENCE!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obviously it wasn't enough  solid  evidence to lynch Woody Allen!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> but enough so the rest of us can see the truth that he is a child molester that preys on family
Click to expand...



That's a different Court you are talking about!

It's called the Court of Public Opinion..... everybody can be lynched with no problem there! No need of solid evidence, no need of nothing.


----------



## Dr Grump

tinydancer said:


> I've put up the testimony of the three care givers. I've put up the court papers where the Justice in question just tore Woody Allen a new orifce over his behaviors.
> 
> His reprehensible behavior with Soon Yi is undisputed. Previn considers Soon Yi dead. This whole family was devastated by Woody's selfish and devious actions.
> 
> But let's take slander. Woody just has to launch a lawsuit to defend his name doesn't he now?
> 
> Dollars to donuts he won't.



You put up testimony from one care giver who didn't like what she saw. Whoop-dee-doo. And the judge did question his behaviour, but didn't convict him. You know that, right?

As stated, Allen isn't even following this latest piece of Mia drama


----------



## tinydancer

skye said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> Mia Farrow should have taken Allen to court!
> 
> 
> Who was stopping her?   Lack of evidence perhaps?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3 babysitters testifying under oath about his behavior is ...........EVIDENCE!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Obviously it wasn't enough  solid  evidence to lynch Woody Allen!
Click to expand...


OJ Simpson was acquitted of murder. Miscarriages of justice occur frequently, do they not?


----------



## Sunshine

skye said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> Mia Farrow should have taken Allen to court!
> 
> 
> Who was stopping her?   Lack of evidence perhaps?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3 babysitters testifying under oath about his behavior is ...........EVIDENCE!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Obviously it wasn't enough  solid  evidence to lynch Woody Allen!
Click to expand...


It absolutely was.  You clearly have not done your reading.  The judge didn't want to put the child through a trial.  But IMO that is a very flimsy excuse even for the times it happened in.  Children confront and testify against their abusers all the time.  The judge was star struck.  OR he, like another I know, was an abuser himself.   You are defending a perp and you know it.


----------



## skye

Sunshine said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 3 babysitters testifying under oath about his behavior is ...........EVIDENCE!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obviously it wasn't enough  solid  evidence to lynch Woody Allen!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It absolutely was.  You clearly have not done your reading.  The judge didn't want to put the child through a trial.  But IMO that is a very flimsy excuse even for the times it happened in.  Children confront and testify against their abusers all the time.  * The judge was star struck.  OR he, like another I know, was an abuser himself.  *
Click to expand...



Oh  my Lord!

Now the judge was an abuser himself!


----------



## Sunshine

tinydancer said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 3 babysitters testifying under oath about his behavior is ...........EVIDENCE!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obviously it wasn't enough  solid  evidence to lynch Woody Allen!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> OJ Simpson was acquitted of murder. Miscarriages of justice occur frequently, do they not?
Click to expand...


Definitely for celebs.  OJ got his comeuppance.  Allen will too.


----------



## tinydancer

Dr Grump said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've put up the testimony of the three care givers. I've put up the court papers where the Justice in question just tore Woody Allen a new orifce over his behaviors.
> 
> His reprehensible behavior with Soon Yi is undisputed. Previn considers Soon Yi dead. This whole family was devastated by Woody's selfish and devious actions.
> 
> But let's take slander. Woody just has to launch a lawsuit to defend his name doesn't he now?
> 
> Dollars to donuts he won't.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You put up testimony from one care giver who didn't like what she saw. Whoop-dee-doo. And the judge did question his behaviour, but didn't convict him. You know that, right?
> 
> As stated, Allen isn't even following this latest piece of Mia drama
Click to expand...


I put up the testimony of two others as well. 

One who testified under oath that Dylan had gone missing on her on the day Dylan remembers getting "finger fucked" in the attic and the other was a care giver who witnessed Woody with Dylan on the couch with no underwear. 

And by the way, this is Dylan's show. Not Mia's.

 Her interview in Vanity Fair is a rarity. Extraordinary woman in her own right with all her humanitarian efforts.

ETA: Of course he was never convicted of anything. He wasn't charged.


----------



## Dr Grump

Sunshine said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 3 babysitters testifying under oath about his behavior is ...........EVIDENCE!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obviously it wasn't enough  solid  evidence to lynch Woody Allen!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It absolutely was.  You clearly have not done your reading.  The judge didn't want to put the child through a trial.  But IMO that is a very flimsy excuse even for the times it happened in.  Children confront and testify against their abusers all the time.  The judge was star struck.  OR he, like another I know, was an abuser himself.   You are defending a perp and you know it.
Click to expand...


Of course the fact the psychiatrists didn't believe Dylan, the rabid DA didn't have enough evidence and there was no physical evidence had nothing to do with him not being charged... no, no, no ..


----------



## freedombecki

jillian said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> You simply can't follow a legal discussion because you and JoeB get your legal knowledge from tabloids. Oh, yea,  sweetie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She's a lawyer. You're not. That much is obvious.
> You do realise you guys are coming across as the Pitchfork Brigade?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> they think he's a new york liberal jew so they have to trash him.
> 
> if he shot an unarmed black kid, they'd be all about that.
Click to expand...

"they think he's a new york liberal jew."

 Actually, Woody Allen is an agnostic/atheist, and he is proud of it. You should read a page of his quotes sometime, sweetie.  



> Not only is there no God, but try getting a plumber on weekends.
> 
> 
> If it turns out that there is a God, I don't think that he's evil. But the worst that you can say about him is that basically he's an underachiever.
> 
> To you, I'm an atheist; to God, I'm the Loyal Opposition.
> 
> If only God would give me some clear sign! Like making a large deposit in my name at a Swiss bank.
> 
> Woody Allen - Biography - IMDb


 His own words tell it.


----------



## tinydancer

Re: Allen not following this? Try googling Woody Allen in the news. His lawyer is even out there freaking out about Mia. 

And Hollywood is circling the wagons around Woody just like they did for Roman "it really wasn't a rape rape" Polanski.


----------



## Connery

skye said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obviously it wasn't enough  solid  evidence to lynch Woody Allen!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but enough so the rest of us can see the truth that he is a child molester that preys on family
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> That's a different Court you are talking about!
> 
> *It's called the Court of Public Opinion*..... .
Click to expand...


That is all that matters in the end. The issue for me  is would a reasonably prudent member of the public allow this man near their child and/or would they allow him to be a role model such as a father, moral guide to their child? 


That is the only issue I see that is worth thinking about after reading what has been said here and the statement issued by the prosecutor, the conduct of his family regarding this situation and how his "family" has progressed over time.


As a result, I would never let him near my child.


----------



## tinydancer

Dr Grump said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obviously it wasn't enough  solid  evidence to lynch Woody Allen!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It absolutely was.  You clearly have not done your reading.  The judge didn't want to put the child through a trial.  But IMO that is a very flimsy excuse even for the times it happened in.  Children confront and testify against their abusers all the time.  The judge was star struck.  OR he, like another I know, was an abuser himself.   You are defending a perp and you know it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course the fact the psychiatrists didn't believe Dylan, the rabid DA didn't have enough evidence and there was no physical evidence had nothing to do with him not being charged... no, no, no ..
Click to expand...


Where are you coming up with your fantasy that there was a rabid DA?


----------



## Dr Grump

tinydancer said:


> I put up the testimony of two others as well.
> 
> One who testified under oath that Dylan had gone missing on her on the day Dylan remembers getting "finger fucked" in the attic and the other was a care giver who witnessed Woody with Dylan on the couch with no underwear.
> 
> And by the way, this is Dylan's show. Not Mia's.
> 
> Her interview in Vanity Fair is a rarity. Extraordinary woman in her own right with all her humanitarian efforts.
> 
> ETA: Of course he was never convicted of anything. He wasn't charged.



A kid going missing in a house of 9 kids for 20 minutes doesn't mean anything. And if you go to the link in the OP it addressing the missing underwear.

Well as long as Mia continues to shill...


----------



## Sunshine

Dr Grump said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obviously it wasn't enough  solid  evidence to lynch Woody Allen!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It absolutely was.  You clearly have not done your reading.  The judge didn't want to put the child through a trial.  But IMO that is a very flimsy excuse even for the times it happened in.  Children confront and testify against their abusers all the time.  The judge was star struck.  OR he, like another I know, was an abuser himself.   You are defending a perp and you know it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course the fact the psychiatrists didn't believe Dylan, the rabid DA didn't have enough evidence and there was no physical evidence had nothing to do with him not being charged... no, no, no ..
Click to expand...


So tell us how a psychiatrist decides if a patient is lying.  Particularly a child who has nothing to gain and everything to lose from the story.  I'd be real interested to know that. 

Someone in psychiatry believes her.  She is an anorexic self mutilator.  She is getting psychiatric care.  And that open letter thing is a therapeutic technique.


----------



## skye

Connery said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> but enough so the rest of us can see the truth that he is a child molester that preys on family
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's a different Court you are talking about!
> 
> *It's called the Court of Public Opinion*..... .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is all that matters in the end. The issue for me  is would a reasonably prudent member of the public allow this man near their child and/or would they allow him to be a role model such as a father, moral guide to their child?
> 
> 
> That is the only issue I see that is worth thinking about after reading what has been said here and the statement issued by the prosecutor, the conduct of his family regarding this situation and how his "family" has progressed over time.
> 
> 
> As a result, I would never let him near my child.
Click to expand...



You know.... I could tell you to take your head out of your ass like you told me a few pages back.... but no way I would say that.

I will  simply tell you that we are all entitled to have our opinions.


----------



## Dr Grump

tinydancer said:


> Where are you coming up with your fantasy that there was a rabid DA?



Oh, sorry, prosecutor (rolls eyes). From the link:

_Woodys ad-hoc press conference made for good television and was widely covered in the press. Less widely disseminated was a news item that appeared in the New York Times five months later (Feb. 24, 1994), which reported that a *disciplinary panel found the actions of County Prosecutor Frank Maco (the probable cause guy) were cause for grave concern* and may have prejudiced the case. It winds up that Maco sent his probable cause statement to the Surrogates Court judge in Manhattan who was still deciding on Allens adoption status of Dylan and Moses, which Mia was trying to annul. The panel wrote, In most circumstances, [Macos comments] would have violated the prosecutors obligation to the accused. [His actions were] inappropriate, unsolicited, and potentially prejudicial. The article states that the agency *could have voted sanctions against Maco ranging from censure to disbarment.* Though the decision was quite damning, Maco got what amounted to a slap on the wrist_


----------



## Dr Grump

Sunshine said:


> So tell us how a psychiatrist decides if a patient is lying.  Particularly a child who has nothing to gain and everything to lose from the story.  I'd be real interested to know that.
> 
> Someone in psychiatry believes her.  She is an anorexic self mutilator.  She is getting psychiatric care.  And that open letter thing is a therapeutic technique.




So if a psychiatrist said he or she did believe Dylan, you'd believe them, right? Unlike a psychologist a psychiatrist is a medically trained doctor, too. They have all sorts of tests and procedures that helps them draw conclusions. What, you think they just say "What happened?", the alleged victim goes "I was raped"...and the psychiatrist goes "I believe/don't believe you" ? Is that what you thinks happens?

A seven year old child has a lot to gain. Getting attention amongst a menagerie of 9 or 10 siblings. A dotting mother paying huge amounts of attention to her. She could have been psychologically damaged on birth, because some people are born with such genes. She might be damaged because Mia is a nutcase. Maybe Woody did molest her. Maybe she is upset that she was adopted and wasn't wanted by her birth parents. Who the fuck knows...


----------



## jillian

Dr Grump said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> So tell us how a psychiatrist decides if a patient is lying.  Particularly a child who has nothing to gain and everything to lose from the story.  I'd be real interested to know that.
> 
> Someone in psychiatry believes her.  She is an anorexic self mutilator.  She is getting psychiatric care.  And that open letter thing is a therapeutic technique.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So if a psychiatrist said he or she did believe Dylan, you'd believe them, right? Unlike a psychologist a psychiatrist is a medically trained doctor, too. They have all sorts of tests and procedures that helps them draw conclusions. What, you think they just say "What happened?", the alleged victim goes "I was raped"...and the psychiatrist goes "I believe/don't believe you" ? Is that what you thinks happens?
> 
> A seven year old child has a lot to gain. Getting attention amongst a menagerie of 9 or 10 siblings. A dotting mother paying huge amounts of attention to her. She could have been psychologically damaged on birth, because some people are born with such genes. She might be damaged because Mia is a nutcase. Maybe Woody did molest her. Maybe she is upset that she was adopted and wasn't wanted by her birth parents. Who the fuck knows...
Click to expand...


a seven year old child can also be coached. and the conclusion drawn by the appellate division decision was not that she was abused. in fact, the issue didn't seem to be raised in the hearing. rather, they said dylan, in particular, was too angry about woody's relationship with soon yi to participate in therapeutic visitation, which is what woody was seeking. at that time there was no claim of abuse as far as i can see. she was, however, enraged with him. and i have no doubt, given a mother so spiteful that she changed his children's names, that her anger was fostered and fed.


----------



## Connery

skye said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's a different Court you are talking about!
> 
> *It's called the Court of Public Opinion*..... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is all that matters in the end. The issue for me  is would a reasonably prudent member of the public allow this man near their child and/or would they allow him to be a role model such as a father, moral guide to their child?
> 
> 
> That is the only issue I see that is worth thinking about after reading what has been said here and the statement issued by the prosecutor, the conduct of his family regarding this situation and how his "family" has progressed over time.
> 
> 
> As a result, I would never let him near my child.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You know.... I could tell you to take your head out of your ass like you told me a few pages back.... but no way I would say that.
> 
> I will  simply tell you that we are all entitled to have our opinions.
Click to expand...



My apologies perhaps I was "jealous"... 

What you stated wayyyyy back there was conclusory without any basis and tried to ram it down my throat. We all are entitled one way or another.   

.....and then we each have our opinions to rest on.


----------



## Sunshine

Dr Grump said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> So tell us how a psychiatrist decides if a patient is lying.  Particularly a child who has nothing to gain and everything to lose from the story.  I'd be real interested to know that.
> 
> Someone in psychiatry believes her.  She is an anorexic self mutilator.  She is getting psychiatric care.  And that open letter thing is a therapeutic technique.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So if a psychiatrist said he or she did believe Dylan, you'd believe them, right? Unlike a psychologist a psychiatrist is a medically trained doctor, too. They have all sorts of tests and procedures that helps them draw conclusions. What, you think they just say "What happened?", the alleged victim goes "I was raped"...and the psychiatrist goes "I believe/don't believe you" ? Is that what you thinks happens?
> 
> A seven year old child has a lot to gain. Getting attention amongst a menagerie of 9 or 10 siblings. A dotting mother paying huge amounts of attention to her. She could have been psychologically damaged on birth, because some people are born with such genes. She might be damaged because Mia is a nutcase. Maybe Woody did molest her. Maybe she is upset that she was adopted and wasn't wanted by her birth parents. Who the fuck knows...
Click to expand...


Well, I am an NP and I practiced in psychiatry for 25 years.  I never treated children, my specialty was adult and geriatric.  But people who have an 'agenda' are pretty easy to spot.  And they usually aren't children.  They don't have to be tested out the wazoo.  And besides, the tests are not to determine if they are lying about an occurrence, but to determine what their pathology is and the best way to treat it.  I can tell you, if someone comes in saying they were raped, she is not a healthy person.   I never treated a self mutilator who was not sexually abused. Those two things go hand in hand.  And this girl is anorexic and a self mutilator.  Self mutilators also dissociate, that is how they are able to cut without feeling pain.  That dissociation is something they learned to do when they were being abused in order to escape it.  Some even suppress the memories and don't recall the event until years later in their lives.  Those are not things people do for attention.

Children the age this girl was when she reported it do not have a sexual vocabulary or repertoire.  They have no idea what the genitalia are there for except to pee.  When they start saying someone did something like touching them or penetrating them, or start perpetrating other children, that is a sure sign they have been perpetrated themselves.  It is the only way they would get that knowledge.  A child that age would be far more believable than would an adult who could be wanting money, disability, or a host of other secondary gains.

The girl was perpetrated and the system copped out on her.


----------



## Sunshine

I should have said I didn't care for very many children.  I did work an  adolescent unit when I was a staff nurse.  Those kids were getting abused in real time.  I simply couldn't take it.  And I admire the ones who could, but I couldn't work there day in and day out.  It was just too much.  It is much easier to work with an adult who has a history of abuse than to work with a child who has the problem currently in their life.


----------



## Sunshine

Connery said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> but enough so the rest of us can see the truth that he is a child molester that preys on family
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's a different Court you are talking about!
> 
> *It's called the Court of Public Opinion*..... .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is all that matters in the end. The issue for me  is would a reasonably prudent member of the public allow this man near their child and/or would they allow him to be a role model such as a father, moral guide to their child?
> 
> 
> That is the only issue I see that is worth thinking about after reading what has been said here and the statement issued by the prosecutor, the conduct of his family regarding this situation and how his "family" has progressed over time.
> 
> 
> *As a result, I would never let him near my child. *
Click to expand...


Good for you!


----------



## boedicca

Woody is totally a child molester.   And it is incredibly creepy how the mediatainment establishment has protected him.


----------



## Sunshine

As long as this has been around, adults still disbelieve little children who have been abused.  That is just unfathomable.


----------



## Dr Grump

Sunshine said:


> Well, I am an NP and I practiced in psychiatry for 25 years.  I never treated children, my specialty was adult and geriatric.  But people who have an 'agenda' are pretty easy to spot.  And they usually aren't children.  They don't have to be tested out the wazoo.  And besides, the tests are not to determine if they are lying about an occurrence, but to determine what their pathology is and the best way to treat it.  I can tell you, if someone comes in saying they were raped, she is not a healthy person.   I never treated a self mutilator who was not sexually abused. Those two things go hand in hand.  And this girl is anorexic and a self mutilator.  Self mutilators also dissociate, that is how they are able to cut without feeling pain.  That dissociation is something they learned to do when they were being abused in order to escape it.  Some even suppress the memories and don't recall the event until years later in their lives.  Those are not things people do for attention.
> 
> Children the age this girl was when she reported it do not have a sexual vocabulary or repertoire.  They have no idea what the genitalia are there for except to pee.  When they start saying someone did something like touching them or penetrating them, or start perpetrating other children, that is a sure sign they have been perpetrated themselves.  It is the only way they would get that knowledge.  A child that age would be far more believable than would an adult who could be wanting money, disability, or a host of other secondary gains.
> 
> The girl was perpetrated and the system copped out on her.



When did the self mutilation start? As 7? At 15? If those problems started later in life who's to say Woody had anything to do with it..


----------



## Dr Grump

Sunshine said:


> As long as this has been around, adults still disbelieve little children who have been abused.  That is just unfathomable.



Well, it's not helped when nutjobs start talkign about naked ritua ls and kids being burned and satanism and crap like that. Stuff that nobody could have hidden. Like the McMartin case in California McMartin preschool trial - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Dr Grump

boedicca said:


> Woody is totally a child molester.   And it is incredibly creepy how the mediatainment establishment has protected him.



I dare you to say that publically, put your name to it...


----------



## Connery

skye said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's a different Court you are talking about!
> 
> *It's called the Court of Public Opinion*..... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is all that matters in the end. The issue for me  is would a reasonably prudent member of the public allow this man near their child and/or would they allow him to be a role model such as a father, moral guide to their child?
> 
> 
> That is the only issue I see that is worth thinking about after reading what has been said here and the statement issued by the prosecutor, the conduct of his family regarding this situation and how his "family" has progressed over time.
> 
> 
> As a result, I would never let him near my child.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> *You know.... I could tell you to take your head out of your ass like you told me a few pages back*....
Click to expand...



You deserve better than that. I said that publicly and it bothered you, therefore I will publicly apologize to you.

Moreover, for me,* "the Court of Public Opinion"* was the most important statement made in this thread.

 [MENTION=40539]skye[/MENTION]


----------



## freedombecki

boedicca said:


> Woody is totally a child molester. And it is incredibly creepy how the mediatainment establishment has protected him.


$omething tell$ me $howbu$ine$$e$ have a $take in $omeone like Woody Allen who $oothe$ their $elfi$h $oul$ by being ju$t a little bit wor$e than the greedie$t among them who make$ them rich a$ Mida$.


----------



## Plasmaball

Gracie said:


> Methinks the loser here is the one defending a perv.



we live in a society where you are innocent until proven guilty. Public opinion is not law, i suggest you understand how our nation works before throwing around verdicts. 

Allen May have actually done this and if proven he should pay for it under the law. He also may not have done this and nothing should happen. 

You would have already been excused from the jury had this gone to a trial. You are unfit and bias.


----------



## Plasmaball

boedicca said:


> Woody is totally a child molester.   And it is incredibly creepy how the mediatainment establishment has protected him.



Proof being?


----------



## tinydancer

boedicca said:


> Woody is totally a child molester.   And it is incredibly creepy how the mediatainment establishment has protected him.



Don't hold back. Tell us how you really feel.


----------



## Sunshine

Dr Grump said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As long as this has been around, adults still disbelieve little children who have been abused.  That is just unfathomable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, it's not helped when nutjobs start talkign about naked ritua ls and kids being burned and satanism and crap like that. Stuff that nobody could have hidden. Like the McMartin case in California McMartin preschool trial - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...


From your link:



> Some of the accusations were described as "bizarre",[5] overlapping with accusations that mirrored the just-starting Satanic ritual abuse panic.[4] It was alleged that, in addition to having been sexually abused, they saw witches fly, traveled in a hot-air balloon, and were taken through underground tunnels.[4] When shown a series of photographs by Danny Davis (the McMartins' lawyer), one child identified actor Chuck Norris as one of the abusers.[20]



Psychiatric interviewing is a skill.  Part of that skill in working with children is to distinguish fact from fantasy.  It is with adults as well.  People can be delusional and make accusations based on those delusions.  When you are dealing with psych patients both children and adults it is of the utmost importance that you NOT put words in their mouths.  

It should proceed:  Tell me what happened?  Did anything else happen?  

Not: Did the person do this?  Did the person do that?  

Unskilled people can do a LOT of damage.  

In the Allen case, I don't think the people working with the girl were unskilled.  And in the current day, she certainly has the symptoms of a history of being sexually abused as a child.  It was NOT the DA who was unwilling to pursue it.  It was NOT for lack of witnesses or evidence.  It was a JUDGE who was either star struck or for some personal reason didn't want the notoriety in his courtroom.  He copped out saying it was for the benefit of the child.


----------



## tinydancer

Interesting time line at this link.

*June 1993: In a scathing judgment against Allen, a Manhattan judge ruled that Farrow should receive custody of the children, and said he was not convinced &#8220;that the evidence proves conclusively that there was no sexual abuse.&#8221; 

He said the psychotherapists who interviewed Dylan Farrow had their judgement &#8220;colored by their loyalty to Mr. Allen,&#8221; according to the Times.

The judge also blasted Allen for his relationship with Previn, saying his relationship with her harmed both her and her adoptive siblings. 

&#8220;Having isolated Soon-Yi from her family, he left her with no visible support system,&#8221; Justice Elliott Wilk wrote.

September 1993: Connecticut state&#8217;s attorney Frank S. Maco announced that while he found &#8220;probable cause&#8221; to prosecute Allen, he was dropping the case because Dylan was too &#8220;fragile&#8221; to deal with a trial.

 Mia Farrow agreed with the decision, he said, and Dylan Farrow provided a similar account in her statement Saturday: 

&#8220;After a custody hearing denied my father visitation rights, my mother declined to pursue criminal charges, despite findings of probable cause by the State of Connecticut &#8211; due to, in the words of the prosecutor, the fragility of the &#8216;child victim,&#8217;&#8221; she wrote.

Maco recently told People that Dylan was &#8220;traumatized to the extent that I did not have a confident witness to testify in any court setting, whether that&#8217;s a closed courtroom or an open courtroom.&#8221;*

Woody Allen Timeline: What Happened to the 1992 Allegations - TheWrap


----------



## Sunshine

Plasmaball said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Methinks the loser here is the one defending a perv.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> we live in a society where you are innocent until proven guilty. Public opinion is not law, i suggest you understand how our nation works before throwing around verdicts.
> 
> Allen May have actually done this and if proven he should pay for it under the law. He also may not have done this and nothing should happen.
> 
> You would have already been excused from the jury had this gone to a trial. You are unfit and bias.
Click to expand...


We also live in a society where a judge will crap out on an innocent child.


----------



## Plasmaball

Connery said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you capable of seeing the devastation wreaked upon the family or at least address my comments in answer to your post?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The "devastation" is a self created devastation  Connery!   they are whipping up their misery...all because Mia Farrow hates her ex partner... she can not prove shit .... all we have here is hearsay and the courts are not going to go for that!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No skye here is an excerpt, "Allen was investigated on child molestation claims for the 1992 accusation in Connecticut but prosecutors elected not to charge him.
> 
> The handling of the investigation was criticized after Litchfield County state attorney Frank S. Maco said in a press conference that he believed there was "probable cause'' to charge Allen but decided against prosecution partly to avoid a traumatic trial for the young girl".
> 
> The Australian
> 
> What do you have to say now or are you still dodging the issue.
Click to expand...


uh thats rather lame...sake of the child? You never see that


----------



## tinydancer

Ronan really puts things in perspective. From a fabulous article entitled *The quiet victory of Mia & the kids Woody left behind*

* Ronan has had no contact with Woody Allen since the split. 

&#8220;He&#8217;s my father married to my sister,&#8221; Ronan has said. &#8220;That makes me his son and his brother-in-law. 

That is such a moral transgression . . . I lived with all these adopted children, so they are my family. To say Soon-Yi was not my sister is an insult to all adopted children.&#8221;*

The quiet victory of Mia & the kids Woody left behind | New York Post


----------



## tinydancer

Plasmaball said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> The "devastation" is a self created devastation  Connery!   they are whipping up their misery...all because Mia Farrow hates her ex partner... she can not prove shit .... all we have here is hearsay and the courts are not going to go for that!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No skye here is an excerpt, "Allen was investigated on child molestation claims for the 1992 accusation in Connecticut but prosecutors elected not to charge him.
> 
> The handling of the investigation was criticized after Litchfield County state attorney Frank S. Maco said in a press conference that he believed there was "probable cause'' to charge Allen but decided against prosecution partly to avoid a traumatic trial for the young girl".
> 
> The Australian
> 
> What do you have to say now or are you still dodging the issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> uh thats rather lame...sake of the child? You never see that
Click to expand...


Frank Maco is still saying that he believed Dylan to be in such a fragile state he decided not to pursue charges.


----------



## Plasmaball

tinydancer said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> No skye here is an excerpt, "Allen was investigated on child molestation claims for the 1992 accusation in Connecticut but prosecutors elected not to charge him.
> 
> The handling of the investigation was criticized after Litchfield County state attorney Frank S. Maco said in a press conference that he believed there was "probable cause'' to charge Allen but decided against prosecution partly to avoid a traumatic trial for the young girl".
> 
> The Australian
> 
> What do you have to say now or are you still dodging the issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> uh thats rather lame...sake of the child? You never see that
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Frank Maco is still saying that he believed Dylan to be in such a fragile state he decided not to pursue charges.
Click to expand...


you dont do that....


----------



## jillian

Plasmaball said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> uh thats rather lame...sake of the child? You never see that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Frank Maco is still saying that he believed Dylan to be in such a fragile state he decided not to pursue charges.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you dont do that....
Click to expand...


he was disciplined for his handling of the case. 

nothing he says really matters.

and no, they don't decide not to prosecute because a victim is "fragile". they only don't prosecute if they don't have evidence.


----------



## Sunshine

Plasmaball said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> uh thats rather lame...sake of the child? You never see that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Frank Maco is still saying that he believed Dylan to be in such a fragile state he decided not to pursue charges.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you dont do that....
Click to expand...


You do if you are protecting the perp.


----------



## jillian

Sunshine said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Frank Maco is still saying that he believed Dylan to be in such a fragile state he decided not to pursue charges.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you dont do that....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You do if you are protecting the perp.
Click to expand...


there's still no 'perp'  no matter how many times you repeat the word.


----------



## Sunshine

tinydancer said:


> Ronan really puts things in perspective. From a fabulous article entitled *The quiet victory of Mia & the kids Woody left behind*
> 
> * Ronan has had no contact with Woody Allen since the split.
> 
> Hes my father married to my sister, Ronan has said. That makes me his son and his brother-in-law.
> 
> That is such a moral transgression . . . I lived with all these adopted children, so they are my family. To say Soon-Yi was not my sister is an insult to all adopted children.*
> 
> The quiet victory of Mia & the kids Woody left behind | New York Post



I had an adopted sister and this puts me in mind of something her son said when she died last year.  The family was all together in a room, and he said, 'she was here before all of us.'  That is the case with Farrow's adopted daughter.  She was there before all of the others, and they came into the world and lived knowing her as their sister.


----------



## Sunshine

jillian said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> you dont do that....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do if you are protecting the perp.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> there's still no 'perp'  no matter how many times you repeat the word.
Click to expand...


Defender of pedophile is pedophile defender.  No surprise.


----------



## BDBoop

skye said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> The only pattern shown here is the one of your stupidity!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Would you remain blind if it was someone close to you he abused?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> of course not!
> 
> if it's proven that the terrible deed was done I would certainly not remain blind!
> 
> otherwise I am not going to lynch  him just because I find him "creepy"...... he might be creepy but that doesn't mean he is a child molester.
> 
> in the absence of proof of his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, I am not going to ruin a life just to make Mia Farrow happy....in many cases lives have been destroyed for things they "probably did" but actually didn't do.
Click to expand...


I am glad you came back to the thread.


----------



## RosieS

BDBoop said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Would you remain blind if it was someone close to you he abused?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> of course not!
> 
> if it's proven that the terrible deed was done I would certainly not remain blind!
> 
> otherwise I am not going to lynch  him just because I find him "creepy"...... he might be creepy but that doesn't mean he is a child molester.
> 
> in the absence of proof of his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, I am not going to ruin a life just to make Mia Farrow happy....in many cases lives have been destroyed for things they "probably did" but actually didn't do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am glad you came back to the thread.
Click to expand...


So am I, Skye  

Regards from Rosie


----------



## Plasmaball

Sunshine said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Frank Maco is still saying that he believed Dylan to be in such a fragile state he decided not to pursue charges.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you dont do that....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You do if you are protecting the perp.
Click to expand...


uh no....regardless you people are typical, and well vile. This is why you should be banned from being on a jury.


----------



## Plasmaball

Sunshine said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> You do if you are protecting the perp.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there's still no 'perp'  no matter how many times you repeat the word.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Defender of pedophile is pedophile defender.  No surprise.
Click to expand...


yawn


----------



## Connery

Plasmaball said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> The "devastation" is a self created devastation  Connery!   they are whipping up their misery...all because Mia Farrow hates her ex partner... she can not prove shit .... all we have here is hearsay and the courts are not going to go for that!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No skye here is an excerpt, "Allen was investigated on child molestation claims for the 1992 accusation in Connecticut but prosecutors elected not to charge him.
> 
> The handling of the investigation was criticized after Litchfield County state attorney Frank S. Maco said in a press conference that he believed there was "probable cause'' to charge Allen but decided against prosecution partly to avoid a traumatic trial for the young girl".
> 
> The Australian
> 
> What do you have to say now or are you still dodging the issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> uh thats rather lame...sake of the child? You never see that
Click to expand...


Are you a trial attorney/litigator?


----------



## Plasmaball

Connery said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> No skye here is an excerpt, "Allen was investigated on child molestation claims for the 1992 accusation in Connecticut but prosecutors elected not to charge him.
> 
> The handling of the investigation was criticized after Litchfield County state attorney Frank S. Maco said in a press conference that he believed there was "probable cause'' to charge Allen but decided against prosecution partly to avoid a traumatic trial for the young girl".
> 
> The Australian
> 
> What do you have to say now or are you still dodging the issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> uh thats rather lame...sake of the child? You never see that
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you a trial attorney/litigator?
Click to expand...


nope, but since we typically hold child molesters in contempt, letting one go because of the child reeks of weak.


----------



## Sunshine

Connery said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> No skye here is an excerpt, "Allen was investigated on child molestation claims for the 1992 accusation in Connecticut but prosecutors elected not to charge him.
> 
> The handling of the investigation was criticized after Litchfield County state attorney Frank S. Maco said in a press conference that he believed there was "probable cause'' to charge Allen but decided against prosecution partly to avoid a traumatic trial for the young girl".
> 
> The Australian
> 
> What do you have to say now or are you still dodging the issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> uh thats rather lame...sake of the child? You never see that
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you a trial attorney/litigator?
Click to expand...


Snicker snicker. Chortle Chortle.  *Horselaugh! *


----------



## Sunshine

Plasmaball said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> uh thats rather lame...sake of the child? You never see that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you a trial attorney/litigator?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> nope, but since we typically hold child molesters in contempt, letting one go because of the child reeks of weak.
Click to expand...


Judges can have their own agenda.


----------



## Connery

Plasmaball said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> uh thats rather lame...sake of the child? You never see that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you a trial attorney/litigator?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> nope
Click to expand...


Thanks


----------



## hazlnut

skye said:


> I have no idea if Woody Allen is a molester  or not.
> 
> All I know is that Mia Farrow is one snake of an ex wife.




Mia Farrow didn't write the open letter.

Her daughter did.


And it can only be one of 3 things.

1) Vindictiveness beyond comprehension.  (just doesn't likely that a person would that intense of grudge all these years and go to such deceptive lengths to punish him for what he did to his mom + given the tone and nature of her letter, she'd have to be sociopath)

2) False memories (as in McMartin Preschool)

3) Truth.


Again, given the tone and nature of her letter, the details about being sickened every time she sees him in the media -- it doesn't seem made up -- only a sociopath could go to that length.  She believes what she's saying -- IMO -- true or not.


----------



## Plasmaball

Sunshine said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you a trial attorney/litigator?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nope, but since we typically hold child molesters in contempt, letting one go because of the child reeks of weak.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Judges can have their own agenda.
Click to expand...


yawn...you are boring...you have nothing, moving on


----------



## Sunshine

hazlnut said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea if Woody Allen is a molester  or not.
> 
> All I know is that Mia Farrow is one snake of an ex wife.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mia Farrow didn't write the open letter.
> 
> Her daughter did.
> 
> 
> And it can only be one of 3 things.
> 
> 1) Vindictiveness beyond comprehension.  (just doesn't likely that a person would that intense of grudge all these years and go to such deceptive lengths to punish him for what he did to his mom + given the tone and nature of her letter, she'd have to be sociopath)
> 
> 2) False memories (as in McMartin Preschool)
> 
> 3) Truth.
> 
> 
> Again, given the tone and nature of her letter, the details about being sickened every time she sees him in the media -- it doesn't seem made up -- only a sociopath could go to that length.  She believes what she's saying -- IMO -- true or not.
Click to expand...


I don't think the McMartin incident was 'false memories.'  I think they had unskilled interviewers who put words in the mouths of the children.  There are a lot of skill levels in every profession.  But even a moderately skilled person can look at the symptomology of the adult in this case and recognize that she was sexually abused as a child.

I will add that it does happen from time to time that a vindictive mother will coach a child on making accusations.  But those cases are easy for the skilled interviewer to spot.  Once you deviate from what was coached, they can't keep up the tone.


----------



## Plasmaball

Connery said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you a trial attorney/litigator?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nope
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Thanks
Click to expand...


you dont throw around the child toucher thing. May you never be on the end of something like that because you pissed off a woman. ( IF its not true ) 

Shame really.


----------



## jillian

Connery said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> No skye here is an excerpt, "Allen was investigated on child molestation claims for the 1992 accusation in Connecticut but prosecutors elected not to charge him.
> 
> The handling of the investigation was criticized after Litchfield County state attorney Frank S. Maco said in a press conference that he believed there was "probable cause'' to charge Allen but decided against prosecution partly to avoid a traumatic trial for the young girl".
> 
> The Australian
> 
> What do you have to say now or are you still dodging the issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> uh thats rather lame...sake of the child? You never see that
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you a trial attorney/litigator?
Click to expand...


are you, hon?


----------



## Connery

jillian said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> uh thats rather lame...sake of the child? You never see that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you a trial attorney/litigator?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> are you, hon?
Click to expand...


yea hon

I always discuss the emotional impact of a trial with the client and then ask them to rest on that knowledge before we continue


are you, hon?


----------



## Plasmaball

Connery said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you a trial attorney/litigator?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> are you, hon?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> yea hon
> 
> I always discuss the emotional impact of a trial with the client and then ask them to rest on that knowledge before we continue
> 
> 
> are you, hon?
Click to expand...


evidence that you are?


----------



## Connery

Plasmaball said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> are you, hon?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yea hon
> 
> I always discuss the emotional impact of a trial with the client and then ask them to rest on that knowledge before we continue
> 
> 
> are you, hon?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> evidence that you are?
Click to expand...


that I am an attorney?


----------



## BDBoop

Connery said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> yea hon
> 
> I always discuss the emotional impact of a trial with the client and then ask them to rest on that knowledge before we continue
> 
> 
> are you, hon?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> evidence that you are?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> that I am an attorney?
Click to expand...


Since you are, I'm rather wondering why you are ignoring the two adult survivors of sexual molestation in this thread, and their perceptions of this situation.


----------



## jillian

Connery said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you a trial attorney/litigator?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> are you, hon?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> yea hon
> 
> I always discuss the emotional impact of a trial with the client and then ask them to rest on that knowledge before we continue
> 
> are you, hon?
Click to expand...


yes. and prosecutors who do sexual abuse cases know that their clients are always fragile. it is their job to walk their victim through the process&#8230; in the family case, they might not have even needed to put the child on the stand, but could have possibly used validators who advance the child's case. (since the visitation matter had no witness confrontation issues in that regard).

i've never seen an attorney not pursue a case because of a "fragile" witness.

and you know very well what the prosecutor being admonished for his behavior means.

what i'll also say is one doesn't need to be an attorney to understand how unreliable the complain is and how, given that the statute of limitations has run, the "open letter"i is only intended to malign&#8230; just like her mother did when she and he broke up.


----------



## Connery

BDBoop said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> evidence that you are?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that I am an attorney?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Since you are, I'm rather wondering why you are ignoring the two adult survivors of sexual molestation in this thread, and their perceptions of this situation.
Click to expand...


Get there posts and present them here, more importantly, what relevancy does that have to do with my position (below)?



Connery said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> but enough so the rest of us can see the truth that he is a child molester that preys on family
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's a different Court you are talking about!
> 
> *It's called the Court of Public Opinion*..... .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is all that matters in the end. The issue for me  is would a reasonably prudent member of the public allow this man near their child and/or would they allow him to be a role model such as a father, moral guide to their child?
> 
> 
> That is the only issue I see that is worth thinking about after reading what has been said here and the statement issued by the prosecutor, the conduct of his family regarding this situation and how his "family" has progressed over time.
> 
> 
> As a result, I would never let him near my child.
Click to expand...


----------



## BDBoop

The posts are by RosieS and I. You obviously already dismissed them, so I won't be dragging them to the forefront again. 

Thank you for your time.


----------



## Gracie

I see skye is still frothing over Mia and not the issue of DYLAN claiming she was molested. Mia this, Mia that. Obviously Skye has issues with Mia Farrow.


----------



## Connery

jillian said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> are you, hon?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yea hon
> 
> I always discuss the emotional impact of a trial with the client and then ask them to rest on that knowledge before we continue
> 
> are you, hon?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> yes. and prosecutors who do sexual abuse cases know that their clients are always fragile. it is their job to walk their victim through the process&#8230; in the family case, they might not have even needed to put the child on the stand, but could have possibly used validators who advance the child's case. (since the visitation matter had no witness confrontation issues in that regard).
> 
> i've never seen an attorney not pursue a case because of a "fragile" witness.
> 
> and you know very well what the prosecutor being admonished for his behavior means.
> .
Click to expand...


I addressed your issues in a previous post. There are other mitigating factors involved here that neither you or I are privy to. Most importantly, the age of the victim is paramount. Nothing is plain vanilla, no two cases are the same and zealously protecting the legitimate the interests of the client carries a different and more cautious standard with a 7 year old or a child of similar  age. I am not going to second guess the prosecutor or why he made his decision. It is a done deal. 

I have not pursued cases and referred them out  at least once because of this type of situation.


----------



## Gracie

Plasmaball said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Methinks the loser here is the one defending a perv.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> we live in a society where you are innocent until proven guilty. Public opinion is not law, i suggest you understand how our nation works before throwing around verdicts.
> 
> Allen May have actually done this and if proven he should pay for it under the law. He also may not have done this and nothing should happen.
> 
> You would have already been excused from the jury had this gone to a trial. You are unfit and bias.
Click to expand...


Good. Cuz I would say hang him by his balls.


----------



## Connery

BDBoop said:


> The posts are by RosieS and I. *You obviously already dismissed them, so I won't be dragging them to the forefront again*.
> 
> Thank you for your time.



You have no idea what I have done ...you are looking for a fight, not an intelligent discussion...I suggest you go elsewhere.

I have set forth my position, you have dismissed it......


----------



## Dr Grump

Sunshine said:


> I don't think the McMartin incident was 'false memories.'  I think they had unskilled interviewers who put words in the mouths of the children.  There are a lot of skill levels in every profession.  But even a moderately skilled person can look at the symptomology of the adult in this case and recognize that she was sexually abused as a child.



Re the McMartin case:

_ Judy Johnson, mother of one of the Manhattan Beach, California, preschool's young students, complained to the police that her son had been sodomized by her estranged husband and by McMartin teacher Ray Buckey.

<snip> 

Johnson also made several more accusations, including that people at the daycare had *sexual encounters with animals*, that "*Peggy drilled a child under the arms*" and "*Ray flew in the air*."[1][5] Ray Buckey was questioned, but was not prosecuted due to lack of evidence. _

Estranged husband, sexual encounters with animals, drilling kids, and Ray flying..

Lots to believe there.... 

This is why I find your _opinion _dangerous. People make shit up all the time with nothing to back it up and people like you run with it. It's beyond awful....


----------



## jillian

Connery said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> yea hon
> 
> I always discuss the emotional impact of a trial with the client and then ask them to rest on that knowledge before we continue
> 
> are you, hon?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yes. and prosecutors who do sexual abuse cases know that their clients are always fragile. it is their job to walk their victim through the process in the family case, they might not have even needed to put the child on the stand, but could have possibly used validators who advance the child's case. (since the visitation matter had no witness confrontation issues in that regard).
> 
> i've never seen an attorney not pursue a case because of a "fragile" witness.
> 
> and you know very well what the prosecutor being admonished for his behavior means.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I addressed your issues in a previous post. There are other mitigating factors involved here that neither you or I are privy to. Most importantly, the age of the victim is paramount. Nothing is plain vanilla, no two cases are the same and zealously protecting the legitimate the interests of the client carries a different and more cautious standard with a 7 year old a child of similar  age. I am not going to second guess the prosecutor or why he made his decision. It is a done deal.
> 
> I have not pursued cases and referred them out  at least once because of this type of situation.
Click to expand...


any mitigating factors, as you call them, would be the subject of speculation. and given the fact that the prosecutor was smacked on the wrist, i think we can agree that no one believed his excuse. if you also recall, the reason he got smacked down was talking about the case when he wasn't bringing charges. that was inappropriate and unethical.

i don't have to second guess him. that was done for me by the powers that be.


----------



## Gracie

Dr Grump said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think the McMartin incident was 'false memories.'  I think they had unskilled interviewers who put words in the mouths of the children.  There are a lot of skill levels in every profession.  But even a moderately skilled person can look at the symptomology of the adult in this case and recognize that she was sexually abused as a child.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Re the McMartin case:
> 
> _ Judy Johnson, mother of one of the Manhattan Beach, California, preschool's young students, complained to the police that her son had been sodomized by her estranged husband and by McMartin teacher Ray Buckey.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> Johnson also made several more accusations, including that people at the daycare had *sexual encounters with animals*, that "*Peggy drilled a child under the arms*" and "*Ray flew in the air*."[1][5] Ray Buckey was questioned, but was not prosecuted due to lack of evidence. _
> 
> Estranged husband, sexual encounters with animals, drilling kids, and Ray flying..
> 
> Lots to believe there....
> 
> This is why I find your _opinion _dangerous. People make shit up all the time with nothing to back it up and people like you run with it. It's beyond awful....
Click to expand...



You weren't speaking to me, but Allen marrying his daughter is enough to make the scales swing towards Perv rather than Innocent.


----------



## skye

Gracie said:


> I see skye is still frothing over Mia and not the issue of DYLAN claiming she was molested. Mia this, Mia that. Obviously Skye has issues with Mia Farrow.




 still mumbling about skye?  obviously somebody has issues with skye!


----------



## BDBoop

Connery said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> The posts are by RosieS and I. *You obviously already dismissed them, so I won't be dragging them to the forefront again*.
> 
> Thank you for your time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have no idea what I have done ...you are looking for a fight, not an intelligent discussion...I suggest you go elsewhere.
> 
> I have set forth my position, you have dismissed it......
Click to expand...


Did you address our posts when posted? No? Then I know what you did.


----------



## Dr Grump

Gracie said:


> You weren't speaking to me, but Allen marrying his daughter is enough to make the scales swing towards Perv rather than Innocent.



It is weird for sure. The jury is out.


----------



## Connery

jillian said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> yes. and prosecutors who do sexual abuse cases know that their clients are always fragile. it is their job to walk their victim through the process in the family case, they might not have even needed to put the child on the stand, but could have possibly used validators who advance the child's case. (since the visitation matter had no witness confrontation issues in that regard).
> 
> i've never seen an attorney not pursue a case because of a "fragile" witness.
> 
> and you know very well what the prosecutor being admonished for his behavior means.
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I addressed your issues in a previous post. There are other mitigating factors involved here that neither you or I are privy to. Most importantly, the age of the victim is paramount. Nothing is plain vanilla, no two cases are the same and zealously protecting the legitimate the interests of the client carries a different and more cautious standard with a 7 year old a child of similar  age. I am not going to second guess the prosecutor or why he made his decision. It is a done deal.
> 
> I have not pursued cases and referred them out  at least once because of this type of situation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> any mitigating factors, as you call them, would be the subject of speculation. and given *the fact that the prosecutor was smacked on the wris**t,* i think we can agree that no one believed his excuse. *if you also recall, the reason he got smacked down was talking about the case when he wasn't bringing charges. that was inappropriate and unethical*.
> 
> i don't have to second guess him. that was done for me by the powers that be.
Click to expand...


What bearing does his getting smacked on the wrist for discussing the case when he was not going to prosecute the matter have to do with Allen's guilt or innocence. That would speak more to the attorney's lack of professionalism and breach of ethical cannons.

If you see my post above, I have one issue regarding Allen, "would a reasonably prudent member of the public allow this man near their child and/or would they allow him to be a role model such as a father, moral guide to their child?"


----------



## BDBoop

BDBoop said:


> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fron the linked article in the OP:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Would you feel comfortable leaving your little girl with him?  You seem to be defending him vehemently for some strange reason.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There are facts. I provided the facts. She was not his adopted daughter, or his stepdaughter.
> 
> I have serious doubts that he molested the seven year-old. There is no allegation that he raped her.
> 
> I myself lived what everybody is accusing Woody of. My mom remarried when I was four. He was my stepdad. He adopted me in fifth grade, molested me in sixth. My mom found pictures ... So it stopped after seven months - the 'hands-on' stuff, anyway.
> 
> She stayed with him.
> 
> What happened to me was completely different than what happened with Soon-yi, as I posted. But everybody is trying to paint her story to look like mine.
> 
> It wasn't. He was not her adoptive father, her stepfather, her mom's live-in. He never even did overnighters at Mia's.
> 
> I read and responded to the article in the OP. it feels like Skye is the only other person who actually did the same.
Click to expand...


There are many people in this thread who refused to damn Woody for what he MIGHT have done. I find it odd that somebody who alleges he is an attorney would pay such scant attention to the law.


----------



## Esmeralda

Connery said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> that I am an attorney?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Since you are, I'm rather wondering why you are ignoring the two adult survivors of sexual molestation in this thread, and their perceptions of this situation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Get there posts and present them here, more importantly, what relevancy does that have to do with my position (below)?
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's a different Court you are talking about!
> 
> *It's called the Court of Public Opinion*..... .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is all that matters in the end. The issue for me  is would a reasonably prudent member of the public allow this man near their child and/or would they allow him to be a role model such as a father, moral guide to their child?
> 
> 
> That is the only issue I see that is worth thinking about after reading what has been said here and the statement issued by the prosecutor, the conduct of his family regarding this situation and how his "family" has progressed over time.
> 
> 
> As a result, I would never let him near my child.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


The problem with some, or perhaps many, adults who experienced abuse as children, is that some see it 'everywhere.'  It's like women who have experinced abusive husbands.  They seem to be always assessing other marriages based on what they experienced, that men in general tend to be abusers.  My point is that rather than having a better take on whether or  not abuse is taking place, they have a skewed vision of it and may tend to see it more often, or they my think that there is only one way to assess if it happens, that they have special insight, but they are, in fact, only seeing the situation from the pov of how they experienced it.


----------



## Gracie

skye said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> I see skye is still frothing over Mia and not the issue of DYLAN claiming she was molested. Mia this, Mia that. Obviously Skye has issues with Mia Farrow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> still mumbling about skye?  obviously somebody has issues with skye!
Click to expand...



We bump heads, but you are funny and I like ya anyway. 

But you're still


----------



## BDBoop

Connery said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> I addressed your issues in a previous post. There are other mitigating factors involved here that neither you or I are privy to. Most importantly, the age of the victim is paramount. Nothing is plain vanilla, no two cases are the same and zealously protecting the legitimate the interests of the client carries a different and more cautious standard with a 7 year old a child of similar  age. I am not going to second guess the prosecutor or why he made his decision. It is a done deal.
> 
> I have not pursued cases and referred them out  at least once because of this type of situation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> any mitigating factors, as you call them, would be the subject of speculation. and given *the fact that the prosecutor was smacked on the wris**t,* i think we can agree that no one believed his excuse. *if you also recall, the reason he got smacked down was talking about the case when he wasn't bringing charges. that was inappropriate and unethical*.
> 
> i don't have to second guess him. that was done for me by the powers that be.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What bearing does his getting smacked on the wrist for discussing the case when he was not going to prosecute the matter have to do with Allen's guilt or innocence. That would speak more to the attorney's lack of professionalism and breach of ethical cannons.
> 
> If you see my post above, I have one issue regarding Allen, "would a reasonably prudent member of the public allow this man near their child and/or would they allow him to be a role model such as a father, moral guide to their child?"
Click to expand...


Which is still not the question. I wouldn't leave my child with anybody other than family. So that's a strawman, I do believe. 

I also believe you've made that the question so you don't have to own that it is not likely he is guilty of molesting the seven year-old, because there is no evidence.


----------



## Dr Grump

TD and Sunshine remind me of this clip of The Newsroom where Don Keefer makes up a story about somebody and runs with it. Other news agencies pick up on it and insist it is true even though he tells them that the group that the politician made the speech to doesn't even exist and he made it up. You can lead a horse to water...


----------



## Gracie

> I have one issue regarding Allen, "would a reasonably prudent member of the public allow this man near their child and/or would they allow him to be a role model such as a father, moral guide to their child?"



Oh HELL no. And I'm willing to bet a nickel those who are defending him wouldn't either because that doubt has already been planted, watered and the seed sprouted.


----------



## BDBoop

Esmeralda said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> Since you are, I'm rather wondering why you are ignoring the two adult survivors of sexual molestation in this thread, and their perceptions of this situation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Get there posts and present them here, more importantly, what relevancy does that have to do with my position (below)?
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is all that matters in the end. The issue for me  is would a reasonably prudent member of the public allow this man near their child and/or would they allow him to be a role model such as a father, moral guide to their child?
> 
> 
> That is the only issue I see that is worth thinking about after reading what has been said here and the statement issued by the prosecutor, the conduct of his family regarding this situation and how his "family" has progressed over time.
> 
> 
> As a result, I would never let him near my child.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The problem with some, or perhaps many, adults who experienced abuse as children, is that some see it 'everywhere.'  It's like women who have experinced abusive husbands.  They seem to be always assessing other marriages based on what they experienced, that men in general tend to be abusers.  My point is that rather than having a better take on whether or  not abuse is taking place, they have a skewed vision of it and may tend to see it more often, or they my think that there is only one way to assess if it happens, that they have special insight, but they are, in fact, only seeing the situation from the pov of how they experienced it.
Click to expand...


Except there are two adult survivors in this thread who believe Woody did not molest Dylan. *if that is the correct child's name*


----------



## BDBoop

Dr Grump said:


> TD and Sunshine remind me of this clip of The Newsroom where Don Keefer makes up a story about somebody and runs with it. Other news agencies pick up on it and insist it is true even though he tells them that the group that the politician made the speech to doesn't even exist and he made it up. You can lead a horse to water...
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Y6nEgnvQIw



OT: I'm gonna miss that show.


----------



## Gracie

> not likely he is guilty of molesting the seven year-old, because there is no evidence.



I don't have any evidence either. Nor my sister. What evidence you see is my ups and downs. My moods. What you DON'T see is stuff I prefer not to talk about on a public message board that will be archived and used later on as a weapon. 
We carry scars. Forever. Fuck the evidence. I AM the evidence. So is my sister.
The old bat finally kicked the bucket. Dad died long before her. My life is fucked up big time and I lay most of it at that old bats feet.

And with that said...I'm done. It's really frustrating. I can imagine how Dylan feels. AND Mia.


----------



## skye

Gracie said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> I see skye is still frothing over Mia and not the issue of DYLAN claiming she was molested. Mia this, Mia that. Obviously Skye has issues with Mia Farrow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> still mumbling about skye?  obviously somebody has issues with skye!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> We bump heads, but you are funny and I like ya anyway.
> 
> But you're still
Click to expand...



I like ya too!!!!

...regardless the fact  you don't  have any idea what you are talking about in the Woody Allen case....


----------



## Connery

BDBoop said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> any mitigating factors, as you call them, would be the subject of speculation. and given *the fact that the prosecutor was smacked on the wris**t,* i think we can agree that no one believed his excuse. *if you also recall, the reason he got smacked down was talking about the case when he wasn't bringing charges. that was inappropriate and unethical*.
> 
> i don't have to second guess him. that was done for me by the powers that be.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What bearing does his getting smacked on the wrist for discussing the case when he was not going to prosecute the matter have to do with Allen's guilt or innocence. That would speak more to the attorney's lack of professionalism and breach of ethical cannons.
> 
> If you see my post above, I have one issue regarding Allen, "would a reasonably prudent member of the public allow this man near their child and/or would they allow him to be a role model such as a father, moral guide to their child?"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which is still not the question. I wouldn't leave my child with anybody other than family. So that's a strawman, I do believe.
> 
> I also believe you've made that the question so you don't have to own that it is not likely he is guilty of molesting the seven year-old, because there is no evidence.
Click to expand...


No you have no idea what I am talking about and are injecting your own very subjective standard. Further, your position is fallacious because children are left with those other than their parents in many, many ways such as school and extra curricular activities at least I do that. I assess every single person that will be with my child before I leave my child with them, that includes play dates and birthday parties. That is what I am talking about.

I am not here to decide the guilt of a man that has not been to trial. I am here to discuss Woody Allen and view his acts and how they effect the family including the person who made that statement which comprises the body of this discussion.


You want to decide his guilt or innocence there are plenty of people here to do that with.


----------



## jillian

Gracie said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think the McMartin incident was 'false memories.'  I think they had unskilled interviewers who put words in the mouths of the children.  There are a lot of skill levels in every profession.  But even a moderately skilled person can look at the symptomology of the adult in this case and recognize that she was sexually abused as a child.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Re the McMartin case:
> 
> _ Judy Johnson, mother of one of the Manhattan Beach, California, preschool's young students, complained to the police that her son had been sodomized by her estranged husband and by McMartin teacher Ray Buckey.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> Johnson also made several more accusations, including that people at the daycare had *sexual encounters with animals*, that "*Peggy drilled a child under the arms*" and "*Ray flew in the air*."[1][5] Ray Buckey was questioned, but was not prosecuted due to lack of evidence. _
> 
> Estranged husband, sexual encounters with animals, drilling kids, and Ray flying..
> 
> Lots to believe there....
> 
> This is why I find your _opinion _dangerous. People make shit up all the time with nothing to back it up and people like you run with it. It's beyond awful....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You weren't speaking to me, but Allen marrying his daughter is enough to make the scales swing towards Perv rather than Innocent.
Click to expand...


she was mia farrow and andre previn's daughter.

creepy but apparently he and soon yi worked out ok, didn't they?


----------



## Gracie

skye said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> still mumbling about skye?  obviously somebody has issues with skye!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We bump heads, but you are funny and I like ya anyway.
> 
> But you're still
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I like ya too!!!!
> 
> ...regardless the fact  you don't  have any idea what you are talking about in the Woody Allen case....
Click to expand...


Neither do you


----------



## Connery

Gracie said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> We bump heads, but you are funny and I like ya anyway.
> 
> But you're still
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I like ya too!!!!
> 
> ...regardless the fact  you don't  have any idea what you are talking about in the Woody Allen case....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Neither do you
Click to expand...


The only two people who do are Allen and Dylan.


----------



## BDBoop

Connery said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> What bearing does his getting smacked on the wrist for discussing the case when he was not going to prosecute the matter have to do with Allen's guilt or innocence. That would speak more to the attorney's lack of professionalism and breach of ethical cannons.
> 
> If you see my post above, I have one issue regarding Allen, "would a reasonably prudent member of the public allow this man near their child and/or would they allow him to be a role model such as a father, moral guide to their child?"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which is still not the question. I wouldn't leave my child with anybody other than family. So that's a strawman, I do believe.
> 
> I also believe you've made that the question so you don't have to own that it is not likely he is guilty of molesting the seven year-old, because there is no evidence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No you have no idea what I am talking about and are injecting your own very subjective standard. Further, your position is fallacious because children are left with those other than their parents in many, many ways such as school and extra curricular activities at least I do that. I assess every single person that will be with my child before I leave my child with them, that includes play dates and birthday parties. That is what I am talking about.
> 
> I am not here to decide the guilt of a man that has not been to trial. I am here to discuss Woody Allen and view his acts and how they effect the family including the person who made that statement which comprises the body of this discussion.
> 
> 
> You want to decide his guilt or innocence there are plenty of people here to do that with.
Click to expand...


Okay -- so you absolutely truly have nothing to do with the thread, and what's being discussed here? Your responses make much more sense in that light.


----------



## RosieS

Esmeralda said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> Since you are, I'm rather wondering why you are ignoring the two adult survivors of sexual molestation in this thread, and their perceptions of this situation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Get there posts and present them here, more importantly, what relevancy does that have to do with my position (below)?
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is all that matters in the end. The issue for me  is would a reasonably prudent member of the public allow this man near their child and/or would they allow him to be a role model such as a father, moral guide to their child?
> 
> 
> That is the only issue I see that is worth thinking about after reading what has been said here and the statement issued by the prosecutor, the conduct of his family regarding this situation and how his "family" has progressed over time.
> 
> 
> As a result, I would never let him near my child.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The problem with some, or perhaps many, adults who experienced abuse as children, is that some see it 'everywhere.'  It's like women who have experinced abusive husbands.  They seem to be always assessing other marriages based on what they experienced, that men in general tend to be abusers.  My point is that rather than having a better take on whether or  not abuse is taking place, they have a skewed vision of it and may tend to see it more often, or they my think that there is only one way to assess if it happens, that they have special insight, but they are, in fact, only seeing the situation from the pov of how they experienced it.
Click to expand...


And some of us feel like  some do about false rape accusations - it is a horrid thing to do to present and future victims.

To take  fears that many kids share, to take common family interactions, and to use them to turn your daughter into  a weapon against your ex ought to be criminal

If not for Soon Yi stealing Mia's BF, Dylan would never have been put thru all she has been thru.

Concocting a false accusation is terrible to all who have and will survive real molestation.

Dylan was determined by hospital staff not to be able to distinguish between reality and fantasy. Almost all second graders can.

When a second grader is expected to act out a grown woman's fantasy,  no wonder the girl is befuddled.

And karma will befall Farrow for making it up out of spite and still pulling this shit 20 years later because Allen won a Lifetime Achievement Award.

It is shameful and sick.

Please do not speak for adult survivors- we have our own true voice.

Regards from Rosie


----------



## Connery

BDBoop said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> Which is still not the question. I wouldn't leave my child with anybody other than family. So that's a strawman, I do believe.
> 
> I also believe you've made that the question so you don't have to own that it is not likely he is guilty of molesting the seven year-old, because there is no evidence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No you have no idea what I am talking about and are injecting your own very subjective standard. Further, your position is fallacious because children are left with those other than their parents in many, many ways such as school and extra curricular activities at least I do that. I assess every single person that will be with my child before I leave my child with them, that includes play dates and birthday parties. That is what I am talking about.
> 
> I am not here to decide the guilt of a man that has not been to trial. I am here to discuss Woody Allen and view his acts and how they effect the family including the person who made that statement which comprises the body of this discussion.
> 
> 
> You want to decide his guilt or innocence there are plenty of people here to do that with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay -- so you absolutely truly have nothing to do with the thread, and what's being discussed here? Your responses make much more sense in that light.
Click to expand...



 I have everything to do with this thread and discussed that which I felt interested me.   We view things differently. I am at a  stage in my life  where I look at people who would be good for my son or bad for my son. This thread has been very enlightening in both the OP and responses. Which is why I have had meaningful and well thought out discussions with those who I enjoyed sharing thoughts with.


Are you suggesting I leave this thread, am posting in an inappropriate way,  derailing or otherwise acting in an untoward manner?  In other words I see you are still trying to provoke....


----------



## Sunshine

Connery said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> that I am an attorney?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Since you are, I'm rather wondering why you are ignoring the two adult survivors of sexual molestation in this thread, and their perceptions of this situation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Get there posts and present them here, more importantly, what relevancy does that have to do with my position (below)?
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's a different Court you are talking about!
> 
> *It's called the Court of Public Opinion*..... .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is all that matters in the end. The issue for me  is would a reasonably prudent member of the public allow this man near their child and/or would they allow him to be a role model such as a father, moral guide to their child?
> 
> 
> That is the only issue I see that is worth thinking about after reading what has been said here and the statement issued by the prosecutor, the conduct of his family regarding this situation and how his "family" has progressed over time.
> 
> 
> As a result, I would never let him near my child.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...



Their posts have no relevance to this case.  Their subjective experience, if indeed they had said subjective experience, cannot be generalized to any other case.


----------



## BDBoop

Connery said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> No you have no idea what I am talking about and are injecting your own very subjective standard. Further, your position is fallacious because children are left with those other than their parents in many, many ways such as school and extra curricular activities at least I do that. I assess every single person that will be with my child before I leave my child with them, that includes play dates and birthday parties. That is what I am talking about.
> 
> I am not here to decide the guilt of a man that has not been to trial. I am here to discuss Woody Allen and view his acts and how they effect the family including the person who made that statement which comprises the body of this discussion.
> 
> 
> You want to decide his guilt or innocence there are plenty of people here to do that with.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Okay -- so you absolutely truly have nothing to do with the thread, and what's being discussed here? Your responses make much more sense in that light.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I have everything to do with this thread and discussed that which I felt interested me.   We view things differently. I am at a  stage in my life  where I look at people who would be good for my son or bad for my son. This thread has been very enlightening in both the OP and responses. Which is why I have had meaningful and well thought out discussions with those who I enjoyed sharing thoughts with.
> 
> 
> Are you suggesting I leave this thread, am posting in an inappropriate way,  derailing or otherwise acting in an untoward manner?
Click to expand...


I'm suggesting you re-read your first several posts in this thread and admit you came at it from the direction of him being guilty of child molestation on Dylan, and quit pretending that suddenly it's about his relationship with Soon-yi, and you really have nothing to say with regard to his guilt or innocence where Dylan is concerned.

Because we all know eww yuck-patooie on the Soon-yi front. But he is innocent until proven guilty on the Dylan front.


----------



## Sunshine

jillian said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> yes. and prosecutors who do sexual abuse cases know that their clients are always fragile. it is their job to walk their victim through the process in the family case, they might not have even needed to put the child on the stand, but could have possibly used validators who advance the child's case. (since the visitation matter had no witness confrontation issues in that regard).
> 
> i've never seen an attorney not pursue a case because of a "fragile" witness.
> 
> and you know very well what the prosecutor being admonished for his behavior means.
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I addressed your issues in a previous post. There are other mitigating factors involved here that neither you or I are privy to. Most importantly, the age of the victim is paramount. Nothing is plain vanilla, no two cases are the same and zealously protecting the legitimate the interests of the client carries a different and more cautious standard with a 7 year old a child of similar  age. I am not going to second guess the prosecutor or why he made his decision. It is a done deal.
> 
> I have not pursued cases and referred them out  at least once because of this type of situation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> any mitigating factors, as you call them, would be the subject of speculation. and given the fact that the prosecutor was smacked on the wrist, i think we can agree that no one believed his excuse. if you also recall, the reason he got smacked down was talking about the case when he wasn't bringing charges. that was inappropriate and unethical.
> 
> i don't have to second guess him. that was done for me by the powers that be.
Click to expand...


Even with evidence, you think Allen is innocent because no charges were brought.  Yet, I have not one shred of doubt that even though Paula Deen's case with was dismissed, you believe that she is guilty.


----------



## skye

jillian said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> Re the McMartin case:
> 
> _ Judy Johnson, mother of one of the Manhattan Beach, California, preschool's young students, complained to the police that her son had been sodomized by her estranged husband and by McMartin teacher Ray Buckey.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> Johnson also made several more accusations, including that people at the daycare had *sexual encounters with animals*, that "*Peggy drilled a child under the arms*" and "*Ray flew in the air*."[1][5] Ray Buckey was questioned, but was not prosecuted due to lack of evidence. _
> 
> Estranged husband, sexual encounters with animals, drilling kids, and Ray flying..
> 
> Lots to believe there....
> 
> This is why I find your _opinion _dangerous. People make shit up all the time with nothing to back it up and people like you run with it. It's beyond awful....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You weren't speaking to me, but Allen marrying his daughter is enough to make the scales swing towards Perv rather than Innocent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> she was mia farrow and andre previn's daughter.
> 
> creepy*  but apparently he and soon yi worked out ok, didn't they? *
Click to expand...



That's correct. Another couple with a big age difference was Charlie Chaplin and Oona O'Neill   (Oona, of course, the daughter of   American playwright and Nobel laureate in Literature,  Eugene O'Neill.)

They married in 1943 when she was 18 and he was 54, they remained together for 34 years and eight children, until his death in 1977.


----------



## Sunshine

BDBoop said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> any mitigating factors, as you call them, would be the subject of speculation. and given *the fact that the prosecutor was smacked on the wris**t,* i think we can agree that no one believed his excuse. *if you also recall, the reason he got smacked down was talking about the case when he wasn't bringing charges. that was inappropriate and unethical*.
> 
> i don't have to second guess him. that was done for me by the powers that be.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What bearing does his getting smacked on the wrist for discussing the case when he was not going to prosecute the matter have to do with Allen's guilt or innocence. That would speak more to the attorney's lack of professionalism and breach of ethical cannons.
> 
> If you see my post above, I have one issue regarding Allen, "would a reasonably prudent member of the public allow this man near their child and/or would they allow him to be a role model such as a father, moral guide to their child?"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which is still not the question. I wouldn't leave my child with anybody other than family. So that's a strawman, I do believe.
> 
> I also believe you've made that the question so you don't have to own that it is not likely he is guilty of molesting the seven year-old, because there is no evidence.
Click to expand...


And yet in most abuse cases the perp is known to the victim and in many cases the perp is a relative.  Anyone raising a child would be more prudent to allow their child to refuse to associate with anyone with whom they feel uncomfortable, be it family, friend, or foe.  You clearly would not listen to a victim.  For that reason, I don't believe you are a victim.


----------



## Sunshine

BDBoop said:


> Esmeralda said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> Get there posts and present them here, more importantly, what relevancy does that have to do with my position (below)?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The problem with some, or perhaps many, adults who experienced abuse as children, is that some see it 'everywhere.'  It's like women who have experinced abusive husbands.  They seem to be always assessing other marriages based on what they experienced, that men in general tend to be abusers.  My point is that rather than having a better take on whether or  not abuse is taking place, they have a skewed vision of it and may tend to see it more often, or they my think that there is only one way to assess if it happens, that they have special insight, but they are, in fact, only seeing the situation from the pov of how they experienced it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Except there are two adult survivors in this thread who believe Woody did not molest Dylan. *if that is the correct child's name*
Click to expand...


That's because your are self involved and cannot empathize with someone else as a victim.


----------



## Dr Grump

Sunshine said:


> Even with evidence, you think Allen is innocent because no charges were brought.  Yet, I have not one shred of doubt that even though Paula Deen's case with was dismissed, you believe that she is guilty.



I believe OJ was guilty:
1) He ran
2) There was blood
3) There was evidence linking him to the scene
4) He had motive

With Dylan please list any evidence. Any will do...


----------



## Sunshine

RosieS said:


> Esmeralda said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> Get there posts and present them here, more importantly, what relevancy does that have to do with my position (below)?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The problem with some, or perhaps many, adults who experienced abuse as children, is that some see it 'everywhere.'  It's like women who have experinced abusive husbands.  They seem to be always assessing other marriages based on what they experienced, that men in general tend to be abusers.  My point is that rather than having a better take on whether or  not abuse is taking place, they have a skewed vision of it and may tend to see it more often, or they my think that there is only one way to assess if it happens, that they have special insight, but they are, in fact, only seeing the situation from the pov of how they experienced it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And some of us feel like  some do about false rape accusations - it is a horrid thing to do to present and future victims.
> 
> To take  fears that many kids share, to take common family interactions, and to use them to turn your daughter into  a weapon against your ex ought to be criminal
> 
> If not for Soon Yi stealing Mia's BF, Dylan would never have been put thru all she has been thru.
> 
> Concocting a false accusation is terrible to all who have and will survive real molestation.
> 
> Dylan was determined by hospital staff not to be able to distinguish between reality and fantasy. Almost all second graders can.
> 
> When a second grader is expected to act out a grown woman's fantasy,  no wonder the girl is befuddled.
> 
> And karma will befall Farrow for making it up out of spite and still pulling this shit 20 years later because Allen won a Lifetime Achievement Award.
> 
> It is shameful and sick.
> 
> Please do not speak for adult survivors- we have our own true voice.
> 
> Regards from Rosie
Click to expand...


The child did not accuse him of rape.  And there were witnesses to his inappropriate behavior with her.


----------



## Plasmaball

Connery said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> yea hon
> 
> I always discuss the emotional impact of a trial with the client and then ask them to rest on that knowledge before we continue
> 
> 
> are you, hon?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> evidence that you are?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> that I am an attorney?
Click to expand...


yes


----------



## Connery

skye said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> You weren't speaking to me, but Allen marrying his daughter is enough to make the scales swing towards Perv rather than Innocent.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> she was mia farrow and andre previn's daughter.
> 
> creepy*  but apparently he and soon yi worked out ok, didn't they? *
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> That's correct. Another couple with a big age difference was Charlie Chaplin and Oona O'Neill   (Oona, of course, the daughter of   American playwright and Nobel laureate in Literature,  Eugene O'Neill.)
> 
> They married in 1943 when she was 18 and he was 54, they remained together for 34 years and eight children, until his death in 1977.
Click to expand...



 I do not think the issue is solely age difference. I liked them as a couple as well. Nice post.


----------



## Sunshine

Connery said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> No you have no idea what I am talking about and are injecting your own very subjective standard. Further, your position is fallacious because children are left with those other than their parents in many, many ways such as school and extra curricular activities at least I do that. I assess every single person that will be with my child before I leave my child with them, that includes play dates and birthday parties. That is what I am talking about.
> 
> I am not here to decide the guilt of a man that has not been to trial. I am here to discuss Woody Allen and view his acts and how they effect the family including the person who made that statement which comprises the body of this discussion.
> 
> 
> You want to decide his guilt or innocence there are plenty of people here to do that with.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Okay -- so you absolutely truly have nothing to do with the thread, and what's being discussed here? Your responses make much more sense in that light.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I have everything to do with this thread and discussed that which I felt interested me.   We view things differently. I am at a  stage in my life  where I look at people who would be good for my son or bad for my son. This thread has been very enlightening in both the OP and responses. Which is why I have had meaningful and well thought out discussions with those who I enjoyed sharing thoughts with.
> 
> 
> Are you suggesting I leave this thread, am posting in an inappropriate way,  derailing or otherwise acting in an untoward manner?  In other words I see you are still trying to provoke....
Click to expand...


She wants to claim that as a supposed victim she is an overriding authority on the matter, and she is just not.  The girl who made the accusations has classic symptoms of survivors of child sexual abuse, she is anorexic and self mutilates.  Those are classic symptoms, and any skilled clinician knows this.


----------



## Sunshine

Dr Grump said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even with evidence, you think Allen is innocent because no charges were brought.  Yet, I have not one shred of doubt that even though Paula Deen's case with was dismissed, you believe that she is guilty.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I believe OJ was guilty:
> 1) He ran
> 2) There was blood
> 3) There was evidence linking him to the scene
> 4) He had motive
> 
> With Dylan please list any evidence. Any will do...
Click to expand...


There were babysitters who testified that they saw Allen in compromising position with the child.  

She has classic symptoms of a survivor of child sexual abuse, she self mutilates and she is anorexic.


----------



## Connery

Plasmaball said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> evidence that you are?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that I am an attorney?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> yes
Click to expand...


There is one poster at USMB, maybe even in this thread, who knows exactly who I am and whether or not I am an attorney. That is enough, believe it or not no matter.


----------



## Plasmaball

Gracie said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Methinks the loser here is the one defending a perv.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> we live in a society where you are innocent until proven guilty. Public opinion is not law, i suggest you understand how our nation works before throwing around verdicts.
> 
> Allen May have actually done this and if proven he should pay for it under the law. He also may not have done this and nothing should happen.
> 
> You would have already been excused from the jury had this gone to a trial. You are unfit and bias.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Good. Cuz I would say hang him by his balls.
Click to expand...


disgusting


----------



## Sunshine

Plasmaball said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> evidence that you are?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that I am an attorney?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> yes
Click to expand...


Show your credentials that prove you are a human.


----------



## Plasmaball

Sunshine said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> that I am an attorney?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yes
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Show your credentials that prove you are a human.
Click to expand...


prove you are not a horse


----------



## tinydancer

RosieS said:


> Esmeralda said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> Get there posts and present them here, more importantly, what relevancy does that have to do with my position (below)?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The problem with some, or perhaps many, adults who experienced abuse as children, is that some see it 'everywhere.'  It's like women who have experinced abusive husbands.  They seem to be always assessing other marriages based on what they experienced, that men in general tend to be abusers.  My point is that rather than having a better take on whether or  not abuse is taking place, they have a skewed vision of it and may tend to see it more often, or they my think that there is only one way to assess if it happens, that they have special insight, but they are, in fact, only seeing the situation from the pov of how they experienced it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And some of us feel like  some do about false rape accusations - it is a horrid thing to do to present and future victims.
> 
> To take  fears that many kids share, to take common family interactions, and to use them to turn your daughter into  a weapon against your ex ought to be criminal
> 
> If not for Soon Yi stealing Mia's BF, Dylan would never have been put thru all she has been thru.
> 
> Concocting a false accusation is terrible to all who have and will survive real molestation.
> 
> Dylan was determined by hospital staff not to be able to distinguish between reality and fantasy. Almost all second graders can.
> 
> When a second grader is expected to act out a grown woman's fantasy,  no wonder the girl is befuddled.
> 
> And karma will befall Farrow for making it up out of spite and still pulling this shit 20 years later because Allen won a Lifetime Achievement Award.
> 
> It is shameful and sick.
> 
> Please do not speak for adult survivors- we have our own true voice.
> 
> Regards from Rosie
Click to expand...


This is Dylan's show. Not Mia's.

The Vanity Fair article was in November 2013. Interview conducted in advance. And it's a rare article. The awards were in January. You are lying your ass off by saying that Mia has been out there spilling venom for 20 years.

She hasn't. I don't know what burr is up your ass but you have no facts to back up your statements. 

I've put up court documents. I've put up testimony from the three caretakers. I've put up article after article to back up anything I've posted.

What about you? Give us some links oh pompous one. I don't know why you have this hard on for Farrow but it's appalling.

She's not the one that brought on this epic and sad tale for this family. Woody did. 

Get real Rosie.


----------



## Esmeralda

freedombecki said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> An interesting read to be sure.
> 
> *
> June 8, 1993
> Allen Loses to Farrow in Bitter Custody Battle
> By PETER MARKS
> 
> Describing Woody Allen as a "self-absorbed, untrustworthy and insensitive" father, a judge in Manhattan yesterday rejected his attempt to win custody of his three children and awarded custody to their mother, Mia Farrow.
> 
> In a scathing 33-page decision, Acting Justice Elliott Wilk of State Supreme Court denounced Mr. Allen for carrying on an affair with one of Ms. Farrow's daughters, trying to pit family members against one another and lacking knowledge of the most basic aspects of his children's lives.
> 
> The judge also denied Mr. Allen immediate visiting rights with his 7-year-old daughter, Dylan Farrow. Last summer Ms. Farrow accused the 57-year-old film maker of molesting the child.
> 
> Justice Wilk said it was unlikely that Mr. Allen could be prosecuted for sexual abuse based on the evidence. But while a team of experts concluded that Dylan was not abused, the judge said he found the evidence inconclusive. *
> 
> AND for you Mia haters out there, the Justice differs with you.
> 
> *Justice Wilk, however, had few unkind words for Ms. Farrow, whom he commended as a caring and loving mother who had tried to protect her children from what he characterized as Mr. Allen's manipulativeness and insensitivity.
> 
> "Ms. Farrow's principal shortcoming with respect to responsible parenting appears to have been her continued relationship with Mr. Allen," he wrote.
> 
> On the other hand, Justice Wilk portrayed Mr. Allen as devious, hurtful and unreliable, a father who did not know the names of his son's teachers -- or even which children shared which bedrooms in Ms. Farrow's apartment. Mr. Allen lived in a separate apartment on the other side of Central Park.
> 
> Referring to what Dylan's own psychotherapist called Mr. Allen's inappropriately intense behavior toward the little girl, the justice said it was unclear whether Mr. Allen could ever develop "the insight and judgment necessary for him to relate to Dylan appropriately." *
> 
> AND
> 
> *The justice said he considered Mr. Allen's affair with Soon-Yi Farrow Previn -- and his inability to comprehend the impact the romance was having on the other children in the Farrow household -- further evidence of his deficiencies as a parent.
> 
> "Having isolated Soon-Yi from her family, he left her with no visible support system," Justice Wilk wrote. *
> 
> Allen Loses to Farrow in Bitter Custody Battle
> 
> 'nuff said
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *The justice said he considered Mr. Allen's affair with Soon-Yi Farrow Previn -- and his inability to comprehend the impact the romance was having on the other children in the Farrow household -- further evidence of his deficiencies as a parent.
> 
> "Having isolated Soon-Yi from her family, he left her with no visible support system," Justice Wilk wrote. *
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Quoting from your link, the two passages about the justice's statement is consistent with the asocial aspect of pedophilia.
> 
> America is a sadder place on account of this celebrity using his star power to excuse himself from accountability for his moral crime against his children Soon-Yi and Dylan, not to mention the confusion he inflicted on the other children in the family whom he horrified with his perversion. I hope those children realize from that justice's statement that someone, and in particular a man, in the human race cares for them and cares for them deeply. Little girls who are abused can grow up very bitter toward the father who abused them. I had such a friend in junior high. Her description of her life around lecherous male relatives was something I didn't quite understand for 10 years.
Click to expand...


I think the only way to be unbiased in considering the character of Allen in this situation is to separate the art from the artist.  I wonder, if he were any other man, just an ordinary man, not a great director, would people continue to support him?  One of my favorite fillms of all films I've ever seen is ANNIE HALL.  That hasn't changed.  I separate the art from the artist.


----------



## Gracie

If their celeb status (his) were not into play.....he would be sitting in a jail cell.


----------



## tinydancer

Esmeralda said:


> freedombecki said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> An interesting read to be sure.
> 
> *
> June 8, 1993
> Allen Loses to Farrow in Bitter Custody Battle
> By PETER MARKS
> 
> Describing Woody Allen as a "self-absorbed, untrustworthy and insensitive" father, a judge in Manhattan yesterday rejected his attempt to win custody of his three children and awarded custody to their mother, Mia Farrow.
> 
> In a scathing 33-page decision, Acting Justice Elliott Wilk of State Supreme Court denounced Mr. Allen for carrying on an affair with one of Ms. Farrow's daughters, trying to pit family members against one another and lacking knowledge of the most basic aspects of his children's lives.
> 
> The judge also denied Mr. Allen immediate visiting rights with his 7-year-old daughter, Dylan Farrow. Last summer Ms. Farrow accused the 57-year-old film maker of molesting the child.
> 
> Justice Wilk said it was unlikely that Mr. Allen could be prosecuted for sexual abuse based on the evidence. But while a team of experts concluded that Dylan was not abused, the judge said he found the evidence inconclusive. *
> 
> AND for you Mia haters out there, the Justice differs with you.
> 
> *Justice Wilk, however, had few unkind words for Ms. Farrow, whom he commended as a caring and loving mother who had tried to protect her children from what he characterized as Mr. Allen's manipulativeness and insensitivity.
> 
> "Ms. Farrow's principal shortcoming with respect to responsible parenting appears to have been her continued relationship with Mr. Allen," he wrote.
> 
> On the other hand, Justice Wilk portrayed Mr. Allen as devious, hurtful and unreliable, a father who did not know the names of his son's teachers -- or even which children shared which bedrooms in Ms. Farrow's apartment. Mr. Allen lived in a separate apartment on the other side of Central Park.
> 
> Referring to what Dylan's own psychotherapist called Mr. Allen's inappropriately intense behavior toward the little girl, the justice said it was unclear whether Mr. Allen could ever develop "the insight and judgment necessary for him to relate to Dylan appropriately." *
> 
> AND
> 
> *The justice said he considered Mr. Allen's affair with Soon-Yi Farrow Previn -- and his inability to comprehend the impact the romance was having on the other children in the Farrow household -- further evidence of his deficiencies as a parent.
> 
> "Having isolated Soon-Yi from her family, he left her with no visible support system," Justice Wilk wrote. *
> 
> Allen Loses to Farrow in Bitter Custody Battle
> 
> 'nuff said
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *The justice said he considered Mr. Allen's affair with Soon-Yi Farrow Previn -- and his inability to comprehend the impact the romance was having on the other children in the Farrow household -- further evidence of his deficiencies as a parent.
> 
> "Having isolated Soon-Yi from her family, he left her with no visible support system," Justice Wilk wrote. *
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Quoting from your link, the two passages about the justice's statement is consistent with the asocial aspect of pedophilia.
> 
> America is a sadder place on account of this celebrity using his star power to excuse himself from accountability for his moral crime against his children Soon-Yi and Dylan, not to mention the confusion he inflicted on the other children in the family whom he horrified with his perversion. I hope those children realize from that justice's statement that someone, and in particular a man, in the human race cares for them and cares for them deeply. Little girls who are abused can grow up very bitter toward the father who abused them. I had such a friend in junior high. Her description of her life around lecherous male relatives was something I didn't quite understand for 10 years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think the only way to be unbiased in considering the character of Allen in this situation is to separate the art from the artist.  I wonder, if he were any other man, just an ordinary man, not a great director, would people continue to support him?  One of my favorite fillms of all films I've ever seen is ANNIE HALL.  That hasn't changed.  I separate the art from the artist.
Click to expand...


I'm with you on this. I love Polanski's films. Chinatown was killer with Nicholson and Dunaway.

And I know he had to be really screwed up and hurting after the Manson family killed his wife and their unborn baby. ETA for young ones: Polanski's wife was Sharon Tate and she was horrifically and brutally murdered by the Manson clan. 

BUT he was guilty of raping a thirteen year old girl that he drugged. I can't just give him a pass because I love his movies and his talent.

His crime was real.


----------



## thanatos144

Facts are Woody Allen will never go to jail for molesting his step daughters and Hollywood will still praise the perverted evil fuck for movies that frankly suck. For some reason Hollywood like directors that abuse young girls.


----------



## Plasmaball

Gracie said:


> If their celeb status (his) were not into play.....he would be sitting in a jail cell.



of goodie more baseless nothing.


----------



## Dr Grump

Sunshine said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even with evidence, you think Allen is innocent because no charges were brought.  Yet, I have not one shred of doubt that even though Paula Deen's case with was dismissed, you believe that she is guilty.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I believe OJ was guilty:
> 1) He ran
> 2) There was blood
> 3) There was evidence linking him to the scene
> 4) He had motive
> 
> With Dylan please list any evidence. Any will do...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There were babysitters who testified that they saw Allen in compromising position with the child.
> 
> She has classic symptoms of a survivor of child sexual abuse, she self mutilates and she is anorexic.
Click to expand...


1) Alleged compromising position
2) They are signs of abuse, not just sexual...
3) And none of the above is of any evidential value in the sense that equates to Simpson...


----------



## Sunshine

An article for the person who claims to have had one experience with abuse. This is from a clinician who worked with abuse victims for 25 years and has the master's and post master's study to do so:



> Self-Harm / Self-Injury
> 
> Deliberate self-harm, or self-injury, is when a person inflicts physical harm on himself or herself, usually in secret. *Some victims of sexual assault *may use self-harm to cope with the difficult or painful feelings, but it is only a temporary relief, not a healthy way to deal with the trauma of sexual assault. Self-harm can cause permanent damage to the body, as well as additional psychological problems that hinder the healing process, such as guilt, depression, low self-esteem or self-hatred, along with a tendency toward isolation.1
> 
> Note: Deliberate self-harm is not necessarily inflicted with suicidal intent, and engaging in self-harm does not necessarily mean that someone wants to die.
> 
> Those who inflict harm on themselves may believe it &#8220;helps&#8221; them cope with their experiences and their emotions. For sexual assault victims, self injury may:1
> &#8226;Provide a way to express difficult or hidden feelings. &#8226;It&#8217;s common for victims to feel numb or empty as a result of sexual assault.
> &#8226;Engaging in self-harm may provide a temporary sense of feeling again, as well as a way to express anger, sadness, grief or emotional pain.
> 
> &#8226;Provide a way of communicating to others that support is needed.
> &#8226;Provide a distraction from emotional pain.
> &#8226;Provide self-punishment for what they believe they deserve.
> &#8226;Provide proof that they are not invisible.
> &#8226;Provide a feeling of control: It&#8217;s not uncommon to feel that self-harm is the only way to have a sense of control over life, feelings, body, especially if other things in life are out of control.
> 
> Some common methods of self-harm include:1
> &#8226;Cutting
> &#8226;Burning
> &#8226;Biting
> &#8226;Hitting the body
> &#8226;Pulling out hair
> &#8226;Scratching and picking at sores on skin
> &#8226;Eating Disorders
> &#8226;Substance Abuse
> 
> Friends and family of sexual assault victims may be among the first to recognize the signs of self-injury. It may be helpful for a survivor to share their experiences and concerns with a qualified service provider who can help him or her find a healthier, positive alternative to alleviate the pain from sexual assault, such as a counselor or psychologist.1



Self-Harm / Self-Injury | RAINN | Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network

Since they know everything and all.........

You are disgusting and you are star struck.  You think anyone in 'the performing arts' is a god when in fact most of them think they walk above the expectations of human decency and are nothing but low life pukes.  As you have so well demonstrated.


----------



## Sunshine

Dr Grump said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> I believe OJ was guilty:
> 1) He ran
> 2) There was blood
> 3) There was evidence linking him to the scene
> 4) He had motive
> 
> With Dylan please list any evidence. Any will do...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There were babysitters who testified that they saw Allen in compromising position with the child.
> 
> She has classic symptoms of a survivor of child sexual abuse, she self mutilates and she is anorexic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1) Alleged compromising position
> 2) They are signs of abuse, not just sexual...
> 3) And none of the above is of any evidential value in the sense that equates to Simpson...
Click to expand...


In 25 years no one but sexual abuse survivors presented as self mutilators to my clinic.  You are simply a celebrity worshiper who will not see what has happened to an innocent child.


----------



## RosieS

Only a lazy clinician lumps clients into only one category.

The reasons kids become cutters are myriad, many having nothing to do with sex and more to do with gender roles and bullying and stress, among other things:

Teens Cutting & Other Self Injurious Behavior in Children & Adolescents

And here is a short review of reasons Dylan Farrow was not believed at the time, in a very recent article which also describes in detail the vengeful females seen in this thread:

Brian Dickerson: In case against Woody Allen, emotion outruns the evidence | Detroit Free Press | freep.com

If you own a pipe, shove these sources in it.

Regards from Rosie


----------



## Dr Grump

Sunshine said:


> In 25 years no one but sexual abuse survivors presented as self mutilators to my clinic.  You are simply a celebrity worshiper who will not see what has happened to an innocent child.



I do not worship Woody Allen in any way, shape or form. I think he's a good director, average actor, and have seen about three of his 40 movies. 

I just want evidence.

And as to your first sentence above? I simply don't believe you...


----------



## Esmeralda

BDBoop said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> Okay -- so you absolutely truly have nothing to do with the thread, and what's being discussed here? Your responses make much more sense in that light.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have everything to do with this thread and discussed that which I felt interested me.   We view things differently. I am at a  stage in my life  where I look at people who would be good for my son or bad for my son. This thread has been very enlightening in both the OP and responses. Which is why I have had meaningful and well thought out discussions with those who I enjoyed sharing thoughts with.
> 
> 
> Are you suggesting I leave this thread, am posting in an inappropriate way,  derailing or otherwise acting in an untoward manner?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm suggesting you re-read your first several posts in this thread and admit you came at it from the direction of him being guilty of child molestation on Dylan, and quit pretending that suddenly it's about his relationship with Soon-yi, and you really have nothing to say with regard to his guilt or innocence where Dylan is concerned.
> 
> Because we all know eww yuck-patooie on the Soon-yi front. But he is innocent until proven guilty on the Dylan front.
Click to expand...


Perhaps I'm wrong, but I thought the idea of the thread was to _discuss_ whether or not he is guilty of child molestation, not to determine it. It would be quite futile to assume any one of us can determine or make some kind of final decision about the abuse. We don't, for one thing, have the evidence that one should have in making a determination, and, as well, any determination would have to be based on logical reasoning, not on hard evidence as there is no hard evidence.  

We are here, imo, to express our ideas about whether he may have done what Dylan says he did or whether he may not have done it. No one can say if he did or didn't.  It isn't a court.  Saying he is innocent until proven guilty shuts down the purpose of the thread, which is to_ discuss_ the issue, not make a final determination.


----------



## jillian

Gracie said:


> If their celeb status (his) were not into play.....he would be sitting in a jail cell.



if you look at how he was treated by the prosecutor (the one who was found to have acted improperly), i'd suggest the opposite. 

if he wasn't a celebrity the publicity hounds wouldn't have gone further once the allegations were unfounded.

but again&#8230; why rely on evidence when you can repeat unproven allegations, years after any statute of limitations ran, just to smear someone.


----------



## JoeB131

tinydancer said:


> Ok people you Woody wankers all.
> 
> What was Mia Farrow supposed to do when her babysitter's employer called her and told her of what she witnessed the day before?
> 
> Baby Dylan on the couch, Woody on his knees in front of her with his head ion Dylan's lap?
> 
> This is testimony. And it was what this babysitter reported to her employer because she found it so disturbing that started this firestorm.
> 
> What was Mia Farrow supposed to do?



Who cares?


----------



## JoeB131

tinydancer said:


> When you have three baby sitters who all said under oath they witnessed disturbing behavior and obviously they had informed Ms. Farrow about the incidents at the time way before the court case, what was Mia to do.
> 
> Then couple this situation with finding pornographic pictures of her daughter on Woody's mantle piece and discovering her long time lover was having an affair with her daughter Woody Allen supporters tell me please what should Mia Farrow have done?



Oh, is it up to three babysitters now?  

Why would it take THREE babysitters?  

Again, this really, really sounds like old Mia got upset that she got traded in.  

Incidently, I think they are both kind of flakey.  But last time I checked, being a flake wasn't a crime, or half of USMB would be posting from prison.


----------



## JoeB131

hazlnut said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea if Woody Allen is a molester  or not.
> 
> All I know is that Mia Farrow is one snake of an ex wife.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mia Farrow didn't write the open letter.
> 
> Her daughter did.
> 
> 
> And it can only be one of 3 things.
> 
> 1) Vindictiveness beyond comprehension.  (just doesn't likely that a person would that intense of grudge all these years and go to such deceptive lengths to punish him for what he did to his mom + given the tone and nature of her letter, she'd have to be sociopath)
> 
> 2) False memories (as in McMartin Preschool)
> 
> 3) Truth.
> 
> 
> Again, given the tone and nature of her letter, the details about being sickened every time she sees him in the media -- it doesn't seem made up -- only a sociopath could go to that length.  She believes what she's saying -- IMO -- true or not.
Click to expand...


I firmly believe she thinks it's the truth.  But again, this was back in the 1990's, when the kinds of therapists who investigated these things were overzealous and oftem prompted children into false memories.  (As you mentioned about the McMartin Pre-School Trial).  

My reasons for being doubtful. 

1) No physical evidence. 

2) No other person has ever come forward to make these kinds of claims.

3) A court let him and Previn adopt children.


----------



## Theowl32

I wonder why he is not suing for defamation of character. If someone accused you publicly through the written word, would you file a lawsuit for libel?

No?

Of course you wouldn't. 

Now, lets get to the question. 

Why isn't he suing? Is he suing? Lets keep an eye on it. Cause if he does not file anything, that is all I will need to know. 

Oh thats right. The girl "believes she is telling the truth."

Cause marrying their adapted daughter and taking nude of photos of her when he was a middle aged man, is not creepy enough. Yeah, nothing there. 

Say, isn't there at least ONE WITNESS to this? The nanny?


----------



## L.K.Eder

Theowl32 said:


> I wonder why he is not suing for defamation of character. If someone accused you publicly through the written word, would you file a lawsuit for libel?
> 
> No?
> 
> Of course you wouldn't.
> 
> Now, lets get to the question.
> 
> Why isn't he suing? Is he suing? Lets keep an eye on it. Cause if he does not file anything, that is all I will need to know.
> 
> Oh thats right. The girl "believes she is telling the truth."
> 
> Cause marrying their adapted daughter and taking nude of photos of her when he was a middle aged man, is not creepy enough. Yeah, nothing there.
> 
> Say, isn't there at least ONE WITNESS to this? The nanny?




you so clever.

not suing proves his guilt. sold.


----------



## Theowl32

L.K.Eder said:


> Theowl32 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder why he is not suing for defamation of character. If someone accused you publicly through the written word, would you file a lawsuit for libel?
> 
> No?
> 
> Of course you wouldn't.
> 
> Now, lets get to the question.
> 
> Why isn't he suing? Is he suing? Lets keep an eye on it. Cause if he does not file anything, that is all I will need to know.
> 
> Oh thats right. The girl "believes she is telling the truth."
> 
> Cause marrying their adapted daughter and taking nude of photos of her when he was a middle aged man, is not creepy enough. Yeah, nothing there.
> 
> Say, isn't there at least ONE WITNESS to this? The nanny?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you so clever.
> 
> not suing proves his guilt. sold.
Click to expand...


Me so clever. 

No no.

You so clever.


----------



## Esmeralda

Theowl32 said:


> I wonder why he is not suing for defamation of character. If someone accused you publicly through the written word, would you file a lawsuit for libel?
> 
> No?
> 
> Of course you wouldn't.
> 
> Now, lets get to the question.
> 
> Why isn't he suing? Is he suing? Lets keep an eye on it. Cause if he does not file anything, that is all I will need to know.
> 
> Oh thats right. The girl "believes she is telling the truth."
> 
> Cause marrying their adapted daughter and taking nude of photos of her when he was a middle aged man, is not creepy enough. Yeah, nothing there.
> 
> Say, isn't there at least ONE WITNESS to this? The nanny?



One reason that seems very obvious why he doesn't sue: he would look like such a villian!  It is something that would be very hurtful to Dylan, whether she was molested or whether it is a false memory: it would be shattering for her, but more important, he would look worse, a worse villian for putting her through more agony.  I don't know if he cares about her at all, but he does care about himself, and his image.


----------



## Theowl32

Esmeralda said:


> Theowl32 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder why he is not suing for defamation of character. If someone accused you publicly through the written word, would you file a lawsuit for libel?
> 
> No?
> 
> Of course you wouldn't.
> 
> Now, lets get to the question.
> 
> Why isn't he suing? Is he suing? Lets keep an eye on it. Cause if he does not file anything, that is all I will need to know.
> 
> Oh thats right. The girl "believes she is telling the truth."
> 
> Cause marrying their adapted daughter and taking nude of photos of her when he was a middle aged man, is not creepy enough. Yeah, nothing there.
> 
> Say, isn't there at least ONE WITNESS to this? The nanny?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One reason that seems very obvious why he doesn't sue: he would look like such a villian!  It is something that would be very hurtful to Dylan, whether she was molested or whether it is a false memory: it would be shattering for her, but more important, he would look worse, a worse villian for putting her through more agony.  I don't know if he cares about her at all, but he does care about himself, and his image.
Click to expand...


Well, we can say there is no evidence. Sometimes the witness being abused is considered to be evidence. In fact, it is often used as evidence. I asked this before. I thought there was one witness, the nanny. 

Also, if you need more evidence than that, then you are saying that the girl could be flat out lying. There is no other way to put it. She is emphatic and direct about it. Now, you can do the old liberal thing and take on both sides of the issue by claiming, "well, I believe she believes it happened."

That is just a pathetic attempt to obfuscate from the real contention. You either believe her, or you doubt her claims. Now, if you doubt her claims, that means she is LYING. She went into some real detail, and from the stand point of the EXPERTS who are either criminal forensic psychologists, or people who have experienced these things, they almost all believe her accounts. 

Plus, when you consider the other things (marrying a young girl and reportedly taking nude photos of her when she was 18) all coincides with a man whose morals are skewed. At least their judgement is. 

You and seemingly the entire left wants to turn this into an official court room. Which is where the notion of INNOCENT TILL PROVEN GUILTY belongs. Opinions on this can be expressed. Yes, even opinions of guilt. People can actually have an opinion of guilt or innocence. 

I think he guilty as hell. I think he is creepy as hell. 

Now, why don't you tell us your opinion. Don't give us this crap about evidence. What is your opinion? Is the girl lying or not. 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Now watch folks. How liberals are totally incapable providing a simple yes or no. What is the definition of "is?"

Behold their double talk and bullshit.


----------



## BDBoop

In this thread, the left thinks he is innocent. 

Dylan Farrow's Brother Moses Defends Woody Allen - Scandals & Feuds, Dylan Farrow, Mia Farrow, Ronan Farrow, Woody Allen : People.com

Moses Farrow weighs in.


----------



## Delta4Embassy

Everyone's innocent until proven guilty. And Allen hasn't even been charged with anything. This is just a lot of unproven claims about something from 22 years ago. 

As the Youtube lesbian molestation incident shows, there's no statute of limitations in some instances. If Allen were really guilty of something Farrow'd file charges, and Allen would be on trial. She hasn't, and he isn't.


----------



## Delta4Embassy

For the record I hate Woody Allen movies. This is straight foward law and justice to me. Until he's actually charged with something and stands his trial, I'd defend him same as anyone else.


----------



## Theowl32

Delta4Embassy said:


> Everyone's innocent until proven guilty. And Allen hasn't even been charged with anything. This is just a lot of unproven claims about something from 22 years ago.
> 
> As the Youtube lesbian molestation incident shows, there's no statute of limitations in some instances. If Allen were really guilty of something Farrow'd file charges, and Allen would be on trial. She hasn't, and he isn't.



This is not a courtroom. That means you can express an opinion. I am sure you have when it came to.....oh, Bush lying about WMDs for example. 

Now, it is not illegal for you to express what you think. 

So, stop dodging and express whether or not you think he is guilty or not. Stop acting like expressing guilt or innocence is something we are not allowed to do outside of the courtroom. 

Or are you going to continue to double talk?


----------



## Esmeralda

Theowl32 said:


> Esmeralda said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Theowl32 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder why he is not suing for defamation of character. If someone accused you publicly through the written word, would you file a lawsuit for libel?
> 
> No?
> 
> Of course you wouldn't.
> 
> Now, lets get to the question.
> 
> Why isn't he suing? Is he suing? Lets keep an eye on it. Cause if he does not file anything that is all I will need to know.
> 
> Oh thats right. The girl "believes she is telling the truth."
> 
> Cause marrying their adapted daughter and taking nude of photos of her when he was a middle aged man, is not creepy enough. Yeah, nothing there.
> 
> Say, isn't there at least ONE WITNESS to this? The nanny?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One reason that seems very obvious why he doesn't sue: he would look like such a villain!  It is something that would be very hurtful to Dylan, whether she was molested or whether it is a false memory: it would be shattering for her, but more important, he would look worse, a worse villain for putting her through more agony.  I don't know if he cares about her at all, but he does care about himself, and his image.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, we can say there is no evidence. Sometimes the witness being abused is considered to be evidence. In fact, it is often used as evidence. I asked this before. I thought there was one witness, the nanny.
> 
> Also, if you need more evidence than that, then you are saying that the girl could be flat out lying. There is no other way to put it. She is emphatic and direct about it. Now, you can do the old liberal thing and take on both sides of the issue by claiming, "well, I believe she believes it happened."
> 
> That is just a pathetic attempt to obfuscate from the real contention. You either believe her, or you doubt her claims. Now, if you doubt her claims, that means she is LYING. She went into some real detail, and from the stand point of the EXPERTS who are either criminal forensic psychologists, or people who have experienced these things, they almost all believe her accounts.
> 
> Plus, when you consider the other things (marrying a young girl and reportedly taking nude photos of her when she was 18) all coincides with a man whose morals are skewed. At least their judgment is.
> 
> You and seemingly the entire left want to turn this into an official court room. Which is where the notion of INNOCENT TILL PROVEN GUILTY belongs. Opinions on this can be expressed. Yes, even opinions of guilt. People can actually have an opinion of guilt or innocence.
> 
> I think he guilty as hell. I think he is creepy as hell.
> 
> Now, why don't you tell us your opinion. Don't give us this crap about evidence. What is your opinion? Is the girl lying or not.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> Now watch folks. How liberals are totally incapable providing a simple yes or no. What is the definition of "is?"
> 
> Behold their double talk and bullshit.
Click to expand...


No one, NO ONE, speaks for me. I don't see how this has anything to do with a political leaning. As far as I am concerned, it doesn't, that's for sure.  I did not in my post suggest he was innocent. When I referred to no evidence, I meant there is no hard, empirical evidence. We have Dylan's statements, but that is not hard, empirical evidence.  Anyone can claim something happened.  That is only proof as far as it is believable, and the believability is usually tested by logical reasoning.  I am in no way suggesting she is lying.  I don't know.  None of us know; that is the point.  I have said in earlier posts that the fact she is saying the same thing some 20 years later lends credence to the veracity of her statements.  But you can't hang a man on a claim of abuse when there is no physical evidence. 

Please don't make me out to be a 'liberal' who is supporting Allen no matter what. If you read my other posts in this thread, you would see I am doing just the opposite.

And no one, conservative or liberal has the right to speak for me.  No one.


----------



## Esmeralda

Theowl32 said:


> Esmeralda said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Theowl32 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder why he is not suing for defamation of character. If someone accused you publicly through the written word, would you file a lawsuit for libel?
> 
> No?
> 
> Of course you wouldn't.
> 
> Now, lets get to the question.
> 
> Why isn't he suing? Is he suing? Lets keep an eye on it. Cause if he does not file anything, that is all I will need to know.
> 
> Oh thats right. The girl "believes she is telling the truth."
> 
> Cause marrying their adapted daughter and taking nude of photos of her when he was a middle aged man, is not creepy enough. Yeah, nothing there.
> 
> Say, isn't there at least ONE WITNESS to this? The nanny?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One reason that seems very obvious why he doesn't sue: he would look like such a villian!  It is something that would be very hurtful to Dylan, whether she was molested or whether it is a false memory: it would be shattering for her, but more important, he would look worse, a worse villian for putting her through more agony.  I don't know if he cares about her at all, but he does care about himself, and his image.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, we can say there is no evidence. Sometimes the witness being abused is considered to be evidence. In fact, it is often used as evidence. I asked this before. I thought there was one witness, the nanny.
> 
> Also, if you need more evidence than that, then you are saying that the girl could be flat out lying. There is no other way to put it. She is emphatic and direct about it. Now, you can do the old liberal thing and take on both sides of the issue by claiming, "well, I believe she believes it happened."
> 
> That is just a pathetic attempt to obfuscate from the real contention. You either believe her, or you doubt her claims. Now, if you doubt her claims, that means she is LYING. She went into some real detail, and from the stand point of the EXPERTS who are either criminal forensic psychologists, or people who have experienced these things, they almost all believe her accounts.
> 
> Plus, when you consider the other things (marrying a young girl and reportedly taking nude photos of her when she was 18) all coincides with a man whose morals are skewed. At least their judgement is.
> 
> You and seemingly the entire left wants to turn this into an official court room. Which is where the notion of INNOCENT TILL PROVEN GUILTY belongs. Opinions on this can be expressed. Yes, even opinions of guilt. People can actually have an opinion of guilt or innocence.
> 
> I think he guilty as hell. I think he is creepy as hell.
> 
> Now, why don't you tell us your opinion. Don't give us this crap about evidence. What is your opinion? Is the girl lying or not.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> Now watch folks. How liberals are totally incapable providing a simple yes or no. What is the definition of "is?"
> 
> Behold their double talk and bullshit.
Click to expand...


You have very obviously not read any of my previous posts and are just looking for a fight and to make this a political left versus right thing. It isn't.  It is not a political issue.  And I do not march in lockstep with every liberal in America or on the planet.


----------



## tinydancer

JoeB131 said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> When you have three baby sitters who all said under oath they witnessed disturbing behavior and obviously they had informed Ms. Farrow about the incidents at the time way before the court case, what was Mia to do.
> 
> Then couple this situation with finding pornographic pictures of her daughter on Woody's mantle piece and discovering her long time lover was having an affair with her daughter Woody Allen supporters tell me please what should Mia Farrow have done?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, is it up to three babysitters now?
> 
> Why would it take THREE babysitters?
> 
> Again, this really, really sounds like old Mia got upset that she got traded in.
> 
> Incidently, I think they are both kind of flakey.  But last time I checked, being a flake wasn't a crime, or half of USMB would be posting from prison.
Click to expand...


The babysitters all witnessed different behaviors. That should be a no brainer.The one that told her employer first and the employer called Mia to tell her what the sitter had seen was the catalyst to the firestorm.

She saw Dylan on the couch with Woody on his knees in front of her with his head in her lap.

Another sitter testified that Dylan had indeed gone missing for about 2o minutes. This is the incident where Dylan claims he finger fucked her. Pardon my french but there is no nice way to put it.

Third babysitter witnessed Dylan with no underpants on sitting next to Allen on the couch.

Mia wasn't upset she was "traded in" . She was pissed off when she saw Soon Yi's pornographic pictures on Woody's mantlepiece. You know. Her daughter's pornographic like pictures taken by her long time lover. 

Farrow and rightfully so was distraught that Woody was having an affair with her daughter. 

And her other children were needless to say completely freaked out that the man they knew as Daddy was going to marry their sister. 

No brainer on why Farrow was upset for crying out loud.


----------



## RosieS

Yup, so upset was Mia that Mommy could not get Dylan to keep her story straight for the people from the hospital.

Nor could Mommy get Dylan to sound natural and not rehearsed for those people.
Despite her acting chops, Mommy was a crappy drama coach.

Yup, there is a child abuser in this sordid tale.

The Yale staff, the first professionals to see and hear Dylan live and uncensored, pointed  to which parent 
was the abuser.

And Dylan will still go off as if on cue any time Mommy's ex gets some positive publicity. Even 20+ years later!

Sick.

Regards from Rosie


----------



## Plasmaball

Connery said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> No you have no idea what I am talking about and are injecting your own very subjective standard. Further, your position is fallacious because children are left with those other than their parents in many, many ways such as school and extra curricular activities at least I do that. I assess every single person that will be with my child before I leave my child with them, that includes play dates and birthday parties. That is what I am talking about.
> 
> I am not here to decide the guilt of a man that has not been to trial. I am here to discuss Woody Allen and view his acts and how they effect the family including the person who made that statement which comprises the body of this discussion.
> 
> 
> You want to decide his guilt or innocence there are plenty of people here to do that with.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Okay -- so you absolutely truly have nothing to do with the thread, and what's being discussed here? Your responses make much more sense in that light.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I have everything to do with this thread and discussed that which I felt interested me.   We view things differently. I am at a  stage in my life  where I look at people who would be good for my son or bad for my son. This thread has been very enlightening in both the OP and responses. Which is why I have had meaningful and well thought out discussions with those who I enjoyed sharing thoughts with.
> 
> 
> Are you suggesting I leave this thread, am posting in an inappropriate way,  derailing or otherwise acting in an untoward manner?  In other words I see you are still trying to provoke....
Click to expand...


Wow so you are a typical parent. Congrats on that accomplishment. 

Beyond you discovering how to be a parent, you are here to discuss his guilt. You've already stated as much that you do not trust him.nothing wrong with that if you do not, but that is not what people are doing are they. They are professing guilt with little to no proof.


----------



## Plasmaball

Where is fox poop, shouldn't she be here defending Allen since people are going after him materially. Ugh I felt stupid saying that.


----------



## Connery

Plasmaball said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> Okay -- so you absolutely truly have nothing to do with the thread, and what's being discussed here? Your responses make much more sense in that light.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have everything to do with this thread and discussed that which I felt interested me.   We view things differently. I am at a  stage in my life  where I look at people who would be good for my son or bad for my son. This thread has been very enlightening in both the OP and responses. Which is why I have had meaningful and well thought out discussions with those who I enjoyed sharing thoughts with.
> 
> 
> Are you suggesting I leave this thread, am posting in an inappropriate way,  derailing or otherwise acting in an untoward manner?  In other words I see you are still trying to provoke....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wow so you are a typical parent. Congrats on that accomplishment.
> 
> Beyond you discovering how to be a parent, you are here to discuss his guilt. You've already stated as much that you do not trust him.nothing wrong with that if you do not, but that is not what people are doing are they. They are professing guilt with little to no proof.
Click to expand...


I have discussed what I felt was germane to the topic.


----------



## Plasmaball

Connery said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have everything to do with this thread and discussed that which I felt interested me.   We view things differently. I am at a  stage in my life  where I look at people who would be good for my son or bad for my son. This thread has been very enlightening in both the OP and responses. Which is why I have had meaningful and well thought out discussions with those who I enjoyed sharing thoughts with.
> 
> 
> Are you suggesting I leave this thread, am posting in an inappropriate way,  derailing or otherwise acting in an untoward manner?  In other words I see you are still trying to provoke....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow so you are a typical parent. Congrats on that accomplishment.
> 
> Beyond you discovering how to be a parent, you are here to discuss his guilt. You've already stated as much that you do not trust him.nothing wrong with that if you do not, but that is not what people are doing are they. They are professing guilt with little to no proof.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have discussed what I felt was germane to the topic.
Click to expand...


good for you.


----------



## tinydancer

RosieS said:


> Yup, so upset was Mia that Mommy could not get Dylan to keep her story straight for the people from the hospital.
> 
> Nor could Mommy get Dylan to sound natural and not rehearsed for those people.
> Despite her acting chops, Mommy was a crappy drama coach.
> 
> Yup, there is a child abuser in this sordid tale.
> 
> The Yale staff, the first professionals to see and hear Dylan live and uncensored, pointed  to which parent
> was the abuser.
> 
> And Dylan will still go off as if on cue any time Mommy's ex gets some positive publicity. Even 20+ years later!
> 
> Sick.
> 
> Regards from Rosie



Your allegation that Dylan has gone off every time Woody received accolades is a lie. 

It's a lie. It's a lie. It's a lie. You're telling a whopper. 

From every article I have read, Dylan's open letter was the first time she herself addressed her molestation by her father. 

*I know its he said, she said,  Dylan told me. But, to me, its black and white, because I was there.

I asked her why shes speaking out now. She said she wants to set the record straight and give courage to victims: I was thinking, if I dont speak out, Ill regret it on my death bed.*

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/02/opinion/sunday/kristof-dylan-farrows-story.html?_r=0


----------



## tinydancer

Now from a child abuse professional. 

* A Child Abuse Investigator&#8217;s View of the Woody Allen/Dylan Farrow Case

Guest Contributor on February 04, 2014

by Patrick Perion

Patrick Perion is a child abuse investigator in Illinois. In this article he gives his professional opinion on the Woody Allen/Dylan Farrow abuse case. The author notes that this post may be triggering. 

The subject of child abuse and in particular child sexual abuse, is not something that people like to talk about. Most people don&#8217;t like to even  think about it. Unfortunately it is real, it is happening right now, and frankly it shouldn&#8217;t be ignored.

This weekends open letter from Dylan Farrow to her father Woody Allen, and Hollywood in general, about the sexual abuse she suffered at his hand, set off a firestorm. 

 It is frank, it is heartfelt and it is powerful. It may also be triggering for some people. If you haven&#8217;t read it, I recommend you do so.

Since the post went up yesterday there has been an outpouring of support for Ms. Farrow and condemnation of Woody Allen.  There have also been numerous supporters of Allen asking for more &#8220;proof&#8221;.  

Twitter and Facebook quickly rent down the middle by those survivors and their supporters, for whom Dylan&#8217;s accusations ring true, and those who either support Allen or want more evidence than just Farrow&#8217;s word.

Filmmaker and author Bob Weide, wrote a piece in the Daily Beast outlining questions, that might exonerate Allen.  The questions Wiede asks seem logical and objective.  They also illustrate how little  the average person knows about the disclosure, investigation and prosecution of child sexual abuse.

As most of you know, I investigate child abuse for a living. I&#8217;ve been doing it for 20 years.  I&#8217;ve done hundreds of sexual abuse cases with thousands of victims.

  I&#8217;m a certified forensic interviewer, advanced forensic interviewer and trainer of the forensic interview techniques.  It&#8217;s with this knowledge and training that I look at the Allen case.


A Botched Investigation

One of the first questions that people have had about the Allen case usually has something to do with Dylan&#8217;s disclosure. 

 In the original story in Vanity Fair in 1993 and in  the follow up in November, Dylan&#8217;s appeared to garbled and contradictory.

  She told the first doctor that she spoke to that Allen had touched her shoulder.  The next day she disclosed a more descriptive account.

This often happens with the outcry of abuse.  In the Allen case, Dylan should NEVER have been questioned by a doctor in a hospital room with her mom there. Unfortunately, it was 1993.  Now children are interviewed in safe one-on-one settings, for the most part. 

 Doctors know that if a parent brings a child in for possible sexual abuse, they are to take the minimum amount of information they need for an exam and let the professionals do the interview.

Weide makes quite a point that the Investigative Team of 3 doctors who conducted a 6-month investigation concluded that no sexual molestation happened.

 They claimed in part that Dylan was an &#8220;emotionally disturbed child whose story became fixed in her head&#8221; or that she was coached or both. 

 They outlined inconsistencies in Dylan&#8217;s statement about being touched on the vaginal area.

The idea of a team of 3 doctors interviewing a frightened 7 year old child individually or as a group over 6 months is reprehensible. 

You getting this Rosie? Seriously are you getting what they put Dylan through?

There&#8217;s a reason we do one interview on tape. Asking Dylan to relive and retell the account of her abuse over and over again victimized her even further.

It&#8217;s not shocking that she said first she wasn&#8217;t touched, then she was, then she wasn&#8217;t.

  Children who are repeatedly interviewed about the same incident often change an answer to please the person doing the interview. 

 We see this in custody cases all the time. When the kids at mom&#8217;s they say they hate dad, when they&#8217;re at dad&#8217;s vice versa.

It&#8217;s not a giant leap to think that Dylan was confused and scared by these three adult men asking her questions about her private parts for SIX MONTHS. 

 It&#8217;s inconceivable to anyone who practices social work today.  It&#8217;s entirely possible that she was &#8220;emotionally&#8221; disturbed because of the way she was dealt with by people who should have known better.

A Child Abuse Investigator's View of the Woody Allen/Dylan Farrow Case | The Daily Banter

Many people, including Weide point out that medical examinations were done and there was no evidence of trauma to the anus or the vagina. 

 This doesn&#8217;t rule out molestation.  In fact it doesn&#8217;t even rule out penetration. The vagina heals remarkably fast and any doctor who knows how to conduct a sexual abuse exam of a child will tell  you that.


Charming and Sneaky

Weide also seems to think that the fact that some of the abuse happened during the time when Allen had to be on his &#8220;best behavior&#8221; on visits precludes the possibility that he abused Dylan. 

 Again a common fallacy among those who don&#8217;t know a whit about how abusers work.

Abusers are charming. Especially when they are grooming the child.  Much of what Dylan described like getting under the covers with Allen, or Allen making her suck his thumb are mere precursors to abuse which could have followed.

In fact, the visits at the Farrow home would be the perfect time for Allen to abuse Dylan for the very reason that people think it was the worst possible time.  Nobody would expect Allen to do that while he was under intense scrutiny after his relationship with Soon-Yi Previn became public.

Weide also casts doubt on Allen being able to do it in a house full of children and nannies. Again abusers are good at what they do, and sexual abusers are the best.  Mikki Kendall, AKA @Karnythia, a feminist, mother and author pointed out on Twitter,  that only the sloppy or the stupid sexual abusers get caught.*


----------



## L.K.Eder

^the retahded gossip-monger screeches "lie, lie, lie"


----------



## thanatos144

Why do some seem to always excuse abuse of young girls? 

tapatalk post


----------



## L.K.Eder

why do some peoplez be fat and dumb


----------



## thanatos144

L.K.Eder said:


> why do some peoplez be fat and dumb



I dont know .... Maybe you should ask your doctor why you are fat and dumb


----------



## L.K.Eder

thanatos144 said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> why do some peoplez be fat and dumb
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I dont know .... Maybe you should ask your doctor why you are fat and dumb
Click to expand...


i already did. i did not like the answer and told him i wanted a second opinion.

he told me that, besides being fat and dumb, i also had no work ethics and should off myself.

fucking librul doctors.


----------



## tinydancer

L.K.Eder said:


> ^the retahded gossip-monger screeches "lie, lie, lie"



When you begin calling me names, I know you Allen Fans to the Death have lost. 

Rosie is lying when she claims that Dylan has been out there for twenty years screeching away at Mia's behest.

Yes it's a lie.

Why don't you prove me wrong? By all means go for it. I back up everything I say. As compared to you Woody lovers who are just flapping your gums and ranting and raving with vitriolic comments blaming Mia Farrow for this sordid mess. 

Give 'er. Prove me wrong.


----------



## skye

Dylan Farrow's Brother Moses Defends Woody Allen


"Of course Woody did not molest my sister," says Moses, who is estranged from Farrow and many of his siblings and is close to Allen and Soon-Yi. "She loved him and looked forward to seeing him when he would visit. She never hid from him until our mother succeeded in creating the atmosphere of fear and hate towards him. The day in question, there were six or seven of us in the house. We were all in public rooms and no one, not my father or sister, was off in any private spaces. My mother was conveniently out shopping. I dont know if my sister really believes she was molested or is trying to please her mother. Pleasing my mother was very powerful motivation because to be on her wrong side was horrible." 




Dylan Farrow's Brother Moses Defends Woody Allen - Scandals & Feuds, Dylan Farrow, Mia Farrow, Ronan Farrow, Woody Allen : People.com


----------



## tinydancer

skye said:


> Dylan Farrow's Brother Moses Defends Woody Allen
> 
> 
> "Of course Woody did not molest my sister," says Moses, who is estranged from Farrow and many of his siblings and is close to Allen and Soon-Yi. "She loved him and looked forward to seeing him when he would visit. She never hid from him until our mother succeeded in creating the atmosphere of fear and hate towards him. The day in question, there were six or seven of us in the house. We were all in public rooms and no one, not my father or sister, was off in any private spaces. My mother was conveniently out shopping. I don&#8217;t know if my sister really believes she was molested or is trying to please her mother. Pleasing my mother was very powerful motivation because to be on her wrong side was horrible."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dylan Farrow's Brother Moses Defends Woody Allen - Scandals & Feuds, Dylan Farrow, Mia Farrow, Ronan Farrow, Woody Allen : People.com



That link isn't working.

How would Moses know? Truly how would Moses know?

You have situations like the crazy dude who had those girls locked up for years, and the other children didn't know that Daddy had these three women 

Ariel Castro. He held these women for over a decade and raped them and no one in the family knew. 

ETA: I can give you a quizzillion examples where family members didn't have a clue what the perpetrator was doing. That's just a no brainer.


----------



## boedicca

I doubt Woody asked Moses to witness the action.


----------



## skye

link is working for me...^^^


----------



## Plasmaball

tinydancer said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> Dylan Farrow's Brother Moses Defends Woody Allen
> 
> 
> "Of course Woody did not molest my sister," says Moses, who is estranged from Farrow and many of his siblings and is close to Allen and Soon-Yi. "She loved him and looked forward to seeing him when he would visit. She never hid from him until our mother succeeded in creating the atmosphere of fear and hate towards him. The day in question, there were six or seven of us in the house. We were all in public rooms and no one, not my father or sister, was off in any private spaces. My mother was conveniently out shopping. I dont know if my sister really believes she was molested or is trying to please her mother. Pleasing my mother was very powerful motivation because to be on her wrong side was horrible."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dylan Farrow's Brother Moses Defends Woody Allen - Scandals & Feuds, Dylan Farrow, Mia Farrow, Ronan Farrow, Woody Allen : People.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That link isn't working.
> 
> How would Moses know? Truly how would Moses know?
> 
> You have situations like the crazy dude who had those girls locked up for years, and the other children didn't know that Daddy had these three women
> 
> Ariel Castro.
Click to expand...


oh so one hearsay is legit and needs defending, but the other needs to be criticized.


----------



## tinydancer

Plasmaball said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> Dylan Farrow's Brother Moses Defends Woody Allen
> 
> 
> "Of course Woody did not molest my sister," says Moses, who is estranged from Farrow and many of his siblings and is close to Allen and Soon-Yi. "She loved him and looked forward to seeing him when he would visit. She never hid from him until our mother succeeded in creating the atmosphere of fear and hate towards him. The day in question, there were six or seven of us in the house. We were all in public rooms and no one, not my father or sister, was off in any private spaces. My mother was conveniently out shopping. I dont know if my sister really believes she was molested or is trying to please her mother. Pleasing my mother was very powerful motivation because to be on her wrong side was horrible."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dylan Farrow's Brother Moses Defends Woody Allen - Scandals & Feuds, Dylan Farrow, Mia Farrow, Ronan Farrow, Woody Allen : People.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That link isn't working.
> 
> How would Moses know? Truly how would Moses know?
> 
> You have situations like the crazy dude who had those girls locked up for years, and the other children didn't know that Daddy had these three women
> 
> Ariel Castro.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> oh so one hearsay is legit and needs defending, but the other needs to be criticized.
Click to expand...


Well, you have the victims word which one Judge and the Prosecutor believed in the probability of the molestation. 

You have 3 babysitters who swore under oath that they say highly suspect behavior between the Father and his daughter.

You have Woody Allen screwing his lover's daughter in a sordid affair and then marrying her later.

And then you have Moses who witnessed nothing who is out there defending his Dad after being estranged for some reason from his mother. 

Moses by the way is an aspiring photographer.  Motive for Moses' to come out and defend his father would be strong. Think of all the contacts!!!

Bottom line. Moses saw nothing. He can clearly state he saw nothing. 

Now what the hell that means in the grand scheme of things of this whole sordid mess is up for grabs.


----------



## Gracie

That was my first thought. Moses sees $$$ so he chose a side.


----------



## RosieS

And yet  It is not yet under consideration that Moses saw nothing BECAUSE NOTHING HAPPENED.

Perjury on behalf of a powerful employer?  And nothing came of that, now did it.

These allegations always were about a whole lot of nothing.

Regards from Rosie


----------



## RosieS

Nanny quits rather than succumbs to pressure to be on Mia Farrow's "side":

Nanny Casts Doubt on Farrow Charges : Custody: She tells Allen's lawyers the actress pressured her to support molestation accusations against him. She says others have reservations. - Los Angeles Times

Note the doubt also by a maid  and by Moses AT THE TIME.

Regards from Rosie


----------



## Gracie

Well, everyone is entitled to speak their opinion. Some agree with each other. Some don't. My stance is Allen is a perv, boinked SoonYi and groomed her to take Mia's place because he likes boinking children, and then he fondled and wanted to boink Dylan and did but maybe not with is penis. Boinking is boinking. He is a perv. In my opinion only. I believe Dylan. Period.


----------



## Plasmaball

tinydancer said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> That link isn't working.
> 
> How would Moses know? Truly how would Moses know?
> 
> You have situations like the crazy dude who had those girls locked up for years, and the other children didn't know that Daddy had these three women
> 
> Ariel Castro.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oh so one hearsay is legit and needs defending, but the other needs to be criticized.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, you have the victims word which one Judge and the Prosecutor believed in the probability of the molestation.
> 
> You have 3 babysitters who swore under oath that they say highly suspect behavior between the Father and his daughter.
> 
> You have Woody Allen screwing his lover's daughter in a sordid affair and then marrying her later.
> 
> And then you have Moses who witnessed nothing who is out there defending his Dad after being estranged for some reason from his mother.
> 
> Moses by the way is an aspiring photographer.  Motive for Moses' to come out and defend his father would be strong. Think of all the contacts!!!
> 
> Bottom line. Moses saw nothing. He can clearly state he saw nothing.
> 
> Now what the hell that means in the grand scheme of things of this whole sordid mess is up for grabs.
Click to expand...


probability is not guilt. 
 highly suspect-hearsay
Allen marrying the step daughter is irrelevant and not evidence. 
Moses is nothing but hearsay as well. 

So the reality is you and others having nothing but gossip.


----------



## tinydancer

RosieS said:


> Nanny quits rather than succumbs to pressure to be on Mia Farrow's "side":
> 
> Nanny Casts Doubt on Farrow Charges : Custody: She tells Allen's lawyers the actress pressured her to support molestation accusations against him. She says others have reservations. - Los Angeles Times
> 
> Note the doubt also by a maid  and by Moses AT THE TIME.
> 
> Regards from Rosie



Moses was 14 years old. I cannot believe for one moment that Moses was going to this nanny and saying my sister is a liar.

Moses didn't see anything. Of course he freaking didn't. Woody didn't finger fuck her in the living room now did he?

Guess who was paying the Nanny's salary? From your link.

*Farrow's attorney, Eleanor Alter, issued a statement Monday saying, "It is my understanding . . . that Ms. Thompson has totally recanted" the statements attributed to her. She noted that Thompson's salary, upwards of $40,000 a year, was paid by Allen.*

Now the most interesting thing about the nanny was that she was not present on the day Dylan claims she was molested. 

So what the hell kind of garbage is this?

*Thompson, who had worked for Farrow for seven years, said she was not present in Connecticut the day last August the incident now under scrutiny by authorities allegedly occurred.*

Nanny Casts Doubt on Farrow Charges : Custody: She tells Allen's lawyers the actress pressured her to support molestation accusations against him. She says others have reservations. - Los Angeles Times


----------



## Iceweasel

Y'all are too hard on Woody. He's offered to take in Hoffman's kids.


----------



## Delta4Embassy

"Never tell anybody outside the family what you're thinking again." - Don Corleone

(rolls eyes at this whole thing)


----------



## tinydancer

Plasmaball said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> oh so one hearsay is legit and needs defending, but the other needs to be criticized.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, you have the victims word which one Judge and the Prosecutor believed in the probability of the molestation.
> 
> You have 3 babysitters who swore under oath that they say highly suspect behavior between the Father and his daughter.
> 
> You have Woody Allen screwing his lover's daughter in a sordid affair and then marrying her later.
> 
> And then you have Moses who witnessed nothing who is out there defending his Dad after being estranged for some reason from his mother.
> 
> Moses by the way is an aspiring photographer.  Motive for Moses' to come out and defend his father would be strong. Think of all the contacts!!!
> 
> Bottom line. Moses saw nothing. He can clearly state he saw nothing.
> 
> Now what the hell that means in the grand scheme of things of this whole sordid mess is up for grabs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> probability is not guilt.
> highly suspect-hearsay
> Allen marrying the step daughter is irrelevant and not evidence.
> Moses is nothing but hearsay as well.
> 
> So the reality is you and others having nothing but gossip.
Click to expand...


I've put up the court papers which granted Mia custody with the Justice's scathing remarks about Mr. Allen and his affair with Soon Yi. The Judge frankly tore Woody a new asshole.

He considered the affair with Soon Yi relevant. The Judge felt there was a probability of molestation. 

I've put up the testimony of three care givers. I've backed everything I've said. I've put up the statements of the Prosecutor who believed that there was probable cause but decided not to pursue the case because basically it would have destroyed Dylan. 

Gossip? Are you kidding me? That's freaking gossip compared to the Woody fans on here who just keep saying "he's not guilty"? With all due respect, kiss my ass! 

Look Plas, none of us have a dog in this hunt. BUT this is a message board and we are discussing the yays and the nays of the "scandal". Mia has gone on to become the most amazing humanitarian worker. Ronan is totally cool and balanced out. Looks like all the kids have been successful after a trip down a very rocky road.

And this is Dylan's show. Her time. She believes it happened. All the rest of us are trying to just sort it out.

I do find it creepy though that as Ronan said "My father is my brother in law". That's FUBAR'D no matter which way you slice the cake.


----------



## jillian

Dr Grump said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> In 25 years no one but sexual abuse survivors presented as self mutilators to my clinic.  You are simply a celebrity worshiper who will not see what has happened to an innocent child.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do not worship Woody Allen in any way, shape or form. I think he's a good director, average actor, and have seen about three of his 40 movies.
> 
> I just want evidence.
> 
> And as to your first sentence above? I simply don't believe you...
Click to expand...


that's because her first sentence is false. while cutting is a common indicator for sexual abuse, any trauma, sociopathy or depression can lead to cutting.

anorexia and bulimia also occur after sexual abuse. but they frequently occur for many other reasons, as well.


----------



## Delta4Embassy

For those who think children don't make up stories about molestation, go read a case history about alien abducion or Satanic ritual abuse sometime. 

Children lie. A LOT.


----------



## JoeB131

tinydancer said:


> [
> 
> The babysitters all witnessed different behaviors. That should be a no brainer.The one that told her employer first and the employer called Mia to tell her what the sitter had seen was the catalyst to the firestorm.
> 
> She saw Dylan on the couch with Woody on his knees in front of her with his head in her lap.
> 
> Another sitter testified that Dylan had indeed gone missing for about 2o minutes. This is the incident where Dylan claims he finger fucked her. Pardon my french but there is no nice way to put it.
> 
> Third babysitter witnessed Dylan with no underpants on sitting next to Allen on the couch.



Excluding the "missing time" one, where Moses Farrow says there wasn't any of, the other two really only sound sinister when you want them to. 




tinydancer said:


> [
> Mia wasn't upset she was "traded in" . She was pissed off when she saw Soon Yi's pornographic pictures on Woody's mantlepiece. You know. Her daughter's pornographic like pictures taken by her long time lover.
> 
> Farrow and rightfully so was distraught that Woody was having an affair with her daughter.
> 
> And her other children were needless to say completely freaked out that the man they knew as Daddy was going to marry their sister.
> 
> No brainer on why Farrow was upset for crying out loud.



Soon-Yi is a grownup and can make pornographic pictures... so that really doesn't mean anything. 

All of your logic circles back to this point which is pretty freakin' irrelevent.


----------



## Plasmaball

tinydancer said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, you have the victims word which one Judge and the Prosecutor believed in the probability of the molestation.
> 
> You have 3 babysitters who swore under oath that they say highly suspect behavior between the Father and his daughter.
> 
> You have Woody Allen screwing his lover's daughter in a sordid affair and then marrying her later.
> 
> And then you have Moses who witnessed nothing who is out there defending his Dad after being estranged for some reason from his mother.
> 
> Moses by the way is an aspiring photographer.  Motive for Moses' to come out and defend his father would be strong. Think of all the contacts!!!
> 
> Bottom line. Moses saw nothing. He can clearly state he saw nothing.
> 
> Now what the hell that means in the grand scheme of things of this whole sordid mess is up for grabs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> probability is not guilt.
> highly suspect-hearsay
> Allen marrying the step daughter is irrelevant and not evidence.
> Moses is nothing but hearsay as well.
> 
> So the reality is you and others having nothing but gossip.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I've put up the court papers which granted Mia custody with the Justice's scathing remarks about Mr. Allen and his affair with Soon Yi. The Judge frankly tore Woody a new asshole.
> 
> He considered the affair with Soon Yi relevant. The Judge felt there was a probability of molestation.
> 
> I've put up the testimony of three care givers. I've backed everything I've said. I've put up the statements of the Prosecutor who believed that there was probable cause but decided not to pursue the case because basically it would have destroyed Dylan.
> 
> Gossip? Are you kidding me? That's freaking gossip compared to the Woody fans on here who just keep saying "he's not guilty"? With all due respect, kiss my ass!
> 
> Look Plas, none of us have a dog in this hunt. BUT this is a message board and we are discussing the yays and the nays of the "scandal". Mia has gone on to become the most amazing humanitarian worker. Ronan is totally cool and balanced out. Looks like all the kids have been successful after a trip down a very rocky road.
> 
> And this is Dylan's show. Her time. She believes it happened. All the rest of us are trying to just sort it out.
> 
> I do find it creepy though that as Ronan said "My father is my brother in law". That's FUBAR'D no matter which way you slice the cake.
Click to expand...


so you have no actual proof like i've been saying all along. Let me know when you have more than Probables and suspicions.


----------



## tinydancer

JoeB131 said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> 
> The babysitters all witnessed different behaviors. That should be a no brainer.The one that told her employer first and the employer called Mia to tell her what the sitter had seen was the catalyst to the firestorm.
> 
> She saw Dylan on the couch with Woody on his knees in front of her with his head in her lap.
> 
> Another sitter testified that Dylan had indeed gone missing for about 2o minutes. This is the incident where Dylan claims he finger fucked her. Pardon my french but there is no nice way to put it.
> 
> Third babysitter witnessed Dylan with no underpants on sitting next to Allen on the couch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Excluding the "missing time" one, where Moses Farrow says there wasn't any of, the other two really only sound sinister when you want them to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> Mia wasn't upset she was "traded in" . She was pissed off when she saw Soon Yi's pornographic pictures on Woody's mantlepiece. You know. Her daughter's pornographic like pictures taken by her long time lover.
> 
> Farrow and rightfully so was distraught that Woody was having an affair with her daughter.
> 
> And her other children were needless to say completely freaked out that the man they knew as Daddy was going to marry their sister.
> 
> No brainer on why Farrow was upset for crying out loud.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Soon-Yi is a grownup and can make pornographic pictures... so that really doesn't mean anything.
> 
> All of your logic circles back to this point which is pretty freakin' irrelevent.
Click to expand...


Moses was 13 or 14 at the time and wouldn't have given a rats ass what his baby sister was doing. And of course he didn't see anything.

It's not like Woody was going to finger fuck Dylan in the living room now would he?

And by the way, when awarding total custody to Farrow whether you like it or not the Justice thought Woody's affair with Soon Yi part of his decision.

Bottom line Woody fucking Mia's daughter and every one else in the family's sister shows how self absorbed he was. And the Judge took that into account.  

It really was relevant. Woody lost custody of his children over it.


----------



## JoeB131

Gracie said:


> Well, everyone is entitled to speak their opinion. Some agree with each other. Some don't. My stance is Allen is a perv, boinked SoonYi and groomed her to take Mia's place because he likes boinking children, and then he fondled and wanted to boink Dylan and did but maybe not with is penis. Boinking is boinking. He is a perv. In my opinion only. I believe Dylan. Period.



so one more time, your only proof that he had sex with a child is that he had sex with an adult.


----------



## tinydancer

Plasmaball said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> probability is not guilt.
> highly suspect-hearsay
> Allen marrying the step daughter is irrelevant and not evidence.
> Moses is nothing but hearsay as well.
> 
> So the reality is you and others having nothing but gossip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've put up the court papers which granted Mia custody with the Justice's scathing remarks about Mr. Allen and his affair with Soon Yi. The Judge frankly tore Woody a new asshole.
> 
> He considered the affair with Soon Yi relevant. The Judge felt there was a probability of molestation.
> 
> I've put up the testimony of three care givers. I've backed everything I've said. I've put up the statements of the Prosecutor who believed that there was probable cause but decided not to pursue the case because basically it would have destroyed Dylan.
> 
> Gossip? Are you kidding me? That's freaking gossip compared to the Woody fans on here who just keep saying "he's not guilty"? With all due respect, kiss my ass!
> 
> Look Plas, none of us have a dog in this hunt. BUT this is a message board and we are discussing the yays and the nays of the "scandal". Mia has gone on to become the most amazing humanitarian worker. Ronan is totally cool and balanced out. Looks like all the kids have been successful after a trip down a very rocky road.
> 
> And this is Dylan's show. Her time. She believes it happened. All the rest of us are trying to just sort it out.
> 
> I do find it creepy though that as Ronan said "My father is my brother in law". That's FUBAR'D no matter which way you slice the cake.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> so you have no actual proof like i've been saying all along. Let me know when you have more than Probables and suspicions.
Click to expand...



I don't have to prove jack shit to you. I've put up testimony and court documents. Hey go be a Woody fan. Knock yourself out!

I don't care.


----------



## JoeB131

tinydancer said:


> [
> 
> Moses was 13 or 14 at the time and wouldn't have given a rats ass what his baby sister was doing. And of course he didn't see anything.
> 
> It's not like Woody was going to finger fuck Dylan in the living room now would he?
> 
> And by the way, when awarding total custody to Farrow whether you like it or not the Justice thought Woody's affair with Soon Yi part of his decision.
> 
> Bottom line Woody fucking Mia's daughter and every one else in the family's sister shows how self absorbed he was. And the Judge took that into account.
> 
> It really was relevant. Woody lost custody of his children over it.



You are suddenly in love with the word "finger-fuck", aren't you? 

Judges usually side with the mother on custody issues, so that's really nothing new, and really doesn't prove anything.  

Hey, here's a whacky idea. Convince me that he was guilty of molesting Dylan without mentioning Soon-Yi.  

That would be impressive.


----------



## RosieS

Delta4Embassy said:


> For those who think children don't make up stories about molestation, go read a case history about alien abducion or Satanic ritual abuse sometime.
> 
> Children lie. A LOT.



Especially when the lie is scripted by a intimidating parent.

Mommy took Dylan to the doctor two days in a row to be sure that "everything's set". Major clueage in that phrase. 

Investigators from Yale found that Dylan could not consistently point out the body parts that had been touched.

Hard for a 7 year old to keep Mommy's furious jilted lies straight, understandably.

Regards from Rosie


----------



## Plasmaball

tinydancer said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've put up the court papers which granted Mia custody with the Justice's scathing remarks about Mr. Allen and his affair with Soon Yi. The Judge frankly tore Woody a new asshole.
> 
> He considered the affair with Soon Yi relevant. The Judge felt there was a probability of molestation.
> 
> I've put up the testimony of three care givers. I've backed everything I've said. I've put up the statements of the Prosecutor who believed that there was probable cause but decided not to pursue the case because basically it would have destroyed Dylan.
> 
> Gossip? Are you kidding me? That's freaking gossip compared to the Woody fans on here who just keep saying "he's not guilty"? With all due respect, kiss my ass!
> 
> Look Plas, none of us have a dog in this hunt. BUT this is a message board and we are discussing the yays and the nays of the "scandal". Mia has gone on to become the most amazing humanitarian worker. Ronan is totally cool and balanced out. Looks like all the kids have been successful after a trip down a very rocky road.
> 
> And this is Dylan's show. Her time. She believes it happened. All the rest of us are trying to just sort it out.
> 
> I do find it creepy though that as Ronan said "My father is my brother in law". That's FUBAR'D no matter which way you slice the cake.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so you have no actual proof like i've been saying all along. Let me know when you have more than Probables and suspicions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I don't have to prove jack shit to you. I've put up testimony and court documents. Hey go be a Woody fan. Knock yourself out!
> 
> I don't care.
Click to expand...


more nothing from tabloid trash. nothing you've posted proves Allen did anything. Speculation isnt facts. Typical of you and your kind. When actually challenged you cry and whine because you have nothing.


----------



## tinydancer

RosieS said:


> And yet  It is not yet under consideration that Moses saw nothing BECAUSE NOTHING HAPPENED.
> 
> Perjury on behalf of a powerful employer?  And nothing came of that, now did it.
> 
> These allegations always were about a whole lot of nothing.
> 
> Regards from Rosie



More likely scenario to explain why Moses didn;t see anything?

Daddy didn't invite him to the attic to watch him finger fuck Dylan. Ever consider that Rosie?

That Daddy chose someplace "away" from the family instead to doing the "dirty" in the living room or the television room where every body could witness him molesting Dylan?

Gee, to me it's a no brainer that Woody didn't want a freaking audience.


----------



## tinydancer

Plasmaball said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> so you have no actual proof like i've been saying all along. Let me know when you have more than Probables and suspicions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't have to prove jack shit to you. I've put up testimony and court documents. Hey go be a Woody fan. Knock yourself out!
> 
> I don't care.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> more nothing from tabloid trash. nothing you've posted proves Allen did anything. Speculation isnt facts. Typical of you and your kind. When actually challenged you cry and whine because you have nothing.
Click to expand...


Ah Plas. You just haven't read my posts. I have not linked to one tabloid. Court documents and reported testimony in the New York Times.

Is the New York Times Archives tabloid trash? 



And who's crying? Not me. Who's whining? Not me. You're doing the imaginary projection thingy again.


----------



## Sunshine

RosieS said:


> Only a lazy clinician lumps clients into only one category.
> 
> The reasons kids become cutters are myriad, many having nothing to do with sex and more to do with gender roles and bullying and stress, among other things:
> 
> Teens Cutting & Other Self Injurious Behavior in Children & Adolescents
> 
> And here is a short review of reasons Dylan Farrow was not believed at the time, in a very recent article which also describes in detail the vengeful females seen in this thread:
> 
> Brian Dickerson: In case against Woody Allen, emotion outruns the evidence | Detroit Free Press | freep.com
> 
> If you own a pipe, shove these sources in it.
> 
> Regards from Rosie



Well, you have just earned a big fat *NEG!*

It takes years of study and thousands of dollars to become a clinician.  You don't know your ass from a hole in the ground on the topic.  And this post just proved it.


----------



## Sunshine

Connery said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have everything to do with this thread and discussed that which I felt interested me.   We view things differently. I am at a  stage in my life  where I look at people who would be good for my son or bad for my son. This thread has been very enlightening in both the OP and responses. Which is why I have had meaningful and well thought out discussions with those who I enjoyed sharing thoughts with.
> 
> 
> Are you suggesting I leave this thread, am posting in an inappropriate way,  derailing or otherwise acting in an untoward manner?  In other words I see you are still trying to provoke....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow so you are a typical parent. Congrats on that accomplishment.
> 
> Beyond you discovering how to be a parent, you are here to discuss his guilt. You've already stated as much that you do not trust him.nothing wrong with that if you do not, but that is not what people are doing are they. They are professing guilt with little to no proof.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have discussed what I felt was germane to the topic.
Click to expand...


   [MENTION=40540]Connery[/MENTION]

And I have discussed it from the point of view of a clinician.   Yet, they simply refuse to see reality.

When my children were VERY young and I was a stay at home mom, I saw a TV show about people who had been molested as children.  They didn't have 'good touch bad touch' then, but the recommendation was to give children permission to decline to associate with anyone who made them feel uncomfortable.  On the show it said that most victims knew something was wrong but did not leave the situation because the person was a family member or a trusted friend.  That is what I did with my children.  I told them that if ANYONE, no matter who it was, made them uncomfortable not to be around the person.  Years later, my daughter told me of someone in my late husband's family she really felt was a creep and had avoided like the plague when she was very young because of what I told her would not stay around him.  I was glad to know that.  I don't know if he ever perpetrated anyone, but he was a sleaze bag.

Years later after I had been to school and was working I asked all of my patients who were survivors if they  had any inkling that something was wrong.  To the person, Just as on the show, they all said 'yes' but that the person was a trusted relative, family friend, bus driver, teacher, shopkeeper, neighbor, etc.  Most of us have gut feelings.  Few of us have permission to follow our gut feelings.

I recommend a book: The Gift of Fear by Gavin de Becker.  Anyone who reads it will have no problem believing in and heeding their gut feelings about other people.  

As we progress to the master's level as clinicians, we learn the models and theories, but we never forget that if we walk into a group of people and the hair on the back of our necks stands up, something is definitely wrong.


----------



## Plasmaball

tinydancer said:


> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't have to prove jack shit to you. I've put up testimony and court documents. Hey go be a Woody fan. Knock yourself out!
> 
> I don't care.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> more nothing from tabloid trash. nothing you've posted proves Allen did anything. Speculation isnt facts. Typical of you and your kind. When actually challenged you cry and whine because you have nothing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ah Plas. You just haven't read my posts. I have not linked to one tabloid. Court documents and reported testimony in the New York Times.
> 
> Is the New York Times Archives tabloid trash?
> 
> 
> 
> And who's crying? Not me. Who's whining? Not me. You're doing the imaginary projection thingy again.
Click to expand...


i never claimed you did, I have dubbed your nickname as tabloid trash.


----------



## Sunshine

thanatos144 said:


> Why do some seem to always excuse abuse of young girls?
> 
> tapatalk post



Why indeed!  Not hard to figure that one out.


----------



## Sunshine

tinydancer said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> Dylan Farrow's Brother Moses Defends Woody Allen
> 
> 
> "Of course Woody did not molest my sister," says Moses, who is estranged from Farrow and many of his siblings and is close to Allen and Soon-Yi. "She loved him and looked forward to seeing him when he would visit. She never hid from him until our mother succeeded in creating the atmosphere of fear and hate towards him. The day in question, there were six or seven of us in the house. We were all in public rooms and no one, not my father or sister, was off in any private spaces. My mother was conveniently out shopping. I dont know if my sister really believes she was molested or is trying to please her mother. Pleasing my mother was very powerful motivation because to be on her wrong side was horrible."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dylan Farrow's Brother Moses Defends Woody Allen - Scandals & Feuds, Dylan Farrow, Mia Farrow, Ronan Farrow, Woody Allen : People.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That link isn't working.
> 
> How would Moses know? Truly how would Moses know?
> 
> You have situations like the crazy dude who had those girls locked up for years, and the other children didn't know that Daddy had these three women
> 
> Ariel Castro. He held these women for over a decade and raped them and no one in the family knew.
> 
> ETA: I can give you a quizzillion examples where family members didn't have a clue what the perpetrator was doing. That's just a no brainer.
Click to expand...


It is also typical behavior for a perp to single out one 'special' child to molest sometimes years at a time.


----------



## Sunshine

jillian said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> In 25 years no one but sexual abuse survivors presented as self mutilators to my clinic.  You are simply a celebrity worshiper who will not see what has happened to an innocent child.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do not worship Woody Allen in any way, shape or form. I think he's a good director, average actor, and have seen about three of his 40 movies.
> 
> I just want evidence.
> 
> And as to your first sentence above? I simply don't believe you...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> that's because her first sentence is false. while cutting is a common indicator for sexual abuse, any trauma, sociopathy or depression can lead to cutting.
> 
> anorexia and bulimia also occur after sexual abuse. but they frequently occur for many other reasons, as well.
Click to expand...


Links?  Studies?  Creds?  Oh, right.  You have none.


----------



## tinydancer

JoeB131 said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> 
> Moses was 13 or 14 at the time and wouldn't have given a rats ass what his baby sister was doing. And of course he didn't see anything.
> 
> It's not like Woody was going to finger fuck Dylan in the living room now would he?
> 
> And by the way, when awarding total custody to Farrow whether you like it or not the Justice thought Woody's affair with Soon Yi part of his decision.
> 
> Bottom line Woody fucking Mia's daughter and every one else in the family's sister shows how self absorbed he was. And the Judge took that into account.
> 
> It really was relevant. Woody lost custody of his children over it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are suddenly in love with the word "finger-fuck", aren't you?
> 
> Judges usually side with the mother on custody issues, so that's really nothing new, and really doesn't prove anything.
> 
> Hey, here's a whacky idea. Convince me that he was guilty of molesting Dylan without mentioning Soon-Yi.
> 
> That would be impressive.
Click to expand...


There's a real simple explanation for "finger fuck" I sprained my wrist and I'm stuck typing with only one hand and it's making me crazy to type this slow.

Consequently I'm taking short cuts with words and phrases and "finger fuck" is a hell of a lot easier than continually typing in "vaginal penetration with his finger while kissing her all over".

Regarding the Judge. It was his open attack on what a piece of shit Woody was as a father that was astonishing.

I mean he ripped Woody a new asshole in his judgement. 

Re: Dylan well hell's bells I've brought up the testimony of the babysitters, court documents  and today I brought to the board a fabulous op ed of a professional child abuse investigator who really pointed out in this piece how horrifically this case was handled.

It's worth the read. I don't know if Dylan was molested or not. I only jumped in on the Dylan part to try to smack down those who were just rabidly going after Mia Farrow.

 I mean hell's bells your babysitters employer calls you and tells you she saw Woody on his knees in front of Dylan with his head in her lap and then Dylan tells Mia what Daddy did, what the hell was Mia to do?

Ignore it? Tell the child she's imagining shit? Tell her she's a bad girl for making up lies?

I believe Mia did the only thing she could do. Take her to a doctor and have an investigation started. 

Frankly I was just keeping to the "creepy" part of Soon Yi before certain individuals wanted to get into a dust up. I will always oblige 

This really really worth the read. 

* Patrick Perion is a child abuse investigator in Illinois. In this article he gives his professional opinion on the Woody Allen/Dylan Farrow abuse case.*

A Child Abuse Investigator's View of the Woody Allen/Dylan Farrow Case | The Daily Banter


----------



## jillian

Sunshine said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do not worship Woody Allen in any way, shape or form. I think he's a good director, average actor, and have seen about three of his 40 movies.
> 
> I just want evidence.
> 
> And as to your first sentence above? I simply don't believe you...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that's because her first sentence is false. while cutting is a common indicator for sexual abuse, any trauma, sociopathy or depression can lead to cutting.
> 
> anorexia and bulimia also occur after sexual abuse. but they frequently occur for many other reasons, as well.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Links?  Studies?  Creds?  Oh, right.  You have none.
Click to expand...


as opposed to your made up anecdotal "evidence"?

lmao


----------



## Connery

Sunshine said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Plasmaball said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow so you are a typical parent. Congrats on that accomplishment.
> 
> Beyond you discovering how to be a parent, you are here to discuss his guilt. You've already stated as much that you do not trust him.nothing wrong with that if you do not, but that is not what people are doing are they. They are professing guilt with little to no proof.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have discussed what I felt was germane to the topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> [MENTION=40540]Connery[/MENTION]
> 
> And I have discussed it from the point of view of a clinician.   Yet, they simply refuse to see reality.
> 
> When my children were VERY young and I was a stay at home mom, I saw a TV show about people who had been molested as children.  They didn't have 'good touch bad touch' then, but the recommendation was to give children permission to decline to associate with anyone who made them feel uncomfortable.  On the show it said that most victims knew something was wrong but did not leave the situation because the person was a family member or a trusted friend.  That is what I did with my children.  I told them that if ANYONE, no matter who it was, made them uncomfortable not to be around the person.  Years later, my daughter told me of someone in my late husband's family she really felt was a creep and had avoided like the plague when she was very young because of what I told her would not stay around him.  I was glad to know that.  I don't know if he ever perpetrated anyone, but he was a sleaze bag.
> 
> Years later after I had been to school and was working I asked all of my patients who were survivors if they  had any inkling that something was wrong.  To the person, Just as on the show, they all said 'yes' but that the person was a trusted relative, family friend, bus driver, teacher, shopkeeper, neighbor, etc.  Most of us have gut feelings.  Few of us have permission to follow our gut feelings.
> 
> I recommend a book: The Gift of Fear by Gavin de Becker.  Anyone who reads it will have no problem believing in and heeding their gut feelings about other people.
> 
> As we progress to the master's level as clinicians, we learn the models and theories, but we never forget that if we walk into a group of people and the hair on the back of our necks stands up, something is definitely wrong.
Click to expand...



Thank you for your thoughtful post. In my various capacities scout leader, volunteer at my son's school etc I am around children a great deal and I am required to take numerous courses regarding some of the issues expressed in this thread. I have read what many people have said, I have taken in constructive posts such as yours and they gave me pause and time to reflect on different elements of Allen's behavior, Dylan's behavior and that of the family unit. I looked at this thread in a global way rather than the sole issue of Allen's guilt or innocence. In fact, I have not thought much about that , although  I have tried to look at all the facts, circumstances etc. that were available.

One thing I do know...kid's can tell tales, kids have very active and vivid imaginations and kids can easily be manipulated by those they love and trust. IMO the telltale sign is in the behavior of the child  and whether that behavior is aberrant or within normal parameters and from there with counseling the truth can be drawn out over time. Then perhaps the road to healing can traversed it is rife with pain, however, when the other end is reached the person may begin to feel whole.


----------



## tinydancer

From the professional  child abuse investigator comes one major part of the jig saw puzzle on the "why" Dylan became so stressed out .

*The idea of a team of 3 doctors interviewing a frightened 7 year old child individually or as a group over 6 months is reprehensible. There&#8217;s a reason we do one interview on tape. Asking Dylan to relive and retell the account of her abuse over and over again victimized her even further.

It&#8217;s not shocking that she said first she wasn&#8217;t touched, then she was, then she wasn&#8217;t. 

 Children who are repeatedly interviewed about the same incident often change an answer to please the person doing the interview.  We see this in custody cases all the time. When the kids at mom&#8217;s they say they hate dad, when they&#8217;re at dad&#8217;s vice versa.

It&#8217;s not a giant leap to think that Dylan was confused and scared by these three adult men asking her questions about her private parts for SIX MONTHS. 

 It&#8217;s inconceivable to anyone who practices social work today.  It&#8217;s entirely possible that she was &#8220;emotionally&#8221; disturbed because of the way she was dealt with by people who should have known better.*

A Child Abuse Investigator's View of the Woody Allen/Dylan Farrow Case | The Daily Banter


----------



## Dr Grump

Gracie said:


> Well, everyone is entitled to speak their opinion. Some agree with each other. Some don't. My stance is Allen is a perv, boinked SoonYi and groomed her to take Mia's place because he likes boinking children, and then he fondled and wanted to boink Dylan and did but maybe not with is penis. Boinking is boinking. He is a perv. In my opinion only. I believe Dylan. Period.




I disagree. I think he likes bonking young women - note I say women not girls. Going by most of his scripts that is...


----------



## Esmeralda

Dr Grump said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, everyone is entitled to speak their opinion. Some agree with each other. Some don't. My stance is Allen is a perv, boinked SoonYi and groomed her to take Mia's place because he likes boinking children, and then he fondled and wanted to boink Dylan and did but maybe not with is penis. Boinking is boinking. He is a perv. In my opinion only. I believe Dylan. Period.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree. I think he likes bonking young women - note I say women not girls. Going by most of his scripts that is...
Click to expand...


Based on his movies, I'd agree with this.  We cannot know or decide what he did, but look at what evidence there may be (there is no physical evidence), and logically reason what might have happened.  His films indicate he has a thing for young women, not children.  But his other behavior indicates he is somewhat amoral and certainly doesn't put the needs of his children above himself.  Witnesses, the child's statements, those things support he did.  Other issues support he didn't.  I want to stress, however, that the fact he was allowed to adopt 2 children with Soon Yi does not indicate anything about his character.  Most likely these were private adoptions through an attorney.  He would not have been investigated. People his age are not normally allowed to adopt if you go through an agency.  Wealthy people pay high prices for private adoptions through attorneys. You work with the attorney and the mother.  Hypothetically it isn't selling the baby because the mother, hypothetically, does not profit.


----------



## Gracie

My question is..that pic of him with that young girl where she is grasping the railing..is that a young soon yi or one of his new adoptive daughters?

Second question is...would ANYONE here on this thread ever let Woody Allen be alone with your 7 year old kid for an hour or two?


----------



## thanatos144

Gracie said:


> My question is..that pic of him with that young girl where she is grasping the railing..is that a young soon yi or one of his new adoptive daughters?
> 
> Second question is...would ANYONE here on this thread ever let Woody Allen be alone with your 7 year old kid for an hour or two?



Fuck no 

tapatalk post


----------



## Gracie

I am curious as to those who are claiming Allen is innocent due to no proof. Would THEY let their 7 year old child be with Allen for an hour or two, alone?


----------



## RosieS

Gracie said:


> I am curious as to those who are claiming Allen is innocent due to no proof. Would THEY let their 7 year old child be with Allen for an hour or two, alone?



I would, because I would not subject my daughter to Mia Farrow' s rages or slapping children around.

Given a choice between Mia Farrow and Woody Allen - Farrow is the abuser.

I believe the Yale professionals who  did the work up on Dylan; I believe in the fact that no charges were ever brought against Allen and

I believe the employee and adopted child (Moses) who both said Farrow was out of control.

I have sufficient evidence - real, personal testimony concerning Farrow and concerning the failure if a 7 year old to convince the pros of abuse -

 - to believe my child would be much safer with Allen.

And I find overwrought, manipulative and enraged women are unhealthy for children to be around.

Leave my girl for 2 hours with Allen, fine, but no way with Farrow.

Your opinion that I am wrong lacks merit. It is merely your opinion; which you are entitled to, but you underestimate me totally.

And that is that.

Regards from Rosie


----------



## Esmeralda

Gracie said:


> My question is..that pic of him with that young girl where she is grasping the railing..is that a young soon yi or one of his new adoptive daughters?
> 
> Second question is...would ANYONE here on this thread ever let Woody Allen be alone with your 7 year old kid for an hour or two?



Well, I'm not ever likely to have any contact with Allen, but most likely, with any man or woman who has been accused of molesting a child, I might not want to leave a 7 year old, male or female with him.

However, I have a personal experience with this type of situation. At one time while living in Seattle, I decided to rent out my extra bedroom as I was short of cash.  The woman who rented it was someone who had accused her husband of child molestation.  The court had found no evidence  and given him custody of the kids.  (I found all of this out after she moved in, didn't realize she was such a nutter before she moved in.)  She had then tried to take them out of the country and got caught at the airport, so her only contact with her kids was a telephone call a couple times a week.  Well, I would have no problem leaving a 7 year old with her husband, who had remarried by that time.  I don't think the allegations were true, but that is because I got to know her and heard her side in depth.  I don't know Mia Farrow or what she is like and do not want to make assumptions based on media coverage of the whole thing. However, the judge in the custody case did not seem to think she was a nut or anything.


----------



## Plasmaball

Gracie said:


> I am curious as to those who are claiming Allen is innocent due to no proof. Would THEY let their 7 year old child be with Allen for an hour or two, alone?



personal opinion does not equal guilt under law.


----------



## L.K.Eder

Gracie said:


> My question is..that pic of him with that young girl where she is grasping the railing..is that a young soon yi or one of his new adoptive daughters?
> 
> Second question is...would ANYONE here on this thread ever let Woody Allen be alone with your 7 year old kid for an hour or two?




"My question is..that pic of him with that young girl where she is grasping the railing..is that a young soon yi or one of his new adoptive daughters?"

that was answered several times in this thread, and it is easy to find out.

why don't you do that?


----------



## Interpol

skye said:


> I have no idea if Woody Allen is a molester  or not.
> 
> All I know is that Mia Farrow is one snake of an ex wife.



They were never married.


----------



## Interpol

koshergrl said:


> If he molested my  kids and married one of our adopted kids, I'd want to ruin him too.
> 
> It's funny to see who will defend child molesters.



The molestation charge is an allegation and Soon-Yi was not Woody's adopted kid; it was Mia's adopted kid. In her memoir, she encouraged the two to get to know each other because she was approaching 20 and he didn't much know her. 

Why? Because Woody didn't live with them or spend that much time with all the kids. So they started hanging out and a year later it was clear to them they were in love. They've been together 22 years now.


----------



## Interpol

Gracie said:


> Woody Allen is a scumbag, banging his adoptive daughter. SCUM. BAG.
> I hope Mia does destroy him but Hollywood seems to think it's A OK to fuck ones daughter even if she is an adoptive one.



Soon-Yi was not his adopted daughter, and she no doubt doesn't find her husband to be a scumbag.


----------



## Interpol

drifter said:


> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> it's so unbelievable....everybody crucifying a man with hearsay...
> 
> 
> I would  like to see you in his shoes....people are weird or ignorant or I don't what...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coming from someone that would crucify Mia Farrow on hearsay?
> 
> I really don't care for Allen or his humor or movies.
> 
> Whether he has done what has been rumored, innocent until proven guilty.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well we do know he married his adopted daughter.
> 
> Here he is as her Dad
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here he is as her Husband
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did Woody Allen Molest His Adopted Daughter 22 Years Ago?
> 
> On This Day In 1997, Woody Allen Marries His Adopted Step-Daughter Soon-Yi Previn | Today in History
Click to expand...


The picture of that child is Woody and Soon-Yi's adopted daughter Bechel Dumaine Allen. 

People keep spreading that picture around and making a false claim about who's in it.


----------



## Politico

But it's no fun if you don't make stuff up.


----------



## JoeB131

tinydancer said:


> [
> 
> There's a real simple explanation for "finger fuck" I sprained my wrist and I'm stuck typing with only one hand and it's making me crazy to type this slow.
> 
> Consequently I'm taking short cuts with words and phrases and "finger fuck" is a hell of a lot easier than continually typing in "vaginal penetration with his finger while kissing her all over".
> 
> Regarding the Judge. It was his open attack on what a piece of shit Woody was as a father that was astonishing.
> 
> I mean he ripped Woody a new asshole in his judgement.
> 
> Re: Dylan well hell's bells I've brought up the testimony of the babysitters, court documents  and today I brought to the board a fabulous op ed of a professional child abuse investigator who really pointed out in this piece how horrifically this case was handled.
> 
> It's worth the read. I don't know if Dylan was molested or not. I only jumped in on the Dylan part to try to smack down those who were just rabidly going after Mia Farrow.
> 
> I mean hell's bells your babysitters employer calls you and tells you she saw Woody on his knees in front of Dylan with his head in her lap and then Dylan tells Mia what Daddy did, what the hell was Mia to do?
> 
> Ignore it? Tell the child she's imagining shit? Tell her she's a bad girl for making up lies?
> 
> I believe Mia did the only thing she could do. Take her to a doctor and have an investigation started.
> 
> Frankly I was just keeping to the "creepy" part of Soon Yi before certain individuals wanted to get into a dust up. I will always oblige
> 
> This really really worth the read.
> 
> * Patrick Perion is a child abuse investigator in Illinois. In this article he gives his professional opinion on the Woody Allen/Dylan Farrow abuse case.*
> ]



Your "professional" abuse investigator was not there, did not talk to any of the witnesses, and is just speculating on media reports.  Therefore, he's really not very "professional".  

But let's look at what we have as REAL evidence. 

No Physical evidence. 
Dylan couldn't keep her story straight when she talked to the first people who examined her at Yales. 
Allen took a lie detector test and passed. 
Moses Farrow has said nothing happened and his mother is batshit crazy. 
The Prosecutor, as much as he wanted to, did not press charges. 

But, hey, fuck all that kind of evidence and concepts of reasonable doubt.  

let's hang him because we think his relationship with an adult (Soon-Yi) is creepy.


----------



## Sunshine

Connery said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have discussed what I felt was germane to the topic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [MENTION=40540]Connery[/MENTION]
> 
> And I have discussed it from the point of view of a clinician.   Yet, they simply refuse to see reality.
> 
> When my children were VERY young and I was a stay at home mom, I saw a TV show about people who had been molested as children.  They didn't have 'good touch bad touch' then, but the recommendation was to give children permission to decline to associate with anyone who made them feel uncomfortable.  On the show it said that most victims knew something was wrong but did not leave the situation because the person was a family member or a trusted friend.  That is what I did with my children.  I told them that if ANYONE, no matter who it was, made them uncomfortable not to be around the person.  Years later, my daughter told me of someone in my late husband's family she really felt was a creep and had avoided like the plague when she was very young because of what I told her would not stay around him.  I was glad to know that.  I don't know if he ever perpetrated anyone, but he was a sleaze bag.
> 
> Years later after I had been to school and was working I asked all of my patients who were survivors if they  had any inkling that something was wrong.  To the person, Just as on the show, they all said 'yes' but that the person was a trusted relative, family friend, bus driver, teacher, shopkeeper, neighbor, etc.  Most of us have gut feelings.  Few of us have permission to follow our gut feelings.
> 
> I recommend a book: The Gift of Fear by Gavin de Becker.  Anyone who reads it will have no problem believing in and heeding their gut feelings about other people.
> 
> As we progress to the master's level as clinicians, we learn the models and theories, but we never forget that if we walk into a group of people and the hair on the back of our necks stands up, something is definitely wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for your thoughtful post. In my various capacities scout leader, volunteer at my son's school etc I am around children a great deal and I am required to take numerous courses regarding some of the issues expressed in this thread. I have read what many people have said, I have taken in constructive posts such as yours and they gave me pause and time to reflect on different elements of Allen's behavior, Dylan's behavior and that of the family unit. I looked at this thread in a global way rather than the sole issue of Allen's guilt or innocence. In fact, I have not thought much about that , although  I have tried to look at all the facts, circumstances etc. that were available.
> 
> One thing I do know...kid's can tell tales, kids have very active and vivid imaginations and kids can easily be manipulated by those they love and trust. IMO the telltale sign is in the behavior of the child  and whether that behavior is aberrant or within normal parameters and from there with counseling the truth can be drawn out over time. Then perhaps the road to healing can traversed it is rife with pain, however, when the other end is reached the person may begin to feel whole.
Click to expand...


  [MENTION=40540]Connery[/MENTION]

Yes, behaviors to tell the tale.  When I was teaching I had a student come to my office as torn up as a can of kraut.  Her daughter's behavior had changed.  So, she got someone to help her log onto the computer using her daughter's password.  When she did she learned that the girl and some of her friends had been lured into a teenage prostitution ring by some 50 year old men.  My student contacted the FBI who came and got the computer.  She received death threats and went through some really horrible stuff.  But the men who were running this teenage prostitution ring were apprehended and shut down.  It made national news.  

If a parent waits until the child's behavior has changed they have waited too late because the abuse has already happened.  The goal is to PREVENT the abuse, so the parent has to act preemptively and many parents just don't know to do that or don't think they can.  Many still use the old 'don't take candy from strangers' method, and quite frankly most children just don't get that.  If the parent dismisses what the child says out of hand, then the parent has failed the child.  Children as young as 7 simply don't have the vocabulary or sexual knowledge to make stuff up.  If a parent is coaching the child, and  yes, that does happen in some bitter divorce cases, it is not difficult for the seasoned professional to tell because the child cannot deviate from the script the parent gave.  

Courts are wising up and most states now have what is called a 'parenting plan.'  In states that have those, a parent who disses the other parent or draws the child into a conspiratorial relationship such as making accusations of abuse which are not true can lose not only custody, but also visitation rights.  In this day and age, using a child in this manner is going to backfire.  When I lived in Nashville, the TN Supreme Court hired a psychologist for a 1 year term to write Tennessee's parenting plan.  It has teeth in it.  

The fact that in this particular case, the child, now an adult, has pursued the issue of her own accord and has clear symptomology really leaves very little doubt in my mind.  It really takes courage for a victim to do something like an 'open letter' to a celeb parent.  And, as we all can see, it really draws ire not only toward the person who wrote the letter, but to other members of the family.  I believe the system failed this child.  And I can tell you from years of practice that the system has failed many children in this country.  That is how so many authority figures, not just parents, have gotten away with victimizing children in this country for so long.  I hope the tide is turning, but the reality is that bringing a perp to justice remains a mine field for the victim.  And the Constitution still gives the accused the right to look dead on in a court of law at the victim even when the victim is a child of tender years.  That will not change, nor should it.  But to refuse to pursue the perp because of the child's tender years denies  that child the closure that he/she needs.

Well,  I'm pretty well done with this thread.  It is just the same asinine BS over and over with the usual suspects defending adults who victimize children.  Cheers.


----------



## Plasmaball

None of that is evidence of guilt. It's just saying you think K you know better than everyone else. You dont. And thus needed to take the cheap shot at the end.


----------



## tinydancer

JoeB131 said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> 
> There's a real simple explanation for "finger fuck" I sprained my wrist and I'm stuck typing with only one hand and it's making me crazy to type this slow.
> 
> Consequently I'm taking short cuts with words and phrases and "finger fuck" is a hell of a lot easier than continually typing in "vaginal penetration with his finger while kissing her all over".
> 
> Regarding the Judge. It was his open attack on what a piece of shit Woody was as a father that was astonishing.
> 
> I mean he ripped Woody a new asshole in his judgement.
> 
> Re: Dylan well hell's bells I've brought up the testimony of the babysitters, court documents  and today I brought to the board a fabulous op ed of a professional child abuse investigator who really pointed out in this piece how horrifically this case was handled.
> 
> It's worth the read. I don't know if Dylan was molested or not. I only jumped in on the Dylan part to try to smack down those who were just rabidly going after Mia Farrow.
> 
> I mean hell's bells your babysitters employer calls you and tells you she saw Woody on his knees in front of Dylan with his head in her lap and then Dylan tells Mia what Daddy did, what the hell was Mia to do?
> 
> Ignore it? Tell the child she's imagining shit? Tell her she's a bad girl for making up lies?
> 
> I believe Mia did the only thing she could do. Take her to a doctor and have an investigation started.
> 
> Frankly I was just keeping to the "creepy" part of Soon Yi before certain individuals wanted to get into a dust up. I will always oblige
> 
> This really really worth the read.
> 
> * Patrick Perion is a child abuse investigator in Illinois. In this article he gives his professional opinion on the Woody Allen/Dylan Farrow abuse case.*
> ]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your "professional" abuse investigator was not there, did not talk to any of the witnesses, and is just speculating on media reports.  Therefore, he's really not very "professional".
> 
> But let's look at what we have as REAL evidence.
> 
> No Physical evidence.
> Dylan couldn't keep her story straight when she talked to the first people who examined her at Yales.
> Allen took a lie detector test and passed.
> Moses Farrow has said nothing happened and his mother is batshit crazy.
> The Prosecutor, as much as he wanted to, did not press charges.
> 
> But, hey, fuck all that kind of evidence and concepts of reasonable doubt.
> 
> let's hang him because we think his relationship with an adult (Soon-Yi) is creepy.
Click to expand...


A valiant effort there JoeB. But all your points are so easily refutable.  I love to argue and debate so here goes. 

What physical evidence do you want? Dylan was very specific that she was only penetrated by her Father's  fingers. There could be no semen. So how could there be physical evidence?

Moses didn't see anything? Seriously what the hell does that mean? How many brothers and sisters never knew that Daddy was targeting one of the family in sexual abuse cases? Happens all the time.

Moses is Johnny Nada. Of course he didn't see anything. Daddy didn't invite him to a front row seat did he now?

Re: Soon Yi For me she doesn't count in the sense that as perverse as it was, it has only to do with how the other children like Ronan feel about their father/brother in law and Soon Yi sister/step mother. 

That's FUBAR'D no matter how you slice and dice it. 

But and please duly note this, it factored into the Judge's judgement to give Farrow full custody.  

Passing a lie dector test?  Give me a break. 

Lie detector tests really mean jack shit. Do you know how many famous murderers have passed the polygraph with flying colors?

One of most famous killers who passed a polygraph and went on to kill and kill again was the Green River killer. Gary passed the test in '84 and he got to keep on killing till 2001.

And then polygraphs can nail the wrong person like it did with Floyd Fay where he failed two lie detector tests and was convicted for a murder he didn't commit.

Buzz made great use of his time in jail. Check it out.

*The county prosecutors offered Buzz a deal: they would drop all charges if he agreed to take a polygraph - a lie detector test - to prove his innocence. Convinced the whole episode was one big mistake, Buzz readily agreed.

 He took two tests but both suggested he was lying about his innocence. This, along with circumstantial evidence, sealed his 1979 conviction and he spent two-and-a-half years in prison for a murder he didn't commit.

During his time in prison, Buzz studied the polygraph. He sent his results to a number of experts but received wildly different interpretations.

Determined to show the test was fallible, he developed a training exercise to help people fool the lie detector and after just 15 minutes of instruction, 23 out of 27 inmates beat the polygraph.

 Buzz was eventually exonerated, helped by the testimony of the real killer's mother, and his case has become one of the most notorious episodes in the history of the technology.

Vaughan Bell: the truth about lie detectors | Science | The Observer*

And last but not least lets address Dylan's state of mind again shall we?. Because it also goes to why the Prosecutor decided not to proceed with the case. 

And this expert can analyze how this situation from afar. Happens all the time for court cases. Experts don't have to be hands on to be able to diagnose the merits or failures of how a situation was handled. 

And it was handled horridly by today's standards. Barbaric in fact. Brutal to make Dylan relive the situation over and over. 

* Weide makes quite a point that the Investigative Team of 3 doctors who conducted a 6-month investigation concluded that no sexual molestation happened. 

They claimed in part that Dylan was an &#8220;emotionally disturbed child whose story became fixed in her head&#8221; or that she was coached or both.  

They outlined inconsistencies in Dylan&#8217;s statement about being touched on the vaginal area.

The idea of a team of 3 doctors interviewing a frightened 7 year old child individually or as a group over 6 months is reprehensible. 

There&#8217;s a reason we do one interview on tape. Asking Dylan to relive and retell the account of her abuse over and over again victimized her even further.

It&#8217;s not shocking that she said first she wasn&#8217;t touched, then she was, then she wasn&#8217;t.  Children who are repeatedly interviewed about the same incident often change an answer to please the person doing the interview. 

 We see this in custody cases all the time. When the kids at mom&#8217;s they say they hate dad, when they&#8217;re at dad&#8217;s vice versa.

It&#8217;s not a giant leap to think that Dylan was confused and scared by these three adult men asking her questions about her private parts for SIX MONTHS. 

 It&#8217;s inconceivable to anyone who practices social work today.  It&#8217;s entirely possible that she was &#8220;emotionally&#8221; disturbed because of the way she was dealt with by people who should have known better.

Many people, including Weide point out that medical examinations were done and there was no evidence of trauma to the anus or the vagina. 

 This doesn&#8217;t rule out molestation.  In fact it doesn&#8217;t even rule out penetration. The vagina heals remarkably fast and any doctor who knows how to conduct a sexual abuse exam of a child will tell  you that.
*

A Child Abuse Investigator's View of the Woody Allen/Dylan Farrow Case | The Daily Banter


----------



## Dr Grump

Gracie said:


> I am curious as to those who are claiming Allen is innocent due to no proof. Would THEY let their 7 year old child be with Allen for an hour or two, alone?



If he was a friend of mine and I needed stuff doing, and I knew him well enough, and I liked him, sure...


----------



## Dr Grump

tinydancer said:


> A valiant effort there JoeB. But all your points are so easily refutable.  I love to argue and debate so here goes.
> 
> What physical evidence do you want? Dylan was very specific that she was only penetrated by her Father's  fingers. There could be no semen. So how could there be physical evidence?
> 
> Moses didn't see anything? Seriously what the hell does that mean? How many brothers and sisters never knew that Daddy was targeting one of the family in sexual abuse cases? Happens all the time.
> 
> Moses is Johnny Nada. Of course he didn't see anything. Daddy didn't invite him to a front row seat did he now?
> 
> Re: Soon Yi For me she doesn't count in the sense that as perverse as it was, it has only to do with how the other children like Ronan feel about their father/brother in law and Soon Yi sister/step mother.
> 
> That's FUBAR'D no matter how you slice and dice it.
> 
> But and please duly note this, it factored into the Judge's judgement to give Farrow full custody.
> 
> Passing a lie dector test?  Give me a break.



1) There would still be some physical evidence if he used his finger - abrasions, bruising etc - especially for a seven year old girl.
2) Moses didn't see anything, neither did the three nannies. Just because something 'didn't look right' doesn't mean anything happened.
3) Soon Yi was an adult when she made her decision. You may not like it, I sure find it weird, but it was her decision. 22 years later they are still together. As for the grooming, it is has been established that one of the reasons he got to know her as a young adult is that because Woody had hardly anything to do with Mia's kids and she encouraged him to do so.
4) While lie detector tests are not admissible in court for their unreliability they do add weight to me in that if you are willing to take the risk and fail one to prove your innocence then that says a lot about how strongly the person believes in their innocence. Note, Farrow refused to take one. Interesting, no?

And can you and Sunshine please stop with this 'defending Woody' hyperbole. None of us are defending him one iota. If he did it, he should pay. What we are defending is the flimsy - and ultimately dangerous - way in which you are trying to convict him. You are almost mirroring the image some people have formed their opinion over Farrow about. Shilling with no evidence or anything close that comes to proving his guilt.


----------



## JoeB131

To TinyDancer- 

Does Woody Allen strike you as the kind of guy who could fool a lie detector test?  The guy looks nervous all the time to start with.  Now, yeah, that might be his public persona, but I just don't picture him as this stone cold liar. 

Point was, this was investigated and the people who investigated it said nothing happened.  

Now, are they all angry at Allen because of his behavior with Soon-Yi.  Hell yeah. Are they anger that Mia's career is in the toilet and he's up for Oscar consideration... Probably.  

But all you offer is a lot of accusations and no proof.   I'm surprised you didn't offer spectral evidence.


----------



## Roguewave

Sunshine said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> I should have been a defense lawyer!
> 
> I like to defend men from snake ex-wives!
> 
> I should have been a great one too!
Click to expand...


You might want to change your aspirations, at least until you can identify the difference between hearsay and direct evidence. The testimony of the victim is direct testimony and will support a guilty verdict in any court if subject to cross examination.


----------



## Rambunctious

I knew Woody was a kid toucher the first time I laid eyes on him. Look at him for Gods sake he has pervert written all over him.


----------



## waltky

Woody sayin' it ain't so...

*Allen responds to Farrow's abuse claims in letter*
_7 Feb.`14   Woody Allen is again denying he molested adoptive daughter Dylan Farrow and is calling ex-partner Mia Farrow vindictive, spiteful and malevolent in an open letter published online Friday by The New York Times._


> The 78-year-old filmmaker says Dylan Farrow's open letter published last week by The New York Times includes "creative flourishes that seem to have magically appeared during our 21-year estrangement."  "Of course, I did not molest Dylan," writes Allen. "I loved her and hope one day she will grasp how she has been cheated out of having a loving father and exploited by a mother more interested in her own festering anger than her daughter's well-being."  Allen was investigated for the alleged molestation, but was never charged. A team of child abuse specialists from the Yale-New Haven Hospital, brought in to the case by prosecutors and police, concluded that Dylan Farrow had not been molested.  "Now it's 21 years later and Dylan has come forward with the accusations that the Yale experts investigated and found false," Allen said.  At the time of the breakup of their 12-year relationship more than two decades ago, Mia Farrow accused Allen of molesting Dylan Farrow. Allen has consistently denied the abuse allegation.
> 
> Their split followed the discovery of an affair between Allen and Mia Farrow's adopted daughter, Soon-Yi Previn, when she was 19 or 21. (Her official date of birth is uncertain.) Allen and Previn married in 1997 and have two adopted daughters.  "I still loved (Dylan) deeply, and felt guilty that by falling in love with Soon-Yi I had put her in the position of being used as a pawn for revenge," Allen said.  The "Annie Hall" and "Blue Jasmine" director again claims in his open letter that 7-year-old Dylan Farrow was coached by Mia Farrow.  "Not that I doubt Dylan hasn't come to believe she's been molested, but if from the age of 7 a vulnerable child is taught by a strong mother to hate her father because he is a monster who abused her, is it so inconceivable that after many years of this indoctrination the image of me Mia wanted to establish had taken root?" Allen said.
> 
> Dylan Farrow claimed in her letter last week that in 1992 at the family's Connecticut home, Allen led her to a "dim, closet-like attic" and "then he sexually assaulted me." Dylan Farrow didn't specify Allen's actions, but described other abusive behavior.  Allen said in his letter he believes Mia Farrow concocted those details, and they were inspired by the Dory Previn song "With My Daddy in the Attic."  "Does the letter really benefit Dylan or does it simply advance her mother's shabby agenda?" Allen said. "That is to hurt me with a smear. There is even a lame attempt to do professional damage by trying to involve movie stars, which smells a lot more like Mia than Dylan."
> 
> In his letter, Allen recounts several anecdotes to call Mia Farrow's integrity into question. He also addressed the claim by Mia Farrow that her ex-husband Frank Sinatra could be the father of son Ronan Farrow, not Allen.  "Even if he is not Frank's, the possibility she raises that he could be, indicates she was secretly intimate with him during our years," said Allen. "Not to mention all the money I paid for child support. Was I supporting Frank's son? Again, I want to call attention to the integrity and honesty of a person who conducts her life like that."
> 
> MORE


----------



## Amelia

^^

"Again, I want to call attention to the integrity and honesty of a person who conducts her life like that."

That's a curious statement to make considering he started his affair with Mia Farrow's teenage daughter while he and Farrow were still a couple.


----------



## Amelia

Woody Allen has always seemed creepy to me.  I'm not familiar with his work because I could never get past the creep-factor long enough to give his movies a chance.


----------



## JoeB131

Amelia said:


> Woody Allen has always seemed creepy to me.  I'm not familiar with his work because I could never get past the creep-factor long enough to give his movies a chance.



Don't care for his movies, either. 

Which is completely irrelevent to whether or not he molested Dylan.


----------



## freedombecki

Sunshine said:


> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> @Connery
> 
> And I have discussed it from the point of view of a clinician. Yet, they simply refuse to see reality.
> 
> When my children were VERY young and I was a stay at home mom, I saw a TV show about people who had been molested as children. They didn't have 'good touch bad touch' then, but the recommendation was to give children permission to decline to associate with anyone who made them feel uncomfortable. On the show it said that most victims knew something was wrong but did not leave the situation because the person was a family member or a trusted friend. That is what I did with my children. I told them that if ANYONE, no matter who it was, made them uncomfortable not to be around the person. Years later, my daughter told me of someone in my late husband's family she really felt was a creep and had avoided like the plague when she was very young because of what I told her would not stay around him. I was glad to know that. I don't know if he ever perpetrated anyone, but he was a sleaze bag.
> 
> Years later after I had been to school and was working I asked all of my patients who were survivors if they had any inkling that something was wrong. To the person, Just as on the show, they all said 'yes' but that the person was a trusted relative, family friend, bus driver, teacher, shopkeeper, neighbor, etc. Most of us have gut feelings. Few of us have permission to follow our gut feelings.
> 
> I recommend a book: The Gift of Fear by Gavin de Becker. Anyone who reads it will have no problem believing in and heeding their gut feelings about other people.
> 
> As we progress to the master's level as clinicians, we learn the models and theories, but we never forget that if we walk into a group of people and the hair on the back of our necks stands up, something is definitely wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for your thoughtful post. In my various capacities scout leader, volunteer at my son's school etc I am around children a great deal and I am required to take numerous courses regarding some of the issues expressed in this thread. I have read what many people have said, I have taken in constructive posts such as yours and they gave me pause and time to reflect on different elements of Allen's behavior, Dylan's behavior and that of the family unit. I looked at this thread in a global way rather than the sole issue of Allen's guilt or innocence. In fact, I have not thought much about that , although I have tried to look at all the facts, circumstances etc. that were available.
> 
> One thing I do know...kid's can tell tales, kids have very active and vivid imaginations and kids can easily be manipulated by those they love and trust. IMO the telltale sign is in the behavior of the child and whether that behavior is aberrant or within normal parameters and from there with counseling the truth can be drawn out over time. Then perhaps the road to healing can traversed it is rife with pain, however, when the other end is reached the person may begin to feel whole.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> @Connery
> 
> Yes, behaviors to tell the tale. When I was teaching I had a student come to my office as torn up as a can of kraut. Her daughter's behavior had changed. So, she got someone to help her log onto the computer using her daughter's password. When she did she learned that the girl and some of her friends had been lured into a teenage prostitution ring by some 50 year old men. My student contacted the FBI who came and got the computer. She received death threats and went through some really horrible stuff. But the men who were running this teenage prostitution ring were apprehended and shut down. It made national news.
> 
> If a parent waits until the child's behavior has changed they have waited too late because the abuse has already happened. The goal is to PREVENT the abuse, so the parent has to act preemptively and many parents just don't know to do that or don't think they can. Many still use the old 'don't take candy from strangers' method, and quite frankly most children just don't get that. If the parent dismisses what the child says out of hand, then the parent has failed the child. Children as young as 7 simply don't have the vocabulary or sexual knowledge to make stuff up. If a parent is coaching the child, and yes, that does happen in some bitter divorce cases, it is not difficult for the seasoned professional to tell because the child cannot deviate from the script the parent gave.
> 
> Courts are wising up and most states now have what is called a 'parenting plan.' In states that have those, a parent who disses the other parent or draws the child into a conspiratorial relationship such as making accusations of abuse which are not true can lose not only custody, but also visitation rights. In this day and age, using a child in this manner is going to backfire. When I lived in Nashville, the TN Supreme Court hired a psychologist for a 1 year term to write Tennessee's parenting plan. It has teeth in it.
> 
> The fact that in this particular case, the child, now an adult, has pursued the issue of her own accord and has clear symptomology really leaves very little doubt in my mind. It really takes courage for a victim to do something like an 'open letter' to a celeb parent. And, as we all can see, it really draws ire not only toward the person who wrote the letter, but to other members of the family. I believe the system failed this child. And I can tell you from years of practice that the system has failed many children in this country. That is how so many authority figures, not just parents, have gotten away with victimizing children in this country for so long. I hope the tide is turning, but the reality is that bringing a perp to justice remains a mine field for the victim. And the Constitution still gives the accused the right to look dead on in a court of law at the victim even when the victim is a child of tender years. That will not change, nor should it. But to refuse to pursue the perp because of the child's tender years denies that child the closure that he/she needs.
> 
> Well, I'm pretty well done with this thread. It is just the same asinine BS over and over with the usual suspects defending adults who victimize children. Cheers.
Click to expand...

I don't blame you, Sunshine. I'm just surprised the thread hasn't been long forgotten.

I'm afraid we haven't seen the last of the pedophilia defenders online. While Woody's married to this helpless woman, they say he's having a free youngster sex-a-thon behind her back (or not). 

The one thing is certain, though: he's the sex predator of youngsters with a history.

It's almost impossible to put a Hollywood star behind bars.


----------



## freedombecki

Rambunctious said:


> I knew Woody was a kid toucher the first time I laid eyes on him. Look at him for Gods sake he has pervert written all over him.



Really? I couldn't tell until his court records were made public. (I'm sooo not psychic).

 Congratulations on your 1000 post. Rep coming your way, and thanks for your service in the Marines.


----------



## tinydancer

TMZ pulled up an interview with the Woody where he claims to desire a love nest of 15 twelve year olds.

Hey hey!


----------



## Toro

I loved his movies.

Too bad about his weird sex life though.


----------



## tinydancer

JoeB131 said:


> Amelia said:
> 
> 
> 
> Woody Allen has always seemed creepy to me.  I'm not familiar with his work because I could never get past the creep-factor long enough to give his movies a chance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't care for his movies, either.
> 
> Which is completely irrelevent to whether or not he molested Dylan.
Click to expand...


Now what gets me. 

"I love you Soon Yi"......"but aren't you my daddy"........"not really.it's ok"....."I love you more than your brothers and sisters"."


----------



## tinydancer

Dr Grump said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> A valiant effort there JoeB. But all your points are so easily refutable.  I love to argue and debate so here goes.
> 
> What physical evidence do you want? Dylan was very specific that she was only penetrated by her Father's  fingers. There could be no semen. So how could there be physical evidence?
> 
> Moses didn't see anything? Seriously what the hell does that mean? How many brothers and sisters never knew that Daddy was targeting one of the family in sexual abuse cases? Happens all the time.
> 
> Moses is Johnny Nada. Of course he didn't see anything. Daddy didn't invite him to a front row seat did he now?
> 
> Re: Soon Yi For me she doesn't count in the sense that as perverse as it was, it has only to do with how the other children like Ronan feel about their father/brother in law and Soon Yi sister/step mother.
> 
> That's FUBAR'D no matter how you slice and dice it.
> 
> But and please duly note this, it factored into the Judge's judgement to give Farrow full custody.
> 
> Passing a lie dector test?  Give me a break.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1) There would still be some physical evidence if he used his finger - abrasions, bruising etc - especially for a seven year old girl.
> 2) Moses didn't see anything, neither did the three nannies. Just because something 'didn't look right' doesn't mean anything happened.
> 3) Soon Yi was an adult when she made her decision. You may not like it, I sure find it weird, but it was her decision. 22 years later they are still together. As for the grooming, it is has been established that one of the reasons he got to know her as a young adult is that because Woody had hardly anything to do with Mia's kids and she encouraged him to do so.
> 4) While lie detector tests are not admissible in court for their unreliability they do add weight to me in that if you are willing to take the risk and fail one to prove your innocence then that says a lot about how strongly the person believes in their innocence. Note, Farrow refused to take one. Interesting, no?
> 
> And can you and Sunshine please stop with this 'defending Woody' hyperbole. None of us are defending him one iota. If he did it, he should pay. What we are defending is the flimsy - and ultimately dangerous - way in which you are trying to convict him. You are almost mirroring the image some people have formed their opinion over Farrow about. Shilling with no evidence or anything close that comes to proving his guilt.
Click to expand...


No. Down slow and easy my friend. No ripping no tearing. 

Now you are getting your nannies mixed up. BTW I am big into crime so I hold onto data for some weird reason in my brain. But I do.

Only one nanny came out in defence of Woody. She's the one that Woody directly paid 40 thousand per year.


----------



## BDBoop

10 Undeniable Facts About the Woody Allen Sexual-Abuse Allegation | Vanity Fair



> 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:



The facts which follow in the article leave me less sure of his innocence re: Dylan than I was before. 

 [MENTION=39688]RosieS[/MENTION] - what's your take on it.


----------



## jillian

tinydancer said:


> TMZ pulled up an interview with the Woody where he claims to desire a love nest of 15 twelve year olds.
> 
> Hey hey!



no doubt the context and the fact that he was joking went over your head



> I'm not above reproach; if anything, I'm below reproach. I mean, if I was caught in a love nest with 15 12-year-old girls tomorrow, people would think, yeah, I always knew that about him." Allen pauses. "Nothing I could come up with would surprise anyone," he ventures helplessly. "I admit to it all."



Angst-Ridden Humorist - Famous Comedians, Woody Allen : People.com

shame on TMZ and shame on you.


----------



## tinydancer

Does everyone realize he was in therapy before the allegations hit mega levels over Dylan?

Dylan's literally got him by the balls on this. 

*Refuting Allen's suggestion that no one had ever complained of his misconduct before the alleged assault on her, Dylan Farrow claims that, 'court documents show that he was in treatment for what his own therapist described as 'inappropriate' behavior with me from as early as 1991'.*

Dylan Farrow hits back at Woody Allen's denials he sexually abused her | Mail Online


----------



## tinydancer

Just a quick aside. What is driving you Woody omg I love his movies Allen defenders?

I only started out in this thread not even wanting to deal with the Dylan part of this creep show. I was just on the whole Soon Yi fucked up mess where Allen sees nothing wrong at all with having an affair with his lovers daughter.


----------



## Esmeralda

JoeB131 said:


> To TinyDancer-
> 
> Does Woody Allen strike you as the kind of guy who could fool a lie detector test?  The guy looks nervous all the time to start with.  Now, yeah, that might be his public persona, but I just don't picture him as this stone cold liar.
> 
> Point was, this was investigated and the people who investigated it said nothing happened.
> 
> Now, are they all angry at Allen because of his behavior with Soon-Yi.  Hell yeah. Are they anger that Mia's career is in the toilet and he's up for Oscar consideration... Probably.
> 
> But all you offer is a lot of accusations and no proof.   I'm surprised you didn't offer spectral evidence.



It has now been clarified that Allen refused to take a polygraph administered by the police. The polygraph he took was administered by a company hired by his own attorneys. He never took an official, law enforcement administered lie detector test.

I like Allen's movies, a lot.  I don't want him to be guilty of this despicable act.  I don't know what to think, but there is credible evidence on both sides of this issue.  I don't dismiss the accusations because he is a great talent or because Mia Farrow may be a woman scorned.  I think the idea that women regularly make up these stories because of an acrimonious split up is as ridiculous as believing that women regularly make up stories about rape.  Such thinking is not logical and has no basis other than to demonize women.


----------



## L.K.Eder

freedombecki said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Connery said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for your thoughtful post. In my various capacities scout leader, volunteer at my son's school etc I am around children a great deal and I am required to take numerous courses regarding some of the issues expressed in this thread. I have read what many people have said, I have taken in constructive posts such as yours and they gave me pause and time to reflect on different elements of Allen's behavior, Dylan's behavior and that of the family unit. I looked at this thread in a global way rather than the sole issue of Allen's guilt or innocence. In fact, I have not thought much about that , although I have tried to look at all the facts, circumstances etc. that were available.
> 
> One thing I do know...kid's can tell tales, kids have very active and vivid imaginations and kids can easily be manipulated by those they love and trust. IMO the telltale sign is in the behavior of the child and whether that behavior is aberrant or within normal parameters and from there with counseling the truth can be drawn out over time. Then perhaps the road to healing can traversed it is rife with pain, however, when the other end is reached the person may begin to feel whole.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @Connery
> 
> Yes, behaviors to tell the tale. When I was teaching I had a student come to my office as torn up as a can of kraut. Her daughter's behavior had changed. So, she got someone to help her log onto the computer using her daughter's password. When she did she learned that the girl and some of her friends had been lured into a teenage prostitution ring by some 50 year old men. My student contacted the FBI who came and got the computer. She received death threats and went through some really horrible stuff. But the men who were running this teenage prostitution ring were apprehended and shut down. It made national news.
> 
> If a parent waits until the child's behavior has changed they have waited too late because the abuse has already happened. The goal is to PREVENT the abuse, so the parent has to act preemptively and many parents just don't know to do that or don't think they can. Many still use the old 'don't take candy from strangers' method, and quite frankly most children just don't get that. If the parent dismisses what the child says out of hand, then the parent has failed the child. Children as young as 7 simply don't have the vocabulary or sexual knowledge to make stuff up. If a parent is coaching the child, and yes, that does happen in some bitter divorce cases, it is not difficult for the seasoned professional to tell because the child cannot deviate from the script the parent gave.
> 
> Courts are wising up and most states now have what is called a 'parenting plan.' In states that have those, a parent who disses the other parent or draws the child into a conspiratorial relationship such as making accusations of abuse which are not true can lose not only custody, but also visitation rights. In this day and age, using a child in this manner is going to backfire. When I lived in Nashville, the TN Supreme Court hired a psychologist for a 1 year term to write Tennessee's parenting plan. It has teeth in it.
> 
> The fact that in this particular case, the child, now an adult, has pursued the issue of her own accord and has clear symptomology really leaves very little doubt in my mind. It really takes courage for a victim to do something like an 'open letter' to a celeb parent. And, as we all can see, it really draws ire not only toward the person who wrote the letter, but to other members of the family. I believe the system failed this child. And I can tell you from years of practice that the system has failed many children in this country. That is how so many authority figures, not just parents, have gotten away with victimizing children in this country for so long. I hope the tide is turning, but the reality is that bringing a perp to justice remains a mine field for the victim. And the Constitution still gives the accused the right to look dead on in a court of law at the victim even when the victim is a child of tender years. That will not change, nor should it. But to refuse to pursue the perp because of the child's tender years denies that child the closure that he/she needs.
> 
> Well, I'm pretty well done with this thread. It is just the same asinine BS over and over with the usual suspects defending adults who victimize children. Cheers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't blame you, Sunshine. I'm just surprised the thread hasn't been long forgotten.
> 
> I'm afraid we haven't seen the last of the pedophilia defenders online. While Woody's married to this helpless woman, they say he's having a free youngster sex-a-thon behind her back (or not).
> 
> The one thing is certain, though: he's the sex predator of youngsters with a history.
> 
> It's almost impossible to put a Hollywood star behind bars.
Click to expand...



"I'm afraid we haven't seen the last of the pedophilia defenders online."

not joining in your gossip-powered lynch mob = defending a pedophile.


thanks for your input.


----------



## Shaarona

*10 Undeniable Facts About the Woody Allen Sexual-Abuse Allegation*

10 Undeniable Facts About the Woody Allen Sexual-Abuse Allegation | Vanity Fair


----------



## JoeB131

tinydancer said:


> Does everyone realize he was in therapy before the allegations hit mega levels over Dylan?
> 
> Dylan's literally got him by the balls on this.
> 
> *Refuting Allen's suggestion that no one had ever complained of his misconduct before the alleged assault on her, Dylan Farrow claims that, 'court documents show that he was in treatment for what his own therapist described as 'inappropriate' behavior with me from as early as 1991'.*
> 
> Dylan Farrow hits back at Woody Allen's denials he sexually abused her | Mail Online



That begs the obvious question, if he has a record of "inappropriate behavior", why didn't Mia start making a big deal about it until AFTER she caught him with Soon-Yi?


----------



## Esmeralda

JoeB131 said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Does everyone realize he was in therapy before the allegations hit mega levels over Dylan?
> 
> Dylan's literally got him by the balls on this.
> 
> *Refuting Allen's suggestion that no one had ever complained of his misconduct before the alleged assault on her, Dylan Farrow claims that, 'court documents show that he was in treatment for what his own therapist described as 'inappropriate' behavior with me from as early as 1991'.*
> 
> Dylan Farrow hits back at Woody Allen's denials he sexually abused her | Mail Online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That begs the obvious question, if he has a record of "inappropriate behavior", why didn't Mia start making a big deal about it until AFTER she caught him with Soon-Yi?
Click to expand...

And the obvious answer is that when someone is 'in love,' he or she very often is in denial about questionable behavior.   It happens all the time about all kinds of behavior, including child abuse.


----------



## JoeB131

Um, yeah, or maybe she was just pissed off she got traded in for a newer model.


----------



## Esmeralda

JoeB131 said:


> Um, yeah, or maybe she was just pissed off she got traded in for a newer model.



I doubt that the 'being traded in for a newer model" had that much to do with it. That's really a cliche and stereotype.  The female he was having a sexual relationship with was her daughter, her child.  That in itself is enough to destroy any feeling she ever had for him. Add to it she is the half sibling of his own children, growing up in the same home with them, and, compared to him, she is very, very young: he may possibly be her first sexual experience. He is having sex with her child, not just any young woman.  So, pissed of?  Far more than that. And she has totally lost any positive feelings she ever had about him, so the mist over her eyes completely lifts and she looks back on the suspicions about inappropriate behavior with another of her children.....and so it goes. Though Soon Yi may have been an adult by age, she was still her mother's child. That's a very important distinction: you don't think of your kid as a true adult until about their mid-20s.


----------



## Shaarona

shaarona said:


> *10 undeniable facts about the woody allen sexual-abuse allegation*
> 
> 10 undeniable facts about the woody allen sexual-abuse allegation | vanity fair



*read this*


----------



## JoeB131

Shaarona said:


> shaarona said:
> 
> 
> 
> *10 undeniable facts about the woody allen sexual-abuse allegation*
> 
> 10 undeniable facts about the woody allen sexual-abuse allegation | vanity fair
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *read this*
Click to expand...


I have.  I'm not impressed.  

Reject evidence that undermines the claims, accept that which doesn't, no matter how flimsy.  

Here's the bottom line.  

Woody Allen was never charged, much less tried and convicted. 

Now, I don't like Woody Allen, don't like his movies and even find his relationship with Soon-Yi to be all manner of creepy.  

BUT NONE OF THIS IS EVIDENCE OF MOLESTATION.


----------



## RosieS

Esmeralda said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Um, yeah, or maybe she was just pissed off she got traded in for a newer model.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I doubt that the 'being traded in for a newer model" had that much to do with it. That's really a cliche and stereotype.  The female he was having a sexual relationship with was her daughter, her child.  That in itself is enough to destroy any feeling she ever had for him. Add to it she is the half sibling of his own children, growing up in the same home with them, and, compared to him, she is very, very young: he may possibly be her first sexual experience. He is having sex with her child, not just any young woman.  So, pissed of?  Far more than that. And she has totally lost any positive feelings she ever had about him, so the mist over her eyes completely lifts and she looks back on the suspicions about inappropriate behavior with another of her children.....and so it goes. Though Soon Yi may have been an adult by age, she was still her mother's child. That's a very important distinction: you don't think of your kid as a true adult until about their mid-20s.
Click to expand...


And there is still no evidence of molestation at all.

Dylan was deemed "fragile" , meaning she would not stand up under cross-examination in a trial.

Children as young as 4 and 5 years old regularly stand up to cross-examination. Those that have actually been sexually assaulted do, that is.

Dylan could not even get where she was touched correct consistently - despite being given tons of chances to get her "story" right.

That is fragile, all right. So fragile that any prosecution would crumble to dust.

No evidence means exactly zilch, zero evidence- no matter how many hordes of screaming Furies insist on something out of nothing.

Luckily everyone was spared the trauma, and taxpayer cost, of a useless trial.

Because Moses says that he was there and nothing happened; his sister now says Moses is dead to her.

Lovely. Vindictiveness is SUCH a family value for the Farrows, isn't it.

Regards from Rosie


----------



## BDBoop

Frankly, if anybody told me I imagined what happened, I would feel completely betrayed.


----------



## longknife

* 10 Undeniable Facts About the Woody Allen Sexual-Abuse Allegation*

By Maureen Orth @ 10 Undeniable Facts About the Woody Allen Sexual-Abuse Allegation | Vanity Fair

Seems every expert has their own take on this. I posted another link saying he couldn't have done those things he's accused of. So, which side does one believe?


----------



## BDBoop

Dylan's response to Woody's response.

Dylan Farrow Responds to Woody Allen: 'Distortions and Outright Lies' - The Hollywood Reporter



> With all the attempts to misrepresent the facts, it is important to be reminded of the truth contained in court documents from the only final ruling in this case, by the New York Supreme Court in 1992. In denying my father all access to me, that court:
> 
> Debunked the "experts" my father claims exonerated him, calling them "colored by their loyalty to Mr. Allen", criticizing the author of their report (who never met me) for destroying all supporting documentation, and calling their conclusions "sanitized and therefore less credible".
> Included testimony from babysitters who witnessed inappropriate sexual behavior by my father toward me.
> Found that there is no credible evidence to support Mr. Allen's contention that Ms. Farrow coached Dylan or that Ms. Farrow acted upon a desire for revenge against him for seducing Soon-Yi. Mr. Allen's resort to the stereotypical woman scorned defense is an injudicious attempt to divert attention from his failure to act as a responsible parent and adult.
> Concluded that the evidence "...proves that Mr. Allen's behavior toward Dylan was grossly inappropriate and that measures must be taken to protect her.
> Finally, the Connecticut State prosecutor found "probable cause" to prosecute, but made the decision not to in an effort to protect "the child victim", given my fragile state.


----------



## BDBoop

Back in the day, Woody on 60 Minutes.

Woody Allen defends himself on 60 Minutes in '92 - CBS News


----------



## RosieS

BDBoop said:


> Frankly, if anybody told me I imagined what happened, I would feel completely betrayed.



What if an experienced  abuse professional had told you it was imagined FOR you? Who might you feel betrayed you, then?

Usually, a child used as a weapon figures that out by adulthood.

But obviously, not always.

Regards from Rosie


----------



## dannyboys

skye said:


> hjmick said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea if Woody Allen is a molester  or not.
> 
> All I know is that Mia Farrow is one snake of an ex wife.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I could see that...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> she hates Allen so much...she wants to destroy him.....it's sickening to watch really!
Click to expand...

Oh yeah. She's one mentally ill bitch. Are you all aware that she has a clause in any contract she signs to do any acting/product endorsements etc that her hands are never to be exposed? That means NEVER! In the past there were always 'hand-models' used. She will never remove her gloves even while sleeping. GOD FORBID she should ever actually touch anything with her hands! You're headed into the Howard Hughes' world with her. She's sick in the head.
Another time and place she would have been stuck away in an institute for the mentally ill.
She has money. If she didn't they'd lock her up and feed her pablum three times a day.


----------



## BDBoop

RosieS said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> Frankly, if anybody told me I imagined what happened, I would feel completely betrayed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What if an experienced  abuse professional had told you it was imagined FOR you? Who might you feel betrayed you, then?
> 
> Usually, a child used as a weapon figures that out by adulthood.
> 
> But obviously, not always.
> 
> Regards from Rosie
Click to expand...


Beats me.


----------



## tinydancer

JoeB131 said:


> Um, yeah, or maybe she was just pissed off she got traded in for a newer model.



Let's find out who you would hit. Mia Farrow in all her beauty or pock marked and pimple faced Soon Yi?


----------



## tinydancer

dannyboys said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hjmick said:
> 
> 
> 
> I could see that...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> she hates Allen so much...she wants to destroy him.....it's sickening to watch really!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh yeah. She's one mentally ill bitch. Are you all aware that she has a clause in any contract she signs to do any acting/product endorsements etc that her hands are never to be exposed? That means NEVER! In the past there were always 'hand-models' used. She will never remove her gloves even while sleeping. GOD FORBID she should ever actually touch anything with her hands! You're headed into the Howard Hughes' world with her. She's sick in the head.
> Another time and place she would have been stuck away in an institute for the mentally ill.
> She has money. If she didn't they'd lock her up and feed her pablum three times a day.
Click to expand...


You are one fucked up dude. What the hell are you talking about?


----------



## BDBoop

tinydancer said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Um, yeah, or maybe she was just pissed off she got traded in for a newer model.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's find out who you would hit. Mia Farrow in all her beauty or pock marked and pimple faced Soon Yi?
Click to expand...


Or maybe choose between the insane and the sane.


----------



## tinydancer

BDBoop said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Um, yeah, or maybe she was just pissed off she got traded in for a newer model.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's find out who you would hit. Mia Farrow in all her beauty or pock marked and pimple faced Soon Yi?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Or maybe choose between the insane and the sane.
Click to expand...


Well wouldn't that be something if everyone could understand that Woody was in therapy for inappropriate behavior with Dylan before all hell broke lose this time. 

Tell me you guys know that right?


----------



## JoeB131

tinydancer said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Um, yeah, or maybe she was just pissed off she got traded in for a newer model.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's find out who you would hit. Mia Farrow in all her beauty or pock marked and pimple faced Soon Yi?
Click to expand...


That's an easy one.  

I have a big time thing for Asian Chicks.  Japanese, Korean, Filipina, they are all smoking hot!!!!

Not so much a thing for old, crazy chicks like Mia, though.


----------



## JoeB131

tinydancer said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's find out who you would hit. Mia Farrow in all her beauty or pock marked and pimple faced Soon Yi?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or maybe choose between the insane and the sane.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well wouldn't that be something if everyone could understand that Woody was in therapy for inappropriate behavior with Dylan before all hell broke lose this time.
> 
> Tell me you guys know that right?
Click to expand...


I think that sounds kind of vague... 

But there's this from the post BD posted. 



> _Allen is cooperating with the investigation. He's made his own psychiatric files and the files of his children available to authorities. He's submitted to a polygraph and a battery of psychological tests. The reports we were shown would seem to support his contention he's not a child molester.  Why then would Allen's 7-year-old daughter tell a Connecticut doctor otherwise?_



Again, this is 60 Minutes.  They were shown the psych evaluations, and they came to the conclusion he wasn't a kiddy diddler.


----------



## tinydancer

BDBoop said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Um, yeah, or maybe she was just pissed off she got traded in for a newer model.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's find out who you would hit. Mia Farrow in all her beauty or pock marked and pimple faced Soon Yi?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Or maybe choose between the insane and the sane.
Click to expand...


One is a daughter. One is that same daughter that the rest of the children regard as their sister. 

Oh and then there is Mom.


----------



## tinydancer

JoeB131 said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> Or maybe choose between the insane and the sane.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well wouldn't that be something if everyone could understand that Woody was in therapy for inappropriate behavior with Dylan before all hell broke lose this time.
> 
> Tell me you guys know that right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that sounds kind of vague...
> 
> But there's this from the post BD posted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Allen is cooperating with the investigation. He's made his own psychiatric files and the files of his children available to authorities. He's submitted to a polygraph and a battery of psychological tests. The reports we were shown would seem to support his contention he's not a child molester.  Why then would Allen's 7-year-old daughter tell a Connecticut doctor otherwise?_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, this is 60 Minutes.  They were shown the psych evaluations, and they came to the conclusion he wasn't a kiddy diddler.
Click to expand...


Most famous was the Green River killer who passed his in 84 and went on to slaughter so many.

Give me a break on "he passed a lie detector test". You guys know please tell me you know that Woody was already in therapy before all hell broke loose for treating Dylan inappropriately? Tell me you know this?


----------



## tinydancer

JoeB131 said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Um, yeah, or maybe she was just pissed off she got traded in for a newer model.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's find out who you would hit. Mia Farrow in all her beauty or pock marked and pimple faced Soon Yi?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's an easy one.
> 
> I have a big time thing for Asian Chicks.  Japanese, Korean, Filipina, they are all smoking hot!!!!
> 
> Not so much a thing for old, crazy chicks like Mia, though.
Click to expand...


Mia is one of those porcelain beauties. You obviously have not been paying attention. Her face takes your breath away. Her eyes as big as the moon open a portal never seen before. One of a kind beauty. Not many these days. And holy toledo you should have seen her mother.


----------



## JoeB131

tinydancer said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well wouldn't that be something if everyone could understand that Woody was in therapy for inappropriate behavior with Dylan before all hell broke lose this time.
> 
> Tell me you guys know that right?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think that sounds kind of vague...
> 
> But there's this from the post BD posted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Allen is cooperating with the investigation. He's made his own psychiatric files and the files of his children available to authorities. He's submitted to a polygraph and a battery of psychological tests. The reports we were shown would seem to support his contention he's not a child molester.  Why then would Allen's 7-year-old daughter tell a Connecticut doctor otherwise?_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, this is 60 Minutes.  They were shown the psych evaluations, and they came to the conclusion he wasn't a kiddy diddler.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Most famous was the Green River killer who passed his in 84 and went on to slaughter so many.
> 
> Give me a break on "he passed a lie detector test". You guys know please tell me you know that Woody was already in therapy before all hell broke loose for treating Dylan inappropriately? Tell me you know this?
Click to expand...


And he handed over all those session notes to the investigators and 60 Minutes, and neither of them saw anything that indicated he was a kiddy diddler. 

Now, frankly, I think therapists are a waste of money, they are the biggest fucking scam in the universe right after religion.  But the fact is, both Mia and Woody are more than just a little nuts, I'm not surprised that they are seeing therapists.


----------



## JoeB131

tinydancer said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's find out who you would hit. Mia Farrow in all her beauty or pock marked and pimple faced Soon Yi?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's an easy one.
> 
> I have a big time thing for Asian Chicks.  Japanese, Korean, Filipina, they are all smoking hot!!!!
> 
> Not so much a thing for old, crazy chicks like Mia, though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Mia is one of those porcelain beauties. You obviously have not been paying attention. Her face takes your breath away. Her eyes as big as the moon open a portal never seen before. One of a kind beauty. Not many these days. And holy toledo you should have seen her mother.
Click to expand...


She doesn't so a thing for me.  The only thing I remember about her is that she did the most unappealing sex scene in _Rosemary's Baby_.  And that as when she was in her prime.  

Oh, yeah. And she's apparently batshit crazy.


----------



## JoeB131

tinydancer said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's find out who you would hit. Mia Farrow in all her beauty or pock marked and pimple faced Soon Yi?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or maybe choose between the insane and the sane.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> One is a daughter. One is that same daughter that the rest of the children regard as their sister.
> 
> Oh and then there is Mom.
Click to expand...


Mom who spent her whole life using powerful men to advance her career, and broke up families, and she wondered why her daughter thought this was perfectly okay?


----------



## Esmeralda

JoeB131 said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> Or maybe choose between the insane and the sane.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One is a daughter. One is that same daughter that the rest of the children regard as their sister.
> 
> Oh and then there is Mom.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Mom who spent her whole life using powerful men to advance her career, and broke up families, and she wondered why her daughter thought this was perfectly okay?
Click to expand...


Allen was the one who should have put the brakes on the relationship with Soon Yi.  He was the 50 year old  adult.  She was a very young, inexperienced woman. That her values may have been influenced by her mother's youthful behavior is irrelevant; Allen was over 50 years old, Soon Yi's mother's boyfriend of 12 years, father to one biological child with Mia and 2 adopted children with her, all of whom were step siblings of Soon Yi and growing up in the same home.  Allen should have known better; Soon Yi was young enough to be excused due to youth and inexperience.

What you have shown clearly in this post is that you are biased toward Mia Farrow because of things she did prior to this incident.  Your whole take on it is biased because of that.


----------



## JoeB131

Esmeralda said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> One is a daughter. One is that same daughter that the rest of the children regard as their sister.
> 
> Oh and then there is Mom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mom who spent her whole life using powerful men to advance her career, and broke up families, and she wondered why her daughter thought this was perfectly okay?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Allen was the one who should have put the brakes on the relationship with Soon Yi.  He was the 50 year old  adult.  She was a very young, inexperienced woman. That her values may have been influenced by her mother's youthful behavior is irrelevant; Allen was over 50 years old, Soon Yi's mother's boyfriend of 12 years, father to one biological child with Mia and 2 adopted children with her, all of whom were step siblings of Soon Yi and growing up in the same home.  Allen should have known better; Soon Yi was young enough to be excused due to youth and inexperience.
> 
> What you have shown clearly in this post is that you are biased toward Mia Farrow because of things she did prior to this incident.  Your whole take on it is biased because of that.
Click to expand...


Soon Yi is nearly 40 now, and she's still with him.  

Probably has more on the ball than Mia did on how to have a lasting relationship.  

Look, I think Allen's relationship with Soon-Yi is kind of creepy.  But it's not illegal. And it's not child molestation or incest. 

I'm biased against Mia because I think she's a vindictive person who would bully her children into hating their father.


----------



## Esmeralda

JoeB131 said:


> Esmeralda said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Mom who spent her whole life using powerful men to advance her career, and broke up families, and she wondered why her daughter thought this was perfectly okay?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Allen was the one who should have put the brakes on the relationship with Soon Yi.  He was the 50 year old  adult.  She was a very young, inexperienced woman. That her values may have been influenced by her mother's youthful behavior is irrelevant; Allen was over 50 years old, Soon Yi's mother's boyfriend of 12 years, father to one biological child with Mia and 2 adopted children with her, all of whom were step siblings of Soon Yi and growing up in the same home.  Allen should have known better; Soon Yi was young enough to be excused due to youth and inexperience.
> 
> What you have shown clearly in this post is that you are biased toward Mia Farrow because of things she did prior to this incident.  Your whole take on it is biased because of that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Soon Yi is nearly 40 now, and she's still with him.
> 
> Probably has more on the ball than Mia did on how to have a lasting relationship.
> 
> Look, I think Allen's relationship with Soon-Yi is kind of creepy.  But it's not illegal. And it's not child molestation or incest.
> 
> I'm biased against Mia because I think she's a vindictive person who would bully her children into hating their father.
Click to expand...


Soon Yi still being with him is irrelevant.  You are assuming the reason they are still together is that Soon Yi has something 'on the ball' about relationships. You  have no way of knowing why they are still together.  I wonder what kind of woman throws her youth away on a man 35 years her senior.  You have never been a parent perhaps?  And you don't see what it means that his having a sexual relationship with Soon Yi, estranging her from her family,etc., is far more than creepy. You show obvious bias against Farrow for things she did in her youth and assume that she is the stereotypical scorned woman though the custody court determined there nothing to that theory.


----------



## JoeB131

Esmeralda said:


> [
> 
> Soon Yi still being with him is irrelevant.  You are assuming the reason they are still together is that Soon Yi has something 'on the ball' about relationships. You  have no way of knowing why they are still together.  I wonder what kind of woman throws her youth away on a man 35 years her senior.  You have never been a parent perhaps?  And you don't see what it means that his having a sexual relationship with Soon Yi, estranging her from her family,etc., is far more than creepy. You show obvious bias against Farrow for things she did in her youth and assume that she is the stereotypical scorned woman though the custody court determined there nothing to that theory.



Usually, when a woman throws herself at an older man, it's because she has "Daddy Issues".  

Okay. So let's look at that.  Soon-Yi lived in an orphanage in Korea until she was about 6 or 8.  We really don't know how old she is because they didn't keep accurate records.  She was adopted by Farrow and composer Andre Previn.

Now Andre is a real peice of work. He abandoned his second wife, Dory Langan while she was being hospitalized, to marry Farrow.  Then they got a divorce in 1979, when Soon-Yi was about 9-11, and he says of his daughter now, "That person doesn't exist".  Yes, I can see how this girl MIGHT want to be involved with an older man to fill those paternal issues.  It seems to me that parenting was a real absense in her life, between her biological parents dumping her, and her adoptive parents neglecting her. 

But neither of us know these people personally, so we would only be speculating.


----------



## RosieS

Esmeralda said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Esmeralda said:
> 
> 
> 
> Allen was the one who should have put the brakes on the relationship with Soon Yi.  He was the 50 year old  adult.  She was a very young, inexperienced woman. That her values may have been influenced by her mother's youthful behavior is irrelevant; Allen was over 50 years old, Soon Yi's mother's boyfriend of 12 years, father to one biological child with Mia and 2 adopted children with her, all of whom were step siblings of Soon Yi and growing up in the same home.  Allen should have known better; Soon Yi was young enough to be excused due to youth and inexperience.
> 
> What you have shown clearly in this post is that you are biased toward Mia Farrow because of things she did prior to this incident.  Your whole take on it is biased because of that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soon Yi is nearly 40 now, and she's still with him.
> 
> Probably has more on the ball than Mia did on how to have a lasting relationship.
> 
> Look, I think Allen's relationship with Soon-Yi is kind of creepy.  But it's not illegal. And it's not child molestation or incest.
> 
> I'm biased against Mia because I think she's a vindictive person who would bully her children into hating their father.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Soon Yi still being with him is irrelevant.  You are assuming the reason they are still together is that Soon Yi has something 'on the ball' about relationships. You  have no way of knowing why they are still together.  I wonder what kind of woman throws her youth away on a man 35 years her senior.  You have never been a parent perhaps?  And you don't see what it means that his having a sexual relationship with Soon Yi, estranging her from her family,etc., is far more than creepy. You show obvious bias against Farrow for things she did in her youth and assume that she is the stereotypical scorned woman though the custody court determined there nothing to that theory.
Click to expand...


The custody court is the court that was biased. Family Court usually is. There are no rules of criminal evidence in Family Court.

There never was a trial. Even though the prosecutor claimed probable cause, no evidence was found by unbiased Yale investigators. They said that Dylan seemed rehearsed, could not tell fantasy from reality -at age 7- and could not identify consisttently where she was touched. That is what "fragile" means- it means unable to withstand cross-examination during a trial.

Even though four and five year olds who have truly been molested can carry the weight of a trial on tiny shoulders and win. Happens everywhere.

There is question whether Allen fathered a y child with Darrow. Ronin's resemblance to Frank Sinatra has caused the Sinatra family to say they welcome him if he is found to be one of Sinatra's sons.

What Soon-Yi did was escape the clutches of  her unstable, erratic and abusive mother. Moses says Farrow slapped him around in anger if he did not do as she demanded.

Moses himself did not escape until much later.

Allen had not one whisper of child molestation against him until Farrow found out that he was leaving her and taking Soon-Yi
.
He has not had a whisper of child molestation from the children he and Soon-Yi adopted.

This is coming out again now because Allen was awarded at the Golden Globes and is up for an Oscar.

And Ronin is getting his own MSNBC show.

Any publicity is good publicity.

There never was a criminal trial-so stop treating Allen as if he is one. That is libel.

Custody trials often are full of lies from both sides and prove nothing. The rules are very slack in Family Court.

It is time for libelous harpies to drop this and put it to rest. You literally never had a case - except that Dylan was brainwashed, that is.

Regards from Rosie


----------



## Esmeralda

JoeB131 said:


> Esmeralda said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> 
> Soon Yi still being with him is irrelevant.  You are assuming the reason they are still together is that Soon Yi has something 'on the ball' about relationships. You  have no way of knowing why they are still together.  I wonder what kind of woman throws her youth away on a man 35 years her senior.  You have never been a parent perhaps?  And you don't see what it means that his having a sexual relationship with Soon Yi, estranging her from her family,etc., is far more than creepy. You show obvious bias against Farrow for things she did in her youth and assume that she is the stereotypical scorned woman though the custody court determined there nothing to that theory.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Usually, when a woman throws herself at an older man, it's because she has "Daddy Issues".
> 
> Okay. So let's look at that.  Soon-Yi lived in an orphanage in Korea until she was about 6 or 8.  We really don't know how old she is because they didn't keep accurate records.  She was adopted by Farrow and composer Andre Previn.
> 
> Now Andre is a real peice of work. He abandoned his second wife, Dory Langan while she was being hospitalized, to marry Farrow.  Then they got a divorce in 1979, when Soon-Yi was about 9-11, and he says of his daughter now, "That person doesn't exist".  Yes, I can see how this girl MIGHT want to be involved with an older man to fill those paternal issues.  It seems to me that parenting was a real absense in her life, between her biological parents dumping her, and her adoptive parents neglecting her.
> 
> But neither of us know these people personally, so we would only be speculating.
Click to expand...


This whole thing to me is about accusations about him being dismissed out of hand because he is a brilliant and successful  director.  It is a stereotype that young women 'go after' older men because they have 'daddy issues.'  Also, you are making the assumption that Mia 'went after' and seduced the older men in her life, and that, as well Soon Yi did the same.  That seems incredibly biased.  These were much older men, wealthy, successful,  powerful men with lots of experience of women, with probably many women regularly throwing themselves their way.  It seems unlikely to me that any very young, inexperienced woman can seduce such a man.  These men are not fools and are extremely well experienced with women. Previn, Sinatra, Allen.  So the theory that either Mia or Soon Yi were the ones who instigated and secured the relationships is something I am very skeptical about.

There is no indication that Mia ever neglected any of her children, or that she was so focused on an acting career that she would 'go after' men who could 'advance' her career.  She seems rather indifferent to her career as opposed to her dedication to her family. As far as her hiding her hands:as an older woman, I get that totally.  The most obvious thing about me that totally betrays my age is my hands.  She may be age conscious, as are a lot of women. Doesn't mean she is a psycho.  

We don't know any of them.  It's all speculation.  I just don't like discounting the child's allegations because of the assumption the mother is coaching her out of spite.  All other evidence points to Mia being a very good mother.  My  position is that I see credible evidence on both sides and just don't like the allegations against him being dismissed out of hand because he is who he is and because people like to demonize women by assuming they will falsely charge abuse because they are angry over a split up.


----------

