snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > Non-UL Chat > Amusement Bark

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02 February 2014, 12:55 AM
Sue's Avatar
Sue Sue is offline
 
Join Date: 26 December 2011
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 9,210
Default Woody Allen’s Adoptive Daughter Speaks Out About Her Sexual Assault

The adoptive daughter of Woody Allen and Mia Farrow published a New York Times piece on Saturday titled “An Open Letter From Dylan Farrow,” in which she describes being sexually abused by Allen when she was 7.

“What’s your favorite Woody Allen movie?” she begins.

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


http://www.buzzfeed.com/alisonvingia...t-her-sexual-a
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02 February 2014, 01:16 AM
Rebochan's Avatar
Rebochan Rebochan is offline
 
Join Date: 19 February 2002
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 11,611
Default

Since I despise sites like Buzzfeed that leech off the hard work of others, here's the article they're stealing from. It's much more nuanced.

http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/201...=tw-share&_r=0
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02 February 2014, 01:23 AM
Sue's Avatar
Sue Sue is offline
 
Join Date: 26 December 2011
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 9,210
Default

Thanks, Rebochan, the link for the NYTimes article wouldn't open for me for some reason.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04 February 2014, 08:47 PM
Sue's Avatar
Sue Sue is offline
 
Join Date: 26 December 2011
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 9,210
Default

Woody Allen's Advantage: How the Law Protects Celebs Accused of Abuse

Stars' out-of-court settlements and PR campaigns amount to legalized witness tampering. A few rule changes for cases with famous defendants could help ensure fairness, though.

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertain...-abuse/283595/
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05 February 2014, 01:01 AM
MisterGrey MisterGrey is offline
 
Join Date: 26 September 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 4,992
Default

Not So Fast

Quote:
Twenty-one years after the first allegations that Woody Allen abused his adopted daughter, that incident is back in the news thanks to the director’s ex-partner, Mia Farrow, and estranged son, Ronan Farrow. But what does a closer examination reveal?
Another interesting read here:

Quote:

Moses Farrow, now 36, and an accomplished photographer, has been estranged from Mia for several years. During a recent conversation, he spoke of “finally seeing the reality” of Frog Hollow and used the term “brainwashing” without hesitation. He recently reestablished contact with Allen and is currently enjoying a renewed relationship with him and Soon-Yi.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05 February 2014, 02:03 AM
Rebochan's Avatar
Rebochan Rebochan is offline
 
Join Date: 19 February 2002
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 11,611
Default

Actually, this is a lot more odd to me. From the Not So Fast article:

Quote:
I thought it unlikely that Mia would object, as I had obtained a signed release for my documentary, in which she granted permission for her appearance in many lengthy clips from several Allen films. At the time, I was extremely grateful for her cooperation, for without it, I would have had a 12-year gap in my film, and Mia would have been extremely conspicuous by her absence. As a further sign of good will, Mia agreed to the use of her “Purple Rose” clip in the Golden Globe montage. The producers of the show were grateful. Everyone agreed it would have been a shame not to acknowledge Mia’s contribution to so many of Allen’s best films.
Wait, wait, wait. So she's super protective of her family from this guy her daughter has repeatedly claimed molested her, but she kept allowing people to use footage of her to promote him!? Including in the Golden Globes montage she turned around and slammed as immoral?

Okay, this doesn't actually say whether or not the molestation DID happen, but it does make me wonder just what kind of parent she was. At best, it makes her seem just a touch hypocritical to support this guy when she thinks it will promote her career...and similarly to drag out the allegations of molestation of her child when, again, it will promote her career.

I think...a lot of creepy insanity took place in that home.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06 February 2014, 01:51 AM
Avril's Avatar
Avril Avril is offline
 
Join Date: 07 August 2002
Location: Princeton, NJ
Posts: 10,543
Default

This blog says pretty much what I think, although I might make some qualifications of some of it if it were me:

http://www.rageagainsttheminivan.com...arrow-and.html

But this part:

Quote:
Wondering if Dylan Farrow is telling the truth? It doesn’t matter. It’s not our place to question her story.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06 February 2014, 02:12 AM
MisterGrey MisterGrey is offline
 
Join Date: 26 September 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 4,992
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avril View Post
This blog says pretty much what I think, although I might make some qualifications of some of it if it were me:

http://www.rageagainsttheminivan.com...arrow-and.html

But this part:
I understand the sentiment of the post, but, as a survivor of childhood sexual abuse myself, I have to say, bulls---t. Where are the parts that say...

Quote:
Q: What if there's considerable evidence that the victim is lying or has false memories?
A: No
Dylan Farrow took this to the public forum. She ran a highly visible, intentionally provocative piece with the (apparent) aim of getting people to rally around her cause, whatever that may be (boycotting Allen films? Re-opening the case? The statute of limitations hasn't run out; as this article explains, Allen can still be charged). This is not an instance of Farrow going to the police, or discussing the matter with an attorney; this was an instance of Farrow using a public medium to attempt to crucify someone. The public has no duty to automatically side with and support her simply because of the nature of her allegations.

Similarly, what about Moses Farrow? He alleges that Allen is innocent of the charges and that Mia Farrow was the abusive parent. By the article's logic, we're not permitted to question him, either, meaning we must accept two mutually exclusive statements at face value.

ETA: This excerpt profoundly disturbs me:

Quote:
In the end, then-Connecticut State’s Attorney Frank Maco announced that he had “probable cause” to prosecute Allen, but had decided to drop the case to spare Dylan the trauma of being cross-examined in court.
Is it at all ethical to decline to pursue charges against someone believed to be a sexual predator of children in order to spare the victim a day in court? By this logic, one could continue to prey upon children but never be brought up on charges for fear of traumatizing each of the victims. If Maco truly believed that Allen were a child molester, isn't it his duty as an officer of the court to somehow pursue that?
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06 February 2014, 03:14 AM
Avril's Avatar
Avril Avril is offline
 
Join Date: 07 August 2002
Location: Princeton, NJ
Posts: 10,543
Default

As I said, I'd qualify it. I don't think one should never ask questions, but I think the way I've seen those questions asked (not here) is problematic.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06 February 2014, 06:04 AM
erwins's Avatar
erwins erwins is offline
 
Join Date: 04 April 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 12,162
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterGrey View Post
Is it at all ethical to decline to pursue charges against someone believed to be a sexual predator of children in order to spare the victim a day in court? By this logic, one could continue to prey upon children but never be brought up on charges for fear of traumatizing each of the victims. If Maco truly believed that Allen were a child molester, isn't it his duty as an officer of the court to somehow pursue that?
It's called prosecutorial discretion. While he could pursue charges against a perpetrator even if he thinks it would profoundly affect a victim, it's also a prosecutor's call to choose not to prosecute under those circumstances. I don't know how it works elsewhere, but in this state Child Welfare is aware of any criminal case that involves child abuse through a cross reporting mechanism. There would, therefore, be civil mechanisms for the state to step in and protect children that had significant contact with a perpetrator, as long as the agency concluded that the allegations were founded--a criminal conviction isn't necessary for that. And prosecutions in family sex abuse cases can be absolutely devastating to victims. It can be a very humane decision to decline to prosecute, depending on the circumstances.

In addition, probable cause isn't proof beyond a reasonable doubt. So the prosecutor knew he could bring the case, but perhaps wasn't sure he could win it. Taking a case like that to court and losing can further increase the devastation to the victim. It's even possible that the prosecutor had doubts about the case himself.

In short, no, it isn't unethical.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 06 February 2014, 12:23 PM
diddy diddy is offline
 
Join Date: 07 March 2004
Location: Plymouth, MN
Posts: 10,928
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by erwins View Post
In addition, probable cause isn't proof beyond a reasonable doubt. So the prosecutor knew he could bring the case, but perhaps wasn't sure he could win it. Taking a case like that to court and losing can further increase the devastation to the victim. It's even possible that the prosecutor had doubts about the case himself.
That’s very important to point out and it’s something that not to many people bring up. Just because the prosecutor thought there was reasonable doubt doesn’t mean that a jury could find the same thing. It’s very possible that said prosecutor figured that the actual evidence wouldn’t be good enough or could be convincingly argued against and that he couldn’t convince a jury with enough confidence of a conviction.

If he declined to prosecute to spare the victim so to speak, he probably figured that the trial would not only be bad, but it would be much worse should it fail.

Of course I should point out that prosecutors can be wrong too. Just because he thinks that Allen was guilty doesn’t make it true.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 06 February 2014, 02:37 PM
Lainie's Avatar
Lainie Lainie is offline
 
Join Date: 29 August 2005
Location: Suburban Columbus, OH
Posts: 74,430
Default

People ran an interview with Moses Farrow.

ETA: Interestingly, he's a "family therapist," according to the article. (I'm quoting the article, not using scare quotes)
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 06 February 2014, 05:54 PM
wanderwoman's Avatar
wanderwoman wanderwoman is offline
 
Join Date: 29 December 2004
Location: Elkhart, IN
Posts: 7,890
Default

It would be very interesting to see the videos of Dylan Farrow's disclosure to her mother. I have to add that it is a red flag for me when a parent, particularly one involved in a nasty custody dispute, attempts to interview the child themselves instead of leaving it to child welfare/law enforcement.

Here are some bits of information I've come across:

The report from the sexual abuse clinic: http://amradaronline.files.wordpress...ital-allen.pdf

The opinion of the custody court: http://www.leagle.com/decision/1994524197AD2d327_1461
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 06 February 2014, 06:35 PM
erwins's Avatar
erwins erwins is offline
 
Join Date: 04 April 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 12,162
Default

I'm disturbed that that first report is available on line. But it certainly shows why a prosecutor would decline to go forward. (The sexual abuse clinic concluded that her allegations were not true, but either made up or coached, or some combination of the two).
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 06 February 2014, 10:38 PM
Rebochan's Avatar
Rebochan Rebochan is offline
 
Join Date: 19 February 2002
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 11,611
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avril's Link
Wondering if Dylan Farrow is telling the truth? It doesn’t matter. It’s not our place to question her story.
Uh...it kind of is. She's put her story not to a jury or the legal system, but the court of public opinion. So yes, she is in fact asking us if we believe her or not. I had been under the impression her statute of limitations had run out, but now that I realize it hasn't, I seriously question the point of writing a public letter. If, as she says, she is truly concerned for other children, it would be imperative for her to lodge a legal complaint and get this guy behind bars. I do question if this is really meant to ensure justice is done, given the timing and given the framing of her letter (which opens and ends with the question "What's your favorite Woody Allen movie?" and in between is a clear attempt to make the viewer and anyone who's worked with him feel guilty for aiding and abetting him.)

And for that matter, we have literally seen people locked up for decades for false charges of child molestation due to false memories, coached testimonies, and questionable prosecution. Come on, it hasn't been THAT long since the day care abuse panic. For goodness sake, it's been barely two months since Frances Keller and her husband were finally freed after spending 21 years in prison for a crime they didn't commit. And there are STILL people insisting they "got away with it".

Yes, we SHOULD question ANY story of abuse. It is a good thing that we as a society are reacting largely correctly to child abusers, but it is not a good thing that the second anyone is accused of a sex crime, they are considered guilty for life even if they are proven beyond a reasonable doubt to be innocent.

The fact that Farrow revealed no new information that contradicts what's publically been available has actually made me a lot more skeptical than I was when I just had the letter in front of me. It's a really sick situation that she and her family have been through. I do feel comfortable keeping my opinion of Woody Allen though - he's a creepy man with questionable morals, but not a child molester.

And I never really went out of my way to see any of his movies, so...I can't say I ever took any kind of stance on him.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 06 February 2014, 10:47 PM
Onyx_TKD Onyx_TKD is offline
 
Join Date: 17 December 2007
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 388
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avril View Post
This blog says pretty much what I think, although I might make some qualifications of some of it if it were me:

http://www.rageagainsttheminivan.com...arrow-and.html
I think the blog writer would have a point if people had pulled this up out of the past unprompted, or even if Dylan Farrow's letter had simply been her account of what happened so that people were informed. But the letter ended with:
Quote:
So imagine your seven-year-old daughter being led into an attic by Woody Allen. Imagine she spends a lifetime stricken with nausea at the mention of his name. Imagine a world that celebrates her tormenter.

Are you imagining that? Now, what’s your favorite Woody Allen movie?
That, to me, is basically goading people to take sides. She didn't just say "this is my story," she basically said "this is my story, and it should change your opinions about Woody Allen and his work." IMO, once she starts pushing the public to take sides on an issue, she makes it the public's business. And when (general) you starting pushing people to take sides on any issue, you had better realize that they're not all going to take your side.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 06 February 2014, 10:58 PM
crescent crescent is offline
 
 
Join Date: 13 August 2008
Location: Right here
Posts: 2,518
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rebochan View Post
And for that matter, we have literally seen people locked up for decades for false charges of child molestation due to false memories, coached testimonies, and questionable prosecution. Come on, it hasn't been THAT long since the day care abuse panic. For goodness sake, it's been barely two months since Frances Keller and her husband were finally freed after spending 21 years in prison for a crime they didn't commit. And there are STILL people insisting they "got away with it"..
It is worth noting that these abuse allegations surfaced during the same time frame as the daycare satanic abuse moral panic. The methods used to get testimony from children at that time have since been discredited, and are believed to have essentially implanted many of the kids with false memories.

I don't much like Woody Allen, but I don't think it is wise accept Dylan and Mia Farrow's testimony without some skepticism. Dylan herself might believe it, but many kids involved in the moral panic at the time ended up believing themselves to have been subject to abuse that was later clearly proven to have not happened. That does not mean that Dylan is lying, it means that Dylan might have been victimized by the hysteria and the psychological practices of the time. She may or may have not also been victimized by Allen.

Maybe it happened, maybe not. I don't think there is any way to ever really know.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 07 February 2014, 12:55 PM
wanderwoman's Avatar
wanderwoman wanderwoman is offline
 
Join Date: 29 December 2004
Location: Elkhart, IN
Posts: 7,890
Default

In reference to the practices of the time, I noticed that in the report from the sex abuse clinic it was mentioned that she was interviewed nine times by them, and this was on top of being multiply questioned by doctors beforehand, and before that, her mother apparently followed her around with a video camera and questioned her. This alone makes it impossible to determine the facts of the case, as repeated questioning has a horrific effect on children and taints their disclosures. Best practice nowadays is to interview a child once on videotape using evidence-based practices (RATAC or NICHD protocol) and corroborating the disclosure with other available evidence. In cases in which there is a lot of family dissention, the child may be so confused by the time child services or law enforcement gets involved that it may be impossible to determine what really happened.

Last edited by wanderwoman; 07 February 2014 at 01:05 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 07 February 2014, 01:16 PM
Elkhound Elkhound is offline
 
Join Date: 09 October 2002
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 10,676
Default

I was always taught, "Believe the children; children do not lie about such things."
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 07 February 2014, 01:39 PM
wanderwoman's Avatar
wanderwoman wanderwoman is offline
 
Join Date: 29 December 2004
Location: Elkhart, IN
Posts: 7,890
Default

I can assure you that there are cases in which children have given disclosures that evidence indicates could not have occurred, or in which adults have misinterpreted something a child said as sexual when it was not.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Man Dressed As Woody Arrested In Times Square On Sex Abuse Charges A Turtle Named Mack Police Blotter 9 15 January 2014 05:41 PM
Italian protester charged with sexual assault after kissing riot police officer A Turtle Named Mack Police Blotter 2 17 December 2013 03:05 PM
Air Force sex assault prevention chief charged in sex assault Simply Madeline Police Blotter 9 17 May 2013 06:28 AM
Woody Allen Sics Lobsters on Madoff snopes Snopes Spotting 0 30 March 2009 06:43 AM
Pregnant Teen Daughter Is Victim of Sexual Ignorance snopes NFBSK 47 27 August 2007 04:45 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.