An Open Letter From Dylan Farrow

[sluce]

And again we have come full circle, with walls of texts, and the result is the same. Some blamed Mia and defended Woody when it first happened, and others blamed Woody and defended Mia. Now some blame Mia and defend Woody, and others blame Woody and defend Mia. Meanwhile Dylan is lost in the argument.

[witchcurlgirl]

Who cares? It's great publicity for Ronan Sinatra's new show on MSNBC. Don't miss it!

[NoNoRehab]

Soon-Yi also claimed there'd been a pattern of physical abuse from Mia. Mia denied but did admit to the assault on Soon-Yi when she discovered her affair with Woody.

[dexknows]

Jerry Sandusky and that lost prophets fucktard in the other thread! The Abusers have to be confronted with hard evidence and even then....in other words victims of childhood sexual abuse are always going to be raked over the coals. This is why so many continue to suffer in silence and these assholes get away with it.
Woody Allen will never admit shit, even if he's guilty.

[dexknows]

Soon-Yi also claimed there'd been a pattern of physical abuse from Mia. Mia denied but did admit to the assault on Soon-Yi when she discovered her affair with Woody.

There's countless evidence as to Mia's fuckery as well but that just goes to show a larger picture of dysfunction (and was discussed up thread) that maybe she'd been in a crazy, or even abusive household. Who knows? But as Sluce mentioned, what about DYLAN??

[sluce]

Who cares? It's great publicity for Ronan Sinatra's new show on MSNBC. Don't miss it!

I hope he does it his way... Is he really getting a show? If so, about what???? I know he is very intelligent and accomplished but seriously, what kind of show will he have?

[NoNoRehab]

It's a political/entertainment talk show. MSNBC wants Ronan to be the new Anderson Cooper.

[witchcurlgirl]

Premieres on February 24! And isn't it great that they're in the news right now, it will really drum up interest. (I'm sure it's purely coincidental)

[sluce]

Now that is an amazing coincidence. But, it still doesn't mean that Dylan was not abused by Woody. It just shows that her mother is willing to use her, like the other kids, for her own purposes.

[twitchy2.0]

I'm on Team Clusterfuck.

[sluce]

Kinky bitch.

[whitetigeress]

Just wanted to mention that some of Allen's defenders have said that Allen was barely in her life and really didn't have any meaningful contact with her until she was in college. But the photo below is all of them traveling to Leningrad in 1987 when Soon Yi would be 15. That is not to say anything was untoward at that point, only that it's pretty clear that he was part of her life for quite a while.


From left: Ronan Farrow held by Lark Previn, Woody Allen holding Dylan Farrow, Fletcher Previn, Daisy Previn, Soon-Yi Previn, Moses Farrow and Mia Farrow in Leningrad in 1987

Isn't this the second photo in this thread alone that I have seen him holding her?!!
I can't believe that Moses is a family therapist yet calls his sister a liar.

[sluce]

^That has been bothering me too. It's an ethical breach. He could have simply stated that he has different memories and is sadden that their mother has chosen to harm Dylan blah blah blah, Or he could have kept his mouth shut which is more professional. I think Moses weighed the odds and realized Woody has a larger estate and fewer kids who will share the money.

[witchcurlgirl]

Just wanted to mention that some of Allen's defenders have said that Allen was barely in her life and really didn't have any meaningful contact with her until she was in college. But the photo below is all of them traveling to Leningrad in 1987 when Soon Yi would be 15. That is not to say anything was untoward at that point, only that it's pretty clear that he was part of her life for quite a while.

Not that this mitigates the creep factor, but that's not just from Allen's defenders, it's mentioned in the NY Appellate Court decision that went in Mia's favor, so it's likely true to some extent, based on what they heard from both sides during the case. The entire decision is at the link, it's long but it's interesting reading:


Certain salient facts concerning both Mr. Allen's and Ms. Farrow's relationships to their children and to each other are not disputed. Review of these facts in an objective manner and the conclusions that flow from them, demonstrate that the determination of the IAS Court as to both custody and visitation is amply supported by the record before this Court.

From the inception of Mr. Allen's relationship with Ms. Farrow in 1980, until a few months after the adoption of Dylan O'Sullivan Farrow on June 11, 1985, Mr. Allen wanted nothing to do with Ms. Farrow's children. Although Mr. Allen and Ms. Farrow attempted for approximately six months to have a child of their own, Mr. Allen did so apparently only after Ms. Farrow promised to assume full responsibility for the child. Following the adoption however, Mr. Allen became interested in developing a relationship with the newly adopted Dylan. While previously he rarely spent time in the respondent's apartment, after the adoption of Dylan he went to the respondent's Manhattan apartment more often, visited Ms. Farrow's Connecticut home and even accompanied the Farrow family on vacations to Europe. Allen also developed a relationship with Moses Farrow, who had been adopted by the respondent in 1980 and was seven years old at the time of Dylan's adoption. However, Allen remained distant from Farrow's other six children.

In 1986 Ms. Farrow expressed a desire to adopt another child. Mr. Allen, while not enthusiastic at the prospect of the adoption of Dylan in 1985, was much more amenable to the idea in 1986. Before the adoption could be completed Ms. Farrow became pregnant with the parties' son Satchel. While the petitioner testified that he was happy at the idea of becoming a father, the record supports the finding that Mr. Allen showed little or no interest in the pregnancy. It is not disputed that Ms. Farrow began to withdraw from Mr. Allen during the pregnancy and that afterwards she did not wish Satchel to become attached to Mr. Allen.

According to Mr. Allen, Ms. Farrow became inordinately attached to the newborn Satchel to the exclusion of the other children. He viewed this as especially harmful to Dylan and began spending more time with her, ostensibly to make up for the lack of attention shown her by Ms. Farrow after the birth of Satchel. Mr. Allen maintains that his interest in and affection for Dylan always has been paternal in nature and never sexual. The various psychiatric experts who testified or otherwise provided reports did not conclude that Allen's behavior toward Dylan prior to August of 1992 was explicitly sexual in nature. However, the clear consensus was that his interest in Dylan was abnormally intense in that he made inordinate demands on her time and focused on her to the exclusion of Satchel and Moses even when they were present.

The record demonstrates that Ms. Farrow expressed concern to Allen about his relationship with Dylan, and that Allen expressed his concern to Ms. Farrow about her relationship with Satchel. In 1990 both Dylan and Satchel were evaluated by clinical psychologists. Dr. Coates began treatment of Satchel in 1990. In April of 1991 Dylan was referred to Dr. Schultz, a clinical psychologist specializing in the treatment of young children with serious emotional problems.

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. In September of 1991 Ms. Previn began to attend Drew College in New Jersey. In December 1991 two events coincided. Mr. Allen's adoptions of Dylan and Moses were finalized and Mr. Allen began his sexual relationship with their sister Soon-Yi Previn.

http://www.leagle.com/decision/1994524197AD2d327_1461

[sluce]

Those records should be sealed.

This passage is interesting and I can see how he was approved to adopt 2 more kids.

In January of 1992, Mr. Allen took the photographs of Ms. Previn, which were discovered on the mantelpiece in his apartment by Ms. Farrow and were introduced into evidence at the IAS proceeding. Mr. Allen in his trial testimony stated that he took the photos at Ms. Previn's suggestion and that he considered them erotic and not pornographic. We have viewed the photographs and do not share Mr. Allen's characterization of them. We find the fact that Mr. Allen took them at a time when he was formally assuming a legal responsibility for two of Ms. Previn's siblings to be totally unacceptable. The distinction Mr. Allen makes between Ms. Farrow's other children and Dylan, Satchel and Moses is lost on this Court. The children themselves do not draw the same distinction that Mr. Allen does. This is sadly demonstrated by the profound effect his relationship with Ms. Previn has had on the entire family. Allen's testimony that the photographs of Ms. Previn "were taken, as I said before, between two consenting adults wanting to do this" demonstrates a chosen ignorance of his and Ms. Previn's relationships to Ms. Farrow, his three children and Ms. Previn's other siblings. His continuation of the relationship, 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.

As we noted above, Mr. Allen maintains that Ms. Farrow's allegations concerning the sexual abuse of Dylan were fabricated by Ms. Farrow both as a result of her rage over his relationship with Ms. Previn and as part of her continued plan to alienate him from his children. However, our review of the record militates against a finding that Ms. Farrow fabricated the allegations without any basis. Unlike the court at IAS, we do not consider the conclusions reached by Doctors Coates and Schultz and by the Yale-New Haven team, to be totally unpersuasive. While the tendency of Dylan to withdraw into a fantasy and the inconsistencies in her account of the events of August 4, 1992, noted particularly by the Yale-New Haven team, must be taken into account in the evaluation of these serious allegations, 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. While the evidence in support of the allegations [197 A.D.2d 333] remains inconclusive, it is clear that the investigation of the charges in and of itself could not have left Dylan unaffected.