Woody Allen's daughter: my father molested me when I was a child.

Oh I luv to be slapped real hard No hard feelings, after this thread, its over. I general like most all your post, but not this one

 

Well, don't insinuate that someone supports pedophiles- I mean, really- if he admits to it or is found guilty, maybe in a civil trial or something, then by all means let him be punished. I love his work, but not so much that it's more important than anything.

If the Texans ever signed Michael Vick, as much as I love my Texans, I would cease to watch them or buy anything from the franchise until he was gone. Some things are more important than sports or entertainment.

But no matter how much I disagree with his whole Soon Yi thing (just like I think it's a joke that McCartney married someone in their 20s), and as much as her story sounds truthful, I cannot call him a pedophile without knowing more or having evidence. That is among the most heinous crimes anyone can commit, serious enough to where if I'm going to call someone that, there'd better be proof.

Now, I'm done with this too. Gotta call the Denver Broncos' management and tell them to remind their team the game started over an hour ago.

 

No idea if he's a pederast or not, Walter, but he's always seemed creepy and has been a regular in my list of Top 5 Popular Hollywood People Who I Should Probably Like But Have Always Annoyed the **** Out Of Me. Also known as The Will Smith/Dustin Hoffman Conundrum.

 

I'm getting the same vibe of institutional protection from many of the people defending Woody Allen as I did from Penn State fans around the Sandusky scandal.

Just to add I haven't followed the case closely enough to have a definitive opinion but am don't think just because he is a great director and Hollywood legend that should put him above suspicion.

 

Umm....huge difference. Jesus, where do I start? Let's see, Sandusky:

1. Multiple allegations
2. Tried and convicted
3. Multiple allegations

Allen: one incident, never brought up on any charges.


Unbelievable that if you advocate due process for anyone, you're accused of supporting a "pedophile." Sandusky deserved the same due process, as well. Or do you recommend doing away with this? As I've CLEARLY, CLEARLY, CLEARLY, CLEARLY, CLEARLY stated before, if there is a way to pursue this on the woman's behalf- civil trial, publishing an open letter (oh, wait, she did that), etc.- then by all means do so. Mr. Allen does not get a pass b/c he is famous. However, he's not automatically guilty due to this, either (a lot of comments on other sites who villified him wanted to see justice b/c "Hollywood gets away with this all the time" and "the rich deserve to be punished").

Victims and/or accusers need to be listened to. Oftentimes, these crimes aren't reported, so we need to encourage these people to speak out- if it helps close the cycle of abuse even slightly, then it's worth it. At the same time, we cannot start abandoning the accused' rights because we feel the need for some sort of web/social media vigilante justice. Otherwise, anyone can accuse anyone of anything and get away with it, and I don't want to live in a world like that.

There is more than enough reason to believe this woman. There is also more than enough reason to believe the accused who says he didn't do it. Even in the court of public opinion, I cannot pass judgment unless there was more. And unlike Sandusky's case, there are certainly reasons to question this whole thing.

 

Woody Allen's allies cast doubt on abuse claims

http://www.chron.com/default/article/Woody-Allen-s-allies-cast-doubt-on-abuse-claims-5199069.php

NEW YORK (AP) — Some of Woody Allen's allies have come to his defense, casting doubt on renewed accusations by Dylan Farrow that she was sexually assaulted by her then-adoptive father when she was 7.

Allen's lawyer, studio and publicist weighed in on Farrow's open letter, published online Saturday by The New York Times, in which she claimed that in 1992 at the family's Connecticut home, Allen led her to a "dim, closet-like attic" and then sexually assaulted her. Farrow didn't specify Allen's actions but described other abusive behavior.

The movie director's publicist, Leslee Dart, said in an email Sunday that Allen has read Farrow's letter.

"Mr. Allen has read the article and found it untrue and disgraceful," Dart said, signaling that Allen would fight the claims dating back to Allen's tempestuous relationship with actress Mia Farrow in the early 1990s.

Elkan Abramowitz, Allen's lawyer, said: "It is tragic that after 20 years a story engineered by a vengeful lover resurfaces after it was fully vetted and rejected by independent authorities. The one to blame for Dylan's distress is neither Dylan nor Woody Allen."

Allen was investigated on child molestation claims for the 1992 accusation but was never charged.

Dylan Farrow's open letter didn't urge renewed legal action but a retrial for Allen in the court of public opinion. Farrow, who now lives in Florida, is married, and goes by another name, argued for fans of Allen's movies and actors who star in his films not to "turn a blind eye."

But on Sunday, Sony Pictures Classics, which regularly distributes Allen's films including his latest, "Blue Jasmine," urged caution in any rush to judgment.

"This is a very complicated situation and a tragedy for everyone involved," the company said in a statement. "Mr. Allen has never been charged in relationship to any of this, and therefore deserves our presumption of innocence."

Ronan Farrow, the son of Allen and Mia Farrow (though she has said ex-husband Frank Sinatra could be the father), said Sunday on Twitter: "I love and support my sister and think her words speak for themselves."

Alec Baldwin, who has starred in Allen films including "Blue Jasmine," was among those Farrow singled out in her letter, asking, "What if it had been your child ...?"

Baldwin responded on Twitter to those demanding a comment from him: "You are mistaken if you think there is a place for me, or any outsider, in this family's issue."

Dylan Farrow's most detailed account of the 1992 encounter returned the spotlight to the original police investigation of Allen. The handling of the investigation was criticized after Litchfield County State Attorney Frank S. Maco said at a news conference that he believed there was "probable cause" to charge Allen but decided against prosecution partly to avoid a traumatic trial for the young girl.

A disciplinary panel found that Maco may have prejudiced the ongoing custody fight between Allen and Mia Farrow by making an accusation without formal charges.

Months before Maco's news conference, a team of child abuse specialists from Yale-New Haven Hospital were brought in to examine the case and concluded that the child had not been molested.

Maco, who retired in 2003, told The Associated Press on Sunday that the statute of limitations on Dylan Farrow's accusations ran out at least 15 years ago. He said he hopes Farrow was able to watch his news conference and read his statement about his decision not to prosecute Allen.

"I hope she has access to that statement, to know what I did and why I did it," Maco said. "I hope she finds some peace and solace at this time."

A spokesman for the Connecticut Division of Criminal Justice said Sunday that the prosecutor's office won't re-examine the case unless the office is asked.

The 1992 allegation came shortly after Allen became involved with Mia Farrow's adopted daughter, Soon-Yi Previn. Allen, then in his mid-50s, was not the adoptive father of Previn, who was about 19 at the time. The two married in 1997 and have two adopted daughters.

By JAKE COYLE, AP Film Writer

 

Yeah, I don't think that off-hand comment needed a response. This is a civil thread with people sharing facts and perspectives, for the most part.

 

Keep in mind though that Sandusky had been protected for years by the football culture and institution of Penn State long before allegations came public and long before he was tried and convicted.

I am not saying to abandon the rights of the accused and as I said I haven't followed it close enough to have any definitive judgement about whether he did it. My gut says he likely is a guilty given that we know he has a predilection for very young looking teenage girls but without more facts I wouldn't convict him if I had to. That said what I am talking about is that it seems like much of the people (not saying you are one of those) rushing to his defense are basing it more on professional respect and fandom. That is what strikes me as similar to what we saw with Penn State.

 

The resolution for suspicion and gut instinct is a thorough and open investigation by the authorities where the DA and Grand Jury file charges and they are tried in a court of law.
Short of that, whatever you think is just like, your opinion man.

who doesn't?

 

That proves my point. It depends on the celebrity.

 

This is all F'd up.

Put him on the stand. Lie-detector. Come on.

 

Serious question.

Let us assume (big assumption) he is guilty.

Do you seperate the art from the artist? Would you still watch his movies? Do you not watch any of his new movies, but only his old ones to limit his income? Does he already have so much money that it doesn't matter?

I find it odd that Mel Gibson is a d1ck and makes some racist/religious comments and he is BLACK BALLED..... but Roman Polansky can rape a child and Woody Allen allegedly is a flatout child molester and they have work coming out their a$$.

I am not Mr. Right Wing on many issues, but Hollywood and the industry is screwed up.

 

the hell is amanda knox doing in that pic

 

I've always liked Woody Allen movies, so the child rape stuff is a bummer. The public accusation is enough for me, honestly; I don't intend to presume his innocence until proven guilty. I'm not going to boycott him or anything, but it does rather sap my enthusiasm, to say the least.

 

Yes I think I stated that.

Woody Allen though acted on it with Soon-Yi. While technically that doesn't make him a pedophile since she was 19 at the time I think it does appear suspicious considering their prior history.

 

He already took a lie detector and passed it back in 1992. They asked Mia Farrow to do the same at the time and she refused.

 

I raised this issue last year in a thread about Ray Lewis. To a certain extent yes I think we can separate what someone has done in the professional field from them. So I can agree that Ray Lewis was a great football player but at the same time I never considered him a hero or someone to be admired. I think the same is true of Woody Allen. I think he is a great director and writer and wouldn't necessarily avoid his movies but at the minimum I don't think he is someone to be admired.

A lot of artists have very messed up personal lives, the stereotype of the suffering artist does have a lot of truth to it. I think we can still admire art while looking at the artist critically.

 

That is pretty much how I feel and have felt that way since the 90's. For the record I haven't seen many of Woody Allen movies in the last 20 years. Not because I've been boycotting him but more because I don't see a lot of movies.

 

I agree with you, the "art" is greater than the "artist" and many horrible people have made incredible art. Having said that, I will not lie, the next time I watch a Woody Allen movie, I will view the inner dynamics of the plot and inparticular, those of the young women in the movie through a different lens.

 

Child molesters are physically, sexually, and emotionally addicted IMO It wouldn't shock me at all that Woody needed to "get his fix" no matter the cost