I mean, you took what Allen said and without scrutiny pretty much posted his defense (ironically accusing me of doing the inverse). But we have the court documents http://thunderpeel2001.blogspot.ca/2...documents.html
What did Justice Wilk have to say about the Yale-New Haven documents?
As far as judge talk goes, that's pretty much tearing the doctor a new one.
He said this literally decades after the event where he would now need to be accountable for not only his father's whereabouts but the other people as well. And yet the person who he argues would be surrounding Woody, actually testified opposite. While others testified other strange occurrences that day.
Pretty much Mia talked to the doctor about the incident that Dylan told her before finding out that the babysitter that was suppose to supervise the visit left Dylan and Allen unaccounted for. Mia Farrow coaching her daughter to say something, and then going to the police, doesn't make sense unless she knew that the witness tasked with watching Dylan was away...yet she didn't find out until the day after she reported the assault to the doctor.
If you read the document, you don't have to read into it to see that he believes Mia Farrow was telling the truth (not that what necessarily Dylan said was true, but that Mia never coached her). He clearly attacks Allen's accusation that Dylan was coached multiple times. So the idea that Soon-Yi's affair made Mia have Dylan lie to the doctors does not hold much, if any, weight:
But this is just the judge who saw the evidence presented before him and was tasked to make a ruling. What does he know?
Again, you can prescribe to the "innocent until proven guilty" but if you're saying that the facts..as presented in the Supreme Court Document...are unfounded and "all incorrect", maybe a little backup to that incredibly insane accusation?
Also for another ick-factor. The court documents reveal that they don't know if Soon-Yi was born in 1970 or 1972. If she was born in 1972, her mother would have started dating Allen when she was 7. She would have started the affair not when she was around 18 but rather around 16.
1. Don't lecture me on judge talk.
2. Your commentary on the facts doesn't change them.
Here's a link with the actual court ruling. The judge basically says there aren't enough facts to decide either way, which is what always happens in a he said/she said scenario.
To clarify a few things:
1. The judge in no way threw out the doctor's report. He said it would be more credible if certain steps were taken. Expert evidence is not meant to displace the trier of facts role, as such, it's extremely common place for a judge to throw out parts of a report or comment on shortfalls.
2. The judge's overall conclusion was that there was not enough evidence to prosecute Allen and that he could not conclusively say that Allen had not groped the child. So pretty much exactly what I said. That only Allen really knows what happened.
There's zero chance Spacey is ever getting another gig.
Will be a sad ending though if they don't finish this season of House of Cards. Maybe a quick re-write to kill him off screen/etc
I honestly can't see myself sitting through another season of House of Cards knowing what I know now. It sucks for all of the people who put in a lot of hard work on the show but I don't think I could stomach it.
Here's a link with the actual court ruling. The judge basically says there aren't enough facts to decide either way, which is what always happens in a he said/she said scenario.
To clarify a few things:
1. The judge in no way threw out the doctor's report. He said it would be more credible if certain steps were taken. Expert evidence is not meant to displace the trier of facts role, as such, it's extremely common place for a judge to throw out parts of a report or comment on shortfalls.
2. The judge's overall conclusion was that there was not enough evidence to prosecute Allen and that he could not conclusively say that Allen had not groped the child. So pretty much exactly what I said. That only Allen really knows what happened.
Well I think the kid would have a pretty good idea the skinpooch had diddled her
Well I think the kid would have a pretty good idea the skinpooch had diddled her
I don't think she would. She was young enough when it happened that she wouldn't be able to distinguish between a real memory and an implanted one from decades of her mother telling her what happened.
2. The judge's overall conclusion was that there was not enough evidence to prosecute Allen and that he could not conclusively say that Allen had not groped the child. So pretty much exactly what I said. That only Allen really knows what happened.
No, that's not exactly what you said at all. You went on to defend Allen by posting several reasons as to why it did not occur, including incorrect facts like he was found not guilty of it after a trial - that didn't occur. Or that there wasn't enough evidence to prosecute when you were corrected, the lead prosecutor has said there was enough evidence for 'probable cause' just that Dylan was too fragile to go through trial.
If you wanted to leave it at Woody Allen was never found guilty of rape and that we may never know what happened as the case was a he said-she said situation, we would both be in agreement. We've both said as much.
But you went on to defend him as to suggest it couldn't have happened in this post:
Quote:
Originally Posted by blankall
And yes, he wasn't tried, but only because there wasn't enough evidence in the pre-trial hearings to proceed with a trial. Dylan Farrow's own doctor, the head of the Yale–New Haven Hospital Child Sexual Abuse Clinic, gave sworn testimony evidence that Dylan likely invented the story. Dylan's older brother Moses gave evidence that there was no opportunity for Allen to molest Dylan, as they were surrounded by people the whole time of the dinner. It's also very strange that these allegations came to light only after Allen's relationship with Soon-Yi became public.
I was responding to those points with the actual facts, as presented in the court documents. The judge did not take the report as credible, no need to bring it up really. Moses discussed the event decades after it occurred, and was incorrect as the person responsible to baby sit left them unattended for 15-20 minutes as shown in her testimony. And finally, insinuating that they were simply making this up in response to Allen cheating, as the judge put it trying to stereotype the "woman scorned" is off-putting
Again, if you want to leave it at innocent until proven guilty, that's cool. No need to try and paint a person saying she was raped as a 7 year old as a liar though either by suggesting it didn't take place.
Pretty much you've taken the position of "We may never know what happened that night..but here's reason the rape didn't happen." Like come on.
And I don't really care. The facts, the uncontested facts, are Woody Allen began dating the daughter of his common-law wife, the sister of her brother, whom he had met when she was either 7 or 9, and began an affair with when she was 16 or 18 after being in her life as, at least Allen believes, as someone paternal. In that regard, to me, he's an immoral, reprehensible individual regardless of what happened with his other 7 year old daughter.
I don't think she would. She was young enough when it happened that she wouldn't be able to distinguish between a real memory and an implanted one from decades of her mother telling her what happened.
See this is the bull#### you need to stop with. What evidence is there that Mia brainwashed her daughter? Any evidence at all?
The judge pretty much tore Allen a new one for suggesting that was the case.
Yes, his 7 year old adopted-daughter may have had a wild imagination and may have made up the situation. But there's 0 evidence to suggest Mia was the reason for this. Her daughter told her something extremely worrisome, she videotaped her over the next 24 hours, and took what was said to the doctors and police.
As we've both linked to multiple times :"There is no credible evidence to support Mr. Allen’s contention that Ms. Farrow coached Dylan." So why do you keep suggesting that's what happened?
I don't think she would. She was young enough when it happened that she wouldn't be able to distinguish between a real memory and an implanted one from decades of her mother telling her what happened.
no, kids will mix up details of abuse but if a kid says they were diddled then something happened every time, now that something may not have happened in the way the kid remembered it but something happened
There was also two sets of legal actions. The family civil proceeding, which would have proceeded on a "balance of probabilities" standard and the criminal proceedings, which would have proceeded on a "reasonable doubt" standard. It's much harder to prove anything on the reasonable doubt standard. Even on the civil standard, this was the judges finding, from page 22 of the ruling in the civil case:
Quote:
"Mr. Allen's relationship with Dylan remains unresolved. The evidence suggests that it is unlikely that he could be successfully prosecuted for sexual abuse. I am less certain however, than is the Yale-New Haven team, that he the evidence proves conclusively that there was no sexual abuse."
So even on the lower civil standard, the judge couldn't conclude Allen was guilty.
Just because you can't find evidence of something, that doesn't mean it didn't happen. The only way to get "credible" evidence of coaching would be to have a witness observe it or a recording of the event. It's interesting that me "suggesting" Farrow may have coached the child is totally outlandish, but every accusation you make against Allen, based on similar though processes are totally on point.
And, now there is credible evidence to suggest Farrow coached her child, her other son Moses:
“My mother drummed it into me to hate my father for tearing apart the family and sexually molesting my sister,” Moses, 36, tells PEOPLE in the magazine’s new issue. “And I hated him for her for years. I see now that this was a vengeful way to pay him back for falling in love with Soon-Yi.”
Quote:
“Of course Woody did not molest my sister,” says Moses, who is estranged from Farrow and many of his siblings and is close to Allen and Soon-Yi. “She loved him and looked forward to seeing him when he would visit. She never hid from him until our mother succeeded in creating the atmosphere of fear and hate towards him. The day in question, there were six or seven of us in the house. We were all in public rooms and no one, not my father or sister, was off in any private spaces. My mother was conveniently out shopping. I don t know if my sister really believes she was molested or is trying to please her mother. Pleasing my mother was very powerful motivation because to be on her wrong side was horrible.”
Listen, once again, no one knows but Allen if he touched her inappropriately. I'm not saying that he did or did not, but there are a lot of things about this case that are very bizarre. The 3 biggest ones:
1. Why would Allen choose that moment in time to start molesting this child? Right after his relationship with Soon-Yi had come to light and he was already under a lot of scrutiny. He's going to then use a supervised visit with his children to pull one of them away to an attic for a quick feel?
2. Dylan Farrow's evidence has changed over time as to how and what happened.
3.. Why is Mosses Farrow, Dylan Farrow's sister, supporting Woody Allen? If a grown man felt up my sister I would not be supporting him in any way. In fact, I'd be looking for a way to bash his face in. Moses Farrow is also a license family therapist. By lying about this issue, he would be violating every standard of his profession.
The fact of the matter is that over time, Mia Farrow's case has gotten less credible. Moses has come forward affirming everything that Allen said. Allen's relationship with Soon-Yi although coming from a very very weird place, seems to have developed into a normal adult relationship.
We do know that Allen has highly inappropriate sexual interest in young girls in his own family, on the whole I would tend to believe the sister of the teenage girl we know Allen diddled when she claims he diddled her as well
This #### has been going on since Hollywood was a thing. Errol Flynn was one of the worst (I just listened to a Dollop podcast episode about him and it threw me for a loop):
Flynn and two other men were arraigned in connection with the “mistreatment” of Betty Hansen, a 17-year-old would-be starlet from Nebraska. As her mother told the Times, “She was a little Christian girl, she must have had dope or something.” Less than a week later, another 17-year-old, this time a nightclub “entertainer,” Peggy La Rue Satterlee, filed another assault complaint, which allegedly took place on the actor’s yacht the year before, when she was only 15.
We do know that Allen has highly inappropriate sexual interest in young girls in his own family, on the whole I would tend to believe the sister of the teenage girl we know Allen diddled when she claims he diddled her as well
What Mia Farrow had was not a conventional family. Woody Allen despite being the adopted parent of several children with her, had almost no contact with them. The children were raised in large parts by Mia's staff. Soon-Yi was also in her 20s when her relationship with Allen started. Allen was not her father, and had little contact with her prior to their relationship:
Quote:
In her own interview with Time, Previn again defended their relationship, saying “I was not raped, molested or manipulated as Mia has hysterically charged, nor am I ######ed or mentally slow as she would have you believe.”
“To think that Woody was in any way a father or stepfather to me is laughable,” she continued. “My parents are Andre Previn and Mia, but obviously they're not even my real parents. I came to America when I was 7. I was never remotely close to Woody.”
I don't know if Allen did it or not, but I am leaning towards not. The biggest thing for me are the statements of Moses Farrow. He has zero motivation to lie about this issue. Lots of people have issues with their own parents, but I cannot see a single reason for why he would lie in order to defend a man who'd been accused of molesting his sister. The fact that he is employed as a family therapist, and himself has expertise on these issues, further supports his credibility.
To add to all of this Mis Farrow's family is very odd. She has 14 children, 10 of whom are adopted. 2 are totally estranged from her, (and support the supposed child molester) and 3 are dead:
