She didn't make that up.

It was real.

Healing thoughts to her and all other survivors.

The way she described it is how I would describe it. I still remember everything. Can't forget that unless you forced it out of your head. My sister is a blocker, she blocks stuff out so I feel like I have to be the elephant and remember everything for her.

I felt bad reading that. I'm so glad I was a little kid when he started going with his step daughter. My step dad, who never adopted me either but was still my dad, was a Woody Allen fan and he could not bring himself to watch one of his movies ever again. We weren't allowed to watch them either. He said that a man who raises a daughter, then has sex with her is a child molester. He assumed that if he raped one of his daughters he probably raped all of them and beat the sons, cause that's how child molesters operate. He had been molested himself as a child, so it made him mad.

I am so sorry.

Thank you for your courage and support!

These grown ups around here judging the honesty of a little girl, who at that age had probably not learned how to lie very well, are disgusting human beings. The same people who doubt the veracity of this woman's tale are the very same people who believe Allen without a moments hesitation.
Is it because she's female? Cause he's famous? I mean any father figure who would marry his daughter figure is a sick person. And a molester.

Seven year olds don't make up things like that.

I feel suspicious of people who accuse kids of making up sexual abuse.

A couple recently got out of prison after 21 years with little evidence against them. As an adult man I am careful to never be alone with female children and rarely am around male children.

My wife was abused as a child by an adult so I have great sympathy for the situation, but allegations without evidence, especially ones from so long ago, are difficult to defend yourself from. It was not so long ago that black men were regularly lynched for "raping" white women without due process, and in many of those cases they were later found to not have done it.


http://www.businessinsider.com/the-disturbing-story-of-the-texas-couple-released-after-spending-21-years-in-prison-for-satanic-abuse-2013-12

The child was three, three year olds are highly suggestable. The people involved were not her parental figures. There were strange religious connotations to the case involving satanic rituals, which should have sent of red flags to any reasonable person.

Dylan's story has nothing in common with this case in the link you provided.

in his relationship with Farrow's adopted daughter. I am not saying he didn't do anything in this case, but I am saying that, especially in a family situation with complex dynamics, to be very careful about believing an unsubstantiated story. I have not watched one of his movies since he took up with Farrow's daughter (who I view as his step daughter even if she was not legally so).

Here is an apologist for Allen with his take on the situation.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/01/27/the-woody-allen-allegations-not-so-fast.html

That why I believe her. It fits his pattern.

How many daughter figures do most men have sex with? Not many I hope. I would hope not even one.
My step dad raised me from six years old and never adopted me. We lived in different states for months at a time. He had sex with my mother. He never came on to me at any time and I'm 32 now.
When this happened with Soon Yi, he explained it to me from that perspective. After having given me baths, bought my clothes, cooking me breakfast, if he ever touched me in a sexual way he would have to kill himself.

How many murders must I commit before I have a history of killing people?
One.
So let's go over the history.
One daughter figure that he had sex with.= Soon Yi . That begins his known history.
Then Dylan.

As for his history of "sexualizing" "daughter figures," this is his know romantic history:

First wife: 16 to his 19.
2nd wife: 27 at marriage.
Diane Keaton: 24 at beginning of relationship.
Stacey Nelkin: 17 at beginning of relationship.
Mia Farrow: 35 at beginning of relationship.
Previn: 19 at beginning of relationship.

He's friends with all of them but Farrow, and none have ever suggested he was interested in toddlers in any way whatsoever.

If you know of any other history, feel free to post it.

Dylan was 7.
I don't understand what you are trying to say.
In his history he is know to have had sex with at least one daughter figure whom he had met as a child. Then Dylan came forward at 7 and accused him of sexualizing her. She never recanted as far as I know. So that's 2. 2 daughter figures, one who he admits to having sex with and has married. The other who he calls liar.
I said nothing of his relationships with non daughter figures. One of whom was barely of the age to consent.

a history of sexualizing daughter figures as evidence that Allen abused Previn.

One 19-year-old woman is not a "history" and is evidence for nothing about what happened with a 7 year old.

in a case where certain issues are PC?

If a woman says it, why, then when considering the validity of that statement, the PC movement means you have to accept it or be guilty of misogony (if you are a man), or being an anti-feminist (if you are a woman).

Anyway it has been some 20 years since the original accusations. If Allen was a pedophile, you would think that even one other woman would have come forward with such charges and level even more accusations against Allen. But instead, Allen and Soon-Yi seem to have a working marriage, and he continues to create his movies and play clarinet in his band.

Kids that age don't know enough about that sort of thing to make up stories unless they themselves experienced it.

It just doesn't make any sense for almost anyone to make up sexual abuse claims. Not with all the crap, the victim blaming and threats, that people get. I've seen people get death threats for coming forward FFS! It's no wonder that most rapes go unreported.

She does not stand to gain anything from this. I feel sorry for her.

Make me the first. We have nothing to discuss. Ever.

Welcome to my ignore list, currently only populated by people who don't support survivors of sexual assault.

You don't even need to read a thread to know. Others I haven't been familiar with.

I knew this day would come.

Good luck

Pre-judgement is, by definition, prejudice. No useful interaction can take place between individuals when one goes into the interaction with prejudice.

Your post is incorrect. Your "ignore list" may include some who, for some unknown reason, don't support survivors of sexual assault, but it also includes a few who refuse to be blackmailed into a position by theatrics and hyperbole, choosing instead, to rationally gather information, and make informed decisions.

I cannot imagine the horror of being a sexual assault victim, particularly acute when the victim is a child, but I can also not imagine the horror of being unjustly accused. The tragedy of the subject matter is so important that it mandates careful consideration, not pre-determined verdicts and prejudiced, blanket pronouncements.

I have no idea what happened, and for those to make judgements with the very same lack of knowledge, aren't being honest.

Means you have made a conscious decision to disbelieve Dylan.

That strategy seems helpful at times. Unless you just have to put your two cents in, or 1000 words.
How kind of you to make judgements about the knowledge and honesty of others.

Back in the day of The Well of the very early internet, I knew that Patsy Ramsey had killed her daughter Jon Benet.

Now of course, the police know that is not true. But the stuff that got circulated on the internet at the time let my mind go into full blown assumption mode. I mean so much data indicating that Patsy was guilty, with that much data, why it all had to be true! And why wouldn't I blame her?

Now I try to not do the same thing twice.

You have Dylan's own account of her molestation. Either you believe her or not.
The cases are not comparable. This is a case of believing a victim or discrediting her as a liar. The latter is of course the more common response, which is why only 3 percent of rapes result in jail time. Even then that jail time can be as short as 30 days.

To keep the kids out of Woody Allen's custody. So I believe that Dylan was coached.

There had to be a reason why she was not believed back then, and that Allen was not indicted back then. (What is most important: If the authorities, and original social workers were competent. Many social workers are in that business to stop human suffering, and are not going to let a little child be abused just on account of celebrity worship.) Since I don't have any knowledge of what did or did not go on in Mia Farrow's household back then, I really have no more information than I had with the Ramsey case. Neither do you.

I have been on the sidelines of two separate divorce cases. In one of those cases, I was aware of how one little 3 year old girl was coached by Mommy to say that Daddy did some heinous things. The social workers had to figure out whether it was true or false. Their questioning let them realize it was a pack of lies. This was a relief to me, as since Mommy hated me as well as the daddy in the case, I would have been the next person on the chopping block.

Oh and two years later, crazy Mommy said the little boy in the case had been abused. It floors me that some parents are willing to damage their children in that especially awful way, just so they get their way!

Sadly, I've seen the same thing.

I've seen divorces turn nasty with accusations of molestations. Fortunately I was too far removed (friend of a friend) to be dragged into it.

I've also seen too many cases of "recovered memories" being used to accuse people who are innocent. I know how mailable memories can be. I read about a cause of a woman who was raped and her rapists was convicted and sent to prison. He maintained his innocence and eventually a DNA test was done and it proved he was innocent. The DNA test also led to the arrest and incarceration of the actual rapist. However, even after the DNA exonerated the innocent man, the woman still remembered him as her rapist, even thought the two men didn't look alike. (They were both black, but that's about the only similarity.) Why? Because she was told that was the case over and over again. Being told over and over again affected her memory of the events of that night. I believe this is what has happened to Dylan. The evidence points to her being coached and Mia Farrow effectively brainwasher her into believe Woody Allen molested her.

In the case I mentioned, the little girl was three and a half. Just old enough to remember almost word for word the atrocities that Mommy had told her to tell the social workers about.

But the little girl was too young to be coached about answers for the "real questions." No little girl who has been a victim of deviant and torturous incest tells a social worker, "You wanna know if I wanna spend this weekend with my Daddy? Well, he's so much fun - I wanna spend my life with him!"

A seven year old can probably be coached to not "slip up" in terms of the answers to questions.

And it is not surprising if many of the members of the Farrow clan "remember" Dylan's version of things. If you have been one of many children adopted, and you know Mommy is angry at Daddy, you certainly don't wanna lose your only support by saying anything other than what Mommy is saying.

Glad to hear that DNA got the innocent man freed from the false memory indictment and imprisonment.

I think it may have been the single lowest thing ever done by someone I actually know. In this case, the woman sort of slyly admitted after the fact that her accusations were BS, but had served their purpose.

Poisoning a relationship like that-- particularly one so fundamental as the parent/child relationship... it's just unconscionable.

......which affords them virtual immunity in our current sound-byte culture.

nt

There will be no trial. The statue of limitations has expired. It would be nice if you granted victims the same level of respect you do to alleged perpetrators. If more people did, we might see more than 3 percent of rapes result in jail time.

I don't know what happened in this case. All I know is that we have conflicting stories and that alleged perpetrators shouldn't get sentenced to prison unless their guilt is proven.

You have an open letter from Dylan and silence from Allen. His apologist in the Daily Beast interviewed him since Dylan's letter and while that guy used every piece of distraction he could conjure up to discredit Dylan, he didn't recount a denial by Allen or even concern for his daughter's well being.

It will count. He chose not to deny it when talking to his friend who wrote the piece in the Daily Beast. Having a publicist release a statement is weak. If a person doesn't have the courage to say something himself, I doubt his sincerity. That is the same reason I never believed (or disbelieved) rumors of Dylan's assault and didn't know whether Mia's allegations in the custody case were true. But when a credible victim herself speaks, I believe her. But by all means, people are free to believe a man who married the teenage daughter of his girlfriend. After all, the accused is a woman. The default position is that makes her a congenital liar. Allen is no different from any other accused rapist. They are always highly valued and "innocent until proven guilty" while their victims are liars. I've seen it dozens of times before. Only the names of perpetrator and victim change. It's rape culture at work. That is precisely why only 3 percent of rapes result in jail time, if only for thirty days, while 25% of women are raped at some point in their lives. To me, this is no different from any other sexual assault case. It's always the same story, and that is what enables rapists to operate with virtual impunity in this country.

I do not know if she is correct. Those are two different propositions. As I noted in another post I was a victim of abuse myself and spent years constructing memories around the event to mitigate its awfulness, or put it in alternate contexts. Not even consciously. It doesn't mean I was crazy, or lying. It's just how the brain works.

So yes I believe that Dylan was molested. And it may have been Allen that did it.

and I am very sorry you had to endure that awful experience.

yeah, Woody we all want to be in the attic with you and Dylan and you show us exactly WTF happened OK.

oh fuck me running that is some fucking funny stuff right there.

he said.

she said.

and HE KNOWS IT. HE KNOWS THERE WILL NEVER BE PROOF.

What a chicken shit piece of a -man-

talk about how they were molested, how it messed them up, and how they still have trauma from it.

Ignore and thank you.

and things like lifetime achievement awards.

What happened in this case is typical. By the time the victim is strong enough to come forward, the statute of limitations has passed. And it doesn't really matter because child molestation typically happens in secret -- with no witnesses and no physical evidence.

he's got a "thing" for very, very young women. Always has.

Creeps me out.

There was no trial because the investigators saw clear signs Dylan was coached.

Again:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martensville_satanic_sex_scandal

More than a dozen people were charged and someone went to jail, even though some of the charges were beyond belief. The kids claimed they were forced to eat fetuses. Why did they do this? Because they wanted to please an authority figure (the cops in this case).

On the other hand, Roman Polanski admitted to raping an underaged girl and Mia Farrow testified on his behalf at a 2005 trial. If you want to go after someone for perpetuating rape culture, go after Mia Farrow.

She gave her testimony in the NYTimes. I find is fascinating that you all continually ignore her statement as thought it doesn't exist. The CT prosecutor also said he believed she was molested but didn't think she would hold up on the stand. Some will always stand up for a rapist. It happens ever single time there is a trial or allegation of rape. I grow tired of the games.

I'm not ignoring her statement, but you seem to be ignoring the facts. When Dylan first interviewed by a doctor, she said she wasn't molested. The next day, Mia Farrow took her to another doctor and she said she was molested. Mia Farrow pressured a nanny to go along with the charges and one quit as a result. The investigators found clear evidence that she was coached.

Why do you keep ignoring this?

For the star-struck stupid.

This leaves "innocent until PROVEN guilty" in a dilemma - either the alleged victim is lying, or the accused perpetrator is lying.

Since there was no court case, you probably assume the victim is lying.

If not, please clarify. If no reply by morning, I will assume you wish to join the Ignore list, and just joined in to insult any victim who never saw a trial.

What about Allen being convicted by you without a trial? You apparently know who is guilty without one. I for one don't believe there is a way to know which one of them is lying.

It is a concept based in law, not personal feelings.

I believe that people shouldn't rush to judgement, all sides of a story be heard, and relevant facts be presented.

are innocent until proven guilty. Many people believe it is fundamental in the construct of a fair legal system, and it is. It has nothing to do with the individual.

So many people don't understand the fundamental importance of it in the judicial system, yet the inability of individuals to maintain the same construct. Kind of like the complete lack of understanding when it comes to the first amendment.

I fully believe he committed that armed robbery

It's more complicated.

Back in the '00s when there were all the priest/abuse scandals breaking there was a rather loud one. It dealt with a high-ranking official in, IIRC, Los Angeles.

She was very specific. Where. What. When. How many times. It was a Big Deal for a couple of days.

Until the photographs and records started to surface. He wasn't in the same state as her when these things happened. On the specific days he was even photographed being in other states. There was no evidence he'd been in California for the year she claimed he abused her. And there was something funny about it--she wasn't in the state or in the city for the years he *was* there. Until recently.

She didn't consciously make the story up. She wasn't lying--she believed it, with absolute confidence. Said this had ruined her life. Human memory is very fallible. Sometimes you remember things as they happened. But every time you remember something, you have the chance to embellish it, to change it. It's easy to plant false memories.

So there was a school in the '90s that was shut down because the adults and teachers had mass-abused so many of the students. Except that it turned out that the kids weren't remembering what happened. They were prompted, prodded, and asked so many times that they finally gave the answers that the investigators wanted. Then they remembered these as though they were their own personal memories.

I was railroaded at a job once. I was playing bridge over a friends and as we talked during a break I said that there was no backup for the computers. If something happened, we'd lose years of data. We needed to get a backup system.

Three days later I was yelled at and told I was planning to erase years of data. When I finally talked to the people, there were three witnesses. This was strange, because one guy that had been there wasn't a witness and we only had 4 people for bridge--him, me, and three witnesses made 5. I asked one of them for details, and finally she and her sister started to fight--until the one woman remembered that her sister was in the bathroom, the reason for the break, and so couldn't have been a witness. To confirm this, they called over their brother, who said that they were all three present when I threatened sabotage. This worked until the brother's sister asked when this was--and said they had spent that night setting up for *her* brother's anniversary party, and pulled out her planner to prove that he hadn't been anywhere near the bridge game.

Three people swore they were eyewitnesses and provided blow-by-blow details. One wasn't present, but taking a leak. Another was 15 miles away in a different town.

It's the same with a lot of eyewitness testimony in courts. Two or three witnesses ID a person. Only to find that the person couldn't have been the perp. They're not lying. They're simply mistaken.

Survivors of sexual abuse aren't liars. They typically believe exactly what they say is true. In some cases--and for this there are no stats, so it may be very rare or it may be more common--their memories are fallible. This means a single witness shouldn't be enough to convict.

As for the stats on how frequent sex abuse of minors is, this results from surveys where they ask the population to recall their past. Some will have blocked out the events and underreport. Some will have created events and that makes for overreporting. But there's no independent confirmation so I think most people assume it's a wash and the stats are fairly reliable. In any event, no more reliable stats are forthcoming.

going to do something wrong.

Parsing sexual molestation as memory problems -- ICK.

Not even going to discuss it.

A huge scandal in California that ended up being entirely concocted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMartin_preschool_trial

Welcome to ignore. Thank you for your honesty.

and how does ignoring anyone help you?

Simply cutting you off from information, that's all.

and I'm a guy.

When confronted by facts they choose to ignore you...

That is what you are ignoring. No one but Dylan has provided evidence. Calling a woman a liar is not a fact. The McMartin case is not evidence in the Allen case. It's the typical shit that goes on each and every time a rape case is made public. One time, someone made up a false allegation, and that is used as an excuse for why rapist a, b,c, d, e, f, g , all the way to z is supposedly innocent. Some things are clockwork, whether Allen, Assange, the Heisman trophy guy, or any other accused rapist. It's the same fucking story every time from the same people who always use the legal standing of innocent until proven guilty to insist women keep their mouths shut about sexual assault. Yet when a woman is charged with a false rape allegation, they never mention innocent until proven guilty. They wish her in prison for the rest of her life or even death. The only facts here are Dylan Farrow's statement that you and others are ignoring in order to excuse yet another accused rapist.

insisting that women keep their mouths shut. There is no connection between those two ideas. Talk, women, talk!

I haven't the slightest interest in excusing Woody Allen either. I thought his marriage to his stepdaughter totally creepy, too. "Manhatten" was creepy, as well. I've seen very few of his movies in subsequent years. Aside from everything else, I think he is overrated as a filmmaker.

Dylan's statement is evidence, it is not necessarily a factual account of what happened. There is much other evidence in terms of statements and examinations and such from back when the charges were originally made, and much of it contradicts itself, depending on the source.

I am not willing to believe Dylan's statement is true simply because she says it is true. She might genuinely believe it to be true, and it may have never happened. It is possible to implant ideas into the minds of small children; that was the point of the McMartin example. Mia seemed to be working very hard at it at the time.

Woody will take another big blow to his reputation now that Dylan and Ronan are after him. The ball is in his court, and the news says he will respond, soon. There is no way to prove either version of the facts beyond a shadow of a doubt. Each person will make their own choice about what they believe happened, and that is where it will end.