(Prov 11:29 KJV) He that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind: and the fool
shall be servant to the wise of heart.
Confession and forgiveness
Both abuser and victim commonly trouble their house long after the
offense. The abuser by not confessing his or her offense to the victim and
asking forgiveness. The victim by not forgiving, even if forgiveness is not
asked, and / or by unnecessarily going public.
[Ten] Undeniable Facts About the Woody Allen
Sexual-Abuse Allegation
VanityFair.com [/] 5:15 PM, FEBRUARY 7
2014 [/] by Maureen Orth
http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2014/02/woody-allen-sex-abuse-10-facts
or http://vnty.fr/1dxCyxm
This week, a number of commentators have published articles containing
incorrect and irresponsible claims regarding the allegation of Woody Allen’s
having sexually abused his adopted daughter, Dylan Farrow. As the author of two
lengthy, heavily researched and thoroughly fact-checked articles that deal with
that allegation—the first published in 1992, when Dylan was seven, and the
second last fall, when she was 28—I feel obliged to set the record straight. As
such, I have compiled the following list of undeniable facts:
1. Mia never went to the police
about the allegation of sexual abuse. Her lawyer told her on August 5, 1992, to
take the seven-year-old Dylan to a pediatrician, who was bound by law to report
Dylan’s story of sexual violation to law enforcement and did so on August 6.
2. Allen had been in therapy
for alleged inappropriate behavior toward Dylan with a child psychologist
before the abuse allegation was presented to the authorities or made public.
Mia Farrow had instructed her babysitters that Allen was never to be left alone
with Dylan.
3. Allen refused to take a
polygraph administered by the Connecticut state police. Instead, he took one
from someone hired by his legal team. The Connecticut state police refused to
accept the test as evidence. The state attorney, Frank Maco, says that Mia was
never asked to take a lie-detector test during the investigation.
4. Allen subsequently lost four
exhaustive court battles—a lawsuit, a disciplinary charge against the
prosecutor, and two appeals—and was made to pay more than $1 million in Mia’s legal
fees. Judge Elliott Wilk, the presiding judge in Allen’s custody suit against
Farrow, concluded that there is “no credible evidence to support Mr. Allen’s
contention that Ms. Farrow coached Dylan or that Ms. Farrow acted upon a desire
for revenge against him for seducing Soon-Yi.”
5. In his 33-page decision,
Judge Wilk found that Mr. Allen’s behavior toward Dylan was “grossly
inappropriate and that measures must be taken to protect her.” The judge also
recounts Farrow’s misgivings regarding Allen’s behavior toward Dylan from the
time she was between two and three years old. According to the judge’s
decision, Farrow told Allen, “You look at her [Dylan] in a sexual way. You
fondled her . . . You don’t give her any breathing room. You look at her when she’s
naked.”
6. Dylan’s claim of abuse was
consistent with the testimony of three adults who were present that day. On the
day of the alleged assault, a babysitter of a friend told police and gave sworn
testimony that Allen and Dylan went missing for 15 or 20 minutes, while she was
at the house. Another babysitter told police and also swore in court that on
that same day, she saw Allen with his head on Dylan’s lap facing her body,
while Dylan sat on a couch “staring vacantly in the direction of a television
set.” A French tutor for the family told police and testified that that day she
found Dylan was not wearing underpants under her sundress. The first babysitter
also testified she did not tell Farrow that Allen and Dylan had gone missing
until after Dylan made her statements. These sworn accounts contradict Moses
Farrow’s recollection of that day in People magazine.
7. The Yale-New Haven Hospital
Child Sex Abuse Clinic’s finding that Dylan had not been sexually molested,
cited repeatedly by Allen’s attorneys, was not accepted as reliable by Judge
Wilk, or by the Connecticut state prosecutor who originally commissioned them.
The state prosecutor, Frank Maco, engaged the Yale-New Haven team to determine
whether Dylan would be able to perceive facts correctly and be able to repeat
her story on the witness stand. The panel consisted of two social workers and a
pediatrician, Dr. John Leventhal, who signed off on the report but who never
saw Dylan or Mia Farrow. No psychologists or psychiatrists were on the panel.
The social workers never testified; the hospital team only presented a sworn
deposition by Dr. Leventhal, who did not examine Dylan.
All the notes from the report were destroyed. Her confidentiality was
then violated, and Allen held a news conference on the steps of Yale University
to announce the results of the case. The report concluded Dylan had trouble
distinguishing fantasy from reality. (For example, she had told them there were
“dead heads” in the attic and called sunset “the magic hour.” In fact, Mia kept
wigs from her movies on styrofoam blocks in a trunk in the attic.) The doctor
subsequently backed down from his contention.
The Connecticut state police, the state attorney, and Judge Wilk all
had serious reservations about the report’s reliability.
8. Allen changed his story
about the attic where the abuse allegedly took place. First, Allen told
investigators he had never been in the attic where the alleged abuse took
place. After his hair was found on a painting in the attic, he admitted that he
might have stuck his head in once or twice. A top investigator concluded that
his account was not credible.
9. The state attorney, Maco,
said publicly he did have probable cause to press charges against Allen but
declined, due to the fragility of the “child victim.” Maco told me that he
refused to put Dylan through an exhausting trial, and without her on the stand,
he could not prosecute Allen.
10. I am not a longtime friend
of Mia Farrow’s, and I did not make any deal with her. I have been personally
accused of helping my “long-time friend” Mia Farrow place the story that ran in
Vanity Fair’s November 2013 issue as part of an effort to help launch Ronan
Farrow’s media career. I have also been accused of agreeing to some type of
deal with Mia Farrow guaranteeing that the sexual-abuse allegation against
Woody Allen would be revisited. For the record, I met Mia Farrow for the first
time in 2003, more than 10 years after the first piece was published, at a
nonfiction play she appeared in for a benefit in Washington, D.C. I saw her and
Dylan again the next day. That is the last time I saw her until I approached
her in April 2013 to do a story about her family and how they had fared over
the years. I talked to eight of her children, including Dylan and a reluctant
Ronan. There was no deal of any kind. Moses Farrow declined to be interviewed
for the 2013 piece.
Read: The scathing 33-page decision from the presiding judge in Woody
Allen’s 1992 custody suit against Mia Farrow. [Photostat - long load time] - http://www.vanityfair.com/dam/2014/02/woody-allen-1992-custody-suit.pdf
or http://vnty.fr/LZx74g
I2C 140208a Pro 11v29 Allen Farrow Abuse / I2C
/ 140208 1205 / Prov 11:29 Allen Farrow Abuse / Confession and forgiveness
