Posts by sammielee24

woody allen wrote a very compelling article in the op-ed of the new york times.. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/09/opinion/sunday/woody-allen-speaks-out.html?ref=opinion&_r=0.

have you ever been accused of something you did not do?

if that happens, what do you do?.

What's even more humorous is that DJS keeps harping about 'facts'..and yet, he mentions another 'girl' who was 18 that Woody had a relationship with. Interesting how those facts aren't supported by evidence but by his own words in some way to support Allen - Stacey Nelkin was a 17 year old high school student when Woody Allen had an affair with her. Her words are at the bottom. She was a kid in highschool and he was about 42 years old - if you think that's okay, then it's your right - but don't put her at the possible 'legal' age of consent when she was only 17 and in many States still a minor. For the record Nelkin is not against Allen - just like Roman Polanski's victim is not speaking out against him - I'm just pointing out the facts in Nelkins voice -sw

"

Since the allegations, Allen has vehemently denied any inappropriate behavior, calling the letter "untrue and disgraceful."

Joining Piers Morgan for a live conversation, Nelkin shared details of her own experiences getting caught in between Allen and Farrow, in which the latter's camp encouraged her to turn on her former lover:

"[They] asked if I would testify and admit that I was 15 when we dated, and I said 'no,' because I was not 15. I was 17, 18 and 19, and to me there's a big distinction between that, and I think they were looking for the fact that, you know, 15 is jail bait. Seventeen is a very different story," said Nelkin, who first met Allen on the set of the film “Manhattan." "I would not go along with that, so I think she was trying to create a pattern of, this is a man who looks for young girls and seduces them unwittingly and that's not true. I was very, very much willing to be dating him, I was thrilled."

131

Woody Allen speaks out

by NewYork44M in

woody allen wrote a very compelling article in the op-ed of the new york times.. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/09/opinion/sunday/woody-allen-speaks-out.html?ref=opinion&_r=0.

have you ever been accused of something you did not do?

if that happens, what do you do?.

sammielee24

And the only thing worse than that is a self made arrogant stupid judgmental person. There are a lot of those on this forum.

-------------------

I agree - so when are you leaving? If you can't engage in a simple discussion and if you don't have the depth to even begin to try to understand where the flow of the conversation extends, and when you judge, belittle and demean others as unworthy of having any opinion - you seem to fit the image of what your profess to hate. Not everyone here is necessarily a JW - but your lack of empathy or understanding may mean that you haven't really left the organization as much as you think you have.

The only facts anyone has in this instance is what either side has publicized.

One thing is certain - you insist you aren't taking sides but it's clear, even with the facts presented that you have. The facts, as you love to talk about, didn't put Soon Yi over the age of 21 when she and her lovers wife/adopted mother/step-father/biological father to her adopted brother/adopted father to her adopted brothes and sisters - was taking nude photos of her. She was still a teenager and that's where people have a differing opinion - perhaps you see a 17 or 18 or 19 year old teenager as a consenting adult, with every right to engage in a sexual realtionship with one of the parental figures in her life. No problem - that's your right. In many States, a relationship between a step-father and step-children is considered incestuous regardless of biology until after the age of legal consent - 18-21. You might not agree - but if you had the depth to try to understand where people are coming from, you might see that for many people, what he did bordered on incest - and the link to that belief means that the swing toward him having molested his daughter isn't that wide.

Hopefully you get it now - I don't think you care - but hopefully you go away with something other than condemnation you have for others who find it difficult to separate the two behaviors - sw

131

Woody Allen speaks out

by NewYork44M in

woody allen wrote a very compelling article in the op-ed of the new york times.. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/09/opinion/sunday/woody-allen-speaks-out.html?ref=opinion&_r=0.

have you ever been accused of something you did not do?

if that happens, what do you do?.

sammielee24

If it is an accurate overview of other adults, including Ms Farrow, her mother and an employee, who saw firsthand highly questionable, if not worrying, incidents involving Allen and Dylan, why did none of them at that time stop his contact with Dylan and alert the authorities?

--------------

Questionable actions as you say - often have people second guessing their own thought process.

It is not at all highly unusual for people around a skilled abuser, to say nothing. If you had worked with victims and families of abuse of all sorts, you would not ask that question. How many people say 'I didn't know', when their sibling, parent, child is found dead from a drug overdose. How many people say 'I didn't know' when a child, many years later comes forward and tells of molestation by a coach, a leader in the community, a family member? How many mothers fearful of their own lives, think but are scared to actually know, if something is happening to their child?

The world is full of people who suffer - does it make the victim any less a victim? No.

Bear in mind that Woody is a rich man and that could have had a factor in why people didn't step up. Another factor could have been that as Farrow pointed out, when she questioned Woody and told him to stop - he questioned her mental and emotional stability in even thinking like that. This is a common tactic in abusive situations. This doesn't excuse anyone for not reporting these circumstances at all - but I'm just pointing out to you that this is more common than you think. Woody is a famous man and very powerful and wealthy - and his 'genius' or 'individualism' and 'quirks' are well known and accepted and even those who questioned him, may have been found to be insulting his very genius.

sw

131

Woody Allen speaks out

by NewYork44M in

woody allen wrote a very compelling article in the op-ed of the new york times.. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/09/opinion/sunday/woody-allen-speaks-out.html?ref=opinion&_r=0.

have you ever been accused of something you did not do?

if that happens, what do you do?.

sammielee24

131

Woody Allen speaks out

by NewYork44M in

woody allen wrote a very compelling article in the op-ed of the new york times.. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/09/opinion/sunday/woody-allen-speaks-out.html?ref=opinion&_r=0.

have you ever been accused of something you did not do?

if that happens, what do you do?.

sammielee24

But it's okay.

If Dylan only wants to be heard and bear in mind what sparked it all was not just her, but a tweet from her brother, then she has a platform. She can afford to take her voice public perhaps to her, it is an even balance. Her father is in the business of playing to the public and if indeed she has been molested, in her mind the justification of using the same public forum to voice her disgust, is, to her, very rational. Woody Allen is a public figure. He makes money off of the public. He is awarded applause and sentiment based on his public performance. Perhaps to her, it was important to play the game in the arena he is most familiar in.

I am not a fan of regression therapy because I don't trust it - there are far too many people who have been the victims of rape, abuse and violence from a very early age who never forget the smells, the sights, the sound and the places of their torment but then again, that's just me.

I think it's her call to make - it's her abuse she speaks about and how do any of us know that when she sees her father with his two daughters, sees her sister married to her father and is faced with a picture of his father holding the hand of his young teenage daughter - how do we know what memories come flooding back? How do we know there is not some deep, searing fear that what was done to her - is being done to them - but they can't speak up.

We don't know - and ultimately it's up to them to figure it out - her allegations - his denial - sw

----

Calling attention to someone’s birthday-party behavior may seem trivial at best. However, Dr. Coates, who just happened to be in Mia’s apartment to work with one of her other children, had only to witness a brief greeting between Woody and Dylan before she began a discussion with Mia that resulted in Woody’s agreeing to address the issue through counseling. At that point Coates didn’t know that, according to several sources, Woody, wearing just underwear, would take Dylan to bed with him and entwine his body around hers; or that he would have her suck his thumb; or that often when Dylan went over to his apartment he would head straight for the bedroom with her so that they could get into bed and play. He called Mia a “spoilsport” when she objected to what she referred to as “wooing.” Mia has told people that he said that her concerns were her own sickness, and that he was just being warm. For a long time, Mia backed down. Her love for Woody had always been mixed with fear. He could reduce her to a pulp when he gave vent to his temper, but she was also in awe of him, because he always presented himself as “a morally superior person.”

One summer day in Connecticut, when Dylan was four and Woody was applying suntan lotion to her nude body, he alarmed Mia’s mother, actress Maureen O’Sullivan, and sister Tisa Farrow when he began rubbing his finger in the crack between her buttocks. Mia grabbed the lotion out of his hand, and O’Sullivan asked, “How do you want to be remembered by your children?” “As a good father,” Woody answered. “Well, that’s interesting,” O’Sullivan replied. “It only lasted a few seconds, but it was definitely weird,” says Tisa Farrow.

On August 4, Woody was in Connecticut to visit the children, and Mia and Casey went shopping, taking along Mia’s two most recently adopted children—a blind Vietnamese girl named Tam, 11, and Isaiah, a seven-month-old black baby born to a crack-addicted mother. While they were gone, there was a brief period, perhaps 15 minutes, when Woody and Dylan vanished from sight. The baby-sitter who was inside searched high and low for them through the cluttered old farmhouse, but she couldn’t find them. The outside baby-sitter, after a look at the grounds around the house, concluded the two must be inside somewhere. When Mia got home a short time later, Dylan and Woody were outside, and Dylan didn’t have any underpants on. (Allen later said that he had not been alone with Dylan. He refused to submit hair and fingerprint samples to the Connecticut state police or to cooperate unless he was assured that nothing he said would be used against him.) Woody, who hated the country and reportedly brought his own bath mat to avoid germs, spent the night in a guest room off the laundry next to the garage and left the next morning.

That day, August 5, Casey called Mia to report something the baby-sitter had told her. The day before, Casey’s baby-sitter had been in the house looking for one of the three Pascal children and had been startled when she walked into the TV room. Dylan was on the sofa, wearing a dress, and Woody was kneeling on the floor holding her, with his face in her lap. The baby-sitter did not consider it “a fatherly pose,” but more like something you’d say “Oops, excuse me” to if both had been adults. She told police later that she was shocked. “It just seemed very intimate. He seemed very comfortable.”

As soon as Mia asked Dylan about it, Dylan began to tell a harrowing story, in dribs and drabs but in excruciating detail. According to her account, she and Daddy went to the attic (not really an attic, just a small crawl space off the closet of Mia’s bedroom where the children play), and Daddy told her that if she stayed very still he would put her in his movie and take her to Paris. He touched her “private part.” Dylan said she told him, “It hurts. I’m just a little kid.” The she told Mia, “Kids have to do what grown-ups say.” Mia, who has a small Beta video camera and frequently records her large brood, made a tape of Dylan for Dylan’s psychologist, who was in France at the time. “I don’t want to be in a movie with my daddy,” Dylan said, and asked, “Did your daddy ever do that to you?”

According to people close to the situation, Mia called her lawyer, who told her to take Dylan to her pediatrician in New Milford. When the doctor asked where her private part was, Dylan pointed to her shoulder. A few minutes later, over ice cream, she told Mia that she had been embarrassed to have to say anything about this to the doctor. Mia asked which story was true, because it was important that they know. They went back to the doctor the next day, and Dylan repeated her original story—one that has stayed consistent through many tellings to the authorities, who are in possession of the tape Mia made. The doctor examined Dylan and found that she was intact. He called his lawyer and then told Mia he was bound by law to report Dylan’s story to the police.

Mia, who never sought to make the allegations public, also told Dr. Coates, who is one of three therapists Woody Allen has seen on a regular basis. Coates too told Mia that she would have to report Dylan’s account to the New York authorities, but that she would also tell Woody. Mia burst out crying, she was so afraid. Ironically, the next day, August 6, Woody and Mia were supposed to sign an elaborate child-support-and-custody agreement, months in the negotiating, giving Mia $6,000 a month for the support of Satchel and Dylan and 15-year-old Moses, the other child of Mia’s whom Woody had adopted on December 17, 1991. Mia believed Woody’s sessions with Dr. Coates had definitely improved his demeanor with Dylan, but because of her concern about Woody’s past history, she had insisted that he not have unsupervised visitation until Dylan and Satchel were through the sixth grade, and that he no longer be able to sleep over at her country house, as he had so far insisted on doing, but stay in a guest cottage across the pond.

[From Vanity Fair's archive, 1992 article

131

Woody Allen speaks out

by NewYork44M in

woody allen wrote a very compelling article in the op-ed of the new york times.. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/09/opinion/sunday/woody-allen-speaks-out.html?ref=opinion&_r=0.

have you ever been accused of something you did not do?

if that happens, what do you do?.

sammielee24

There are no winners here and certainly the "truth" is left to people to decide for themselves - a precarious outcome for all concerned.

------

but perhaps that is all she wants - people to decide for themselves whether or not a man who (according to her) molested a child, is deserving of a life time achievement or humanitarian or any other award. Perhaps when she saw the accolades and applause being heaped on her abuser, she felt cheated out of a childhood, her innocence and perhaps she saw the possibility of repition in the man who now has two little girls.

This is her way of dealing with it and maybe that is all she has left.

To say it serves nobody is just an opinion - perhaps to her, in her life, in her struggles - it serves a purpose that you can't imagine.

Just a thought. sw

131

Woody Allen speaks out

by NewYork44M in

woody allen wrote a very compelling article in the op-ed of the new york times.. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/09/opinion/sunday/woody-allen-speaks-out.html?ref=opinion&_r=0.

have you ever been accused of something you did not do?

if that happens, what do you do?.

sammielee24

Adam - if you want to pick apart the article, contact the write - Ms Bloom. She is a lawyer and has a lot more experience than I - sw

131

Woody Allen speaks out

by NewYork44M in

woody allen wrote a very compelling article in the op-ed of the new york times.. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/09/opinion/sunday/woody-allen-speaks-out.html?ref=opinion&_r=0.

have you ever been accused of something you did not do?

if that happens, what do you do?.

sammielee24

--

Six reasons why Dylan Farrow's statement of sexual abuse is highly credible

Lisa Bloom
NakedLaw
Mon, 03 Feb 2014 09:58 CST Woody Allen's twenty-eight year old daughter, Dylan Farrow, has just written a powerful statement outlining the sexual abuse she says she endured by her father, Woody Allen, when she was seven years old. The famous director strongly denies the allegations, and claims that Dylan's mother, Mia Farrow, is responsible for the false claims.[1] A friend and filmmaker colleague has written a strong opinion piece defending Woody Allen.

Woody Allen is presumed innocent. However, having represented many child sexual abuse victims for decades, I find Dylan's story is highly credible. Here's why.

1. She is not seeking anything from Woody Allen. She is not suing him. No criminal case is pending. (Nor could there be, due to the statute of limitations.) She is not selling a book or movie or anything else. Her sole motivation appears to be to tell her story. When sexual abuse victims grow up and get healthy, telling is a crucial, life-affirming step. Secrecy is toxic. Telling is liberating. It takes the shame off the victim's shoulders and places it squarely where it belongs: on the perpetrator.

2. She spoke out immediately after the incident, when she was seven years old. Many victims take years or decades to tell. Many keep the secret to their graves. According to reports, Dylan Farrow endured Woody Allen's alleged creepy but not criminal behaviors (putting his head on her naked lap, his thumb in her mouth) but told shortly after he sexually assaulted her, asking innocently whether this is something fathers do to daughters. This is not a story she just came up with.

3. Blaming the mother is a tired, common strategy for those accused of sexual abuse. (Mothers also get blamed when they fail to act promptly in response to a child's accusation.) A loving, healthy mother will be sickened and outraged when a child tells on an adult for sexual abuse. This is how Mia behaved. She should not be faulted for it.

The claim that Mia Farrow manufactured all of this does not ring true because (i) Dylan reportedly told a babysitter first; (ii) Mia Farrow reportedly gave her daughter multiple opportunities to recant if she wanted to; and (iii) Dylan is now a mature, happy adult who would have no motivation to continue to lie for her mother, twenty two years later, who lives a thousand miles away from her.

Mia Farrow also did not sue Woody Allen for the sexual abuse of her daughter. She could have. She gained nothing by backing her daughter, and endured a nightmare in the courts and the media by doing so after a mandatory reporter went to the police with Dylan's allegations. She has spent her life raising her own biological children as well as disadvantaged, often disabled children, and fiercely advocating for human rights for desperately poor Africans and victims of genocide.

4. Woody Allen not only has had a long-term, well-established interest in young girls, he's never seen anything wrong with it. His film Manhattan, in which he stars, features a forty-two year old man in a sexual relationship with a seventeen year old high school student without any compunction whatsoever. (Don't tell me things were different in 1979. Plenty of us opposed sexual abuse then too.) And more significantly, he demonstrated an outrageous ability to prey on Mia's family by secretly engaging in a sexual relationship with Dylan's teenaged sister Soon-Yi and taking explicit pornographic pictures of her. (He ultimately married her.) He made bizarre public statements showing an almost sociopathic lack of understanding of the devastating pain this caused to Mia and the siblings at the time, like:

"I didn't find any moral dilemmas whatsoever, I didn't feel that just because she was Mia's daughter, there was any great moral dilemma. It was a fact, but not one with any great import. It wasn't like she was my daughter."

Not important! Not a moral issue at all! No wonder Woody Allen is kept from making public statements now, hiding behind his publicists and attorneys.

5. The lack of criminal findings tells us nothing. There was no finding of guilt, and no finding that Dylan or Mia was lying. In 1992 a prosecutor oddly announced that while there was "probable cause" to believe Dylan, he would not pursue the case because of the "fragility of the child victim."

When it comes to allegations of sexual abuse, especially against wealthy, powerful men, the child is easily discredited and often loses. See, e.g., Roman Polanski. In this case the prosecutor is alleged to have persuaded Mia not to put Dylan through the ordeal of testifying. This is very common and completely outrageous. Children should be supported, prepared, and encouraged to testify. I have done this many times and they find it an empowering experience when it's over. Testifying teaches a child to hold her head high, that she can speak her truth without being swallowed up by the earth, that she has done nothing wrong and is a hero for bringing justice to the predator and protecting future victims. Discouraging kids from testifying allows predators to escape justice and to prey on others.

Our legal system is entirely broken when it comes to child molestation. It's heartbreaking. People contact me constantly seeking help for prosecutors who won't prosecute, or police who won't investigate.

6. Dylan's story is entirely consistent with what we know about sexual abuse. Commonly, decades pass before a victim can become centered and brave enough to speak out. (Many never do.) Dylan's details are powerful (such as getting sick looking at toy trains to this day and Woody's claimed "grooming" behavior like putting his head in her naked lap and his thumb in her mouth) and consistent with the literature about the effects of molestation on its victims.

Woody Allen's friend says that the idea of him molesting her in an attic when he was claustrophobic and there were others in the large house implies that child molesters behave rationally. Nothing could be further from the truth. Child molestation is inherently irrational, compulsive behavior. Little girls are commonly molested when family lurks in the next room. Little boys are victimized in homes, hotels, out of doors, anywhere and everywhere. The digital sexual assault Dylan alleged can happen in seconds and leave no trace.

Woody Allen's publicist said that seven year old Dylan was unable to distinguish between fantasy and reality. Seven year olds do not fantasize about sex with their father. They don't fantasize about sex at all. To a seven year old, sex is disgusting and unimaginable.

This matter will probably never be resolved, as no one is going to court now. But the least we can do is acknowledge the credibility of Dylan's story, and, more broadly, show respect to other sexual abuse victims by avoiding tired myths about how and why they speak out.

[1] Ronan Farrow, Dylan's brother, who supports her claims, will soon host a show on MSNBC, where I am a regular contributor. I have never met or spoken to him or anyone else involved in this story