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.

(People Magazine)   Another member of the Allen/Farrow clan speaks up. Bonus: He's a family therapist   (people.com) divider line 154
    More: Followup, Woody Allen, Allen/Farrow, Brother Moses, family therapist, Soon-Yi Previn, Mia Farrow, false memories  
•       •       •

3449 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 06 Feb 2014 at 4:08 AM (25 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-06 10:25:33 PM

ambercat: DamnYankees: James!: But he is a convicted child molester.  If someone's claiming to have been molested you might look to the guy who actually was convicted of it rather than the guy mom's already mad at.

Yeah, to be honest when I read this it struck me a incredibly bizarre. What are the odds that this woman's brother is a child molester, and she just so happens to have had a long term relationship with another man she's accusing of child molestation? Isn't that unlikely?

No, sadly it's the opposite. Just like how women who were abused are more likely to hook up with physically abusive partners later in life. That's what makes this story so hard- given Mia's history you could see her being the kind of crazy who would hook up with a child molester, she's even done it before with Polanski. She clearly has a type. Older, famous, and with a predilection for young tail. You could also see a molester being attracted to her- both because she's spent so much of her life going after way older men and because she's so unstable no one would believe her. But then, she is so unstable you could also easily see her making something like this up, and traumatizing her own child by getting her to believe it. It's like a gordian knot of crazy.


I hear Gordian Knot of Crazy was the opening band for Palpable biatchery.
 
2014-02-06 10:32:38 PM

DamnYankees: namegoeshere: There is no prosecution possible at this point. There will be no official investigation beyond what was done at the time:

Under the law in 1993, Farrow had until age 20 to file criminal charges against Allen. That legal limit covers her criminal claims - and so, now that she is 28, she is barred.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/law-child-sex-abuse-victims-articl e -1.1602057#ixzz2sbG3lgt3

That doesn't make sense. People don't file criminal charges. The state does.


Awkwardly worded, yes. This one might make more sense:

Former Litchfield County state attorney Frank Maco said in a phone interview Sunday with The Associated Press that the statute of limitations on adopted daughter Dylan Farrow's accusations ran out at least 15 years ago.
 
2014-02-07 12:46:11 AM

James!: abfab: Did anyone read the Vanity Fair article? (*crickets*) It is a FACT that BEFORE the therapist reported (nope, Mia didn't start this) Dylan's allegations, Allen was already in therapy for "inappropriate behavior" toward her. (Among other things, he enjoyed sticking his thumb in her mouth and having her suck it. Not making this up.) He was attending that therapy WILLINGLY. It's a matter of record. I don't know about any of you, but I sure as hell wouldn't go to therapy for something like that, because I'm not a pedo, and I wouldn't want anyone thinking I was. (No shade to the pedos that DO seek help, however; good on you, keep it up.)

I'm amazed at how many people would rather believe in some elaborate, masterful brainwashing conspiracy whose effects lasted for DECADES than use their damned common sense and say, "Ya know, there is quite a bit of smoke here. Might well be some fire."

According to a Vanity Fair writer who is friends with the family.  Here's what the psychiatrist hired by the Connecticut State Police said:

Dr. John M. Leventhal, who interviewed Dylan nine times, said that one reason he doubted her story was that she changed important points from one interview to another, like whether Mr. Allen touched her vagina. Another reason, he said, was that the child's accounts had "a rehearsed quality." At one point, he said she told him, "I like to cheat on my stories."

(Link)


Oh, so you're saying Woody Allene was not in therapy for inappropriate behavior with Dylan? That aspect of the Vanity Fair article was false?

Nope:

http://www.nytimes.com/books/97/02/23/reviews/farrow-verdict.html

Also, it bears mentioning that although Allen threatened to sue Vanity Fair, the magazine publicly announced that they stood by their story, and guess what? No lawsuit. Google for yourself, dude never sued them. That should make you wonder, but I'm guessing it won't.

/Bookmarks thread for the day the adopted daughters get free of him and come forward to accuse him of abusing them, also. Shouldn't be too long.
 
2014-02-07 03:30:40 AM

abfab: James!: abfab: Did anyone read the Vanity Fair article? (*crickets*) It is a FACT that BEFORE the therapist reported (nope, Mia didn't start this) Dylan's allegations, Allen was already in therapy for "inappropriate behavior" toward her. (Among other things, he enjoyed sticking his thumb in her mouth and having her suck it. Not making this up.) He was attending that therapy WILLINGLY. It's a matter of record. I don't know about any of you, but I sure as hell wouldn't go to therapy for something like that, because I'm not a pedo, and I wouldn't want anyone thinking I was. (No shade to the pedos that DO seek help, however; good on you, keep it up.)

I'm amazed at how many people would rather believe in some elaborate, masterful brainwashing conspiracy whose effects lasted for DECADES than use their damned common sense and say, "Ya know, there is quite a bit of smoke here. Might well be some fire."

According to a Vanity Fair writer who is friends with the family.  Here's what the psychiatrist hired by the Connecticut State Police said:

Dr. John M. Leventhal, who interviewed Dylan nine times, said that one reason he doubted her story was that she changed important points from one interview to another, like whether Mr. Allen touched her vagina. Another reason, he said, was that the child's accounts had "a rehearsed quality." At one point, he said she told him, "I like to cheat on my stories."

(Link)

Oh, so you're saying Woody Allene was not in therapy for inappropriate behavior with Dylan? That aspect of the Vanity Fair article was false?

Nope:

http://www.nytimes.com/books/97/02/23/reviews/farrow-verdict.html

Also, it bears mentioning that although Allen threatened to sue Vanity Fair, the magazine publicly announced that they stood by their story, and guess what? No lawsuit. Google for yourself, dude never sued them. That should make you wonder, but I'm guessing it won't.

/Bookmarks thread for the day the adopted daughters get free of him and come forward to accu ...


that's an interesting standard. No lawsuit. You know Allen was never charged with a crime, sued by farrow or put under a restraining order.

The farrow family (the ones that actually believe it) have kept their accusations in the court of public opinion and out of actual court. By your standard that would make them suspicious.
 
Displayed 4 of 154 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