If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Time)   Cate Blanchett and Alec Baldwin finally respond to Dylan Farrow's letter regarding Woody Allen's alleged sexual abuse   (entertainment.time.com) divider line 155
    More: Followup, Cate Blanchett, Woody Allen, Dylan Farrow, Diane Keaton, Scarlett Johansson, Santa Barbara International Film Festival, Blue Jasmine, Film Festivals  
•       •       •

8079 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 04 Feb 2014 at 9:18 AM (41 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



155 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-04 02:08:26 PM  

Champion of the Sun: I'm just curious why Ronan Farrow is everywhere all of a sudden and has his own show.  He was on Bill Maher last week and was totally lost.  One of those guests who kept going back to his cue cards about the same topic even though the rest of the panel had moved on.  I get that he has pretty eyes and famous parents, but how is he so famous all of a sudden?  And I thought MSNBC wasn't giving airtime to photogenic people anymore.


He's been around for a little while.  Super smart kid at least on the intellectual side--he graduated from college at 15 and Yale Law School at 22; he did a Rhodes Scholarship a couple of years ago.  He was the youngest person to work for the State Department (21).  But like seemingly everyone else on that abominable website, he's an idiot on Twitter.
 
2014-02-04 02:09:59 PM  

hasty ambush: But Hollywood and the movie going public does not seem to care given the how they treat the likes Polanski.  I mean they will boycott things like Arizona but one of their own over child rape, not hardly.


Personally, I boycott Polanski's films for that reason. Still not seen The Pianist (I should probably just rip it from a Warez site). He can go and serve his time, then I'll start watching them.

And I could easily boycott Allen's films. I've seen a couple recently. One was bad, one was good, but he's not like Guillermo del Toro or Brad Bird where I have to watch everything they make.

But I'm still not comfortable about these allegations.
 
2014-02-04 02:11:12 PM  

Kid the Universe: guilty until proven otherwise, right!


don't tell me what you can prove, tell me what you THINK.

do you THINK that Woody had sex with Soon-Yi before she was old enough to give consent?

because it is more than obvious that he DID, even if we can't PROVE it.  Having said that, I THINK that there is more to the allegations than a spurned woman.
 
2014-02-04 02:17:35 PM  

frepnog: Kid the Universe: guilty until proven otherwise, right!

don't tell me what you can prove, tell me what you THINK.

do you THINK that Woody had sex with Soon-Yi before she was old enough to give consent?

because it is more than obvious that he DID, even if we can't PROVE it.  Having said that, I THINK that there is more to the allegations than a spurned woman.


I don't think I've ever seen anyone so illogically and passionately convinced of their rightness about something so impossible to ever be "right" about as you are.
 
2014-02-04 02:19:09 PM  

frepnog: Kid the Universe: guilty until proven otherwise, right!

don't tell me what you can prove, tell me what you THINK.

do you THINK that Woody had sex with Soon-Yi before she was old enough to give consent?

because it is more than obvious that he DID, even if we can't PROVE it.  Having said that, I THINK that there is more to the allegations than a spurned woman.


Do I think he had sex with Soon-Yi before she was legal? I don't know. But I definitely think he was grooming her from an early age to be his future wife, which is just ick. I don't think it is obvious at all if he had sex with her or not, because somebody is grooming somebody doesn't mean they are also having sex with them.

I just think that both Woody and Mia are both really farked up manipulative people who should have never been allowed around children. And if she wasn't rich and famous, I doubt Farrow would have never passed a psych evaluation and been allowed to adopt.
 
2014-02-04 02:22:47 PM  

frepnog: Kid the Universe: guilty until proven otherwise, right!

don't tell me what you can prove, tell me what you THINK.

do you THINK that Woody had sex with Soon-Yi before she was old enough to give consent?

because it is more than obvious that he DID, even if we can't PROVE it.  Having said that, I THINK that there is more to the allegations than a spurned woman.


I am not going to defend the morality of Woody and Soon-Yi, but I think it looks like, based upon the facts outlined in the dailybeast article, that Woody did not have any sort of relationship with Soon-Yi until she was 19 or 21.  It is certainly isn't obvious.

/Still shouldn't have a relationship with your girlfriend's daughter who is 30+ years younger.
 
2014-02-04 02:28:59 PM  

frepnog: Kid the Universe: guilty until proven otherwise, right!

don't tell me what you can prove, tell me what you THINK.

do you THINK that Woody had sex with Soon-Yi before she was old enough to give consent?

because it is more than obvious that he DID, even if we can't PROVE it.  Having said that, I THINK that there is more to the allegations than a spurned woman.


I think this is a sad tale for sure. I used to think Mia's allegations were more plausible than I do now having read the dailybeast article and I posted that link because accusations make the front page and retractions get printed somewhere under the crossword. I think the Soon-yi thing is still really creepy even if he wasn't that girl's "father." Having grown up in an extremely dysfunctional family, I have experienced firsthand the power and manipulation parents have over their children. Both of my parents tried to get my brother and sister and I to hate the other parent. And it worked because we were kids trying to please our parents and make sense of our broken family.

Mostly though, I think this has become quite embarrassing for this family and my opinion doesn't matter in the slightest.
 
2014-02-04 02:30:10 PM  

boyofd: but I think it looks like, based upon the facts outlined in the dailybeast article, that Woody did not have any sort of relationship with Soon-Yi until she was 19 or 21.


well, except for those naked pics he took when she was 17.

she was 9 when she came over.  To say she had no relationship with Woody is disingenuous at best.
 
2014-02-04 02:30:59 PM  

someonelse: I don't think I've ever seen anyone so illogically and passionately convinced of their rightness about something so impossible to ever be "right" about as you are.


try typing your next post BEFORE you take a bong rip.
 
2014-02-04 02:41:22 PM  

Doc Batarang: Because of the internet, I read too much about: celebrity sex abuse scandals, bitcoins and Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.

I agree with Alec Baldwin and would like to add that someone should file some charges with the police or shut up about it.


The statute of limitations has expired on this, has it not? So charges are no longer possible?

/not sure who is telling the truth here
//the guy is creepy as hell either way
 
2014-02-04 02:43:18 PM  

namegoeshere: Doc Batarang: Because of the internet, I read too much about: celebrity sex abuse scandals, bitcoins and Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.

I agree with Alec Baldwin and would like to add that someone should file some charges with the police or shut up about it.

The statute of limitations has expired on this, has it not? So charges are no longer possible?

/not sure who is telling the truth here
//the guy is creepy as hell either way


Depends on where it happened. In some states there isn't a statute of limitations on rape or child molestation anymore.
 
2014-02-04 02:45:17 PM  

frepnog: boyofd: but I think it looks like, based upon the facts outlined in the dailybeast article, that Woody did not have any sort of relationship with Soon-Yi until she was 19 or 21.

well, except for those naked pics he took when she was 17.

she was 9 when she came over.  To say she had no relationship with Woody is disingenuous at best.


Yeah, the naked pictures would be a problem.  But I'm not aware of them.  Any links?

As for her age when she came to the US, it isn't very relevant if Woody never lived with Mia and never spent the night at her apartment.  Apparently, Mia has admitted that Woody had nothing to do with Soon-Yi until she was at least 18, and that the relationship started when she pushed Woody to become more involved.

/Still really creepy.
 
2014-02-04 02:45:37 PM  

kanesays: Jizz Master Zero: Can anyone give me an unbiased rundown of this whole thing? I've been able to pick up little details (there was a taped deposition that was suspiciously stopped/started in between every question and answer, the whole thing was thrown out of court for lack of evidence, Mia Farrow has a reputation as a childish psycho), but I have no idea what the full story is and I can't find a concise account anywhere.

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

This is a look at the allegations, with full disclosure of the author being the director of the PBS documentary on Allen.


Would something written by a guy doing a documentary on Allen qualify as *unbiased*?
 
2014-02-04 02:56:19 PM  

Jizz Master Zero: Can anyone give me an unbiased rundown of this whole thing? I've been able to pick up little details (there was a taped deposition that was suspiciously stopped/started in between every question and answer, the whole thing was thrown out of court for lack of evidence, Mia Farrow has a reputation as a childish psycho), but I have no idea what the full story is and I can't find a concise account anywhere.


http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/01/27/the-woody-allen-all eg ations-not-so-fast.html
 
2014-02-04 02:58:12 PM  

kanesays: frepnog: why does everyone think Mia is the one with problems?/seriously, I don't know

Let's see if I can present a scenario, based solely on my own speculation. Mia Farrow married Frank Sinatra when she was 19 and he was 50, half his age. Then she moved on to Andre Previn. Then to Woody Allen. I can see a career of star-f**king going on here. You picking up on that at all?
Now, she's no longer the beauty she was and is she is no longer able to sleep her way around Hollywood, or be on the 'A' list. She and her entire family have lost their celebrity status. It's over. Yet, she nor members of her family can move on. Woody has.

Lastly, to top it off, this woman who at one point was married to the most powerful man in show biz, Frank Sinatra, was dropped for a woman half her age. And to top that off, a woman Farrow she brought to this country and legally adopted, and has no relationship with anymore either.

Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.


You forgot the part where a 40-something Farrow cheated on Woody with a 71-year-old Sinatra, got pregnant, and then told Woody the kid was his.
 
2014-02-04 02:59:55 PM  

susansto-helit: kanesays: Jizz Master Zero: Can anyone give me an unbiased rundown of this whole thing? I've been able to pick up little details (there was a taped deposition that was suspiciously stopped/started in between every question and answer, the whole thing was thrown out of court for lack of evidence, Mia Farrow has a reputation as a childish psycho), but I have no idea what the full story is and I can't find a concise account anywhere.

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

This is a look at the allegations, with full disclosure of the author being the director of the PBS documentary on Allen.

Would something written by a guy doing a documentary on Allen qualify as *unbiased*?


Maybe not "unbiased", but it's an accurate telling from someone inside the situation, with links to other articles from that time that support his point of view, and it's written from a very balanced perspective.

I think people just want a good old-fashioned witch hunt, and they're getting upset that the facts are not supporting the accusations in this case.
 
2014-02-04 03:00:58 PM  

boyofd: frepnog: boyofd: but I think it looks like, based upon the facts outlined in the dailybeast article, that Woody did not have any sort of relationship with Soon-Yi until she was 19 or 21.

well, except for those naked pics he took when she was 17.

she was 9 when she came over.  To say she had no relationship with Woody is disingenuous at best.

Yeah, the naked pictures would be a problem.  But I'm not aware of them.  Any links?

As for her age when she came to the US, it isn't very relevant if Woody never lived with Mia and never spent the night at her apartment.  Apparently, Mia has admitted that Woody had nothing to do with Soon-Yi until she was at least 18, and that the relationship started when she pushed Woody to become more involved.

/Still really creepy.


Not sure that came out the way you intended. Or maybe it did.
 
2014-02-04 03:01:59 PM  

boyofd: But I'm not aware of them.


Mia found them.  it is how she discovered that Woody was banging Soon-Yi.
 
2014-02-04 03:03:48 PM  

boyofd: frepnog: boyofd: but I think it looks like, based upon the facts outlined in the dailybeast article, that Woody did not have any sort of relationship with Soon-Yi until she was 19 or 21.

well, except for those naked pics he took when she was 17.

she was 9 when she came over.  To say she had no relationship with Woody is disingenuous at best.

Yeah, the naked pictures would be a problem.  But I'm not aware of them.  Any links?

As for her age when she came to the US, it isn't very relevant if Woody never lived with Mia and never spent the night at her apartment.  Apparently, Mia has admitted that Woody had nothing to do with Soon-Yi until she was at least 18, and that the relationship started when she pushed Woody to become more involved.

/Still really creepy.


No more creepy than a 21-year-old Mia Farrow getting involved with 51-year-old Frank Sinatra. No more creepy than a 24-year-old Mia Farrow getting pregnant by a married 40-year-old Andre Previn and subsequently stealing him away from his wife (her friend, apparently) and driving her mad. CERTAINLY no more creepy than a 42-year-old Farrow cheating on Woody with a 71-year-old Frank Sinatra, getting pregnant, and then telling Woody the child was his.

Pot. Kettle. VERY black.
 
2014-02-04 03:07:18 PM  

ZeroCorpse: No more creepy than a 21-year-old Mia Farrow getting involved with 51-year-old Frank Sinatra. No more creepy than a 24-year-old Mia Farrow getting pregnant by a married 40-year-old Andre Previn and subsequently stealing him away from his wife (her friend, apparently) and driving her mad. CERTAINLY no more creepy than a 42-year-old Farrow cheating on Woody with a 71-year-old Frank Sinatra, getting pregnant, and then telling Woody the child was his.


it isn't creepy when a woman uses sex as a weapon.  it's just a woman.

you know that right?
 
2014-02-04 03:08:36 PM  

ZeroCorpse: boyofd: frepnog: boyofd: but I think it looks like, based upon the facts outlined in the dailybeast article, that Woody did not have any sort of relationship with Soon-Yi until she was 19 or 21.

well, except for those naked pics he took when she was 17.

she was 9 when she came over.  To say she had no relationship with Woody is disingenuous at best.

Yeah, the naked pictures would be a problem.  But I'm not aware of them.  Any links?

As for her age when she came to the US, it isn't very relevant if Woody never lived with Mia and never spent the night at her apartment.  Apparently, Mia has admitted that Woody had nothing to do with Soon-Yi until she was at least 18, and that the relationship started when she pushed Woody to become more involved.

/Still really creepy.

No more creepy than a 21-year-old Mia Farrow getting involved with 51-year-old Frank Sinatra. No more creepy than a 24-year-old Mia Farrow getting pregnant by a married 40-year-old Andre Previn and subsequently stealing him away from his wife (her friend, apparently) and driving her mad. CERTAINLY no more creepy than a 42-year-old Farrow cheating on Woody with a 71-year-old Frank Sinatra, getting pregnant, and then telling Woody the child was his.

Pot. Kettle. VERY black.


You've convinced me, that's a free pass for Woody to molest children.
 
2014-02-04 03:09:34 PM  

frepnog: boyofd: But I'm not aware of them.

Mia found them.  it is how she discovered that Woody was banging Soon-Yi.


By snooping in someone else's stuff. Yeah, that's mentally healthy.

And again, she had cheated on Woody and had a baby as a result of that affair-- which she never revealed to him-- by that time.

Woody was in his mid-50s and Soon-Yi was either 19 or 21 (her Korean birth record is not clear, but it's one of those two) when they got together. She's highly intelligent, and Mia pushed them into spending time together... And they fell in love.

Yes, the age difference is vast, but no more vast than Mia and her own lovers and husbands. But Woody was never Soon-Yi's father figure, adoptive father, live-in authority figure, or anything else. To Soon-Yi, he was her adoptive mother's boyfriend after she divorced Soon-Yi's adoptive father, and she didn't have much to do with Woody until she was an adult.

But people seem to NEED to lie like crazy and say she was a child, she was retarded, she was his stepdaughter, she was his adopted daughter, she was living with him, she was the girl in the photo at the basketball game, etc. etc....  and all of that is complete and utter bullshiat.

I don't particularly care about Allen... But I hate to see someone being accused of a heinous act by people who are lying, distorting, or misrepresenting the facts in order to push their own blind hatred for someone/something.
 
2014-02-04 03:14:54 PM  

Cletus C.: boyofd: frepnog: boyofd: but I think it looks like, based upon the facts outlined in the dailybeast article, that Woody did not have any sort of relationship with Soon-Yi until she was 19 or 21.

well, except for those naked pics he took when she was 17.

she was 9 when she came over.  To say she had no relationship with Woody is disingenuous at best.

Yeah, the naked pictures would be a problem.  But I'm not aware of them.  Any links?

As for her age when she came to the US, it isn't very relevant if Woody never lived with Mia and never spent the night at her apartment.  Apparently, Mia has admitted that Woody had nothing to do with Soon-Yi until she was at least 18, and that the relationship started when she pushed Woody to become more involved.

/Still really creepy.

Not sure that came out the way you intended. Or maybe it did.


Whoooooooooooooooooooooooooaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa Nelly!  Sorry about that.  Wish I could claim I intended that as a joke.
 
2014-02-04 03:15:09 PM  
ok, fark just kills me.

Woody accused, never convicted of a crime, adult victim maintains abuse occurred - oh Mia is just nuts, let's dig into her past and make her look nuts, she slept around, victim is making it up, WHORE

Zimmerman accused, all evidence supports him, acquitted of a crime - oh Trayvon was innocent, he just liked tea and candy, his past and actions HAVE NO BEARING LEAVE HIM ALONE
 
2014-02-04 03:15:29 PM  

someonelse: frepnog: faked paternity? who cares?

Sinatra's wife, I imagine.


Since she told Woody Allen, he was the father of Ronan, maybe Woody Allen would care as well.
 
2014-02-04 03:15:56 PM  

frepnog: boyofd: But I'm not aware of them.

Mia found them.  it is how she discovered that Woody was banging Soon-Yi.


That's not very good evidence that Soon-Yi was 17 when it started.
 
2014-02-04 03:16:06 PM  

Cletus C.: ZeroCorpse: boyofd: frepnog: boyofd: but I think it looks like, based upon the facts outlined in the dailybeast article, that Woody did not have any sort of relationship with Soon-Yi until she was 19 or 21.

well, except for those naked pics he took when she was 17.

she was 9 when she came over.  To say she had no relationship with Woody is disingenuous at best.

Yeah, the naked pictures would be a problem.  But I'm not aware of them.  Any links?

As for her age when she came to the US, it isn't very relevant if Woody never lived with Mia and never spent the night at her apartment.  Apparently, Mia has admitted that Woody had nothing to do with Soon-Yi until she was at least 18, and that the relationship started when she pushed Woody to become more involved.

/Still really creepy.

No more creepy than a 21-year-old Mia Farrow getting involved with 51-year-old Frank Sinatra. No more creepy than a 24-year-old Mia Farrow getting pregnant by a married 40-year-old Andre Previn and subsequently stealing him away from his wife (her friend, apparently) and driving her mad. CERTAINLY no more creepy than a 42-year-old Farrow cheating on Woody with a 71-year-old Frank Sinatra, getting pregnant, and then telling Woody the child was his.

Pot. Kettle. VERY black.

You've convinced me, that's a free pass for Woody to molest children.


wow you've convinced me! Mia is clearly a paragon of virtue and couldn't possibly be capable of fabricating this

oh, that's a logical fallacy, is it? Hmm, good thing straw-man arguments are admissible in cases like these
 
2014-02-04 03:18:10 PM  

boyofd: That's not very good evidence that Soon-Yi was 17 when it started.


yeah because I have never farked women that i took naked pics of.

/yes I have, every last farking one.
 
2014-02-04 03:18:52 PM  

Cletus C.: ZeroCorpse: boyofd: frepnog: boyofd: but I think it looks like, based upon the facts outlined in the dailybeast article, that Woody did not have any sort of relationship with Soon-Yi until she was 19 or 21.

well, except for those naked pics he took when she was 17.

she was 9 when she came over.  To say she had no relationship with Woody is disingenuous at best.

Yeah, the naked pictures would be a problem.  But I'm not aware of them.  Any links?

As for her age when she came to the US, it isn't very relevant if Woody never lived with Mia and never spent the night at her apartment.  Apparently, Mia has admitted that Woody had nothing to do with Soon-Yi until she was at least 18, and that the relationship started when she pushed Woody to become more involved.

/Still really creepy.

No more creepy than a 21-year-old Mia Farrow getting involved with 51-year-old Frank Sinatra. No more creepy than a 24-year-old Mia Farrow getting pregnant by a married 40-year-old Andre Previn and subsequently stealing him away from his wife (her friend, apparently) and driving her mad. CERTAINLY no more creepy than a 42-year-old Farrow cheating on Woody with a 71-year-old Frank Sinatra, getting pregnant, and then telling Woody the child was his.

Pot. Kettle. VERY black.

You've convinced me, that's a free pass for Woody to molest children.



Some people just can't accept facts when they want a good witch hunt.

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


Excerpts:

"I know I'm treading a delicate path here, and opening myself up to accusations of "blaming the victim." However, I'm merely floating scenarios to consider, and you can think what you will. But if Mia's account is true, it means that in the middle of custody and support negotiations, during which Woody needed to be on his best behavior, in a house belonging to his furious ex-girlfriend, and filled with people seething mad at him, Woody, who is a well-known claustrophobic, decided this would be the ideal time and place to take his daughter into an attic and molest her, quickly, before a house full of children and nannies noticed they were both missing.

...

Let's back up a bit: Mia's allegations of molestation automatically triggered a criminal investigation by the Connecticut State Police, who brought in an investigative team from the Yale-New Haven Hospital, whose six-month long inquiry (which included medical examinations) concluded that Dylan had  not been molested. I've since read a recurring canard that Woody "chose" the investigative team. Yet nobody has suggested how or why Mia's team would ever outsource the investigation to a team "chosen" by Woody. Others have said that the investigators talked to psychiatrists "on Allen's payroll" before letting him off the hook. The only way I can explain this is that the investigators, naturally, would have spoken with Woody's shrinks before giving him a clean bill of health. So technically, yeah, Woody's shrinks would have been paid a lot of money by Woody over the years. (Let's even call it an annuity.) The same would be true of his dentist, his eye doctor, and his internist. 

As for the evidentiary videotape of young Dylan's claims, it's been noted that there were several starts and stops in the recording, essentially creating in-camera "edits" to the young girl's commentary. This raises questions as to what was happening when the tape wasn't running. Was Mia "coaching" her daughter off-camera, as suggested by the investigators? Mia says no-she merely turned the camera on whenever Dylan starting talking about what Daddy did. Maybe we should take Mia at her word on this. Since I wasn't there, I think it's good policy not to presume what took place.

The videotape and the medical exams weren't the only problems Mia faced in bringing abuse charges against her former lover. There were problems with inconsistencies in her daughter's off-camera narrative as well. ANew York Times article dated March 26, 1993,quotes from Mia's own testimony, during which she recalled taking the child to a doctor on the same day as the alleged incident. Farrow recalled, "I think (Dylan) said (Allen) touched her, but when asked where, she just looked around and went like this," at which point Mia patted her shoulders. Farrow recalls she took Dylan to another doctor, four days later. On the stand, Allen's attorney asked Mia about the second doctor's findings: "There was no evidence of injury to the anal or vaginal area, is that correct?" Farrow answered, "Yes."

In the midst of the proceedings, on February 2, 1993,  a revealing article appeared in the Los Angeles Times,
headlined: "Nanny Casts Doubt on Farrow Charges," in which former nanny Monica Thompson (whose salary was paid by Allen, since three of the brood were also his) swore in a deposition to Allen's attorneys that she was pressured by Farrow to support the molestation charges, and the pressure led her to resign her position. Thompson had this to say about the videotape: ""I know that the tape was made over the course of at least two and perhaps three days. I recall Ms. Farrow saying to Dylan at that time, 'Dylan, what did daddy do... and what did he do next?' Dylan appeared not to be interested, and Ms. Farrow would stop taping for a while and then continue."

Thompson further revealed a conversation she had with Kristie Groteke, another nanny. "She told me that she felt guilty allowing Ms. Farrow to say those things about Mr. Allen. (Groteke) said the day Mr. Allen spent with the kids, she did not have Dylan out of her sight for longer than five minutes. She did not remember Dylan being without her underwear."

On April 20, 1993, a sworn statement was entered into evidence by Dr. John M. Leventhal, who headed the Yale-New Haven Hospital investigative team looking into the abuse charges. An article from the New York Times dated May 4, 1993, includes some interesting excerpts of their findings. As to why the team felt the charges didn't hold water, Leventhal states: "We had two hypotheses: one, that these were statements made by an emotionally disturbed child and then became fixed in her mind. And the other hypothesis was that she was coached or influenced by her mother. We did not come to a firm conclusion. We think that it was probably a combination."

Leventhal further swears Dylan's statements at the hospital contradicted each other as well as the story she told on the videotape. "Those were not minor inconsistencies. She told us initially that she hadn't been touched in the vaginal area, and she then told us that she had, then she told us that she hadn't." He also said the child's accounts had "a rehearsed quality." At one point, she told him, "I like to cheat on my stories." The sworn statement further concludes: "Even before the claim of abuse was made last August, the view of Mr. Allen as an evil and awful and terrible man permeated the household. The view that he had molested Soon-Yi and was a potential molester of Dylan permeated the household... It's quite possible -as a matter of fact, we think it's medically probable-that (Dylan) stuck to that story over time because of the intense relationship she had with her mother." Leventhal further notes it was "very striking" that each time Dylan spoke of the abuse, she coupled it with "one, her father's relationship with Soon-Yi, and two, the fact that it was her poor mother, her poor mother," who had lost a career in Mr. Allen's films. "



There's way more to this, of course, but it seems that the people who just want to spew "he's a pedo!" over and over aren't willing to pay any attention to the facts of the case, the people who know the man, and the words of Dylan's own brother who says that Mia was doing a lot of brainwashing, and that he was around that day and witnessed nothing like what Mia and Dylan described.

But hey, he turned you into a newt, so burn him.
 
2014-02-04 03:19:44 PM  

ZeroCorpse: boyofd: frepnog: boyofd: but I think it looks like, based upon the facts outlined in the dailybeast article, that Woody did not have any sort of relationship with Soon-Yi until she was 19 or 21.

well, except for those naked pics he took when she was 17.

she was 9 when she came over.  To say she had no relationship with Woody is disingenuous at best.

Yeah, the naked pictures would be a problem.  But I'm not aware of them.  Any links?

As for her age when she came to the US, it isn't very relevant if Woody never lived with Mia and never spent the night at her apartment.  Apparently, Mia has admitted that Woody had nothing to do with Soon-Yi until she was at least 18, and that the relationship started when she pushed Woody to become more involved.

/Still really creepy.

No more creepy than a 21-year-old Mia Farrow getting involved with 51-year-old Frank Sinatra. No more creepy than a 24-year-old Mia Farrow getting pregnant by a married 40-year-old Andre Previn and subsequently stealing him away from his wife (her friend, apparently) and driving her mad. CERTAINLY no more creepy than a 42-year-old Farrow cheating on Woody with a 71-year-old Frank Sinatra, getting pregnant, and then telling Woody the child was his.

Pot. Kettle. VERY black.


I am in complete agreement that Mia has a lot to answer for, and that her activities and motives make Dylan's accusations suspect.  But (1) don't blame 21-year old Mia for getting involved with 51-year old Frank.  The creepiness on that relationship comes from Frank's end, and there is still a huge difference between starting a relationship with a 21-year old actress and a 19-year old daughter of your girlfriend.

And (2) nothing about Mia's activities in this case lends any defense to Woody for his relationship with Soon-Yi (which is creepy and immoral, in my eyes, but not unlawful or evidence in favor of Dylan's accusations).
 
2014-02-04 03:22:56 PM  

Marisyana: Seriously, I don't understand why anyone would think this kid's father was Frank Sinatra.  Really, no clue whatsoever ...
[cdn-s3.thewrap.com image 618x400]


Yeah - he was on Real Time's panel the other night - Yeah - Sinatra's DNA is all up in that kids genetic code.
 
2014-02-04 03:27:30 PM  

frepnog: boyofd: That's not very good evidence that Soon-Yi was 17 when it started.

yeah because I have never farked women that i took naked pics of.

/yes I have, every last farking one.


You are missing my point, I think.  The evidence I have seen (including an admission from Mia) was that Woody and Soon-Yi met like 3 times before she turned 18 or 19 (Soon-Yi did not live with Mia, but with her father), and that their relationship began when she was 19 or 21.  The counter-evidence you claim is photographs of a naked 17-year old Soon-Yi, but there is nothing offered (other than Mia's word, I guess) that those photographs took place 2 years before Woody and Soon-Yi started seeing each other (nor were there apparently many opportunities).  You seem to be taking it on faith that (1) the photos exist; (2) that Woody took them; and (3) that Mia could tell the difference between her daughter at 17 and 19.
 
2014-02-04 03:32:46 PM  

frepnog: ok, fark just kills me.

Woody accused, never convicted of a crime, adult victim maintains abuse occurred - oh Mia is just nuts, let's dig into her past and make her look nuts, she slept around, victim is making it up, WHORE


I don't really give a shiat about Zimmerman (though he's a prick), and the point wasn't that Mia's a "whore" -- The point is that people are screaming for Woody's head because he was 56 and Soon-Yi was 19 (or 21), but conveniently overlooking that Mia was 21 and Sinatra was 51, or that Mia was 24 and Andre Previn was 40 (and married).

If you're going to assume Woody's scum because he went for a younger woman, then you have to apply the same logic to Mia and her relationships with older men, not to mention her infidelity.

There's no evidence that Woody ever inappropriately touched any children, ever. It's been refuted by MANY people, including Mia's own son.

So your main reason for smearing Woody is his relationship with Soon-Yi, which was legal, adult, above-the-board, and not in any way incestuous or abusive. You just can't admit that the bullshiat you've been spouting about Soon-Yi being a little girl and/or Woody's "daughter"  isn't true, and so you're standing by your original stance come hell or high water.

Which leads us all to believe it comes down to you hating Woody personally. Maybe you hate his movies. Maybe you hate his political stance. Maybe you hate him for other reasons. Whatever the case, you're ignoring facts to support  your own fantasy version of things.

Doctors, officers of the court, Dylan's own brother, nannies that worked for Mia, and several other people have actively and openly contradicted Mia and Dylan's version of events. I don't see how anyone can look at the facts and then keep saying "he's a child molester" as if it's a fact. It's not a fact. It's not even a very solid accusation at this point.

As for bringing Mia's character into question: HELL YES, the character of an accuser is DEFINITELY of value in any investigation.
 
2014-02-04 03:33:17 PM  

hasty ambush: INeedAName: I think Hollywood needs to burn a bit over this. They seem to be pretty insular and protective over some pretty questionable stuff at times and it would be good for some light to get in there and expose some of the crap.

Many of the Hollywood types are in the same crowd that say if a woman claims to have been raped she must be believed, They are normally not so shy in voicing their opinions are matters like this.... unless of course it is of of their own Allen , Polanski, Clinton any Kennedy. Then it becomes not really any of their business or as in the case of Polanski it was not "rape, rape" and excusable.

Do I think Allen is a creepy pervert who I would not trust around kids? Yes. I s he innocent till proven guilty Yes. The actions of Mia and company right now leave me with too much room for reasonable doubt at this point. Allen would not be the first man to be falsely accused thanks to the coaching of a child by a bitter ex.


Is he overrated in his profession. Most definitely.


Agreed on all points
 
2014-02-04 03:34:15 PM  

ZeroCorpse: susansto-helit: kanesays: Jizz Master Zero: Can anyone give me an unbiased rundown of this whole thing? I've been able to pick up little details (there was a taped deposition that was suspiciously stopped/started in between every question and answer, the whole thing was thrown out of court for lack of evidence, Mia Farrow has a reputation as a childish psycho), but I have no idea what the full story is and I can't find a concise account anywhere.

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

This is a look at the allegations, with full disclosure of the author being the director of the PBS documentary on Allen.

Would something written by a guy doing a documentary on Allen qualify as *unbiased*?

Maybe not "unbiased", but it's an accurate telling from someone inside the situation, with links to other articles from that time that support his point of view, and it's written from a very balanced perspective.

I think people just want a good old-fashioned witch hunt, and they're getting upset that the facts are not supporting the accusations in this case.


Some people would disagree with your assessment of Weide's "balanced perspecive."

http://www.slate.com/articles/life/culturebox/2014/02/woody_allen_s_ bi ggest_defender_robert_weide_s_attack_on_mia_farrow_and_her.html
 
2014-02-04 03:38:20 PM  

farkeruk: hasty ambush: But Hollywood and the movie going public does not seem to care given the how they treat the likes Polanski.  I mean they will boycott things like Arizona but one of their own over child rape, not hardly.

Personally, I boycott Polanski's films for that reason. Still not seen The Pianist (I should probably just rip it from a Warez site). He can go and serve his time, then I'll start watching them.

And I could easily boycott Allen's films. I've seen a couple recently. One was bad, one was good, but he's not like Guillermo del Toro or Brad Bird where I have to watch everything they make.

But I'm still not comfortable about these allegations.


Who would be comfortable with such allegations, but it also highlights one of the problems.  Simply being accused is enough to make you guilty in many people's minds.  If Allen were joe average the accusations alone could cost him his career, family etc even if they are never substantiated not so Hollywood.


That Allen is a major sleaze is a given but that by itself is not enough to convict.
 
2014-02-04 03:43:58 PM  

ZeroCorpse: So your main reason for smearing Woody is his relationship with Soon-Yi, which was legal, adult, above-the-board, and not in any way incestuous or abusive. You just can't admit that the bullshiat you've been spouting about Soon-Yi being a little girl and/or Woody's "daughter" isn't true, and so you're standing by your original stance come hell or high water.


nah.  I will freely admit that when Woody went public with the relationship, she was of legal age.  I don't care about the age difference.  Hell, my own wife is considerably younger than me.

I care that the victim maintains that the abuse occurred.  I care that it is highly likely that Woody's relationship with Soon-Yi started before she was of legal age, showing his obvious interest in girls too young.  I care that Woody being Woody Allen may have shielded him from scrutiny.

I am afraid that in years to come, his children with Soon-Yi adopted or otherwise may have some tales to tell.

I dunno.  I suppose it doesn't matter.
 
2014-02-04 04:31:17 PM  

ChrisDe: The Muthaship: Alec deserves a pass for this, he was busy abusing his own daughter.

Actually, his response was on point. He doesn't know what the hell went on, and we don't either.


I don't think it was "on point" at all.  It's perfectly reasonable for Dylan Farrow to demand to know why he's enriching the man she claims raped her when she was a child.
 
2014-02-04 04:35:24 PM  

Jizz Master Zero: Can anyone give me an unbiased rundown of this whole thing? I've been able to pick up little details (there was a taped deposition that was suspiciously stopped/started in between every question and answer, the whole thing was thrown out of court for lack of evidence, Mia Farrow has a reputation as a childish psycho), but I have no idea what the full story is and I can't find a concise account anywhere.


Woody Allen married Mia Farrow.  While they were married, he had an affair with Mia Farrow's daughter (Soon Yi).  Mia found out about it, Woody left Mia for Soon Yi, and around this time Dylan Farrow (then 7) claimed that Woody Allen raped her.  Now an adult, Dylan Farrow is sticking to her story.
 
2014-02-04 04:42:05 PM  

meanmutton: Woody Allen married Mia Farrow.


I think I see your problem: you're trolling.
 
2014-02-04 04:45:17 PM  

susansto-helit: kanesays: Jizz Master Zero: Can anyone give me an unbiased rundown of this whole thing? I've been able to pick up little details (there was a taped deposition that was suspiciously stopped/started in between every question and answer, the whole thing was thrown out of court for lack of evidence, Mia Farrow has a reputation as a childish psycho), but I have no idea what the full story is and I can't find a concise account anywhere.

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

This is a look at the allegations, with full disclosure of the author being the director of the PBS documentary on Allen.

Would something written by a guy doing a documentary on Allen qualify as *unbiased*?


You would prefer a journalist who has never met the man, knows not a thing about him other than what he read in the tabloids, or have an inkling as to what a man is like in his personal life? Or is it preferable to have a person who has spent years around the man as he worked on the biography of the man's work, has been a witness to the man's behavior behind closed doors, and how he has conducted himself, both privately and professionally?


I know whom I feel would present a more complete and accurate story.
 
2014-02-04 04:45:32 PM  

BeatrixK: Marisyana: Seriously, I don't understand why anyone would think this kid's father was Frank Sinatra.  Really, no clue whatsoever ...
[cdn-s3.thewrap.com image 618x400]

Yeah - he was on Real Time's panel the other night - Yeah - Sinatra's DNA is all up in that kids genetic code.


Add in that Woody married Soon-Yi in her twenties, when she would have been quite fertile ... and almost immeditely adopted two kids.  Also Nancy Sinatra has said that Ronan is "a big part" of the Sinatra family's lives.  Why would a kid mothered by your dad's very brief third wife be a big part of your family?  According to the 1993 Vanity Fair article Woody supposedly had next to nothing to do with Ronan either--and this was his only biological child.  Now it kind of makes sense.

The whole thing is creepy.  I have no sympathy for either Woody or Mia.
 
2014-02-04 04:46:47 PM  

meanmutton: I don't think it was "on point" at all. It's perfectly reasonable for Dylan Farrow to demand to know why he's enriching the man she claims raped her when she was a child.


Fark members have insulted me several times in Fark threads. Why are you enriching Fark when it's been proven time and time again there are cynical douchebags here that are mean to people?

Alec Baldwin has nothing to do with Woody Allen's personal life. Neither does anyone else not involved in this shiatstorm. I work with plenty of douchebags at work. Men who cheat on their wives. Women who cheat on their husbands. Men who have gone to court for numerous crimes. It wouldn't surprise me if one or two of them had 'secret lives' that noone knows about.

Does that make me an accomplice for sharing a workplace with potentially evil people? Or does it just make me a human being who by nature is forced to work with evil people? I have nothing to do with their personal lives.
 
2014-02-04 04:55:54 PM  

meanmutton: Jizz Master Zero: Can anyone give me an unbiased rundown of this whole thing? I've been able to pick up little details (there was a taped deposition that was suspiciously stopped/started in between every question and answer, the whole thing was thrown out of court for lack of evidence, Mia Farrow has a reputation as a childish psycho), but I have no idea what the full story is and I can't find a concise account anywhere.

Woody Allen married Mia Farrow.  While they were married, he had an affair with Mia Farrow's daughter (Soon Yi).  Mia found out about it, Woody left Mia for Soon Yi, and around this time Dylan Farrow (then 7) claimed that Woody Allen raped her.  Now an adult, Dylan Farrow is sticking to her story.


Slight correction, Allen and Farrow were not legally married.    They were a long time couple, but not married.

Not that I don't still find it incredibly creepy, inappropriate and gross, especially since Sun Yi was 19 when the affair started  (at least Allen claims she was 19 ).
 
2014-02-04 05:26:02 PM  

ZeroCorpse: Woody was in his mid-50s and Soon-Yi was either 19 or 21 (her Korean birth record is not clear, but it's one of those two) when they got together. She's highly intelligent, and Mia pushed them into spending time together... And they fell in love.



 I love how it's implied here that Farrow somehow played de facto matchmaker because she had the audacity and naivete  to expect that her adopted daughter and long time partner could be put in a room together with out him boinking her.

ZeroCorpse: No more creepy than a 21-year-old Mia Farrow getting involved with 51-year-old Frank Sinatra. No more creepy than a 24-year-old Mia Farrow getting pregnant by a married 40-year-old Andre Previn and subsequently stealing him away from his wife (her friend, apparently) and driving her mad. CERTAINLY no more creepy than a 42-year-old Farrow cheating on Woody with a 71-year-old Frank Sinatra, getting pregnant, and then telling Woody the child was his.


Actually, yes ... way more creepy. Because it's not just an age difference thing, there's also the complete and utter lack of personal boundaries involved with having an affair with someone who is essentially your teenage step-daughter.     Which apparently doesn't even enter your mind (see above).

If Allen directed generic action movies, Hollywood wouldn't touch him with a 1,000 foot pole and he would have as many defenders as Mel Gibson.    But because he directs "important" movies  like Small Time Crooks, then obviously the woman who has spent her life adopting and raising 9 destitute orphans and works on documentaries about Rwanda (as opposed to her crappy jazz band vanity project) is just a dirty slut.
 
2014-02-04 05:28:31 PM  

frepnog: someonelse: I don't think I've ever seen anyone so illogically and passionately convinced of their rightness about something so impossible to ever be "right" about as you are.

try typing your next post BEFORE you take a bong rip.


That's no fun. And my point stands.
 
2014-02-04 05:54:46 PM  

Cletus C.: mekki: someonelse: frepnog: faked paternity? who cares?

Sinatra's wife, I imagine.

Also, Allen for having to pay child support

She tried to pass off this kid as Woody Allen's kid.
[towleroad.typepad.com image 250x317]
And now she is being all coy and saying that it was Sinatra's kid. And if this is the case, which, come on, look at that mug, it would mean she had an affair with Frank while he was still married. And she knew this and yet still made Allen pay for child support for him.

Farrow is a notorious liar who does what she wants. Others be damned.

Is your point that the little girl deserved to be diddled?


No, my point is I think it never happened. I think this was a case of a parent who was going through a horrible custody battle, has a history of lying and cheating and was willing to brainwash her then seven year old child into believing this happened. One of her kid wants nothing to do with her now for this very reason. He said that Farrow brainwashed his siblings to get what she wanted.

But, hey, keep on ignoring facts because feelings are more important, right?
 
2014-02-04 06:27:15 PM  

Diogenes: eldritch2k4: Diogenes: You knew me when I was a little girl, Diane Keaton. Have you forgotten me?"

You may have answered your own question, Mia.  Dory Previn knew you, too.  And she ended up in the looney bin as a result.

Mia didn't ask the question, her daughter did.

Ah, right.  Then I partially withdraw my comment.  I still believe Mia's a psycho who infects almost everyone she gets close to.  Including her children.


It does seem that way.
None of us were there that day but the chick has a screw loose to be bringing his up, publicly, so many years later.
Good for Alec Baldwin. Unfortunately it is popular and PC to jump on the vicitm's bandwagon without any regard for the accused's privacy or truth of the events.
 
2014-02-04 07:00:55 PM  

mekki: No, my point is I think it never happened. I think this was a case of a parent who was going through a horrible custody battle, has a history of lying and cheating and was willing to brainwash her then seven year old child into believing this happened. One of her kid wants nothing to do with her now for this very reason. He said that Farrow brainwashed his siblings to get what she wanted.

But, hey, keep on ignoring facts because feelings are more important, right?


I don't think you know the "facts" any more than I do. I read this woman's letter and find it quite compelling. She's speaking as an adult about her childhood trauma.

You want to make it about what it was when she was a little girl under the control of her mother. It's not that anymore. It's a woman pointing her finger at her alleged abuser.
 
2014-02-04 07:21:29 PM  

Darth Macho: The child is now 28 years old and knows the difference between false and true memories


Uhh?   It has been proven scientifically that there is a thing called "False Memory Syndrome" in which a person (children are particularly are susceptible) in which a memory can be "implanted" and the person cannot distinguish between the "false" memory and one which was based on reality.

Do you not remember from about a decade or so ago, thousands of men being charged with sexually abusing their children based on the testimony of now adult children who claimed they had memories of such sexual abuse since childhood.  As it turns out and the reason why almost all of these convictions have been overturned in the interim and that is because it was scientifically proven that such memories can be created and implanted by someone attempting to do so.

There's still some adults out there, who as children testified to an alleged string of satanic ritual sex abuse committed by their parents and their parents friends, neighbors, etc.   After 37 people had been convicted, it was finally determined that NO SUCH ABUSE HAD HAPPENED and that all "memories" of such had been implanted by a sheriff's deputy and a social worker in what they claimed were "therapy sessions" with the children.   So we know for a fact now, that there was no mass child abuse, that all of the those sent to prison were innocent and yet, there's still a significant number of those who testified, and who are now adults, still are convinced that it all happened and still refuse contact with their parents.

Just read up on this by searching Kern County or by going online and finding the documentary on the subject.
 
Displayed 50 of 155 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report