Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)What's really relevant in the Dylan Farrow molestation case [View all]
According to Jezebel.
The Babysitters
In "Mia's Story," the Vanity Fair profile on 1993 about the Farrow-Allen custody case, writer Maureen Orth cites witness accounts from two babysitters that corroborates the story from Dylan's side that on the day of the molestation, both Allen and his adopted daughter disappeared for around 15 minutes, and then reappeared, with Dylan missing her underwear. After denying these charges, Allen "refused to submit hair and fingerprint samples to the Connecticut state police or to cooperate unless he was assured that nothing he said would be used against him."
Another babysitter corroborates the allegation that Allen would put his head on Dylan's lap:
The Daily Beast op-ed in defense of Allen cites a Farrow-Allen babysitter who testified differently:
In "Mia's Story," the Vanity Fair profile on 1993 about the Farrow-Allen custody case, writer Maureen Orth cites witness accounts from two babysitters that corroborates the story from Dylan's side that on the day of the molestation, both Allen and his adopted daughter disappeared for around 15 minutes, and then reappeared, with Dylan missing her underwear. After denying these charges, Allen "refused to submit hair and fingerprint samples to the Connecticut state police or to cooperate unless he was assured that nothing he said would be used against him."
Another babysitter corroborates the allegation that Allen would put his head on Dylan's lap:
That day, August 5, Casey called Mia to report something the baby-sitter had told her. The day before, Casey's baby-sitter had been in the house looking for one of the three Pascal children and had been startled when she walked into the TV room. Dylan was on the sofa, wearing a dress, and Woody was kneeling on the floor holding her, with his face in her lap. The baby-sitter did not consider it "a fatherly pose," but more like something you'd say "Oops, excuse me" to if both had been adults. She told police later that she was shocked. "It just seemed very intimate. He seemed very comfortable."
The Daily Beast op-ed in defense of Allen cites a Farrow-Allen babysitter who testified differently:
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."
The entire article is back and forth, pro and con, based on press accounts (not documents filed with the court).
http://jezebel.com/what-we-should-talk-about-when-we-talk-about-the-dylan-1514959143?utm_campaign=socialflow_jezebel_facebook&utm_source=jezebel_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow
98 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Not exactly true. The prosecutor said he had enough evidence to bring to a trial, but he had decided
pnwmom
Feb 2014
#2
or one can suggest progressives not accept the grown man putting his head in a girls lap.....
seabeyond
Feb 2014
#26
"The prosecutor made a public announcement that basically said Woody Allen was guilty, we have
El_Johns
Feb 2014
#29
that is not our reality we live. and still, i refuse to be part of the problem enabling
seabeyond
Feb 2014
#34
There was *a* witness, who happened to be the babysitter of Mia's childhood friend Casey
El_Johns
Feb 2014
#66
Prosecutors ALWAYS think they have enough. I would never trust a thing a prosecutor says.
morningfog
Feb 2014
#5
we wont know, because they got rid of notes that no doctor would get rid of. ignore the tells.....
seabeyond
Feb 2014
#27
and they got rid of their notes. you live in this world, and i am sure experience it. no, doctors
seabeyond
Feb 2014
#42
And Dylan's personal therapist since preschool said she didn't think the kid had been molested.
El_Johns
Feb 2014
#82
Mia had custody. That gave her the right to fire, assuming you have some link to that statement.
pnwmom
Feb 2014
#86
I don't know what you're getting at. The point is that he had the home study of Ronan and Dylan
pnwmom
Feb 2014
#90
If the children were legally Farrow's, the home study could not have been waived without
El_Johns
Feb 2014
#91
How many times do I have to say that I blame Mia, too, for allowing his inappropriate behaviors
pnwmom
Feb 2014
#98
The prosecution selected them but Yale chose to include psychologists on Woody's payroll
pnwmom
Feb 2014
#62
No, Yale chose to INTERVIEW Woody's psychologists. Big difference. And the team that the MD
El_Johns
Feb 2014
#68
I have no idea, and neither do you. What I do know is that every time I bat down one of your
El_Johns
Feb 2014
#72
I said no Yale MD interviewed her, and that is perfectly true. The physician wrote the report
pnwmom
Feb 2014
#74
no. you did not "bat down" any of the argument nor was the story changed, but progressed
seabeyond
Feb 2014
#93
They were chosen, hired and paid for by the state of Connecticut. And were probably the only
El_Johns
Feb 2014
#30
who got rid of notes, notes that NO doctor would get rid of. why do you ignore the obvious
seabeyond
Feb 2014
#37
But they don't mind trying it in the media, both in 1992-93 and 20 years later.
El_Johns
Feb 2014
#85
it was on woodys shoulders in the 90's. which i am sure you are well aware of. he was accused,
seabeyond
Feb 2014
#94
Many cases are left alone because of lack of evidence, not because they think the perp is innocent.
redqueen
Feb 2014
#21
for me what is really relevant are all the tells he is a molestor and so many ignore....
seabeyond
Feb 2014
#20
homophobia with those that call out perversion. the raw truth of what is being said
seabeyond
Feb 2014
#24
it's a hateful variant on the "pearl clutching" theme. apparently a LT partner can do any
bettyellen
Feb 2014
#25
The OP was such a vile POS, the poster claimed he wasn't even making the anaology to homophobia when
bettyellen
Feb 2014
#35
I believe the point of that OP was the fallacy of linking two unrelated things that you find vile.
Nine
Feb 2014
#43
Do DUers have a habit of going around and making accusations against everyone who dates younger?
kcr
Feb 2014
#45
Did you think that everyone who molests a child fits the boiler plate definition of a pedo?
bettyellen
Feb 2014
#48
There is no correlation between dating younger woman and molesting prepubescent girls.
Nine
Feb 2014
#53
The problem is, he didn't just date a younger woman. Just a random younger woman he happened to meet
kcr
Feb 2014
#54
they are framing this as if Dylan's letter does not exist, that there is no context of deep betrayal
bettyellen
Feb 2014
#56
again, you write as if it is one random teenager. Unfortunately for Woody, people are looking at
bettyellen
Feb 2014
#55
He didn't "fuck" her, that's for sure. There was no evidence of rape, penetration or molestation.
El_Johns
Feb 2014
#33
He did betray his LT partner by fucking HER daughter, Soon Yi- Dylan was THEIR daughter, and I know
bettyellen
Feb 2014
#39
If you think Woody Allen is guilty then you're just like people who think gay people are pedophiles
kcr
Feb 2014
#46
It didn't. He got visitation with Satchel/Ronan, and that was his only biological child. Though
El_Johns
Feb 2014
#67
Again, you make a false statement, and when shown it's false you change the subject.
El_Johns
Feb 2014
#75
Like wrestling with eels. You say "It's about one thing" and then you bring in 1000 irrelevant
El_Johns
Feb 2014
#80
woody wanted custody of dylan. not only denied that, denied visitation. not only denied visitation
seabeyond
Feb 2014
#96
If Allen doesn't sue someone he believes was psychologically abused by her mom, he must be guilty?
Democat
Feb 2014
#71