Dylan Farrow Responds to Woody Allen: 'Distortions and Outright Lies'

[BainsBane]

78. What does it tell you?

About Dylan's truthfulness? Exactly nothing. All your distractions in this thread say exactly nothing about the case. Dylan accused Woody Allen, as the court record makes abundantly clear. Dylan is the one speaking out publicly now, which has nothing to do with Mia's request for child support or palimony.

As much as you or others might think Allen should not be responsible for child support or palimony, that is irrelevant to Dylan's charges in 92 or her decision go public this week. Pointing to Mia is only an transparent effort to distract from Dylan's accusations. That is indeed Woody's intent in promoting that story through his publicity machine. That you swallow it whole is unfortunate, particularly when there is a court record that proves that virtually none of what Allen claimed has ANY evidentiary basis. In fact, Allen himself was able to provide no evidence of any brainwashing or implanted memories in the custody suit he waged.

This is the document from Woody Allen's suit for custody against Farrow. It lays out the facts of the case as much as anyone can know them without having been with Dylan and Woody that day. http://www.scribd.com/doc/205403621/Allen-v-Farrow-Custody-Ruling-June-7-1993

Dylan told her story several times independently, including to a therapist hired by Allen, who eventually reported it to NY Child service. Dylan told the story to the family doctor, who reported it to CT officials. A babysitter saw Dylan return from being alone with Allen, something already prohibited by court order--with her underwear missing. The babysitter told her employer, who then told Mia, who then asked Dylan what had happened. Woody's entire story is concocted. He presented the court with no evidence of brainwashing or implanted memories. None.

How ironic that you are more concerned about Mia's association with Polanksi than with Allen's involvement with underage girls, the sister of his own children, and alleged rape of Dylan. I don't know the details of her relationship with Polanski and nor do I care (though Redqueen did post a GD thread on it this week) because It has no bearing on Dylan's truthfulness. Additionally, I have seen rape survivors repeatedly make excuses for accused rapists. People are made up in all kinds of different ways, and some react to trauma by identifying with the abuser rather than other victims. I'm not saying that is Mia's situation at all, only that whatever professional or personal relationship she had with Polanski is not germane to whether or not Dylan is telling the truth. It says nothing about the charges against Allen.

The continued efforts to point to Mia demeans Dylan. They treat her as incompetent, as unable to speak to her own experiences. It is incredibly insulting and dismissive, particularly when the court record establishes that she was clear and consistent in her statements to authorities, as she was in her letter to the Times this week.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/205403621/Allen-v-Farrow-Custody-Ruling-June-7-1993

One thing I have learned through all of this. It does not matter one bit how much evidence exists against a famous man, or whom he harms, some will continue to dissemble, deflect, and avoid examining actual evidence to excuse him and instead vilify women and girls. That is the essence of rape culture and we have seen a stunning demonstration of it this week.

You may believe the story you repeat, but there is no reason to do so given the actual finding of fact by the family court judge. Woody's story is without evidentiary basis, recounted here as a result of gossip and the spin of a publicity machine. Woody Allen is not a convicted child rapist. That is a legal fact. But there is NO evidence that Dylan was manipulated or brainwashed into giving false statements. If you are going to defend Allen, you will have to call Dylan a liar.