Sunday, February 2, 2014

Statement Analysis: Woody Allen's Daughter Issues Letter

Woody Allen was accused of molesting his 7 year old adoptive daughter.  He was never prosecuted for it, but the case became sensational and a judge denied him visitation privileges.  This judge likely heard evidence that the public would not hear in closed-door testimony.

Did he molest Dylan Farrow?

Here, Dylan Farrow has spoken out for the first time, via a letter.

Statement Analysis is applied to the letter looking for veracity or deception, as well as linguistic indicators of sexual abuse.  I have added emphasis to the letter to highlight principles of Statement Analysis.  We know that there are signs, within the life of a victim, which testify to the molestation, but our focus is in the language.  Yet, the twain do meet, in that the expected or known patterned suffering, will show up in the language of victims.  We did Statement Analysis on Latoya Jackson's claim of sexual molestation and found indicators of veracity.  What will Statement Analysis show of Dylan Farrow's claim?

Regarding Woody Allen's denial, Vanity Fair did an extensive article in 1992.  Allen's denials were all similar to this early one:

"Suddenly I got a memo from her lawyers saying no more visits at all. Something had taken place. When I called Mia, she just slammed the phone. And then I was told by my lawyers she was accusing me of child molestation. I thought this was so crazy and so sick that I cannot in all conscience leave those kids in that atmosphere. So I said, I realize this is going to be rough, but I’m going to sue for custody of the children.

When he said, "...she was accusing me of child molestation" it is the perfect place for him to say he did not do it.  Instead, he said it was "so crazy" and "so sick"; and not that he did not do it. 

Recall that in Statement Analysis a "Reliable Denial" consists of Three (3) Components:

1.  The pronoun "I"
2.  The past tense verb "did not" or "didn't"
3.  The accusation specifically met

"I did not molest my daughter" or "I didn't sexually touch Dylan..." (and so on) would have been very strong denials.  Woody Allen did not issue any.  

Frequently we find the word "would" used instead of "did not", as "would not" or "would never" is future/conditional tense, and does not link the subject back to the event itself.  This violates component number two (2).

We also find among the deceptive a minimization or avoidance of addressing the specific allegation. 

"I didn't do anything to her" avoids the specific allegation, violating component three (3).  

In live interviewing, we often find the pronoun "I" to be missing  with "Didn't molest her!" or it is exchanged for the plural pronoun, "we" which seeks to spread out guilt, or 'hide in a crowd' of others (something parents of teenagers know too well). 

In the original accusation, Woody Allen was seen as deceptive in his responses, and avoided making a reliable denial. 

Eventually, nude photos of Mia Farrow's adopted 19 year old daughter, Soon Yi, were found in the then 56 year old Allen's possession.  He lived in the role of step father to his step daughter.  Regarding the sexual relationship, he said, 

"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.”

Note that this is something he did not "find"; to "find" denotes search.  It is reported in the negative. 

Note that "moral dilemmas" is both plural, and in the negative. 
Next notice that it is repeated with the change from "any" to "any great" moral dilemma (singular) indicating that he did find a moral dilemma, but did not find a sexual relationship with his step daughter a "great" moral dilemma.  
The age is mentioned as a disparity in sophistication.  At this age, legally, she was past the age of legal exploitation. 
Note in the negative the embedded, "she was my daughter."

Regarding Dylan Farrow's letter analyzed:

What do we look for?

When is he "Woody Allen"?
When is he "father" or "dad"?
Does she connect to the past with appropriate verb tenses?
How strong are the pronouns?
Any signals of deception?
Any references to water, doors, lights?
Any sensory descriptions of the molestations?  Memory is often associated with the something smelled, tasted, or felt?
Any signals of disassociation?
Any signals of having no voice?  Sexual abuse victims feel silenced.
Coverings, blankets, sheets, etc   This is for both sexual abuse victims and those who suffer from PTSD symptoms.

What’s your favorite Woody Allen movie? 
Where someone begins a statement is always important.  It is often the reason for writing.  Here, it is a question.  One should always wonder if the person is asking herself a question.  
Before you answer, 
Here the subject interrupts the question, reducing its importance, for now, because of something to follow: 
you should know: 
There is something "you", the reader will need to know before answering the question.  The subject recognizes that what is about to follow is so important that it may change the answer to the question: 
when I was seven years old, Woody Allen took me by the hand and led me into a dim, closet-like attic on the second floor of our house. 
We find strong pronoun usage:  "I", "me" and "our house."
"I" and "me" are very strong. Yet, why "our" house and not "my" house?
The need to 'share' is often the language of divorce, or step parenting.  
Please also note the appropriate past tense verbs. 
He told me to lay on my stomach and play with my brother’s electric train set. 
Note continued strong pronoun use. 
Note body posture indicates increase in tension. 
Note detail of the train set:  it was "electric", which may suggest veracity as an electric train set makes noise.  For a child's memory, just as with an adult, there is a connection to the senses.
It should also be noted that dissociation may be at play as the subject focuses upon something else.  Sexual abuse victims, in order to survive, will often 'split' in the brain, in order to protect itself.  The more intelligent the child, the deeper the split.  

Then he sexually assaulted me. 
"Then" has a passage of time, which is explain above. 
"he sexually assaulted me" is very strong.  No hedging, no additional language.  This is a very strong statement.  If the rest of the statement supports it, it should be believed. 
Who sexually assaulted her?  ("Assault" is the language of an adult)
"he" did.  
This is distancing language and is not unusual, nor unexpected.  
He talked to me while he did it, whispering that I was a good girl, that this was our secret, promising that we’d go to Paris and I’d be a star in his movies. 
We continue to see sensory language.  Rape victims, for example, often recall the smell of breath, the body odor, the sounds around them, etc.  "Whispering" is something a child would recall.  "Our" secret enters the language of the abuser. 
Notice the past tense verbs are strong. 
I remember staring at that toy train, focusing on it as it traveled in its circle around the attic. To this day, I find it difficult to look at toy trains.
Many years have passed yet the disassociation is in play.  The "electric" train set is now a "toy" train.  "Electric" above would make noise as it moves.  Here, she literally describes focusing on it.  This would be an adult interpretation of a childhood memory.  That it is an adult view, note "to this day" is as an adult. 
For as long as I could remember, my father had been doing things to me that I didn’t like. 
"had been" lengthens time.  Note its appropriate use because of "for as long as I could remember..."
He is "my  father" in the passage of time. 
Please note that the abuse may have started earlier. 
Next she tells us what she did not like, which is in the negative, and very important.  How did the child feel about the molestation?
Children are often afflicted with terrible confusion, acutely interfering with normal development. 
Here it is because:  It may not have been painful.  
Father figure means parents are always right.
She may have enjoyed the attention while feeling dirty or guilty. 
It may not have been physically painful, which, later on, causes increase in psychological damage, especially when the natural high level of hormones begins to decrease.  This is why many women are often found seeking help in their 30's and 40's for depression or anxiety, and when the source of their suffering is found, childhood sexual abuse comes to the surface. 
I didn’t like how often he would take me away from my mom, siblings and friends to be alone with him. I didn’t like it when he would stick his thumb in my mouth. I didn’t like it when I had to get in bed with him under the sheets when he was in his underwear. I didn’t like it when he would place his head in my naked lap and breathe in and breathe out. 
1.  Didn't like thumb in mouth (sensory)
2.  Didn't like getting in bed while he was in his underwear
3.  Didn't like his head in her naked lap
("Breath in and out" is sensory recall). 
Note that she did not include attention.  This is another indicator of veracity as children like the attention, even when it is negative, especially if they are attention starved, making them even more vulnerable.

"Under the sheets" is covering, associated with both sexual abuse victims and PTSD sufferers. 
Next, note that expanse of time is in context:
I would hide under beds or lock myself in the bathroom to avoid these encounters, but he always found me. 
Note "would hide" is in response to the indefinite period of time. 
Strong past tense verb usage. 
These things happened so often, so routinely, so skillfully hidden from a mother that would have protected me had she known, that I thought it was normal. I thought this was how fathers doted on their daughters. But what he did to me in the attic felt different. I couldn’t keep the secret anymore.
Note "a" mother is distancing language.  
Question:  Why might she use distancing language since she did not like being taken from her mother?
Answer:  The mother did not protect her.  
This is something that, as an adult, she understands ("had she known") yet, emotionally, even an adult feels the sting of not being protected. 

When I asked my mother if her dad did to her what Woody Allen did to me, I honestly did not know the answer. 
This is a weak assertion of not knowing.  By age seven, she would be faced with the reality that what was happening was wrong.  The conflict would be severe for the age.  
Note he is "Woody Allen" (distance) here. 
What one "didn't know" is very important to the subject and she lists them: 
I also didn’t know the firestorm it would trigger. I didn’t know that my father would use his sexual relationship with my sister to cover up the abuse he inflicted on me. I didn’t know that he would accuse my mother of planting the abuse in my head and call her a liar for defending me. I didn’t know that I would be made to recount my story over and over again, to doctor after doctor, pushed to see if I’d admit I was lying as part of a legal battle I couldn’t possibly understand. At one point, my mother sat me down and told me that I wouldn’t be in trouble if I was lying – that I could take it all back. I couldn’t. 
Note he is "my father" in this context. 
We have a list of what she did not know, including the Soon Yi case, putting her, no longer as a child, but as an adult commenting:
Note "to see if I was lying" may be entering the language of others, including doctors.  At one point, she likely entered the language of her mother who "sat me down" (tension increase) who may have told her daughter she could "take it all back" (again, the language of another).
This is where we seek to learn whether something is an embedded admission, or entrance into the language of another.  
It was all true. 
She uses the word "true" in her statement along with "all."
But sexual abuse claims against the powerful stall more easily. There were experts willing to attack my credibility. There were doctors willing to gaslight an abused child.
Note possessive pronoun:  "my credibility" is very strong. 
Note "gaslight" is adult perspective. 
Note that she refers to herself as a "child" and not "girl" or "kid", etc.  
When one refers to herself as a "child" it is a strong indication of sexual abuse.  80% likely is sexual abuse.  (LSI research) 
After a custody hearing denied my father visitation rights, 
"my father" is the one denied visitation rights.
my mother declined to pursue criminal charges, despite findings of probable cause by the State of Connecticut 
this is the private closed door hearing in child abuse cases
– due to, in the words of the prosecutor, the fragility of the “child victim.” 
Children are ripped up by defense attorneys.  
Woody Allen was never convicted of any crime. That he got away with what he did to me haunted me as I grew up
Childhood sexual victims grew up with guilt.  The guilt makes them seek punishment.  In order to be punished, they often act out in order to receive punishment.  Male victims often take out their guilt on others, while female victims often (but not always) internalize guilt and seek to destroy themselves.  The natural high hormonal level sometimes delays this until their 30's or 40's, depending upon "natural strength" in life. It does appear to catch up to all, sooner or later. 
Females, in attacking themselves, will often develop eating disorders (the need to control something because they were in positions of utter control of someone else, right down to their own bodies), substance abuse, promiscuity, and so on. 
I was stricken with guilt that I had allowed him to be near other little girls. I was terrified of being touched by men. I developed an eating disorder. I began cutting myself. 
Signals of sexual abuse listed.
Note "began" is without completion.  The subject has overcome some things ("I was terrified...) but not all things.  She may not be cutting herself today, but she still suffers. 
That torment was made worse by Hollywood. 
Note the reference to Hollywood.  Note the first sentence of the letter. 
All but a precious few (my heroes) turned a blind eye. Most found it easier to accept the ambiguity, to say, “who can say what happened,” to pretend that nothing was wrong. 
Note that in covering the case, "we can say" because, via the lens of Statement Analysis, we listen to the words spoken.  For Woody Allen, it may be "crazy" and "sick", which we agree, but he did not tell us (in many statements) that he didn't do it. 
Actors praised him at awards shows. Networks put him on TV. Critics put him in magazines. Each time I saw my abuser’s face – on a poster, on a t-shirt, on television – I could only hide my panic until I found a place to be alone and fall apart.
Note possessive pronoun is very strong.  "my integrity" and "my abuser"
Note relief seeking. 
Last week, Woody Allen was nominated for his latest Oscar. 
Now we see the importance of the first sentence
But this time, I refuse to fall apart. 
The subject acknowledges that she has "fallen apart" before "this time."
For so long, Woody Allen’s acceptance silenced me. It felt like a personal rebuke, like the awards and accolades were a way to tell me to shut up and go away. But the survivors of sexual abuse who have reached out to me – to support me and to share their fears of coming forward, of being called a liar, of being told their memories aren’t their memories – have given me a reason to not be silent, if only so others know that they don’t have to be silent either.
Note that to the overwhelming victims of sexual abuse having a voice is critical and it is a very sensitive point. 
Note "tell me to shut up" is to be silenced. 
Today, I consider myself lucky. I am happily married. I have the support of my amazing brothers and sisters. I have a mother who found within herself a well of fortitude that saved us from the chaos a predator brought into our home.
Readers of Statement Analysis recognize the above.  Suffice to say, the victim has suffered greatly, including periods of unhappiness.  The distancing language is a conflict, praising her mother who "found" strength, which indicates that the subject knows there was a time when she did not have the "well of fortitude."  This may be due to the shock and denial of childhood sexual abuse.  The shock would be far less powerful once it was seen that he had a sexual relationship with his step daughter, Soon Yi. 
But others are still scared, vulnerable, and struggling for the courage to tell the truth. The message that Hollywood sends matters for them.
The subject's bitterness at not being believed (via action) is heavily personal.  This is another indication of veracity:
What if it had been your child, Cate Blanchett? Louis CK? Alec Baldwin? What if it had been you, Emma Stone? Or you, Scarlett Johansson? You knew me when I was a little girl, Diane Keaton. Have you forgotten me?

It may be that this question is more rhetorical in nature, as often questions in open statements can be. 
Woody Allen is a living testament to the way our society fails the survivors of sexual assault and abuse.

Comment:  to this, I personally agree.  More therapists should be trained in Statement Analysis, though some are intuitively good at it, so that veracity could be verified.  
In some staters, perpetrators get lighter sentences than they do when harming pets. 
So imagine your seven-year-old daughter being led into an attic by Woody Allen. Imagine she spends a lifetime stricken with nausea at the mention of his name. Imagine a world that celebrates her tormenter.

"Celebrate" the tormenter is to reaffirm the torment.  The subject allows the naming of celebrities to share in the guilt of praising her tormentor.  
Are you imagining that? Now, what’s your favorite Woody Allen movie?COE

 indications here
that the subject is telling the truth. 
Statement Analysis:  Veracity Indicated. 


John Mc Gowan said...

" Under the sheets "

We note Coverings in possible child abuse spousal abuse.

"I would hide under beds or lock myself in the bathroom to avoid these encounters, but he always found me".

"Under beds"

Would this also come under coverings?

"lock myself in the bathroom"

"Lock myself"

We note doors closing and opening.

"In the bathroom"

Would this also come under "Water"

What i did notice also, is, there was NO use of the word "WE" which would show unity, and possible deception.

Great analysis!!

getthem said...

Just like Roman Polansky. Certain celebrities considered "greats" have a way that their peers look the other way. The recent Golden Globe's show for Woody Allen was the depths of Sodom and Gomorrah. It made me sick. I watched Diane Keaton make a morbid spectacle of herself singing for him before I shut it off and refused to ever think about it again... until I read today's SA.

getthem said...

John -- Bathroom/water... interesting catch. I wonder.

Statement Analysis Blog said...

thanks, John. I added in "sheets" in the intro and in the analysis. It is associated with both sex abuse victims (covering oneself) and in PTSD sufferers.


JerseyJane said...

"What's your favorite Woody Allen movie?"
Is a famous question said around the world.

THIS was her "forever viewed in her head" Woody Allen movie. As his victim, I'm so happy she has linked his abuse to her to this famous question. This famous question is his status, his ego, his selfishness, his everything....
Everyones' ears, eyes and hearts may now open and feel disgust and never answer...
The famous question is now spontaneous vomitting..

Enjoy bathing in others' bodily fluids, Woody Allen..

Statement Analysis Blog said...

Jersey J,

I did not know this was a pop reference. thanks, Peter

Anonymous said...

Thank you, Peter for explaining the reason for wanting to destroy myself.

JerseyJane said...

I heard the question many many times from as a teenager and up to present. My first answer by me, was a question, "Who is Woody Allen?" it puzzled to always hear it for decades that I finally explored watching one of his movies for 15 mins and quickly decided I didn't care who he was, let alone, what was my favorite movie. I'm glad I never saw a whole movie of his, it made answering the question easier to answer over the years.

As I found out more about him, it puzzled me, how people, Hollywood, held him in high regard.. My first job was in Activities for a Nursing Home so pop references, mottos, trivia, etc was a big part of group activities. Personally, I chose also, to explore more what the residents wanted, Plant Therapy, Basic Science, History, Nature, Cooking, Math, etc... Subjects Residents didn't get enough of in their schooling days! The hell with Hollywood crap, useless, and the residents in their 80's 90's didn't give a hoot about Woody Allen,

Anonymous said...

Interview with Louise Lasser, Woody Allen's 2nd wife.

He was married when they met.
It's an interesting commentary of Allen, as Lasser says they did not live in the same home, while married. They kept separate residences. I read on a presser, this when the reaction came out, of Diane Keaton, lifetime achievement dedication to Allen. A person commented they (Allen's) live in NY and that he and his present wife (Soon Yi) have two separate homes. They do not live together, that it's of no secret. Truth or not? don't know.

Date: Dec 30, 2013. Interview Louise Lasser, infamously known as TV character, Mary Hartman.

Sus said...

I am so glad Dylan Farrow spoke out for her own healing. Everytime Woody Allan is praised or receives an award it means people accept him...all of him. Thus Dylan feels her experience is denied.

I believe Woody Allan is the classic cerebral narcissist. He leaves destruction in his wake. A cerebral narcissist isn't really even interested in sex, only using it as a means for power or to seduce someone new into his web. They jump from one supply to the next without a care.

A sick characteristic of a narcissist is that they see their children as extensions of themselves. There is no boundary in the narcissist's mind to stop him/her from molesting his own children.

Woody Allan destroyed the Farrow family. I pray Dylan, her mother, and siblings find peace. I even hope someone is there for Soon Yi because I'll bet Woody Allan will destroy her.

Statement Analysis Blog said...

Anonymous said...
Thank you, Peter for explaining the reason for wanting to destroy myself.
February 2, 2014 at 11:17 AM

please contact me. I have resources that can help.


Statement Analysis Blog said...

I will post an article on an element of healing for those who read here who were sexually abused in childhood.

It will help.


Unknown said...

Great analysis! Thanks Peter :)

Tinidril said...

Peter, as usual, I'm very impressed with your analysis, and I agree w/ you that Dylan Farrow is being truthful, but I have a question from the "Loyal Opposition", i.e., my boyfriend, who is a lawyer who deals w/ family situations where abuse is alleged. He says as follows: It seems that "he sexually assaulted me" is in fact very vague, and in the midst of very specific allegations of kind of "creepy" behaviour, for Dylan Farrow, to use legally conclusive language "sexually assaulted" rather that state the specifics, at the very moment of the alleged crime at issue seems strange. Likewise her description of the ongoing problems is vague and gives the impression of ongoing "sexual assault" without saying what that sexual assault was. It seems all lumped together in the mind. How does one exclude the possibility of implantation of memory after being told over and over that certain things constituted were bad. How does one exclude that the speaker is "being truthful" but wrong? How does one determine that the vagueness which may be from the pain of the trauma, is not just the use of a vague word for something that the speaker feels in the mind could be called "sexual assault" and therefore can be used when in fact there is no real memory of what actually happened.
That's my boyfriend's thoughts on the matter, and we'd both love to hear your thoughts, Peter. Thanks!


Deejay said...

I remember reading about this situation at the time and believing the child's story. She was seven, and it seemed she was truthful. Her story had elements of escalation over time, that Allen was fixated on the little girl, and kept isolating her from the family. For instance, when there were so many kids in the family- he mostly tried to go places with Dylan alone. Then when there was photographic proof he abused the teenage sister- which cemented the idea of Allen as a child abuser in my mind.

Plus abusers (ie Sandusky) try to come up with 'reasonable' explanations for their awful behavior. It was only tickling, he needed a shower, I was just talking to her- whatever.

I think Dylan wrote this because he is being celebrated and honored in Hollywood- and she is angry (and afraid) as an adult that he got away and may be perpetuating this behavior. She wants the info out there... Maybe she wants to warn Soon-Yi who has 2 daughters.

Deejay said...

She maybe using 'sexually assaulted' to give herself a (shred) of privacy because she is using legal language and not being specific as to what was done to her. Also legally many things are 'assault' but other - if given wiggle room- may deny her experience.

Lemon said...

"Thank you, Peter for explaining the reason for wanting to destroy myself."

I do hope you take PH's offer of resources, and I wish you better days ahead.

Anonymous said...

I read this afternoon that Woody Allen will be releasing a statement in response to Dylan's open letter. I'm very interested in reading a statement analysis of that, if it does indeed happen.

This is the statement from his publicist, Leslee Dart:

"Mr. Allen has read the article and found it untrue and disgraceful. He will be responding very soon...At the time, a thorough investigation was conducted by court appointed independent experts. The experts concluded there was no credible evidence of molestation; that Dylan Farrow had an inability to distinguish between fantasy and reality; and that Dylan Farrow had likely been coached by her mother Mia Farrow. No charges were ever filed."

Anonymous said...

@ Anonymous 5:19

He "found it untrue and disgraceful."

According to SA then, others may find it true.

Also there is no simple denial that he did it.

He did it.

Anonymous said...

What scares me is that this man has (adopted, I believe) two children with his current wife/former stepdaughter, another young woman that he sexually groomed and manipulated emotionally. The sad reality is that sexual abusers often have multiple generations of victims.

Anonymous said...

Yes and the other thing that is super scary is how much the one daughter looks like Soon-Yi did when she was younger.

Anonymous said...

Woody Allen released reaction of Dylan's published Open Letter is breaking all over Media. It's not Allen's statement, it is 2nd party his rep, on his behalf.

The statement released by Allen representative Leslee Dart said:

"Mr. Allen has read the article and found it untrue and disgraceful. He will be responding very soon.

In the meantime, it is essential that your coverage make the following facts clear:

"At the time, a thorough investigation was conducted by court appointed independent experts. The experts concluded there was no credible evidence of molestation; that Dylan Farrow had an inability to distinguish between fantasy and reality; and that Dylan Farrow had likely been coached by her mother Mia Farrow. No charges were ever filed."

Woody Allen, 60 mins interview, he responds to allegations of Dylan Farrow, Mia, year 1992

Dylan, I am proud of you, your courage will aid others to come forth. Your letter, is gaining reactions all over the world positive. People are not so convincing of Woody Allen's past denial. Your letter to cause a scathing reaction mixed with legal jargon,, from Allen's rep is very telling, who he isn't, he isn't a man. He is a coward.

Woody Allen, his people, are not the final say. As his denial is not benefiting him in any positive light. He clearly has a god complex. He feels he has a tribe to protect him. Every dog has their day. He, in the video 1992 is how he sees himself, above everyone, he of no faults, none. Sad little man.

Anonymous said...

"It's not Allen's statement, it is 2nd party his rep, on his behalf."

Yes, I know. I clearly stated that in my comment as I attributed the quote to his publicist Leslee Dart. I was saying that I was eager to read a statement analysis of his statement when it became available, which would be sometime in the future.

Eliza said...

Since I read about Allen and Soon Yi, I felt disgusted and I formed the opinion that he is a vile child molester... In my mind, I have no doubt that Dylan is telling the truth. I hope that he pays for his crimes and I hate the fact that criminals like him and Polansky are being protected just because they happen to make good (according to some people) movies.

Anonymous said...

I can not belive Allen was allowed to adopt again!!!! he has two adopted girls with his former adopted daughter/current wife.

Maggie said...

Woody Allen LOOKS like such a creep!
I believe every word Dylan Farrow wrote. It must make her feel terrible to see him winning awards. And shame on all the actors/actresses who don't have the guts to take a stand against him. All of these people she named in her letter are so famous, yet they feel they must bow to Woody Allen. What a goddamn creep he is!

LC said...

Anonymous at 11:39 AM -
He also didn't live with Mia Farrow during their whole 13 year long relationship.
He is an odd duck, for sure.
But Mia is also sneaky and vindictive. I can't wait to hear what Woody's New response is going to be. His attorney says a statement is coming soon.

Anonymous said...

By the way, people, Soon-Yi was never Woody Allen's adopted daughter. She was adopted by Mia Farrow and was Dylan's half sister by that association. They did not live under the same roof.
still too close for comfort, but not incestuous...

Anonymous said...

No, he didn't just decide to like little girls at the age of 57.

It's documented that he liked teenage girls when he was 42 and his "girlfriend" Stacey Nelkin was 17 and still in high school.

It's documented that he was 56 when he took nude photos of his girlfriend's daughter when she was just past the age of consent.

Anonymous said...

I've never had a "favorite Woody Allen movie" I've always thought he was creepy and weird even before the scandal with Soon Yi Previn happened. His whole I'm-so-neurotic public persona always seemed contrived. I believe Dylan.
Tinidril, I think that her use of 'sexually assaulted' is not a vague minimization. I think Dylan doesn't want to go into explicit detail because the ways and means are unimportant to making her point. We can extrapolate without a play by play. When she did go to court, as a 7 year old child, she was gaslighted and discredited as the product of a vindictive mother (Mia Farrow.) It's a good question though, when you're repeating something that someone else has told you is the truth, you're not lying even if what they have said is a lie. Anon J

Bwarf said...

Hi Peter. I read an article that claims Mia Farrow has been brainwashing or manipulating Dylan since she was a kid into believing she had been abused. I do not believe that to be true, I think Woody Allen did abuse her.

But, if a person could have been brainwashed or manipulated for years, and really believes (or thinks) he or she has been abused, would that still show up in statement analysis?

Anonymous said...

Well, here you go:

"I never did anything. I would never molest a child," [Allen] said at a hearing.

Anonymous said...

There are some sick people out there, and Woody Allen is one of them.
It pains me to hear of how her doctors gaslighted (discredited) her and also how Woody Allen persists in doing so.
Unless you have experienced gaslighting by someone who is trying to cover abuse and/or may even enjoy making someone look crazy, the concept probably seems so unbelievable that it is hard to believe.
I had a parent who sadistically abused me (not sexually) by secretly injuring me (sometimes very severely) as well as my siblings in premeditated attacks. This parent would then smile or laugh at the pain they caused. This parent could write a book on how to gaslight a person. A few of MANY examples I could give are the parent would do things like hiding objects and watching you look for them while laughing and then when you accuse them of taking the object, after going to the spot where they have hid it and handing it back to you, saying that you need to be institutionalized because you are paranoid. If I moved an object, for example throwing away a big bag from shopping, placing the exact same bag (same type of bag from same store) in the exact location where I had picked it up and thrown it away. (The bag that I had thrown away WOULD still be in the trash) Taking homework out of my bag and hiding it. When I would find it in a concealed spot and accuse them of putting it there, this parent would say that they "found" it and that I should thank them for finding it. This parent told my younger sibling when we were in elementary school for years that they should not go outside and play because if she went outside to play with me and my friend we would take her to a scary, scary place making her too afraid to go outside.
It enrages me to hear Woody Allen say of his daughter that she could not differentiate fantasy from reality. This is the hallmark of gaslighting and the intention is to convince others and the victim that they literally cannot trust their own mind and therefore cannot tell fantasy from reality. I have had it done to me and it is a hell almost as bad as the abuse which for me was sadistic physical injuries. Basically, Woody Allen accusing her of not being able to tell fantasy from reality is a RED FLAG that he has done something very bad to her. Because my parent who did that to me (gaslighting/discrediting) was covering up VERY bad actions towards me (and my siblings).

Unknown said...

I believe Dylan, and my heart aches for her as her alleged perp denies any event whatsoever. Red flag that the alleged disgusting molester mentions he didn't even tickle her, huh? Didn't even do a thing that could be mistaken for molestation.

Of course Mia thought he was a great guy before Dylan spoke up and before she found he'd taken nude photos of her 19 year old daughter. I don't care if Mia and Woody were ever married, the were with each other or he wouldn't have adopted a kid with her. I don't care if Woody wasn't technically a step dad of the 19 year old, that was gross and morally reprehensible, too. I see no reason for Mia to want to install horrific traumatizing false memories into her daughter. There is no way I could see any court giving Woody custody over Mia when Woody was now with one of Mia's young daughters; she didn't need to trump up any charges to get custody in my opinion.

Woody's excuse that he wouldn't do anything like that because he's famous is ridiculous, presidents and priests, people in midst of running for public office, super stars - all are capable of disgusting acts.

Topping it all off is the fact this guy is an actor and he still can't bring himself to say 'i didn't do it'

Shelley said...

I always believed her and will not watch anything he is involved with. Not like that makes a difference (clearly he has maintained his celebrity status) but I stand by that. I am more angry that for certain people be it a celebrity, a priest, or the star football...that some seem about the law. Above what is right.

Michael Jackson. Chris Brown are others.

I promise of the 40 something man next door invited your 7 year old to a sleep over you would never all it.

If a man beat your daughter and put her in te hospital you would not support him.

Yet you add celebrity and people forgive or excuse behaviors. Not that it does not happen with normal people, but in this world of fame it is worse.

Especially I cases like Woody... His fame is not affected. It's like he is still looked up to when in reality he should be seen as the true monster he is.

And those that praise him, watch his movies are saying it's ok.

I am not one of them.

Chris Brown and Michael Jackson will never be on my iPod. I will never watch a movie by Woody....

Michael at not be alive (I think he at least felt some guilt and that is why he choose to take so many drugs in an effort to forget or maybe stop himself) but those that are will not benefit from me.

I wish these people would get what they deserve. Not fame and awards but be shamed and punished!

Anonymous said...

This was an excellent read. I have always detested this man.I have not ever watched an awards show for or about him. I never watched any of his movies either. He has always looked like a creep to me.

Anonymous said...

People Magazine, Oct, 1976: "He goes on: "I'm open-minded about sex. I'm not above reproach; if anything, I'm below reproach. I mean, if I was caught in a love nest with 15 12-year-old girls tomorrow, people would think, yeah, I always knew that about him." Allen pauses. "Nothing I could come up with would surprise anyone," he ventures helplessly. "I admit to it all."


Anonymous said...

Hiding in plain sight...

Anonymous said...

Dylan has renewed her vicious accusations, and although I don't personally care for Woody Allen or his work, he has not made any personal public remarks about this since 1992.
For 22 years the public has believed that Soon Yi considered him to be a father figure. For all this time, the public assumed Woody lived with Mia and the children. In reality, he didn't spend a single overnight at her home during their 13 year relationship - so says Mia herself. She is just as weird as he is.
Oh - and it was the DA who said Dylan couldn't distinguish fantasy from reality - not Woody.
just sayin'

JerseyJane said...

Anon^^^, Nooooo, it was Woody Allen's paid for experts that said Dylan couldn't distinguish fantasy from reality....

JerseyJane said...

JUNE 1993:

Allen loses his custody battle. State Supreme Court Acting Justice Elliott Wilk denounces him as an inadequate, irresponsible and self-absorbed father. The judge says he doesn't know if the molestation happened, but bars Allen from seeing Dylan for at least six months and limits visits with other children. He also criticizes the Connecticut investigation that found no abuse.



In Litchfield, Conn., State's Attorney Frank Maco says there was "probable cause" to charge Allen with molesting Dylan and that police had drawn up an arrest warrant, but that he decided not to pursue the case, in part because it would traumatize Dylan. At his own news conference, Allen lashes out at Farrow, police and Maco. The director, who hasn't seen Dylan in 14 months, reads her a message: "I'm sorry I missed your eighth birthday ... I love you, and I miss you, and don't worry — the dark forces will not prevail."


MAY 1994:

Allen's appeal of the custody ruling is denied.



A judge denies Allen's request for better visitation terms, and says Allen still doesn't understand how he's made the children suffer.


JUNE 1997:

Allen loses his bid for disciplinary action against Maco when a state panel rules that the prosecutor was acting within his rights when he announced he had evidence Allen had abused Dylan. Allen had charged that Maco's statement essentially convicted him of child abuse and prejudiced his custody fight.

JerseyJane said...

There are public photos of Woody Allen having his thumb put and held in young Dylan's mouth as he carried her. How do you explain him having a youngster made to suck on his thumb? Did he love the feel and imagine it to be another part of his body? Grooming the little girl to have something of his in his mouth till he could replace it with another part of him? Like a Woody even tho his first name is Allen..

Anonymous said...

I wonder if you could analyze this interview with Woody Allan discussing the case?

Kellie Sue said...

Mariem said...

I believed he did it even without statement analysis.

Peter, is there a way for me to contact you? I've been wondering for a long time if I've been sexually abused in my childhood. I don't remember if I was, but there are also reasons that keep me wondering. Reasons such as: I can't sleep if my whole body isn't completely covered, up to my neck. When I feel bad, the first thing I want to do is take a shower, a long one. So long that the water ends up cold forcing me to get out. I used to have an eating disorder, now I'm fat but I feel safer this way. I used to cut, even scratch my own skin or pull my hair out. I'm now married with 2 kids, but I have a lot of trouble trusting my husband (or any man for that matter). I've also been diagnosed with an anxiety disorder and I have a tendency to avoid things (meeting people, going out..) Does that automatically indicate sexual abuse or could it be something else altogether?

I feel so lost. I always try to 'get better', but I keep wondering. I wish I had a definite answer so that I could just move on.

Unknown said...

Re-Watching Woody Allen - The newly-chilling themes that you can see throughout his movies

Read more:

Anonymous said...

Re-Watching Woody Allen
The newly-chilling themes that you can see throughout his movies

Anonymous said...

Re-Watching Woody Allen
The newly-chilling themes that you can see throughout his movies

Children7 said...

People with 'false' or 'implanted' memories (very rare, btw), do not have symptoms. Certainly would not remember starring at a toy train during the abuse. That is classic dissociation. With false memories there IS no PTSD, dissociative states or disorders, no being triggered by pictures of the abuser, nor by toy trains or anything else. No flashbacks, intrusive memories, intense feelings of rage, terror, guilt shame etc. No self injury or eating disorders. That's because you cannot traumatize a brain by convincing a person they were abused.

From the first time I read Dylan's statement I knew it rang true. I absolutely believe her.

Nadine Lumley said...