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
 

VermontKevin

(1,473 posts)
38. You keep using the prosecutor who was disciplined for his actions on this case as an authority.
Sat Dec 9, 2017, 10:58 AM
Dec 2017

Recommendations

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

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
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Dylan Farrow: Why has the...»Reply #38