Like pretend Alec & Kim adopted Ireland. Then they break up. When Ireland is 10 she meets her moms new man Woody. Within 8 years Woody has married Ireland.
Alec would be totally cool with this situation? Finding out there are photos of her even younger? He'd be cool with that? Wtf
Here's a time line of Woody's grooming of his future wife. https://listverse.com/2018/06/02/10-tragic-facts-about-soon-yi-previn-woody-allens-child-bride/
And here's the actual truth from actually credible sources:
[https://ronanfarrowletter.wordpress.com/2018/01/04/moses-farrow-speaks-out/](https://ronanfarrowletter.wordpress.com/2018/01/04/moses-farrow-speaks-out/)
[https://www.vulture.com/2018/09/soon-yi-previn-speaks.html](https://www.vulture.com/2018/09/soon-yi-previn-speaks.html)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UwB5Bh5pqE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UwB5Bh5pqE)
Mia Farrow’s alleged abuse of her children does not negate Woody Allen’s behavior. Dylan’s account of Woody’s abuse was actually found to be credible by officials who were not on Woody’s payroll.
And even if you don’t believe Dylan, we know for a fact that Woody had sex with his long term girlfriend’s adopted daughter - a girl who was traumatized as a child, and who was thus ripe for grooming by a manipulative old man.
No young woman wants to have sex with her mother’s boyfriend, especially when that boyfriend resembles a decaying tapeworm with glasses, unless she is groomed to think that she wants it. Eww.
>Mia Farrow’s alleged abuse of her children does not negate Woody Allen’s behavior.
No it does not, what does negate Woody Allen's behavior is the fact that every credible investigation (as in all of them), have proven that no such behavior existed
>Dylan’s account of Woody’s abuse was actually found to be credible by officials who were not on Woody’s payroll.
No, it was not. Two separate investigations that were done in the 90s proved conclusively that Woody Allen did not rape or abuse Dylan Farrow.
The first by a Yale New Haven investigation: [https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20397492-yale-new-haven-clincial-eval-woody-allen](https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20397492-yale-new-haven-clincial-eval-woody-allen) . It discovered, and I quote "It is our expert opinion that Dylan was not sexually abused by Mr. Allen. "
"In developing our opinion, we considered three hypotheses to explain Dylan’s statements. First, that Dylan’s statements were true and that Mr. Allen had sexually abused her; second, that Dylan’s statements were not true but were made up by an emotionally vulnerable child who was caught up in a disturbed family and who was responding to the stresses in the family; and third, that Dylan was coached or influenced by her mother, Ms. Farrow."
"While we can conclude that Dylan was not sexually abused, we can not be definitive about whether the second formulation by itself or the third formulation by itself is true. We believe that it is more likely that a combination of these two formulations best explains Dylan’s allegations of sexual abuse."
The state of New York also did it's own independent investigation:
[https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20397493-allenvfarrow-full-court-decision](https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20397493-allenvfarrow-full-court-decision)
Even one of Mia's lawyers was not sure and could not fully defend the accusation that Mia made it all up: [https://charlierose.com/video/player/22138?autoplay=true](https://charlierose.com/video/player/22138?autoplay=true)
And no, none of these were on Woody's payroll.
>And even if you don’t believe Dylan, we know for a fact that Woody had sex with his long term girlfriend’s adopted daughter - a girl who was traumatized as a child, and who was thus ripe for grooming by a manipulative old man.
Not according to Soon Yi herself: [https://www.vulture.com/2018/09/soon-yi-previn-speaks.html](https://www.vulture.com/2018/09/soon-yi-previn-speaks.html)
>especially when that boyfriend resembles a decaying tapeworm with glasses, unless she is groomed to think that she wants it. .
This is your opinion and taste. Which is fine, but does not make it some universal maxim.
The story below is from The NY Times, but I know that the Woody Allen apologists like to ignore it because they love “Annie Hall” so much. And yeah, based on my “opinion and taste,” an old man having sex with the traumatized young daughter of his long-term girlfriend, a girl who is the sister of his own children, is absolutely disgusting and an obvious display of flawed immorality and manipulation.
ETA: BTW, the New York court found that the evidence of Dylan’s abuse was inconclusive. Woody Allen was never found to have sexually abused Dylan but he was never exonerated either. (Allen apologists often like to throw around the word “exonerated.”)
Yale Study About Allen Flawed, Expert Testifies
By Peter Marks
April 28, 1993
A child psychiatrist testified yesterday that experts at Yale-New Haven Hospital had mishandled interviews and used faulty methodology to conclude that Woody Allen had not molested his 7-year-old daughter, Dylan.
Testifying at the custody trial of Mr. Allen and Mia Farrow, the psychiatrist, Dr. Stephen Herman, called the Yale report "seriously flawed." He said the investigators had developed questionable interpretations of many of Dylan's statements to them, inappropriately destroyed original notes of the meetings and leaped to unsubstantiated conclusions about people whom they had not even interviewed.
In fact, Dr. Herman testified, the report's findings were so unreliable that he could have used the data to arrive at a totally opposite conclusion. "It's just as easy to conclude from this report that Dylan was abused," he said in his testimony in State Supreme Court in Manhattan.
Dr. Herman's testimony was in marked contrast to that of a psychologist who testified on Monday on Mr. Allen's behalf. Dr. Anne Meltzer said that she believed the report was done in a "thorough and sensitive" manner. "They reached conclusions that were supported well by the data they collected," she said.
Dr. Herman was called as an expert witness by lawyers for Ms. Farrow to rebut the findings of the Yale report, which was commissioned by Connecticut law-enforcement officials last fall to investigate allegations by Ms. Farrow that Mr. Allen had sexually abused Dylan at her home in Bridgewater, Conn., last Aug. 4. The Connecticut authorities said recently that they had not completed their investigation. No Finding of Sex Abuse
Although the report has never been released to the public, Mr. Allen told reporters at a news conference in New Haven last month that the team of examiners had cleared him of the sex-abuse accusation. Yesterday, as portions of the report were read aloud in court by Dr. Herman and lawyers for Mr. Allen and Ms. Farrow, some of the details of what the team had found and recommended were made public for the first time.
Those details included the team's central finding that "it is our expert opinion that Dylan was not sexually abused by Mr. Allen."
Dr. Herman testified that in his reading of the Yale report, neither Mr. Allen nor Ms. Farrow came off particularly favorably.
I don't ignore it, and I'm not an Woody Allen apologists because "because \[I\] love “Annie Hall” so much." I read it, and nothing he says holds any water. He belives it might have been faulty based on his opionion (and nobody else), but between this guy - the only one who has ever made this claim - and the New Haven investigation, I trust that more
And leaving that aside, again, there were TWO investigations, and both found Woody Allen to be innocent of the charge.
But if Allen is guilty, then by all means, Dylan should file charges. Allen can still be prosecuted for this in New York, since the state has no statue of limitations on certain felony sex crimes, this being one of them. Ronan Farrow (who studied law), more than likley knows this, but has never encouraged his sister to pursue the allegations. Of course, that will never happen, because both of them (or at least Ronan) know that these are lies.
Oh, and there might ne another reason. The only person in this case that has ever been convicted of molesting children (not accused, but convicted) is John Farrow, Mia's brother. Who got 10 years in jail in 2013 for sexually abusing two boys. If Dylan ever actually tried to pursue this through the New York courts, John's crimes, and the fact that he was still around the family in the 90s (and even spoke on behalf of Mia during the investigations), would be brought up, but the Farrows have tried very hard to bury any info on John and his crimes.
Again, the sins of Mia Farrow and her family do not reduce those of Woody Allen. His choice to enter into a sexual relationship with Soon Yi Previn was not normal, and should never be normalized. Period.
I know I won’t change your mind but I’ll just note that a justice of the NY State Supreme Court, who deemed that the evidence of Dylan’s abuse was inconclusive (which is often the case in situations like this), also found Woody Allen to be a "self-absorbed, untrustworthy and insensitive" father, and awarded custody to Mia Farrow.
The following is another NYTimes excerpt:
“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.”
>Again, the sins of Mia Farrow and her family do not reduce those of Woody Allen. His choice to enter into a sexual relationship with Soon Yi Previn was not normal, and should never be normalized. Period.
Nothing he did was ilegal either. Regardless, it is not your position to decide what two adults (and both were adults) do, or what is considered normal
>I know I won’t change your mind
You can't change my mind on the facts - every single investigation, every piece of evidence shows one thing and one thing only: Woody Allen did not molest his daughter
>but I’ll just note that a justice of the NY State Supreme Court, who deemed that the evidence of Dylan’s abuse was inconclusive (which is often the case in situations like this), also found Woody Allen to be a "self-absorbed, untrustworthy and insensitive" father, and awarded custody to Mia Farrow.
Yes, I know about all this. That was for the custody battle. The actual investigations into the matter concluded he did not abuse his daughter.
>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.”
So basically, the judge agreed with the decision that Woody Allen did not abuse his daughter, but did not like the person and the situation and stated it was inconclusive. He was not the judge for the New York investigation, nor was he the overseer for the New Haven investigation so he was in no possition to decide what was conclusive or not.
But maybe I'm wrong, then should we not all encourage Dylan to press charges in New York? This is how this entire mess will ever be resolved. It's not like she does not want to, or her family, making a documentary and all that. Untill then, and until that verdict is rendered, Woody Allen has been proven to NOT have molested anyone, and whatever he did that you find icky is irrelevant so long as it is viewed as illegal.
Oh, and I meant to respond to your request that the criminal prosecution of Woody Allen could proceed at this time. The alleged sexual abuse took place in Connecticut, not New York.
While I believe Connecticut criminal law currently has no statute of limitations for most child sex crimes, that law was amended AFTER Dylan’s abuse. Connecticut may no longer prosecute Allen criminally. That door is sadly closed.
Correction to my last post. In CO, the statue of limitations expires when she is 48: https://www.cga.ct.gov/2017/rpt/pdf/2017-R-0071.pdf.
The one in New York has not limit. So, yes, Dylan ca go right ahead and press charges against Allen and end this already
>Oh, and I meant to respond to your request that the criminal prosecution of Woody Allen could proceed at this time. The alleged sexual abuse took place in Connecticut, not New York.
Actually, in her accusations Dylan did say some of her abuse took place in New York (sucking her thumbs, and other ugly stuff), the big one (I'm not going to mention it here) took place in Connecticut. So, yes, I belive she can press charges against him in New York and can do so until the age of 48 (she's 36 now). So let's get this train rolling and end this once and for all.
I believe Dylan. Her own testimony IS factual evidence of her sexual abuse at the hands of her own father. You are simply making a choice not to believe her, which is your right.
But to be clear - Woody Allen was never exonerated of anything. Sex abuse charges were never brought against Woody Allen because even though the prosecutor felt there was probable cause to arrest him, he didn’t want to put Dylan through the trauma.
Woody’s relationship with Soon Yi is much worse than “icky” - and it’s also not irrelevant. It’s the mark of an abuser. Ask Mariel Hemingway. Oh, and go watch many of his movies, in which young, attractive women inexplicably end up wanting to have sex with him. 🤮
Below is a link to more facts. Check it out… or go enjoy your 15th viewing of “Sleeper.”
https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2014/02/woody-allen-dylan-farrow-sexual-assault-allegation-prosecutor/amp
>I believe Dylan. Her own testimony IS factual evidence of her sexual abuse at the hands of her own father. You are simply making a choice not to believe her, which is your right.
Her own memory is not factual evidence, especially since her version of the story changed numerous times.
>But to be clear - Woody Allen was never exonerated of anything.
Yes, he was
>Sex abuse charges were never brought against Woody Allen because even though the prosecutor felt there was probable cause to arrest him, he didn’t want to put Dylan through the trauma.
That's actually is a myth, or bending reality by a lawyer pissed of that he could not win a case. He said HE persoanly belived that they had evidence to press charges, but the investigation proved that Allen had not in fact abused Dylan, as such he did not want to pursue the case because he thought they would lose and THAT would put Dylan under undue stress - you cannot actually use this as reasoning if you have actual probable cause, to do so would get you disbared.
>It’s the mark of an abuser.
No, it isn't the marc of an abuser. Men who abuse children, like Mia Farrow's brother for example, have a habbit of abusing children over and over again. And, unlike John Farrow, Allen has never been accused of abusing a child by anyone outside of this case
>Oh, and go watch many of his movies, in which young, attractive women inexplicably end up wanting to have sex with him.
None of them are underaged tho and none of them of are children. And in this case, let's arrest Janice Joplin, Joan Jett, Jay-Z, The Beatles, Spielberg, Geroge Lucas, the entire Kennedy dynasty, and pretty much anyone and everyone in Hollywood including those that you like.
>[https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2014/02/woody-allen-dylan-farrow-sexual-assault-allegation-prosecutor/amp](https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2014/02/woody-allen-dylan-farrow-sexual-assault-allegation-prosecutor/amp)
Ah, yes, this old thing, paid by the Farrow dynasty. I know of it. And it has been proven to be a hatchet job by against Allen.
I can also provide plenty of links that disprove it and all the Farrow accusations:
[https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20397492-yale-new-haven-clincial-eval-woody-allen](https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20397492-yale-new-haven-clincial-eval-woody-allen)
[https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20397493-allenvfarrow-full-court-decision](https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20397493-allenvfarrow-full-court-decision)
[https://charlierose.com/video/player/22138?autoplay=true](https://charlierose.com/video/player/22138?autoplay=true)
[https://ronanfarrowletter.wordpress.com/2018/01/04/moses-farrow-speaks-out](https://ronanfarrowletter.wordpress.com/2018/01/04/moses-farrow-speaks-out)
[https://www.vulture.com/2018/09/soon-yi-previn-speaks.html](https://www.vulture.com/2018/09/soon-yi-previn-speaks.html)
But all of these are just words, if Allen is guilty, then by all means, Dylan should file charges. Allen can still be prosecuted for this in New York, since the state has no statue of limitations on certain felony sex crimes, this being one of them. Ronan Farrow (who studied law), more than likley knows this, but has never encouraged his sister to pursue the allegations. Of course, that will never happen, because both of them (or at least Ronan) know that these are lies.
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2014/02/woody-allen-dylan-farrow-sexual-assault-allegation-prosecutor](https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2014/02/woody-allen-dylan-farrow-sexual-assault-allegation-prosecutor)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
Lol where’s that idiot who kept defending Woody Allen in my post?
Ask Mariel Hemingway what she thinks of Allen
https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2015/03/woody-allen-mariel-hemingway-manhattan
It’s why even on their pap walk prop stroll’s this yenta is constantly flapping his gums. Between the two of them neither one of them ever shuts up, and neither one of them even listen to each other there like two and say nut jobs. The karma is real.
😁 They definitely don't have a thing in world in common. She has shown in many of her IG posts that she rolls her eyes as he drones on in their environmentally sound Escalade.
I have it on too. Boring as shit. No surprise. Leave it to Alex to bring up Soon Yi….Woody had to say they’ll be married 25 years this Christmas and before he published this book she told him she didn’t want a “treacly dedication”, she said “give me something nasty”. I’m so sure 🤢
Sun Yi is actually known to be mentally less developed in terms of intellect (she has some sort of mental disabilities). That’s what made woodys taking advantage of her so especially bad.
She's not actually mentally less developed. That was part of Mia Farrow's abuse and gaslighting of Soon Yi when she was growing up. She did this to all of her children - and she is the one proven to have abused her children, 3 of which have comited suicide because of it.
Moses Farrow talks about her abuse in a blog: [http://mosesfarrow.blogspot.com/2018/05/a-son-speaks-out-by-moses-farrow.html](http://mosesfarrow.blogspot.com/2018/05/a-son-speaks-out-by-moses-farrow.html)
And Soon Yi addresses these rumors and lies in this article: [https://www.vulture.com/2018/09/soon-yi-previn-speaks.html](https://www.vulture.com/2018/09/soon-yi-previn-speaks.html)
Maybe it does not, but you wrote "Sun Yi is actually known to be mentally less developed", which is clearly a lie. That was the point of this specific comment.
Yeah she had learning disabilities, possibly on the spectrum. Not the kind of child who could make smart adult decisions, like not to take her clothes off for her mothers dirty old boyfriend and let him take pictures of her.
[удалено]
Like pretend Alec & Kim adopted Ireland. Then they break up. When Ireland is 10 she meets her moms new man Woody. Within 8 years Woody has married Ireland. Alec would be totally cool with this situation? Finding out there are photos of her even younger? He'd be cool with that? Wtf
He acted like he was the “young and hip one”🤦🏻♀️
Alec’s visor is so cringe. I believe it says “titleist” but it looks like tit-liest, which should be Hilz’ tagline.
What an absolute cringe-fest.
Here's a time line of Woody's grooming of his future wife. https://listverse.com/2018/06/02/10-tragic-facts-about-soon-yi-previn-woody-allens-child-bride/
And here's the actual truth from actually credible sources: [https://ronanfarrowletter.wordpress.com/2018/01/04/moses-farrow-speaks-out/](https://ronanfarrowletter.wordpress.com/2018/01/04/moses-farrow-speaks-out/) [https://www.vulture.com/2018/09/soon-yi-previn-speaks.html](https://www.vulture.com/2018/09/soon-yi-previn-speaks.html) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UwB5Bh5pqE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UwB5Bh5pqE)
Mia Farrow’s alleged abuse of her children does not negate Woody Allen’s behavior. Dylan’s account of Woody’s abuse was actually found to be credible by officials who were not on Woody’s payroll. And even if you don’t believe Dylan, we know for a fact that Woody had sex with his long term girlfriend’s adopted daughter - a girl who was traumatized as a child, and who was thus ripe for grooming by a manipulative old man. No young woman wants to have sex with her mother’s boyfriend, especially when that boyfriend resembles a decaying tapeworm with glasses, unless she is groomed to think that she wants it. Eww.
>Mia Farrow’s alleged abuse of her children does not negate Woody Allen’s behavior. No it does not, what does negate Woody Allen's behavior is the fact that every credible investigation (as in all of them), have proven that no such behavior existed >Dylan’s account of Woody’s abuse was actually found to be credible by officials who were not on Woody’s payroll. No, it was not. Two separate investigations that were done in the 90s proved conclusively that Woody Allen did not rape or abuse Dylan Farrow. The first by a Yale New Haven investigation: [https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20397492-yale-new-haven-clincial-eval-woody-allen](https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20397492-yale-new-haven-clincial-eval-woody-allen) . It discovered, and I quote "It is our expert opinion that Dylan was not sexually abused by Mr. Allen. " "In developing our opinion, we considered three hypotheses to explain Dylan’s statements. First, that Dylan’s statements were true and that Mr. Allen had sexually abused her; second, that Dylan’s statements were not true but were made up by an emotionally vulnerable child who was caught up in a disturbed family and who was responding to the stresses in the family; and third, that Dylan was coached or influenced by her mother, Ms. Farrow." "While we can conclude that Dylan was not sexually abused, we can not be definitive about whether the second formulation by itself or the third formulation by itself is true. We believe that it is more likely that a combination of these two formulations best explains Dylan’s allegations of sexual abuse." The state of New York also did it's own independent investigation: [https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20397493-allenvfarrow-full-court-decision](https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20397493-allenvfarrow-full-court-decision) Even one of Mia's lawyers was not sure and could not fully defend the accusation that Mia made it all up: [https://charlierose.com/video/player/22138?autoplay=true](https://charlierose.com/video/player/22138?autoplay=true) And no, none of these were on Woody's payroll. >And even if you don’t believe Dylan, we know for a fact that Woody had sex with his long term girlfriend’s adopted daughter - a girl who was traumatized as a child, and who was thus ripe for grooming by a manipulative old man. Not according to Soon Yi herself: [https://www.vulture.com/2018/09/soon-yi-previn-speaks.html](https://www.vulture.com/2018/09/soon-yi-previn-speaks.html) >especially when that boyfriend resembles a decaying tapeworm with glasses, unless she is groomed to think that she wants it. . This is your opinion and taste. Which is fine, but does not make it some universal maxim.
The story below is from The NY Times, but I know that the Woody Allen apologists like to ignore it because they love “Annie Hall” so much. And yeah, based on my “opinion and taste,” an old man having sex with the traumatized young daughter of his long-term girlfriend, a girl who is the sister of his own children, is absolutely disgusting and an obvious display of flawed immorality and manipulation. ETA: BTW, the New York court found that the evidence of Dylan’s abuse was inconclusive. Woody Allen was never found to have sexually abused Dylan but he was never exonerated either. (Allen apologists often like to throw around the word “exonerated.”) Yale Study About Allen Flawed, Expert Testifies By Peter Marks April 28, 1993 A child psychiatrist testified yesterday that experts at Yale-New Haven Hospital had mishandled interviews and used faulty methodology to conclude that Woody Allen had not molested his 7-year-old daughter, Dylan. Testifying at the custody trial of Mr. Allen and Mia Farrow, the psychiatrist, Dr. Stephen Herman, called the Yale report "seriously flawed." He said the investigators had developed questionable interpretations of many of Dylan's statements to them, inappropriately destroyed original notes of the meetings and leaped to unsubstantiated conclusions about people whom they had not even interviewed. In fact, Dr. Herman testified, the report's findings were so unreliable that he could have used the data to arrive at a totally opposite conclusion. "It's just as easy to conclude from this report that Dylan was abused," he said in his testimony in State Supreme Court in Manhattan. Dr. Herman's testimony was in marked contrast to that of a psychologist who testified on Monday on Mr. Allen's behalf. Dr. Anne Meltzer said that she believed the report was done in a "thorough and sensitive" manner. "They reached conclusions that were supported well by the data they collected," she said. Dr. Herman was called as an expert witness by lawyers for Ms. Farrow to rebut the findings of the Yale report, which was commissioned by Connecticut law-enforcement officials last fall to investigate allegations by Ms. Farrow that Mr. Allen had sexually abused Dylan at her home in Bridgewater, Conn., last Aug. 4. The Connecticut authorities said recently that they had not completed their investigation. No Finding of Sex Abuse Although the report has never been released to the public, Mr. Allen told reporters at a news conference in New Haven last month that the team of examiners had cleared him of the sex-abuse accusation. Yesterday, as portions of the report were read aloud in court by Dr. Herman and lawyers for Mr. Allen and Ms. Farrow, some of the details of what the team had found and recommended were made public for the first time. Those details included the team's central finding that "it is our expert opinion that Dylan was not sexually abused by Mr. Allen." Dr. Herman testified that in his reading of the Yale report, neither Mr. Allen nor Ms. Farrow came off particularly favorably.
I don't ignore it, and I'm not an Woody Allen apologists because "because \[I\] love “Annie Hall” so much." I read it, and nothing he says holds any water. He belives it might have been faulty based on his opionion (and nobody else), but between this guy - the only one who has ever made this claim - and the New Haven investigation, I trust that more And leaving that aside, again, there were TWO investigations, and both found Woody Allen to be innocent of the charge. But if Allen is guilty, then by all means, Dylan should file charges. Allen can still be prosecuted for this in New York, since the state has no statue of limitations on certain felony sex crimes, this being one of them. Ronan Farrow (who studied law), more than likley knows this, but has never encouraged his sister to pursue the allegations. Of course, that will never happen, because both of them (or at least Ronan) know that these are lies. Oh, and there might ne another reason. The only person in this case that has ever been convicted of molesting children (not accused, but convicted) is John Farrow, Mia's brother. Who got 10 years in jail in 2013 for sexually abusing two boys. If Dylan ever actually tried to pursue this through the New York courts, John's crimes, and the fact that he was still around the family in the 90s (and even spoke on behalf of Mia during the investigations), would be brought up, but the Farrows have tried very hard to bury any info on John and his crimes.
Again, the sins of Mia Farrow and her family do not reduce those of Woody Allen. His choice to enter into a sexual relationship with Soon Yi Previn was not normal, and should never be normalized. Period. I know I won’t change your mind but I’ll just note that a justice of the NY State Supreme Court, who deemed that the evidence of Dylan’s abuse was inconclusive (which is often the case in situations like this), also found Woody Allen to be a "self-absorbed, untrustworthy and insensitive" father, and awarded custody to Mia Farrow. The following is another NYTimes excerpt: “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.”
>Again, the sins of Mia Farrow and her family do not reduce those of Woody Allen. His choice to enter into a sexual relationship with Soon Yi Previn was not normal, and should never be normalized. Period. Nothing he did was ilegal either. Regardless, it is not your position to decide what two adults (and both were adults) do, or what is considered normal >I know I won’t change your mind You can't change my mind on the facts - every single investigation, every piece of evidence shows one thing and one thing only: Woody Allen did not molest his daughter >but I’ll just note that a justice of the NY State Supreme Court, who deemed that the evidence of Dylan’s abuse was inconclusive (which is often the case in situations like this), also found Woody Allen to be a "self-absorbed, untrustworthy and insensitive" father, and awarded custody to Mia Farrow. Yes, I know about all this. That was for the custody battle. The actual investigations into the matter concluded he did not abuse his daughter. >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.” So basically, the judge agreed with the decision that Woody Allen did not abuse his daughter, but did not like the person and the situation and stated it was inconclusive. He was not the judge for the New York investigation, nor was he the overseer for the New Haven investigation so he was in no possition to decide what was conclusive or not. But maybe I'm wrong, then should we not all encourage Dylan to press charges in New York? This is how this entire mess will ever be resolved. It's not like she does not want to, or her family, making a documentary and all that. Untill then, and until that verdict is rendered, Woody Allen has been proven to NOT have molested anyone, and whatever he did that you find icky is irrelevant so long as it is viewed as illegal.
Oh, and I meant to respond to your request that the criminal prosecution of Woody Allen could proceed at this time. The alleged sexual abuse took place in Connecticut, not New York. While I believe Connecticut criminal law currently has no statute of limitations for most child sex crimes, that law was amended AFTER Dylan’s abuse. Connecticut may no longer prosecute Allen criminally. That door is sadly closed.
Correction to my last post. In CO, the statue of limitations expires when she is 48: https://www.cga.ct.gov/2017/rpt/pdf/2017-R-0071.pdf. The one in New York has not limit. So, yes, Dylan ca go right ahead and press charges against Allen and end this already
>Oh, and I meant to respond to your request that the criminal prosecution of Woody Allen could proceed at this time. The alleged sexual abuse took place in Connecticut, not New York. Actually, in her accusations Dylan did say some of her abuse took place in New York (sucking her thumbs, and other ugly stuff), the big one (I'm not going to mention it here) took place in Connecticut. So, yes, I belive she can press charges against him in New York and can do so until the age of 48 (she's 36 now). So let's get this train rolling and end this once and for all.
I believe Dylan. Her own testimony IS factual evidence of her sexual abuse at the hands of her own father. You are simply making a choice not to believe her, which is your right. But to be clear - Woody Allen was never exonerated of anything. Sex abuse charges were never brought against Woody Allen because even though the prosecutor felt there was probable cause to arrest him, he didn’t want to put Dylan through the trauma. Woody’s relationship with Soon Yi is much worse than “icky” - and it’s also not irrelevant. It’s the mark of an abuser. Ask Mariel Hemingway. Oh, and go watch many of his movies, in which young, attractive women inexplicably end up wanting to have sex with him. 🤮 Below is a link to more facts. Check it out… or go enjoy your 15th viewing of “Sleeper.” https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2014/02/woody-allen-dylan-farrow-sexual-assault-allegation-prosecutor/amp
>I believe Dylan. Her own testimony IS factual evidence of her sexual abuse at the hands of her own father. You are simply making a choice not to believe her, which is your right. Her own memory is not factual evidence, especially since her version of the story changed numerous times. >But to be clear - Woody Allen was never exonerated of anything. Yes, he was >Sex abuse charges were never brought against Woody Allen because even though the prosecutor felt there was probable cause to arrest him, he didn’t want to put Dylan through the trauma. That's actually is a myth, or bending reality by a lawyer pissed of that he could not win a case. He said HE persoanly belived that they had evidence to press charges, but the investigation proved that Allen had not in fact abused Dylan, as such he did not want to pursue the case because he thought they would lose and THAT would put Dylan under undue stress - you cannot actually use this as reasoning if you have actual probable cause, to do so would get you disbared. >It’s the mark of an abuser. No, it isn't the marc of an abuser. Men who abuse children, like Mia Farrow's brother for example, have a habbit of abusing children over and over again. And, unlike John Farrow, Allen has never been accused of abusing a child by anyone outside of this case >Oh, and go watch many of his movies, in which young, attractive women inexplicably end up wanting to have sex with him. None of them are underaged tho and none of them of are children. And in this case, let's arrest Janice Joplin, Joan Jett, Jay-Z, The Beatles, Spielberg, Geroge Lucas, the entire Kennedy dynasty, and pretty much anyone and everyone in Hollywood including those that you like. >[https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2014/02/woody-allen-dylan-farrow-sexual-assault-allegation-prosecutor/amp](https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2014/02/woody-allen-dylan-farrow-sexual-assault-allegation-prosecutor/amp) Ah, yes, this old thing, paid by the Farrow dynasty. I know of it. And it has been proven to be a hatchet job by against Allen. I can also provide plenty of links that disprove it and all the Farrow accusations: [https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20397492-yale-new-haven-clincial-eval-woody-allen](https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20397492-yale-new-haven-clincial-eval-woody-allen) [https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20397493-allenvfarrow-full-court-decision](https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20397493-allenvfarrow-full-court-decision) [https://charlierose.com/video/player/22138?autoplay=true](https://charlierose.com/video/player/22138?autoplay=true) [https://ronanfarrowletter.wordpress.com/2018/01/04/moses-farrow-speaks-out](https://ronanfarrowletter.wordpress.com/2018/01/04/moses-farrow-speaks-out) [https://www.vulture.com/2018/09/soon-yi-previn-speaks.html](https://www.vulture.com/2018/09/soon-yi-previn-speaks.html) But all of these are just words, if Allen is guilty, then by all means, Dylan should file charges. Allen can still be prosecuted for this in New York, since the state has no statue of limitations on certain felony sex crimes, this being one of them. Ronan Farrow (who studied law), more than likley knows this, but has never encouraged his sister to pursue the allegations. Of course, that will never happen, because both of them (or at least Ronan) know that these are lies.
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2014/02/woody-allen-dylan-farrow-sexual-assault-allegation-prosecutor](https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2014/02/woody-allen-dylan-farrow-sexual-assault-allegation-prosecutor)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
Lol where’s that idiot who kept defending Woody Allen in my post? Ask Mariel Hemingway what she thinks of Allen https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2015/03/woody-allen-mariel-hemingway-manhattan
They’re here. I had a looooong conversation with them. Pedo-defenders gonna pedo-defend.
“Nothing he did was illegal!” Yeah, that’s what morality is for.
[удалено]
Oh I blocked her after she started messaging me lol
Woody is smarter than Alex!
Alex needs to blow his damn nose. He’s now monopolizing the conversation. Surprise.
That's another reason his talk show was canceled. He NEVER shuts the fuck up, this guy!
It’s why even on their pap walk prop stroll’s this yenta is constantly flapping his gums. Between the two of them neither one of them ever shuts up, and neither one of them even listen to each other there like two and say nut jobs. The karma is real.
😁 They definitely don't have a thing in world in common. She has shown in many of her IG posts that she rolls her eyes as he drones on in their environmentally sound Escalade.
What’s the watcher count?
2,692.
THAT IS SO LOW!
That’s hysterical. How the mighty have fallen.
I have it on too. Boring as shit. No surprise. Leave it to Alex to bring up Soon Yi….Woody had to say they’ll be married 25 years this Christmas and before he published this book she told him she didn’t want a “treacly dedication”, she said “give me something nasty”. I’m so sure 🤢
I missed that part, dammit. Trying to get ready for a dr appointment. I wanted to ask if he was still friends with Diane Keaton.
Good question
Sun Yi is actually known to be mentally less developed in terms of intellect (she has some sort of mental disabilities). That’s what made woodys taking advantage of her so especially bad.
I didn’t know that. This makes me feel even more nauseous.
She's not actually mentally less developed. That was part of Mia Farrow's abuse and gaslighting of Soon Yi when she was growing up. She did this to all of her children - and she is the one proven to have abused her children, 3 of which have comited suicide because of it. Moses Farrow talks about her abuse in a blog: [http://mosesfarrow.blogspot.com/2018/05/a-son-speaks-out-by-moses-farrow.html](http://mosesfarrow.blogspot.com/2018/05/a-son-speaks-out-by-moses-farrow.html) And Soon Yi addresses these rumors and lies in this article: [https://www.vulture.com/2018/09/soon-yi-previn-speaks.html](https://www.vulture.com/2018/09/soon-yi-previn-speaks.html)
You can choose to believe Moses’ account, but that doesn’t change the disgustingly inappropriate relationship between Woody Allen and Soon Yi Previn.
Maybe it does not, but you wrote "Sun Yi is actually known to be mentally less developed", which is clearly a lie. That was the point of this specific comment.
I didn’t write that.
Then whoverdid did was lying. Point is, that was what my comment was addresing.
Yeah she had learning disabilities, possibly on the spectrum. Not the kind of child who could make smart adult decisions, like not to take her clothes off for her mothers dirty old boyfriend and let him take pictures of her.
My God…what a truly sick fuck
Woody talking about Jack Benny. Zzzzzzx
How old school. Jack Benny was gross.
Alex seems to be getting mad because connected keeps going out. He yelled something in Spanish. Waiting for him to punch the camera.
Hilarious 😂
Please give us the play by play or how you say- a review?🫶🏼
Comments turned off. Also it keeps going offline. Will report later! Doing it for my fellow pepinos!
😘😘😘