Schweinstein 2: Sexual Abuse & Misconduct Allegations In Hollywood. Or Anywhere.

[kngen]

It started really well, but suffers from the American problem of needing to draw itself out as long as possible so studio execs can fuck it for money.

Actually, I think it had a pretty shaky start, but - like The Simpsons - seasons 2 to 6 are some of the best American comedy ever made, IMO. Not the place to discuss that really, so I'll stop.

[ieXush2i]

Once again, from Judge Wilks' custody judgement in 1993:

There is no credible evidence to support Mr. Allen's contention that Ms. Farrow coached Dylan or that Ms. Farrow acted upon a desire for revenge against him for seducing Soon-Yi. Mr. Allen's resort to the stereotypical "woman scorned" defense is an injudicious attempt to divert attention from his failure to act as a responsible parent and adult.

from elsewhere in the same judgement:

By then, Ms. Farrow had become concerned with Mr. Allen's behavior toward Dylan. During a trip to Paris, when Dylan was between two and three years old, Ms. Farrow told Mr. Allen that "[y]ou look at her [Dylan] in a sexual way. You fondled her. It's not natural. You're all over her. You don't give her any breathing room. You look at her when she's naked."


Her apprehension was fueled by the intensity of the attention Mr. Allen lavished on Dylan, and by his spending play-time in bed with her, by his reading to her in his bed while dressed in his undershorts, and by his permitting her to suck on his thumb.

Ms. Farrow testified that Mr. Allen was overly attentive and demanding of Dylan's time and attention. He was aggressively affectionate, providing her with little space of her own and with no respect for the integrity of her body. Ms. Farrow, Casey Pascal, Sophie Raven (Dylan's French tutor), and Dr. Coates testified that Mr. Allen focused on Dylan to the exclusion of her siblings, even when Satchel and Moses were present.

Woody Allen is a living Red Flag

[biggytitbo]

They certainly suspected it -

Dr. Leventhal said: "We had two hypotheses: one, that these were statements that were made by an emotionally disturbed child and then became fixed in her mind. And the other hypothesis was that she was coached or influenced by her mother. We did not come to a firm conclusion. We think that it was probably a combination."

but considering both major independent investigations into the incident concluded no abuse occurred, and Mia was a psychologically manipulative bully to her children...well it adds up doesn't it?

[ieXush2i]

It doesn't add up because children being brainwashed into making sexual abuse claims is practically non-existent.

And the judge did not find those theories credible, and neither did other expert witnesses during the trial. Leventhal, who suggested Dylan Farrow was disturbed or brainwashed rather than telling the truth, never ever saw Dylan Farrow for even an assessment.

Allen had a fixation/obsession with Dylan, which was acknowledged repeatedly in various court outcomes.

Here's the full context of why Wilkes found the claims of brainwashing/disturbance to be cobblers:

I am less certain, however, than is the Yale-New Haven team, that the evidence proves conclusively that there was no sexual abuse.

Both Dr. Coates and Dr. Schultz expressed their opinions that Mr. Allen did not sexually abuse Dylan. Neither Dr. Coates nor Dr. Sc­hultz has expertise in the field of child sexual abuse. I believe that the opinions of Dr. Coates and Dr. Schultz may have been colored by their loyalty to Mr. Allen. I also believe that therapists would have a natural reluctance to accept the possibility that an act of sexual abuse occurred on their watch. I have considered their opinions, but do not find their testimony to be persuasive with respect to sexual abuse or visitation.

I have also considered the report of the Yale-New Haven team and the deposition testimony of Dr. John M. Leventhal. The Yale-New Haven investigation was conducted over a six-month period by Dr. Leventhal, a pediatrician; Dr. Julia Hamilton, who has a Ph.D. in social work; and Ms. Jennifer Sawyer, who has a master's degree in social work. Responsibility for different aspects of the investigation was divided among the team. The notes of the team members were destroyed prior to the issuance of the report, which, presumably, is an amalgamation of their independent impressions and observations. The unavailability of the notes, together with their unwillingness to testify at this trial except through the deposition of Dr. Leventhal, compromised my ability to scrutinize their findings and resulted in a report which was sanitized and, therefore, less credible.

Dr. Stephen Herman, a clinical psychiatrist who has extensive familiarity with child abuse cases, was called as a witness by Ms. Farrow to comment on the Yale-New Haven report. I share his reservations about the reliability of the report.

Dr. Herman faulted the Yale-New Haven team (1) for making visitation recommendations without seeing the parent interact with the child; (2) for failing to support adequately their conclusion that Dylan has a thought disorder; (3) for drawing any conclusions about Satchel, whom they never saw; (4) for finding that there was no abuse when the supporting data was inconclusive; and (5) for recommending that Ms. Farrow enter into therapy. In addition, I do not think that it was appropriate for Yale-New Haven, without notice to the parties or their counsel, to exceed its mandate and make observations and recommendations which might have an impact on existing litigation in another jurisdiction.

Unlike Yale-New Haven, I am not persuaded that the videotape of Dylan is the product of leading questions or of the child's fantasy.

Richard Marcus, a retired New York City police officer, called by Mr. Allen, testified that he worked with the police sex crimes unit for six years. He claimed to have an intuitive ability to know if a person is truthful or not. He concluded, "based on my experience," that Dylan lacked credibility.

I did not find his testimony to be insightful. I agree with Dr. Herman and Dr. Brodzinsky that we will probably never know what occurred on August 4, 1992. The credible testimony of Ms. Farrow, Dr. Coates, Dr. Leventhal and Mr. Allen does, however, prove that Mr. Allen's behavior toward Dylan was grossly inappropriate and that measures must be taken to protect her.

Allen was never granted any form of custody for his children precisely because there was a risk that he would abuse Dylan Farrow. I get that this 33 page judgement is extremely unhelpful for Dylan Denialists but it's all there.

[biggytitbo]

The other thing about that is whatever the why's of the allegations, the actual hows don't bear much scrutiny. Like Dylan's detailed description of how her father took her to the attic, layed her down and abused her as she watched the toy train set go around. As Moses has confirmed, there never was a toy train set in the attic, it wouldn't fit, it was actually kept in the boys room. So that's a false memory right there.


As the investigators testified, one of the reasons they concluded there was no abuse was that there were multiple repeated major inconsistencies in the testimony like this.

[biggytitbo]

It doesn't add up because children being brainwashed into making sexual abuse claims is practically non-existent.

And the judge did not find those theories credible, and neither did other expert witnesses during the trial. Leventhal, who suggested Dylan Farrow was disturbed or brainwashed rather than telling the truth, never ever saw Dylan Farrow for even an assessment.

Allen had a fixation/obsession with Dylan, which was acknowledged repeatedly in various court outcomes.

There never was any trial about the abuse allegations, Allen was never charged with any abuse let alone tried for it. There was no case to answer because both the investigations cleared him of the allegations.

[Paul Calf]

Actually, I think it had a pretty shaky start, but - like The Simpsons - seasons 2 to 6 are some of the best American comedy ever made, IMO. Not the place to discuss that really, so I'll stop.

Yeah, we don't want to bring the tone down by diluting the frenzied nonce-sniffing and gleeful recounting of unsubstantiated allegations of rape and sexual abuse.

[kngen]

Yeah, we don't want to bring the tone down by diluting the frenzied nonce-sniffing and gleeful recounting of unsubstantiated allegations of rape and sexual abuse.

Fair point.

[ieXush2i]

The other thing about that is whatever the why's of the allegations, the actual hows don't bear much scrutiny. Like Dylan's detailed description of how her father took her to the attic, layed her down and abused her as she watched the toy train set go around. As Moses has confirmed, there never was a toy train set in the attic, it wouldn't fit, it was actually kept in the boys room. So that's a false memory right there.


As the investigators testified, one of the reasons they concluded there was no abuse was that there were multiple repeated major inconsistencies in the testimony like this.

How do we know Moses isn't having a false memory?

[biggytitbo]

And the judge did not find those theories credible, and neither did other expert witnesses during the trial. Leventhal, who suggested Dylan Farrow was disturbed or brainwashed rather than telling the truth, never ever saw Dylan Farrow for even an assessment.

Unrue:

The Farrows would surely love to dismiss this "questionable 1993 report," but it's not so easy. This report was actually the summary of an extensive six-month investigation by The Child Sexual Abuse Clinic of the Yale/New Haven Hospital, ordered by the Connecticut State Police, which concluded, decisively and unambiguously, that "Dylan was not abused by Mr. Allen." As to why the team felt that Mia's charges didn't hold water, the summary states: "We had two hypotheses: one, that [Dylan's] statements [were] made by an emotionally disturbed child and then became fixed in her mind. And the other hypothesis was that she was coached or influenced by her mother. We did not come to a firm conclusion. We believe that it is [likely] a combination of these two formulations." The Farrows can't seem to mention this study by name, nor will they tell you that the summary of their findings are available on-line for anyone to read. Despite Dylan Farrow's insistence that she was not interviewed for this investigation, the summary lists the precise dates of the nine interviews conducted with her between 18 September, and 13 November, 1992.

[Dr Rock]

There never was any trial about the abuse allegations, Allen was never charged with any abuse let alone tried for it. There was no case to answer because both the investigations cleared him of the allegations.

State's attorney Frank S. Maco announced in 1993 that while he found "probable cause" to prosecute Allen, he was dropping the case because Dylan was too "fragile" to deal with a trial. Mia agreed with the decision, he said.

[ieXush2i]

There never was any trial about the abuse allegations, Allen was never charged with any abuse let alone tried for it. There was no case to answer because both the investigations cleared him of the allegations.

A state's attorney in Connecticut said yesterday that he had "probable cause" to prosecute Woody Allen on charges that he sexually molested his adopted daughter, but had decided to spare her the trauma of a court appearance.

Allen was never "cleared" of the charges.

http://www.nytimes.com/1993/09/25/nyregion/connecticut-prosecutor-won-t-file-charges-against-woody-allen.html

[ieXush2i]

Here's an article that goes into depth about the lack of credibility of the Yale-New Haven investigation:

http://www.nytimes.com/1993/04/28/nyregion/yale-study-about-allen-flawed-expert-testifies.html

In fact, Dr. Herman testified, the report's findings were so unreliable that he could have used the data to arrive at a totally opposite conclusion. "It's just as easy to conclude from this report that Dylan was abused," he said in his testimony in State Supreme Court in Manhattan.

[biggytitbo]

How do we know Moses isn't having a false memory?

Considering Moses is 7 years older and was 14 at the time of the allegations? Of course he (and Soon-Yi) have written in detail about the years of physical abuse and bullying him and the other kids sufferent under Mia's parenting, so maybe they're making it up to get back at her, like they allege she did with Woody.

[ieXush2i]

Considering Moses is 7 years older and was 14 at the time of the allegations? Of course he (and Soon-Yi) have written in detail about the years of physical abuse and bullying him and the other kids sufferent under Mia's parenting, so maybe they're making it up to get back at her, like they allege she did with Woody.

Why do you think his age makes his memory less fallible than Dylan's?

Do you honestly think that the single questionable detail regarding the train overwhelms all of the other evidence, witnesses, character testimony, the fact Allen had to see psychiatrists because he had an unhealthy fixation on Dylan... and the child's own testimony, of course.

We also know from the Wilks judgement that Allen rammed Dylan's face into a plate of hot spaghetti, and she saw her father and her sister having sex.

[biggytitbo]

Here's an article that goes into depth about the lack of credibility of the Yale-New Haven investigation:

http://www.nytimes.com/1993/04/28/nyregion/yale-study-about-allen-flawed-expert-testifies.html

Wow a paid expert for Mia disagrees with report that contradicts her story! Its odd though, that a completely separate investigation concluded exactly the same thing? -

New York State child welfare investigators have dropped their inquiry into the charge that Woody Allen sexually molested his 7-year-old daughter, saying they consider the accusation unfounded.

The state Department of Social Services informed Mr. Allen in a letter dated Oct. 7 that it had closed the 14-month-old investigation. "No credible evidence was found that the child named in this report has been abused or maltreated," the letter said. "This report has, therefore, been considered unfounded."

http://www.nytimes.com/1993/10/26/nyregion/agency-drops-abuse-inquiry-in-allen-case.html

[Buelligan]

Is it true that WA took those photos of his step daughter and left those photos out for her mother to find?  Is it true that he has had a long sexual relationship with her - a person who arrived into his life and care around the age of eight or nine? 

[kngen]

Is there not a case for saying that Woody Allen is a sick fuck, Mia Farrow is fucking mental, and they have both damaged their children (and step-children) in such a hugely profound way that there can never be a reliable account of what took place, and that's a massive unforgiveable tragedy for them* (and their hopes of processing what has transpired), regardless of whose side your on?

*The children

[up_the_hampipe]

Gilbert Gottfried mentioned this on Greg Fitzsimmons' podcast, handling the subject with his usual tact and restraint:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23NBUdu26eM

That podcast episode is hilarious. There's another bit where he impersonates being raped by Bill Cosby https://youtube.com/watch?v=fuB5xUeR-XY

[biggytitbo]

Allen was never "cleared" of the charges.

http://www.nytimes.com/1993/09/25/nyregion/connecticut-prosecutor-won-t-file-charges-against-woody-allen.html

Yeah and Maco was reprimanded for unprofessional conduct for saying that.

A Connecticut prosecutor's handling of a child-molestation complaint against Woody Allen was cause for "grave concern" and may have prejudiced the legal battle between Mr. Allen and Mia Farrow, a disciplinary panel has found.

But while its decision, dated Feb. 3, amounted to a stern rebuke of the prosecutor, Frank S. Maco, the state Grievance Panel concluded that Mr. Maco, the State's Attorney for Litchfield County, had not violated any provision of the state's code of conduct for lawyers. The panel, a state agency, could have voted sanctions ranging from censure to disbarment.

[biggytitbo]

Is it true that WA took those photos of his step daughter and left those photos out for her mother to find?  Is it true that he has had a long sexual relationship with her - a person who arrived into his life and care around the age of eight or nine?

No, she was never in his care. She is Andre Previns adopted daughter, and they never lived in the same house or had much contact with each other until the affair.

[Buelligan]

No, she was never in his care. She is Andre Previns adopted daughter, and they never lived in the same house or had much contact with each other until the affair.

So they never had a relationship before she reached the legal age to be fucked by an old man?  I wonder why he initiated it then.

[ieXush2i]

Is it true that WA took those photos of his step daughter and left those photos out for her mother to find?  Is it true that he has had a long sexual relationship with her - a person who arrived into his life and care around the age of eight or nine?

Yes and that he admitted to only wanting a "fling" with her, but it turned into a marriage etc. She says she felt sorry for him one night when he told her he had no-one to go to the basketball (front row) with him.

However before people rush in to correct you, Soon-Yi was actually adopted by Mia and Andre Previn (from an abusive mother who worked as a prostitute), not Allen. He was definitely in Soon-Yi's life for her teen years, though not arsed enough to fulfil any actual parental duties. He only really took any interest in her when he realised he wanted a shag.

Maco was not reprimanded, after the complaint against him was investigated it was not upheld. EDIT - it was actually dismissed!

http://articles.courant.com/1993-11-04/news/0000002493_1_attorney-frank-s-maco-allen-s-lawyers-allen-and-farrow

[ieXush2i]

So they never had a relationship before she reached the legal age to be fucked by an old man?  I wonder why he initiated it then.

"I started the relationship with her and I thought it would just be a fling. It wouldn't be serious, but it had a life of its own. And I never thought it would be anything more. Then we started going together, then we started living together, and we were enjoying it. And the age difference didn't seem to matter. It seemed to work in our favor actually," Allen said of their romance.

[Buelligan]

I knew about the Previn thing.  Of course.  The point stands, Mia Farrow was Allen's partner whilst Soon Yi was a little girl.

[ieXush2i]

I knew about the Previn thing.  Of course.  The point stands, Mia Farrow was Allen's partner whilst Soon Yi was a little girl.

Yup, I can think of loads of sordid step-dad/mother's boyfriend sleeps with their partner's daughter after grooming (if they can be bothered to make the effort) but this still doesn't seem to ping in people's brains when it comes to Allen for some reason.

Have you read this Buellers?

In the summer of 1992, Soon-Yi was employed as a camp counselor. During the third week of July, she telephoned Ms. Farrow to tell her that she had quit her job. She refused to tell Ms. Farrow where she was staying. A few days later, Ms. Farrow received a letter from the camp advising her that:

[it] is with sadness and regret that we had to ask Soon-Yi to leave camp midway through the first camp session ... Throughout the entire orientation period and continuing during camp, Soon-Yi was constantly involved with telephone calls. Phone calls from a gentleman whose name is Mr. Simon seemed to be her primary focus and hits definitely detracted from her concentration on being a counselor.

Mr. Simon was Woody Allen.

[Buelligan]

No.  TBH I hate the whole subject.  I just find it incredibly tedious - the idea that the fine distinctions of legality are somehow important and are where people need to stand to be "right" or "wrong".  It's absolutely obvious to me that fucking people you've been in a parental or similar role with is not OK, ever.

[biggytitbo]

Yes and that he admitted to only wanting a "fling" with her, but it turned into a marriage etc. She says she felt sorry for him one night when he told her he had no-one to go to the basketball (front row) with him.

However before people rush in to correct you, Soon-Yi was actually adopted by Mia and Andre Previn (from an abusive mother who worked as a prostitute), not Allen. He was definitely in Soon-Yi's life for her teen years, though not arsed enough to fulfil any actual parental duties. He only really took any interest in her when he realised he wanted a shag.

Maco was not reprimanded, after the complaint against him was investigated it was not upheld. EDIT - it was actually dismissed!

http://articles.courant.com/1993-11-04/news/0000002493_1_attorney-frank-s-maco-allen-s-lawyers-allen-and-farrow

Right, so to prove your case you link to an article where Macos conduct is criticized?

[biggytitbo]

No.  TBH I hate the whole subject.  I just find it incredibly tedious - the idea that the fine distinctions of legality are somehow important and are where people need to stand to be "right" or "wrong".  It's absolutely obvious to me that fucking people you've been in a parental or similar role with is not OK, ever.

However sordid it may be, he was never in a parentel role with her, he was not a father figure or surrogate father or anything of the kind, all of those roles were taken by Andre Previn.

[ieXush2i]

Criticized, without breaking any regulations. To try and paint all of Allen's failed legal actions during the 90s as any sort of legal victory is like saying black is white.

Yep Buellers you're absolutely right, inappropriate sexual relationships between teenage children and their guardians/parents/mentors is too hard for people to really think about. People feel far safer condemning undeniable pre-teen child abuse (which is obviously a fucking heinous thing that's affected the life of myself and my loved ones before anyone attempts to cunt off the back of DM's transparent bullying) than confronting "grey areas" that have persisted in society for decades, if not longer.