General Discussion

bathroommonkey76

(3,827 posts)

1. B/c the police investigated and didn't find any wrongdoing?

Thu Dec 7, 2017, 06:07 PM

Dec 2017

No one ever mentions how fuckin' batshit crazy Mia Farrow was during the 90s. Here's a Valentine's Day card she gave to Woody Allen.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

45 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Dylan Farrow: Why has the #MeToo revolution spared Woody Allen? [View all] 4now Dec 2017 OP

B/c the police investigated and didn't find any wrongdoing? bathroommonkey76 Dec 2017 #1

Not true. The prosecutor said he had probable cause and the only reason he didn't prosecute pnwmom Dec 2017 #3

Um, no. The dr who interviewed her 9 times for the CT state police didn't find her credible: VermontKevin Dec 2017 #7

That doesn't change the fact that the PROSECUTOR said he had probable cause. pnwmom Dec 2017 #8

That's why judges determine probable cause, not prosecutors. VermontKevin Dec 2017 #9

No, it isn't. The prosecutor didn't bring an argument for probable cause to the judge pnwmom Dec 2017 #10

I think the point went over your head. A prosecutor can say they have "probable cause" VermontKevin Dec 2017 #20

He didn't arrest Allen because there was no point once he decided pnwmom Dec 2017 #25

This nt Laffy Kat Dec 2017 #28

The prosecutor she keeps citing was disciplined for his statements. He was wrong. VermontKevin Dec 2017 #37

Actually, the information we have now is that Farrow defended Polanski, and was an abuser herself. VermontKevin Dec 2017 #35

According to subsequent articles, Dr. Leventhal did not personally interview Dylan Tanuki Dec 2017 #13

Thanks for the link. I hadn't see that one before. n/t pnwmom Dec 2017 #18

What's Mia Farrow got to do with it? The DA found probable cause and declined to prosecute MaryMagdaline Dec 2017 #2

The Dr. for the State of CT interviewed her 9 times and did not find her credible because of Mia: VermontKevin Dec 2017 #5

That 1993 article is wrong. Numerous articles since then have correctly reported that Leventhal pnwmom Dec 2017 #11

Thank you MaryMagdaline Dec 2017 #14

And Ronan Farrow witnessed and has always confirmed his father's inappropriate behavior pnwmom Dec 2017 #15

Yes MaryMagdaline Dec 2017 #16

And Moses Allen, older, and now a therapist himself completely disputes the version his VermontKevin Dec 2017 #21

Ronan and Dylan say that Moses wasn't in the house when the worst event occurred. pnwmom Dec 2017 #23

Moses was in the house. Mia was not. VermontKevin Dec 2017 #36

Babysitters were there, Moses wasn't. pnwmom Dec 2017 #42

Neither article supports your claim that Moses wasn't there. I notice you don't discuss nannies who VermontKevin Dec 2017 #43

You must have missed the paragraph where the Court lists who was in the home. pnwmom Dec 2017 #44

As to the nanny you mentioned, who was paid $40K a year by Allen, (a lot in 1993), pnwmom Dec 2017 #45

Dylan Farrow's Brother Moses Says Mia Farrow, Not Woody Allen Was Abusive kskiska Dec 2017 #34

And Woody has probably been very generous financially with him over the years. pnwmom Dec 2017 #41

Good question Gothmog Dec 2017 #4

Ny times link that explains why CT police concluded Farrow was not molested: VermontKevin Dec 2017 #6

That 1993 article has been discredited since then by more thorough reporting. n/t pnwmom Dec 2017 #12

You keep using the prosecutor who was disciplined for his actions on this case as an authority. VermontKevin Dec 2017 #38

Why does it not include Dotard? He seems to have a pass on this whole thing. Tipperary Dec 2017 #17

forreal Puzzledtraveller Dec 2017 #19

Why is Mia Farrow a defender of Roman Polanski? kskiska Dec 2017 #22

What are you referring to? n/t pnwmom Dec 2017 #24

Yeah I never heard that one still_one Dec 2017 #26

It's commonly known. There are many sources. Just google it. kskiska Dec 2017 #29

Arts, Briefly; Mia Farrow Testifies For Roman Polanski oberliner Dec 2017 #39

Note, that's in 2005. VermontKevin Dec 2017 #40

Why has it spared that pussy grabbing fucking pig onecaliberal Dec 2017 #27

Because it has nothing to do with taking sides in your family drama. milestogo Dec 2017 #30

For my part, I can't watch anything he is a part of bhikkhu Dec 2017 #31

No kidding! What a creep Thekaspervote Dec 2017 #32

Maybe because it is old news LeftInTX Dec 2017 #33