• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Woody Allen - Pedophile?

Woody Allen


  • Total voters
    64
Hmmm. No one finds it odd that the ONE child he was not interested in at all is the one he married? Lol! So she just comes home from college, and he suddenly finds her interesting, takes some pornographic pictures of her while still "being" with her adopted mother, has an affair with her and then marries her. This does not add up.

He wasn't much interested in any of the others either. Mia kept insisting he must spend more time with them, especially SoonYii whom he'd practically ignored for most of their relationship. It's all out there for you to read, if you're interested. Mia is a nutjob, but she's also a fascinating woman in many ways and a great humanitarian. You should read her book.
 
It still does not equal innocence. Not enough evidence is not an indication of innocence.
It is legally.

I admire your tenacity, Chris, but in the face of the incontrovertible, it only appears as stubbornness and ego.

Btw, what did the cops say? They're moving on this, right? I hope they get that bastard.
 
As a former detective who's investigated numerous complaints of child molestation I can tell you that I have serious reservations about this accusation. Primarily because an independent team of investigators retained by the State Police found no evidence of molestation at the time of the crime. Not only did they find no evidence, they believed the girl was coached by her mother. I have been in the position of the investigator that had to examine heart wrenching victim statements and want to stomp a guys skull in...only to find out that the whole thing was a lie. If you tell a lie enough times you may just start to believe it. If it is reinforced enough times you may just start to believe it. And maybe Dylan believes she is telling the truth. At age 7 children are very vulnerable to suggestion from their parents. I've seen it happen in nasty custody feuds more than once. Manufactured accusations of physical/sexual abuse. It's not uncommon.

Everyone always wants to err on the side of caution in these cases and believe the victim, and well they should. At first. But once the evidence is examined and it's found to be not true then you have to put your bias aside. Because the evidence is the evidence. It doesn't matter if her words convince you personally, you must, absolutely must, take into account all of the evidence. Or lack thereof. Someone else's life is riding on this, not just the supposed victim. And an accusation of child molestation, whether true or not, lives with you for many, many years.

You always approach these cases as if the victim is telling the truth and then you investigate it as thoroughly as possible. But in the end you must yield to the facts. You don't destroy a person simply because the accusers story really, really seems convincing. People are fantastic at lying. As to the prosecutor saying he thought he had probable cause to arrest, that's all fine and good. I've arrested on probable cause that was enough to put a guy in jail and buy me time to finish an investigation. A good victim statement can be considered probable cause. Doesn't mean you have enough evidence to convict a person. Just means there is enough to warrant arresting someone on good faith that they are the perpetrator of a crime. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is something else entirely, and that is what matters.

Unless someone can show me where the police and the sexual abuse investigators made a huge error in this case I have no choice but to presume Allen is innocent, no matter how strongly written this woman's statement may be. People accuse others of terrible things every day, doesn't mean the allegations are true.

That being said, if somehow new evidence is brought to light that proves he did it then he needs to go to jail. I'll reserve judgement on this until this new investigation (if there really is one) is concluded.
 
Last edited:
Eh he's a creepy guy and I don't particularly like his movies or his sense of humor - call me a troglodyte - but I don't think he's a pedo. The allegations were apparently seriously investigated and eventually dismissed.
The statute of limitations has expired. It's a done deal as far as I'm concerned.

As far as Soon-Yi goes, that's creepy but the world is full of people doing things I consider creepy (anyone remember Bill Wyman and his son??) but that doesn't make them illegal or even immoral. Soo-Yi was not legally
related to him under the laws of any state in the United States and to all accounts he didn't have a paternal role in her life. I still think it's weird but who am I to judge - they're married
15 - 16 years and appear happy enough so they must be doing something right.
 
It still does not equal innocence. Not enough evidence is not an indication of innocence.

Too little evidence is an indication. An alibi or better a vid showing that the perpetrator was elsewhere wiukd be much more ribust.
 
As a former detective who's investigated numerous complaints of child molestation I can tell you that I have serious reservations about this accusation. Primarily because an independent team of investigators retained by the State Police found no evidence of molestation at the time of the crime. Not only did they find no evidence, they believed the girl was coached by her mother. I have been in the position of the investigator that had to examine heart wrenching victim statements and want to stomp a guys skull in...only to find out that the whole thing was a lie. If you tell a lie enough times you may just start to believe it. If it is reinforced enough times you may just start to believe it. And maybe Dylan believes she is telling the truth. At age 7 children are very vulnerable to suggestion from their parents. I've seen it happen in nasty custody feuds more than once. Manufactured accusations of physical/sexual abuse. It's not uncommon.

Everyone always wants to err on the side of caution in these cases and believe the victim, and well they should. At first. But once the evidence is examined and it's found to be not true then you have to put your bias aside. Because the evidence is the evidence. It doesn't matter if her words convince you personally, you must, absolutely must, take into account all of the evidence. Or lack thereof. Someone else's life is riding on this, not just the supposed victim. And an accusation of child molestation, whether true or not, lives with you for many, many years.

You always approach these cases as if the victim is telling the truth and then you investigate it as thoroughly as possible. But in the end you must yield to the facts. You don't destroy a person simply because the accusers story really, really seems convincing. People are fantastic at lying. As to the prosecutor saying he thought he had probable cause to arrest, that's all fine and good. I've arrested on probable cause that was enough to put a guy in jail and buy me time to finish an investigation. A good victim statement can be considered probable cause. Doesn't mean you have enough evidence to convict a person. Just means there is enough to warrant arresting someone on good faith that they are the perpetrator of a crime. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is something else entirely, and that is what matters.

Unless someone can show me where the police and the sexual abuse investigators made a huge error in this case I have no choice but to presume Allen is innocent, no matter how strongly written this woman's statement may be. People accuse others of terrible things every day, doesn't mean the allegations are true.

That being said, if somehow new evidence is brought to light that proves he did it then he needs to go to jail. I'll reserve judgement on this until this new investigation (if there really is one) is concluded.
+1

See. A detective with specific experience, ffs.

I can assure you in advance that despite your credentials and professional experience, your perspective means absolutely nothing to the mob.
 
I just read the letter written by Dylan Farrow about her childhood with Woody Allen. He needs to be castrated, his balls put in his mouth and then hung.

There are people that would pay to be allowed to do that to someone.
 
She's been brainwashed by her mother's endless hate. She's been told since she was seven that this happened to her. The story has wandered all over the place over the years. The "daughter" he married was a different one, not kin to either of them, and Rohan, the one child they had between them, Mia claimed might have been Sinatra's! (whose age difference when she married him was greater than that of Woody's and Soon-Yi's)
Given that Mia was married to Andre Previn, then in a relationship with Allen, Sinatra still being around is a bit odd.

I would certainly want more evidence than at present I have seen. At this point it could easily be false accusation.
 
And as far as the whole "he has had sex with his step daughter and married her therefore he is a perverted child molesting creep"...I can't go along with that. Soon Yi Previn was never his step daughter, there is no blood relationship between the two. Farrow and Allen were never married. She was the product of Farrow's previous relationship. Allen didn't adopt her and he didn't raise her in his home as a parental figure.

Sure, when you say a stepfather had sex with his step daughter it sounds gross and creepy. But I just don't think that's an accurate description of the relationship. At 45 would I have sex with a 20 year old? No...I wouldn't. I have daughters older than that and that would be on my mind. Some men however have no issues with age difference like that. To each his own. I would have avoided that relationship out of respect for Farrow and the other children as it would surely cause some uncomfortable feelings. But it's not like he was molesting his actual daughter or step daughter. They were two consenting, non related adults having a sexual relationship that eventually turned into a strong marriage.

Do I approve of it? No. But I also don't disapprove of it. I just don't care because once the hyperbole is stripped away it's just not a big deal.
 
And...I didn't vote because a choice describing my position isn't listed in the poll.
 
And...I didn't vote because a choice describing my position isn't listed in the poll.

Would you say Woody Allen is talented but appears a bit eccentrically weird and pervy. Mia seems like a nutty, drama queen. And though there's not enough evidence to bring charges or even accuse Allen. He at worst may have did some inappropriate, touching and molesting but not full on sexual assault?

Or there's just no way to know without more evidence and it shouldn't have been brought up?
 
Would you say Woody Allen is talented but appears a bit eccentrically weird and pervy. Mia seems like a nutty, drama queen. And though there's not enough evidence to bring charges or even accuse Allen. He at worst may have did some inappropriate, touching and molesting but not full on sexual assault?

Or there's just no way to know without more evidence and it shouldn't have been brought up?

Honestly my position is that I am forced to reserve judgement based upon the fact there is nothing new here. I must presume he is innocent because that's what law enforcement and sex abuse investigators determined at the time of the allegation. That being said I have no idea if they botched the investigation and Allen is guilty or if they did a good job and made the right call. So I will go with what my experience leads me towards and that is stick with the presumption of innocence until evidence is presented to make me change my position. Which could happen, who knows.
 
Honestly my position is that I am forced to reserve judgement based upon the fact there is nothing new here. I must presume he is innocent because that's what law enforcement and sex abuse investigators determined at the time of the allegation. That being said I have no idea if they botched the investigation and Allen is guilty or if they did a good job and made the right call. So I will go with what my experience leads me towards and that is stick with the presumption of innocence until evidence is presented to make me change my position. Which could happen, who knows.

If Mia led the girl on, she should be committed for evaluation but if she knew there was nothing more than hearsay, then I'm surprised she would let her bring it up. Unless knowing there was no proof that even the allegation would make him miserable and possibly prevent any future acts by Woody?
 
Well since he married a woman young enough to be his daughter.....wait...she was...I don't second guess the pedo claims. Even his son threw him under the bus on his social media.

She wasn't actually his daughter, Soon-Yi's father is Andre Previn.

Still kind of creepy though.
 
Eh he's a creepy guy and I don't particularly like his movies or his sense of humor - call me a troglodyte - but I don't think he's a pedo. The allegations were apparently seriously investigated and eventually dismissed.
The statute of limitations has expired. It's a done deal as far as I'm concerned.

As far as Soon-Yi goes, that's creepy but the world is full of people doing things I consider creepy (anyone remember Bill Wyman and his son??) but that doesn't make them illegal or even immoral. Soo-Yi was not legally
related to him under the laws of any state in the United States and to all accounts he didn't have a paternal role in her life. I still think it's weird but who am I to judge - they're married
15 - 16 years and appear happy enough so they must be doing something right.

Correcting myself since I'm past the time that I can edit my post.

If he were to be charged under NY 130.75, which essentially would have required that he had sex with her at least twice in three months, there is no time limitation on bringing a prosecution. Otherwise it's five years and long since past.

In either case at this point I'm presuming he's innocent because the allegation was investigated by both the police and sex abuse specialists at Yale University and found meritless.
 
Too little evidence is an indication. An alibi or better a vid showing that the perpetrator was elsewhere wiukd be much more ribust.

It's not an indication of guilt or innocence. It is simply not enough evidence to make such a determination.
 
Correcting myself since I'm past the time that I can edit my post.

If he were to be charged under NY 130.75, which essentially would have required that he had sex with her at least twice in three months, there is no time limitation on bringing a prosecution. Otherwise it's five years and long since past.

In either case at this point I'm presuming he's innocent because the allegation was investigated by both the police and sex abuse specialists at Yale University and found meritless.

It was not found meritless. There was inconclusive evidence for a trial. A specialist stated that Dylan exhibited signs of an abused child. She gave a detailed account of what happened to her. She had gone to a physician who suspected sexual abuse and I believe it may have been the doctor who actually reported the abuse to authorities. When the authorities investigated, they felt there was too little evidence for any kind of indictment. I see nothing in there that says "innocent."

OTH, Dylan has the doctor who allegedly saw signs of sexual assault, the child abuse expert who stated she did indeed exhibit signs of abused child syndrome, and her story has not changed one iota in more than 20 years. Also, Dylan has NOTHING to gain by bringing this all up again. Nothing at all.
 
It was not found meritless. There was inconclusive evidence for a trial. A specialist stated that Dylan exhibited signs of an abused child. She gave a detailed account of what happened to her. She had gone to a physician who suspected sexual abuse and I believe it may have been the doctor who actually reported the abuse to authorities. When the authorities investigated, they felt there was too little evidence for any kind of indictment. I see nothing in there that says "innocent."

OTH, Dylan has the doctor who allegedly saw signs of sexual assault, the child abuse expert who stated she did indeed exhibit signs of abused child syndrome, and her story has not changed one iota in more than 20 years. Also, Dylan has NOTHING to gain by bringing this all up again. Nothing at all.

You'll never see "innocent" in any kind of criminal proceeding. It's either "guilty" or "not guilty" - the latter meaning that the state could not prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. That fact that they didn't call him innocent is really irrelevant because they'd never call anyone innocent.

The bar to indict someone is pretty low. If they couldn't find a way to hang an indictment on him there really wasn't anything there.
 
You'll never see "innocent" in any kind of criminal proceeding. It's either "guilty" or "not guilty" - the latter meaning that the state could not prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. That fact that they didn't call him innocent is really irrelevant because they'd never call anyone innocent.

The bar to indict someone is pretty low. If they couldn't find a way to hang an indictment on him there really wasn't anything there.

That is absolutely not true. There are many cases where evidence isn't sufficient. That has nothing to do with the guilt or innocence of a person, it only means there is not enough evidence. What evidence would you expect there to be anyway? Please detail the evidence you would expect to see in a molested child.
 
As you can see above, you acknowledged the link and it's statements already prior in this discussion. Here is the link again with the particular excerpt.

Did Woody Allen molest his adopted daughter 22 years ago? Reviewing the evidence.

In the Time interview, Allen strongly suggests a cause-and-effect relationship between Farrow discovering his affair with Soon-Yi and the molestation allegations. But that account is hard to deduce from the timeline of events. Farrow found out about the affair when Allen left pornographic photographs of Soon-Yi on his mantel in January 1992—eight months before Dylan made her allegations. By Orth’s account, Allen was already in therapy for “inappropriate behavior” with Dylan before the revelation of the affair.

And in their May 1994 decision, the judges of the New York appellate court held that, with regard to the events of Aug. 4, 1992, “the testimony given at trial by the individuals caring for the children that day, the videotape of Dylan made by Ms. Farrow the following day and the accounts of Dylan's behavior toward Mr. Allen both before and after the alleged instance of abuse, suggest that the abuse did occur.” Although “the evidence in support of the allegations remains inconclusive,” the court stated, “our review of the record militates against a finding that Ms. Farrow fabricated the allegations without any basis.”

Never mind how some journalist describes what the judge said. Read what the judge actually said here:

ALLEN v. FARROW | Leagle.com

A search for "inappropriate" finds the following quotes

The respondent maintains that the petitioner has shown no genuine parental interest in, nor any regard for, the children's welfare and that any interest he has shown has been inappropriate and even harmful. Respondent cites the fact that the petitioner has commenced and maintained an intimate sexual relationship with her daughter Soon-Yi Previn, which he has refused to curtail, despite the obvious ill effects it has had on all of the children and the especially profound effect it has had on Moses. It is also contended that petitioner has at best, an inappropriately intense interest in, and at worst, an abusive relationship with, the parties' daughter Dylan.

His continuation of the relationship, (with Soon-Yi -ed)viewed in the best possible light, shows a distinct absence of judgment. It demonstrates to this Court Mr. Allen's tendency to place inappropriate emphasis on his own wants and needs and to minimize and even ignore those of his children. At the very minimum, it demonstrates an absence of any parenting skills.

Although the investigation of the abuse allegations have not resulted in a conclusive finding, all of the evidence received at trial supports the determination as to custody and visitation with respect to this child. There would be no beneficial purpose served in disturbing the custody arrangement. Moreover, even if the abuse did not occur, it is evident that there are issues concerning Mr. Allen's inappropriately intense relationship with this child that can be resolved only in a therapeutic setting

With respect to Satchel, the IAS Court denied the petitioner's request for unsupervised visitation. While the court stated that it was not concerned for Satchel's physical safety, it was concerned by Mr. Allen's "demonstrated inability to understand the impact that his words and deeds have upon the emotional well being of the children". We agree. The record supports the conclusion that Mr. Allen may, if unsupervised, influence Satchel inappropriately, and disregard the impact exposure to Mr. Allen's relationship with Satchel's sister, Ms. Previn, would have on the child

The respondent maintains that the petitioner has shown no genuine parental interest in, nor any regard for, the children's welfare and that any interest he has shown has been inappropriate and even harmful.

. It is also contended that petitioner has at best, an inappropriately intense interest in, and at worst, an abusive relationship with, the parties' daughter Dylan.

Please note that none of the quotes states that his behavior was "inappropriate". That is the journalists description.
 
That is absolutely not true. There are many cases where evidence isn't sufficient. That has nothing to do with the guilt or innocence of a person, it only means there is not enough evidence. What evidence would you expect there to be anyway? Please detail the evidence you would expect to see in a molested child.

I have no idea I'm not an expert in child molestation. The people who are experts couldn't find enough to evidence to warrant bringing it to a grand jury. Under our legal system that's enough to end the matter. Does it mean that he didn't molest her? No. Lack of evidence doesn't mean it didn't happen. However, given how easy it is in general to get an indictment not being able to get one, especially after a 6 month investigation, certainly makes it much more probable that nothing happened.
 
I have no idea I'm not an expert in child molestation. The people who are experts couldn't find enough to evidence to warrant bringing it to a grand jury. Under our legal system that's enough to end the matter. Does it mean that he didn't molest her? No. Lack of evidence doesn't mean it didn't happen. However, given how easy it is in general to get an indictment not being able to get one, especially after a 6 month investigation, certainly makes it much more probable that nothing happened.

It most certainly means nothing of the sort. And exactly WHAT evidence would you think there is to prove such a thing? Please be detailed.
 
Allen was never interested in Mia's children, especially not SoonYii. Mia herself talks about it in her book and in articles published, I believe, in Vanity Fair. The only ones he showed some interest in were the ones he adopted with her, Dylan and Moses and, of course, the one he still sees as his biological son, Ronan.

ALLEN v. FARROW | Leagle.com
From the court's decision:
From the inception of Mr. Allen's relationship with Ms. Farrow in 1980, until a few months after the adoption of
[197 A.D.2d 330]
Dylan O'Sullivan Farrow on June 11, 1985, Mr. Allen wanted nothing to do with Ms. Farrow's children.

In 1990 at about the same time that the parties were growing distant from each other and expressing their concerns about the other's relationship with their youngest children, Mr. Allen began acknowledging Farrow's daughter Soon-Yi Previn. Previously he treated Ms. Previn in the same way he treated Ms. Farrow's other children from her prior marriage, rarely even speaking to them.
 
Now if you can make an undeniable claim that someone molested a child with that type of evidence/testimony then I hope you never serve on a jury.

Tell me about it. There are a few too many here guided totally on emotion and not at all by logic or rationality.
 
:lamo

I nominate your post for the DP most hilariously desperately feeble attempt to derail a thread award.

That's the equivalent of giving Meryl Streep another Oscar nomination - so many worthy examples to choose from.
 
Back
Top Bottom