@@helenfoster5760 actually they did, if you havent watched thr 4part series then you shouldnt comment. All the other children stated NO physical abuse by Mia ever happened.
As I watched the recent documentary on the Woody Allen/Mia Farrow contretemps I formed the impression that the charges were probably correct. However, by the end of the series I was convinced that he was innocent. Woody Allen may not be a saint but he is not guilty of the charge levied against him by his former spouse.
It’s interesting that in the times of #metoo that nobody else has come forward to say that W.A did anything to them. It’s only Dylan and her Mother that insist he did (and Ronan of course followed suit). When Dylan talks about where the worst of it allegedly happened on 1 particular occasion and after reading Moses’ statement, what Dylan said about the incident, where it occurred etc, doesn’t really make a lot of sense. It was found, in 2 separate official reports that these experts thought Dylan had “been trained” in what to say. Mia was no angel either - she was mentally and physically abusive with some of her children on multiple occasions according to Moses and Suun-Yi, and not surprising then that 1 ran off with her mother’s boyfriend, another committed suicide accord to Moses even though Mia said it “was an accident” and another ended up a drug addict who died destitute on the street. Moses who is now a therapist himself won’t even talk to Mia....I think that all of this speaks volumes. Considering that Mia had allegedly been informed of Allen’s inappropriate behaviour with his adopted daughter, Dylan, years before the allegations came out, one would think a mother would have taken more action sooner. I think she was simply a jilted woman out for revenge. I also think it’s crazy that all these actors have jumped on the bandwagon to speak out against Allen with no real proof of the allegations.
I love it: "That adult (Soon-Yi) is the victim and may never get over it..." Meanwhile, decades later, she's still happily married to the man and they have raised children together I would bet are far healthier than the others Mia raised. At least the ones Mia raised that are still living.
@Marion Hartmann Considering the factual errors in your sentence, it is barely worth replying to. But again, for the folks in the cheap seats: Never proven to have committed or been convicted of anything despite multiple investigations. Not his step-daughter. Have a nicer day!
3:07 No, Woody Allen wasn't "in treatment for that" as clearly stated in the Supreme Court document: "In June 1990, the parties became concerned with Satchel’s behavior and took him to see Dr. Coates, with whom he then began treatment. At Dr. Coates’ request, both parents participated in Satchel’s treatment. In the fall of 1990, the parties asked Dr. Coates to evaluate Dylan to determine if she needed therapy. During the course of the evaluation, Ms. Farrow expressed her concern to Dr. Coates that Mr. Allen’s behavior with Dylan was not appropriate. Dr. Coates observed: I understood why she was worried, because it [Mr. Allen’s relationship with Dylan] was intense, … I did not see it as sexual, but I saw it as inappropriately intense because it excluded everybody else, and it placed a demand on a child for a kind of acknowledgment that I felt should not be placed on a child."
@@smithdawn1 When someone quotes only one part of the sentence to change its meaning, this someone immediately and for ever looses any kind of credibility.
The irony of this is that Mia told Woody when she was pregnant with Ronan not to grow attached to the child because their relationship was not going anywhere, and after the birth spent all her time with Ronan. She admitted to this in court. Woody had to step in to take care of the girl, because Mia couldn't spare her time. Then she complained that Woody was too close to her.
In context her statements make sense regarding Soon-yi, but almost 30 years later it means next to nothing. Woody and Soon-yi have remained together and it obviously didn't turn out to be a frivolous affair that left Soon-yi alone with no family.
One would think that, but I am not positive either way. I had never thought of the fact that Soon-Yi was "alienated" from the only family she had, but on the other hand the "Woody Allen is innocent" long RUclips video puts a lot of that in context. Soon-Yi was not living with Mia Farrow and was at a school or camp where she was let go because she did not want to be there, she was going to see Woody. But ... what was that relationship really? In any case, there are lots of normal average people who have dysfunctions and terrible things happen to them that they have to survive. All of these people are in situations where they are wealthy and will be taken care of. I think Dylan is the biggest victim, and at this point most of it has been from Mia, considering what has come out about abuse in her family. Definitely if you are interested in this a logical source of information is that "woody allen is innocent" video.
It’s very clear that Woody Allen did not “alienate” Soon-Yi Previn from the Farrow family, but rather he saved her from them. (Two of Mia’s adopted children committed suicide and a third died from AIDS-related complications alone in a hospital room.) Woody Allen and Soon-Yi have two children of their own and have been happily married for almost 30 years. Claiming that Woody alienated Soon-Yi from “the only family she’s ever known” robs her of her own agency. Mia Farrow famously used to refer to Soon-Yi as “retarded,” and this falsehood was widely accepted in the media, when she is in fact quite an intelligent and capable woman (she has a graduate degree from Columbia University). Check out this passage from Woody Allen’s memoir: ““I adored Soon-Yi, and despite the huge amount of flack I got for pursuing her, it was worth every second of it. Sometimes, when the going got rough and I was maligned everywhere, I was asked if I had known the outcome, do I ever wish I never took up with Soon-Yi? I always answered I’d do it again in a heartbeat, and the most satisfying achievement of my life is not my movies but that I was able to liberate Soon-Yi from a terrible situation and provide her with an opportunity to flower and realize her potential, and she would never have to eat a bar of soap or long for a hug or get hit with a phone again.”
@@adamplunkett9589 Mia Farrow betrayed her best friend Dory Previn by getting pregnant (with twins) by her husband Andre Previn & sending her into a mental institution (Dory wrote a song about it - Beware of Young Girls - & later forgave her) People can be very cruel & selfish, can't they? & judgmental. On social media. About total strangers.
@@barbaranugnes5800 No, she was not. There was never any suggestion by any professional that anything Woody Allen did with respect to Dylan was sexual. The lawyer should not have said what she said.
@@gmh471 More than that, but those involved specifically stated that Allen's "inappropriate behaviour" was NOT sexual in nature, just that he was too clingy.
@@pappy374 Indeed. And if someone is threatening to take your child away (as someone who had to go through an attempt, but not as someone accused of a crime), you are going to want to spend more time with your child for fear that he/she will be taken away, and you don't know how much time you have, you will want to spend more time with your children.
Correction: Allen was never in therapy for his behavior towards Dylan; he was merely a loving doting older father. Dylan was in therapy for her tendency to live in a fantasy world-even when describing horses she went off into fantasy land. Mia and Allen sometimes participated in DYLAN’S therapy, it had nothing to do with Allen. As for Soon-Yi, she went off to college after Allen and Mia split up-they never even lived together and Mia had many affairs with other men while they dated, hence her not knowing who Ronan’s father was. Allen didn’t keep Soon-Yi isolated from the world-quite the opposite. She has a close relationship with her brother Moses Farrow who sides with Allen, Soon-Yi and their two college-attending daughters. Remember: Allen volunteered to take a lie detector test administered by a well respected former FBI expert. He passed. Mia refused to take one; to obscure that fact team-Mia have put out the lie that Allen refused a request to take one from the Connecticut police- not true, he was never asked. Ronan and Dylan won’t take a lie detector test either.
@@dantesabatino5429 Yes, people are so gullible they believe a Mia, lady who refused to take a lie detector test over a man, Allen, who volunteered to take one from a respected FBI expert and passed it. Mua, NOT Allen, has been credibly accused of abuse by by two of her adult children, her other two adopted children committed suicide, and her brother is a convicted imprisoned child molester. Allen has never been accused of anything before or since, and this one absurd accusation that was to have happened one time only-molesters never molest one time only-was supposed to have happened in the middle of a heated custody battle with a room full of witnesses. Absurd. Moses Dylan-14 years old at the time-sides with Allen, the nanny sides with Allen (she says Mia pressured her to lie and that Allen was always the better parent), the examining doctor sides with Allen, the two separate groups of investigative experts sided with Allen. They all say Mia coached Dylan. Yes, you and many others are 100% gullible. Allen and Soon-Yi’s two college-attending daughters have to put up with idiots who believe the Farrow’s debunked BS.
@@kevinf4896 Mia’s own therapist along with Allen’s said that he was never in therapy for that. He AND Mia participated in Dylan’s therapy because SHE-before the phony discredited allegation was made to coerce Allen to pay Mia $7M-had a hard time distinguishing reality from fantasy. Another FACTS: Mia would have dropped her allegation IF Allen paid her $7M, Allen refused . Mia REFUSED to take a lie detector test. Allen volunteered to take one and passed it-it was administered by a well respected former FBI expert. Mia’s nanny recanted her testimony in a signed affidavit, in it she said Mia pressured her to lie about Allen and that HE, not Mia, was always the better parent; Moses Farrow concurs with that assessment.
@@kevinf4896 Per the custody hearing court documents: "In June 1990, the parties became concerned with Satchel’s behavior and took him to see Dr. Coates, with whom he then began treatment. At Dr. Coates’ request, both parents participated in Satchel’s treatment. In the fall of 1990, the parties asked Dr. Coates to evaluate Dylan to determine if she needed therapy. During the course of the evaluation, Ms. Farrow expressed her concern to Dr. Coates that Mr. Allen’s behavior with Dylan was not appropriate. Dr. Coates observed: I understood why she was worried, because it [Mr. Allen’s relationship with Dylan] was intense, … I did not see it as sexual, but I saw it as inappropriately intense because it excluded everybody else, and it placed a demand on a child for a kind of acknowledgment that I felt should not be placed on a child … She testified that she worked with Mr. Allen to help him to understand that his behavior with Dylan was inappropriate and that it had to be modified. Dr. Coates also recommended that Dylan enter therapy with Dr. Schultz, with whom Dylan began treatment in April 1991".
She says he was in treatment for his behavior toward his daughter for years, but as he explains in his book, it's well known that he's been in psychoanalysis for many years. It's not as if his treatment was suddenly mandated for some kind of inappropriate behavior toward Dylan. I, too, would love to hear this woman's take on Woody and Soon-Yi today. I can't imagine her still holding on to this bubbe-meise today.
She's still alive, for all I know. Why doesn't anyone at the NY Times go out and interview her? There are many actual incentives, like Dylan seeking publicity, or Ronan seeking publicity, or Woody's movies being shunned in the US. Perhaps media don't want this disgusting, yet sensational story to be hurt by the truth.
The treatment they are talking about was Dylan's treatment, and both Woody and Mia were involved in it. The description that "Woody was in treatment for inappropriate behavior" towards Dylan is very damning, but it is not really accurate, like a lot of the supposed facts that of this story.
@@justgivemethetruth It makes absolutely no sense that she would have him go into therapy for sexualized interest in Dylan, instead of completely severing ties with him altogether. It beggars disbelief.
‘On September 24, 1993, (Frank) Maco held a news conference to say that he would not pursue the molestation allegation, despite having probable cause, citing a desire not to traumatize Dylan. ‘ Probable Cause’ is not the same as ‘No Credible Evidence’.
new york state department concluded "no credible evidence" in their final report. Maco was the conneticut state prosecutor. he said there was "probable cause" to go to trail. he is not an impartial investigator...his job is to prosecute. his case was weak and he is making excuses.
If you read Maco's actual decision, not just listen to what he said in the press conference, it becomes crystal clear that Maco did not prosecute for a (total) lack of credible evidence. He refers to the custody case in New York, where Justice Wilk - who hated Allen's guts for his affair with Soon-Yi - had NOT found the abuse allegation credible, even to a much lower standard of evidence ('preponderance of the evidence') than Maco was bound to ('evidence beyond reasonable doubt'). In other words: Maco had no case, and a trial was sure to fail. *Only given this situation*, Maco argued it made no sense to put Dylan on the stand for nothing, noting that Allen did not present any danger to the civilians of Connecticut either. Maco spun this as "I could have prosecuted him, I had an arrest warrant ready, I had 'probable cause', but ladies & gentlemen, I have a good heart and because of Dylan's frailty I'm not going to put her sexual molester in jail'. Which was, of course, an absurd statement to make without any legal validity about the useless 'arrest warrant' and the useless 'probable cause' claim, but Maco was all about saving face, and almost 30 years later he is still lying us in the face on television - hoping to reach the gullible. Not me. Because I have read what he wrote. And you should read that too, to know what a guy Maco is.
Soon-Yi is not a victim; rescued herself. She was an adult and not living at home because of her mother’s abuse. He mother claimed she was an idiot, yet Soon-UpYi has a BA in psychology and a Masters in Child Development from Columbia University, after which she worked at several private schools in NYC. She was 27 years old when she married Woody Allen and they raised two healthy and successful daughters. Woody Allen was in long term psychoanalysis long before he met Mia Farrow, which is not unusual for many artists. He was not in treatment for anything to do with his children, but rather an exploration of his own inner archetypal awareness. Mia Farrow broke up Andre Previn marriage by getting pregnant. They then adopted Soon-Yi who spent time with her father frequently; he is the person she point to as having given her decent parenting. Mia adopted over a dozen children who now complain about her abuse of them.
Soon-yi's family abandoned her. Previn wouldn't fund her college education (so Allen did). And Mia was hostile to her (so she left that house). As Soon-Yi and Woody Allen said, they were thrown together because of the rejection by both parents.
Considering his own behaviour, Charlie Rose would be very keen for doubt to be cast on any accusations of sexual misconduct. Total projection on his part!!
woody allen didn't alienate soon yi from her family. mia did. is she confused. this is insane. her family, including mia, should have stood by her no matter what. this is insane.
The sibling relations in this extremely extended family are extremely unusual. Keep in mind that Mia collected children over the course of more than 25 years. Sascha and Matthew born (out of wedlock, with her best friend's husband) in 1970, and Frankie-Minh adopted in 1995. They never even *met* as kids. As soon as Woody and Soon-Yi got together, her adoptive father André Previn came out saying that "Soon-Yi no longer exists for us". That is how 'loving' her adoptive parents were. When her brother Moses came out publicly *denying* Dylan's abuse, she immediately stated "My brother is dead to me". That is the kind of sibling relations we're talking about here. So spare me your "his birth son's step sister" argument, because its validity is zero.
@3:08 she says that Allen was receiving treatment for "that behaviour", which she has just described as "his behaviour with Dylan, was as his own witnesses said, was inappropriate, overly intense, with sexual overtones that went on for years...".... this would predate the accusation by Dylan, so is it correct that Allen was already getting treatment to address inappropriate behaviour towards Dylan with sexual overtones, and did Mia Farrow know he was getting such treatment, and if so, how could he have been allowed to adopt her and how could Mia Farrow have wanted him to adopt her, or did that only come out through the court process?
It is one of the many falsehoods the Farrows want you to blindly believe. But Dylan's therapist, who was in contact with both Mia and Woody, has flat out denied that Woody received therapy for his behavior with Dylan. She testified that Woody's behavior was not abusive, not 'sexual', and not 'romantic'. He just spent a lot of time with Dylan (while Mia appropriated Satchel) and that he needed to give her some space, and spend more time with the other children (i.e. Moses). Here's a fragment of Dr. Coates' sworn testimony: Q. Now, these sessions you were having with Mr. Allen were related to Satchel's therapy, is that correct? A. Yes. Q. You were not treating Mr. Allen for any problems, were you? A. Absolutely not. Q. Specifically you were not treating him for any sexual problem, were you? A. Absolutely not. And here's another fragment, from a news report during the custody trial: Coates testifïed that Allen's relationship with Dylan was 'inappropriately intense' but denied that it was 'romantic.' 'Mr. Allen focused on Dylan because he feit Miss Farrow was obsessed with Satchel,' she testifïed. But she said Farrow had told her Allen was a 'negative and bad influence' on Satchel, whom Coates also treated. 'I told her I thought there was a positive relationship between Mr. Allen and Satchel,' she said. 'She did not agree with me about Satchel. She did not want him to see his father. She said she'd feel safer if Satchel was not with his father.' Coates testifed that Farrow and Allen were included in her sessions with Dylan and Satchel but denied that she was treating Allen for 'sexual problems.' The Farrows count on their audience *not* checking the facts, and *not* doing the research. They count on being blindly believed, for whatever vicious lie smears Woody Allen.
@@nicosiv Yes, we call that the narcissistic discard. She did the same to Allen! Along with false allegations of sex abuse and a public smear campaign that continues to this day. Mia is one sick bitch.
Let me get this right,this video which states that woodys own witness's describe his relationship with Dylan as INAPPROPRIATE OVERLY INTENSE WITH SEXUAL OVERTONES which went on for years which he was in treatment for. Have you all lost your minds
For all you guys here in the comment section saying “Woody didn’t molest Dylan”; and “the older daughter was no victim”. Ok, I can agree there’s enough evidence from the testimony of kids that Mia was an awful parent. There’s not much talk about whether Woody was a good parent or not. I don’t know. But here’s what I don’t understand - if Woody is NOT the creepy pervert that he looks like and that Dylan lied.. then WHY IN THE HECK DID HE MARRY MIA’S DAUGHTER?? That’s crossing BOUNDARIES. if my H were to die or we were to get a divorce, you can bet I WILL NOT be dating my stepson who’s 16 years younger than me!!! Neither would any emotionally healthy person. Why are people defending WA? I don’t get it.
Okay here's the deal. First things first, you said "my H" which I assume you mean your husband. In that case, Woody and Mia were never married. They were dating, and in all that time, they never lived together. He never slept in her home either. Soon Yi and Mia had a falling out early on and she left her home when she was like 13-14 years old (I could be wrong about the age). She wasn't living with Mia when her affair with Woody started. And she was 19 when they first met. If you read Moses Farrow's blog, you'll learn how awful a parent Mia was. She once even hit Soon Yi with a phone receiver because she would not approve of a thing Mia believed she did. Also, in case you're getting this wrong, Soon Yi is not the step daughter of Woody Allen and Mia Farrow. She was adopted by Mia Farrow and Andre Previn, when Mia was married to Andre Previn. No doubt Woody Allen is a terrible parent. You don't go and have an affair with your girlfriend's step daughter. As creepy and weird and unusual as it is, it's not illegal is what I'm saying. It's not even creepy in the predator-child-molestor sense. He did not groom her or coach her or brainwash her. She was a consenting adult. The Dylan Farrow accusations are a different chapter, and there too, as much as I'd want to believe her, her story doesn't logically add up.
@@Star-dj1kw I appreciate you being open minded and receptive to civilized rational thought unlike most people right now. We'll never know the truth but we have to do with the evidence we have. Maybe WA did do it, but then again, maybe he didn't do it. If tomorrow some conclusive evidence pops up against WA, I would be the first one to accept my mistake and renounce him.
He was not under treatment for behavior with Dylan. Dr. Coates denies this and says there was no sexual abuse. Dr. Coates said in court IT IS NOT TRUE THAT I TREATED ONLY WOODY. I TREATED MIA AND WOODY SIMULTANEOUSLY RE FAMILY DYNAMICS AND THERE WAS NO SEXUAL ABUSE.
I believe Allen to be innocent. But I'd be curious to learn more about the supposed "inappropriate, overly-intense," relationship with "sexual overtones" that Allen is said to have had with Dylan here. And if he got treatment over that, then does that imply some sort of validation to the claim? Or is there another explanation?
A reasonable request G. Monkey. Here is more detailed background about the issue, and the misleading phrases that have been tossed about in this case. medium.com/@levine2001/the-woody-allen-controversy-reader-debunking-maureen-orths-undeniable-facts-about-the-woody-37ed3eff1989
I wonder where the "sexual overtones" come from. As far as I know, Dr Susan Coates, who had been Dylan's therapist for years, testified in the custody trial that there was NO sexual aspect to Allen's attention for his daughter; and Judge Wilk relied on that. Yes, Wilk strongly disapproved of what he saw as a "too intense" attention of Allen for his daughter "at the exclusion of all others". But neither Coates nor Wilk have declared anything about "sexual overtones". It is what Mia would have liked us all to believe - maybe Alter is echoing her client's words here. By the way, Dylan's older brother Moses describes the relationship between Allen and Dylan as loving, and not particularly problematic - until Mia made her allegation.
With "sexual overtones" ? I'm afraid you're lying. Or maybe you just forget the word "NO" ? with "NO sexual overtones". "During the course of the evaluation, Ms. Farrow expressed her concern to Dr. Coates that Mr. Allen’s behavior with Dylan was not appropriate. Dr. Coates observed: ‘I understood why she was worried, because it [Mr. Allen’s relationship with Dylan] was intense, … I DID NOT SEE IT AS SEXUAL but I saw it as inappropriately intense because it excluded everybody else, and it placed a demand on a child for a kind of acknowledgment that I felt should not be placed on a child …’" - Supreme Court, Justice Wilk
Mia Farrow’s own lawyer says Soon-Yi and not Dylan was the greatest victim in all of this? Wow that’s pretty inconvenient for the “Allen v. Farrow” narrative.
I've been watching that, and watching the "By The Way Woody Allen Is Innocent" YT video .. that for over 2 hours goes into excruciating detail in every aspect of this, while the Allen V. Farrow you can tell just from the title that makes it sound like Allen is attacking, and this is a fair legal action with due process. But nothing of the kind. The AVF video is so distorted and one-sided. From what I know now, and not saying this could never change, but it is more believable to me that Mia Farrow is so hurt, angry, vindictive, and hateful towards Woody that she would make something up to attack him, than it is that during a bitter divorce and custody battle Woody would choose to become a child molester of his own daughter while being watched by everyone in the household.
I don't might like the title, but for facts, interviews, research, documents, this is very impartial (except the concluding title) & an excellent watch to fill in a lot of actual information. Rick Worley By the Way, Woody Allen is Innocent ruclips.net/video/muyaCg2dGAk/видео.html
Mrs. Alter can be heard telling evident falsehoods here twice. She says: "There is no question in my mind that his behavior with Dylan was, as his own witnesses said, inappropriate, overly intense, with sexual overtones. That went on for years. And he was under treatment for that behavior." It is factually, verifiably UNTRUE that: - his witnesses said that his behavior with Dylan had 'sexual overtones'; - he was under treatment for that behavior. The truth is that Allen's witness, who was Mia's and Dylan's therapist, stated that she did NOT see Allen's behavior with Dylan as sexual. She also stated that although both Mia and Woody participated in her treatment of Dylan (who had trouble separating reality from fantasy), Allen was NOT in treatment for any sexual aspect to his behavior. Eleanor Alter does not seem to be purposefully lying here, but she told these two falsehoods all the same. Which is a shame.
This is a lie. He absolutely was in treatment for it. Its in the custody case file. And the psychotherapist said "ALLEN didnt see it as sexual., even if Mia, witnesses, or Dylan did." WHy you lying?
@@kevinf4896 wrong he was NOT IN TREATMENT. For that. Mia and Woody simultaneously saw Dr Coates. Dr Coates said she told Woody she was worried about his safety because of Mia rants. Coates said there was NO EVIDENCE OF sexual abuse. Mia refused a lie detector test. Woody was tested by foremost authority on detection. He was an FBI tester. MIA LIED RE Dylan ran to lark or Daisy after abuse and when told impossible because they were not in CT but in NYC. Mia said I mean spiritually. Coates said Woody relationship with Dylan was one of overprotection to the dismissal of the other children. That’s it. Now you have the facts. FYI Dylan changed her story some four times.
What a horrible attorney you are Ms. Alter. You actually think the timeline for when the three children were adopted matters to them. Why didn’t you just keep your mouth shut. You have nothing to offer to this conversation. Talk and talk and talk then say you do not know if the abuse took place.
Mia Farrow did the alienating and disrupted every life she touched. Woody and Soon-Yi escaped an insane asylum.
The man was a victim of a 21st-century witchhunt.
How about the trauma Moses alleges, that Mia Farrow was emotionally and physically abusive.
HBO is spewing bullshit and would never feature that insightful info into their documentary
@@alwkw3783 this
@@helenfoster5760 actually they did, if you havent watched thr 4part series then you shouldnt comment. All the other children stated NO physical abuse by Mia ever happened.
@@alwkw3783 exactly
@@chrispetrick6276 I watched it and I wish they delved more into it. Can’t interview all of the dead siblings either, obviously.
As I watched the recent documentary on the Woody Allen/Mia Farrow contretemps I formed the impression that the charges were probably correct. However, by the end of the series I was convinced that he was innocent.
Woody Allen may not be a saint but he is not guilty of the charge levied against him by his former spouse.
Not his former spouse : while Allen v Farrow is full of lies, I don't think they pretend Allen and Farrow have been married.
Welcome to the truth.
If you think Ronan is Allen's biological son, Alec Baldwin's wife is ethnically Spanish.
@@snowman8329 LOL
Mia was NOT his former spouse.
It’s interesting that in the times of #metoo that nobody else has come forward to say that W.A did anything to them. It’s only Dylan and her Mother that insist he did (and Ronan of course followed suit). When Dylan talks about where the worst of it allegedly happened on 1 particular occasion and after reading Moses’ statement, what Dylan said about the incident, where it occurred etc, doesn’t really make a lot of sense. It was found, in 2 separate official reports that these experts thought Dylan had “been trained” in what to say. Mia was no angel either - she was mentally and physically abusive with some of her children on multiple occasions according to Moses and Suun-Yi, and not surprising then that 1 ran off with her mother’s boyfriend, another committed suicide accord to Moses even though Mia said it “was an accident” and another ended up a drug addict who died destitute on the street. Moses who is now a therapist himself won’t even talk to Mia....I think that all of this speaks volumes. Considering that Mia had allegedly been informed of Allen’s inappropriate behaviour with his adopted daughter, Dylan, years before the allegations came out, one would think a mother would have taken more action sooner. I think she was simply a jilted woman out for revenge. I also think it’s crazy that all these actors have jumped on the bandwagon to speak out against Allen with no real proof of the allegations.
I love it: "That adult (Soon-Yi) is the victim and may never get over it..." Meanwhile, decades later, she's still happily married to the man and they have raised children together I would bet are far healthier than the others Mia raised. At least the ones Mia raised that are still living.
@Marion Hartmann Considering the factual errors in your sentence, it is barely worth replying to. But again, for the folks in the cheap seats: Never proven to have committed or been convicted of anything despite multiple investigations. Not his step-daughter. Have a nicer day!
3:07 No, Woody Allen wasn't "in treatment for that" as clearly stated in the Supreme Court document:
"In June 1990, the parties became concerned with Satchel’s behavior and took him to see Dr. Coates, with whom he then began treatment. At Dr. Coates’ request, both parents participated in Satchel’s treatment. In the fall of 1990, the parties asked Dr. Coates to evaluate Dylan to determine if she needed therapy. During the course of the evaluation, Ms. Farrow expressed her concern to Dr. Coates that Mr. Allen’s behavior with Dylan was not appropriate. Dr. Coates observed:
I understood why she was worried, because it [Mr. Allen’s relationship with Dylan] was intense, … I did not see it as sexual, but I saw it as inappropriately intense because it excluded everybody else, and it placed a demand on a child for a kind of acknowledgment that I felt should not be placed on a child."
Coates- “I UNDERSTOOD why she was worried”= Mia wasn’t crazy for being concerned
@@smithdawn1 When someone quotes only one part of the sentence to change its meaning, this someone immediately and for ever looses any kind of credibility.
@@pascalriben-photographs953 Cry me a river
The irony of this is that Mia told Woody when she was pregnant with Ronan not to grow attached to the child because their relationship was not going anywhere, and after the birth spent all her time with Ronan. She admitted to this in court. Woody had to step in to take care of the girl, because Mia couldn't spare her time. Then she complained that Woody was too close to her.
Yet, Mia Farrow supported Roman Polanski.
In context her statements make sense regarding Soon-yi, but almost 30 years later it means next to nothing. Woody and Soon-yi have remained together and it obviously didn't turn out to be a frivolous affair that left Soon-yi alone with no family.
One would think that, but I am not positive either way. I had never thought of the fact that Soon-Yi was "alienated" from the only family she had, but on the other hand the "Woody Allen is innocent" long RUclips video puts a lot of that in context. Soon-Yi was not living with Mia Farrow and was at a school or camp where she was let go because she did not want to be there, she was going to see Woody. But ... what was that relationship really? In any case, there are lots of normal average people who have dysfunctions and terrible things happen to them that they have to survive. All of these people are in situations where they are wealthy and will be taken care of. I think Dylan is the biggest victim, and at this point most of it has been from Mia, considering what has come out about abuse in her family. Definitely if you are interested in this a logical source of information is that "woody allen is innocent" video.
@Векторная Эйфория
You have a point, but the context we are discussing here is in the molestation case.
Allen knew by then he better make the relationship into something cause Mia wasn't letting him do what he wanted anymore.
@@n.m.patterson7630 lol right
@@n.m.patterson7630 If he did not marry her, he would have really been seen as a child molester. He had to change the narrative.
It’s very clear that Woody Allen did not “alienate” Soon-Yi Previn from the Farrow family, but rather he saved her from them. (Two of Mia’s adopted children committed suicide and a third died from AIDS-related complications alone in a hospital room.) Woody Allen and Soon-Yi have two children of their own and have been happily married for almost 30 years. Claiming that Woody alienated Soon-Yi from “the only family she’s ever known” robs her of her own agency. Mia Farrow famously used to refer to Soon-Yi as “retarded,” and this falsehood was widely accepted in the media, when she is in fact quite an intelligent and capable woman (she has a graduate degree from Columbia University).
Check out this passage from Woody Allen’s memoir: ““I adored Soon-Yi, and despite the huge amount of flack I got for pursuing her, it was worth every second of it. Sometimes, when the going got rough and I was maligned everywhere, I was asked if I had known the outcome, do I ever wish I never took up with Soon-Yi? I always answered I’d do it again in a heartbeat, and the most satisfying achievement of my life is not my movies but that I was able to liberate Soon-Yi from a terrible situation and provide her with an opportunity to flower and realize her potential, and she would never have to eat a bar of soap or long for a hug or get hit with a phone again.”
If it was truly liberation and love that Soon-Yi was in need of, surely her stepfather could have provided that without sleeping with her?
@@adamplunkett9589 never her stepfather
@@pauldunn108 In a relationship with her mother for 12 years. End of story.
@@adamplunkett9589 "end of story"?
....except that Soon-Yi has now enjoyed 28 years of happiness with WA raising 2 daughters, now adult & in college
@@adamplunkett9589 Mia Farrow betrayed her best friend Dory Previn by getting pregnant (with twins) by her husband Andre Previn & sending her into a mental institution
(Dory wrote a song about it - Beware of Young Girls - & later forgave her)
People can be very cruel & selfish, can't they?
& judgmental.
On social media.
About total strangers.
Why llet him adopt the kids then. Mia is nuts.
Her statement that Woody was being treated for his “intense behavior with sexual overtones” toward Dylan, should be refuted in the accompanying text.
This is not Her statement. She is just quoting what was decided.
@@barbaranugnes5800 No, she was not. There was never any suggestion by any professional that anything Woody Allen did with respect to Dylan was sexual. The lawyer should not have said what she said.
@@gmh471 More than that, but those involved specifically stated that Allen's "inappropriate behaviour" was NOT sexual in nature, just that he was too clingy.
@@pappy374 Indeed. And if someone is threatening to take your child away (as someone who had to go through an attempt, but not as someone accused of a crime), you are going to want to spend more time with your child for fear that he/she will be taken away, and you don't know how much time you have, you will want to spend more time with your children.
Correction: Allen was never in therapy for his behavior towards Dylan; he was merely a loving doting older father. Dylan was in therapy for her tendency to live in a fantasy world-even when describing horses she went off into fantasy land. Mia and Allen sometimes participated in DYLAN’S therapy, it had nothing to do with Allen. As for Soon-Yi, she went off to college after Allen and Mia split up-they never even lived together and Mia had many affairs with other men while they dated, hence her not knowing who Ronan’s father was. Allen didn’t keep Soon-Yi isolated from the world-quite the opposite. She has a close relationship with her brother Moses Farrow who sides with Allen, Soon-Yi and their two college-attending daughters. Remember: Allen volunteered to take a lie detector test administered by a well respected former FBI expert. He passed. Mia refused to take one; to obscure that fact team-Mia have put out the lie that Allen refused a request to take one from the Connecticut police- not true, he was never asked. Ronan and Dylan won’t take a lie detector test either.
Exactly, there’s so many loving parents who cuddle and rest heads in their child’s lap, people are so gullible.
@@dantesabatino5429 Yes, people are so gullible they believe a Mia, lady who refused to take a lie detector test over a man, Allen, who volunteered to take one from a respected FBI expert and passed it. Mua, NOT Allen, has been credibly accused of abuse by by two of her adult children, her other two adopted children committed suicide, and her brother is a convicted imprisoned child molester. Allen has never been accused of anything before or since, and this one absurd accusation that was to have happened one time only-molesters never molest one time only-was supposed to have happened in the middle of a heated custody battle with a room full of witnesses. Absurd. Moses Dylan-14 years old at the time-sides with Allen, the nanny sides with Allen (she says Mia pressured her to lie and that Allen was always the better parent), the examining doctor sides with Allen, the two separate groups of investigative experts sided with Allen. They all say Mia coached Dylan. Yes, you and many others are 100% gullible. Allen and Soon-Yi’s two college-attending daughters have to put up with idiots who believe the Farrow’s debunked BS.
You are lying. He ABSOLUTELY was in therapy to deal with his inappropriate relationship with her. I have reported your comment.
@@kevinf4896 Mia’s own therapist along with Allen’s said that he was never in therapy for that. He AND Mia participated in Dylan’s therapy because SHE-before the phony discredited allegation was made to coerce Allen to pay Mia $7M-had a hard time distinguishing reality from fantasy. Another FACTS: Mia would have dropped her allegation IF Allen paid her $7M, Allen refused . Mia REFUSED to take a lie detector test. Allen volunteered to take one and passed it-it was administered by a well respected former FBI expert. Mia’s nanny recanted her testimony in a signed affidavit, in it she said Mia pressured her to lie about Allen and that HE, not Mia, was always the better parent; Moses Farrow concurs with that assessment.
@@kevinf4896 Per the custody hearing court documents:
"In June 1990, the parties became concerned with Satchel’s behavior and took him to see Dr. Coates, with whom he then began treatment. At Dr. Coates’ request, both parents participated in Satchel’s treatment. In the fall of 1990, the parties asked Dr. Coates to evaluate Dylan to determine if she needed therapy. During the course of the evaluation, Ms. Farrow expressed her concern to Dr. Coates that Mr. Allen’s behavior with Dylan was not appropriate. Dr. Coates observed:
I understood why she was worried, because it [Mr. Allen’s relationship with Dylan] was intense, … I did not see it as sexual, but I saw it as inappropriately intense because it excluded everybody else, and it placed a demand on a child for a kind of acknowledgment that I felt should not be placed on a child …
She testified that she worked with Mr. Allen to help him to understand that his behavior with Dylan was inappropriate and that it had to be modified. Dr. Coates also recommended that Dylan enter therapy with Dr. Schultz, with whom Dylan began treatment in April 1991".
She says he was in treatment for his behavior toward his daughter for years, but as he explains in his book, it's well known that he's been in psychoanalysis for many years. It's not as if his treatment was suddenly mandated for some kind of inappropriate behavior toward Dylan. I, too, would love to hear this woman's take on Woody and Soon-Yi today. I can't imagine her still holding on to this bubbe-meise today.
She's still alive, for all I know. Why doesn't anyone at the NY Times go out and interview her? There are many actual incentives, like Dylan seeking publicity, or Ronan seeking publicity, or Woody's movies being shunned in the US.
Perhaps media don't want this disgusting, yet sensational story to be hurt by the truth.
The treatment they are talking about was Dylan's treatment, and both Woody and Mia were involved in it. The description that "Woody was in treatment for inappropriate behavior" towards Dylan is very damning, but it is not really accurate, like a lot of the supposed facts that of this story.
@@justgivemethetruth It makes absolutely no sense that she would have him go into therapy for sexualized interest in Dylan, instead of completely severing ties with him altogether. It beggars disbelief.
‘On September 24, 1993, (Frank) Maco held a news conference to say that he would not pursue the molestation allegation, despite having probable cause, citing a desire not to traumatize Dylan. ‘ Probable Cause’ is not the same as ‘No Credible Evidence’.
Jocelyn Doucette It was put up or shut up time, and Maco wouldn't do either.
was that the same lawyer of Mia who said they were willing to drop the MO charge if Woody Allen paid them 7 mil dollars?
new york state department concluded "no credible evidence" in their final report. Maco was the conneticut state prosecutor. he said there was "probable cause" to go to trail. he is not an impartial investigator...his job is to prosecute. his case was weak and he is making excuses.
@@camdonking1919 That lawyer was Alan Dershowitz.
If you read Maco's actual decision, not just listen to what he said in the press conference, it becomes crystal clear that Maco did not prosecute for a (total) lack of credible evidence. He refers to the custody case in New York, where Justice Wilk - who hated Allen's guts for his affair with Soon-Yi - had NOT found the abuse allegation credible, even to a much lower standard of evidence ('preponderance of the evidence') than Maco was bound to ('evidence beyond reasonable doubt'). In other words: Maco had no case, and a trial was sure to fail. *Only given this situation*, Maco argued it made no sense to put Dylan on the stand for nothing, noting that Allen did not present any danger to the civilians of Connecticut either.
Maco spun this as "I could have prosecuted him, I had an arrest warrant ready, I had 'probable cause', but ladies & gentlemen, I have a good heart and because of Dylan's frailty I'm not going to put her sexual molester in jail'. Which was, of course, an absurd statement to make without any legal validity about the useless 'arrest warrant' and the useless 'probable cause' claim, but Maco was all about saving face, and almost 30 years later he is still lying us in the face on television - hoping to reach the gullible.
Not me. Because I have read what he wrote. And you should read that too, to know what a guy Maco is.
Soon-Yi is not a victim; rescued herself. She was an adult and not living at home because of her mother’s abuse. He mother claimed she was an idiot, yet Soon-UpYi has a BA in psychology and a Masters in Child Development from Columbia University, after which she worked at several private schools in NYC. She was 27 years old when she married Woody Allen and they raised two healthy and successful daughters. Woody Allen was in long term psychoanalysis long before he met Mia Farrow, which is not unusual for many artists. He was not in treatment for anything to do with his children, but rather an exploration of his own inner archetypal awareness. Mia Farrow broke up Andre Previn marriage by getting pregnant. They then adopted Soon-Yi who spent time with her father frequently; he is the person she point to as having given her decent parenting. Mia adopted over a dozen children who now complain about her abuse of them.
Mia was probably a terrible mother but what Woody did with his stepdaughter is WRONG.
Mia adopted 10 children. Two allege abuse; 3 are dead, the rest are more or less silent
Mia told the most vile lies abot this, because she was really hurt by the love between her daughter, who was not a minor , and Allen.
Soon-yi's family abandoned her. Previn wouldn't fund her college education (so Allen did). And Mia was hostile to her (so she left that house). As Soon-Yi and Woody Allen said, they were thrown together because of the rejection by both parents.
Considering his own behaviour, Charlie Rose would be very keen for doubt to be cast on any accusations of sexual misconduct. Total projection on his part!!
The big difference, Charlie had multiple accusers, and was actually guilty!
woody allen didn't alienate soon yi from her family. mia did. is she confused. this is insane. her family, including mia, should have stood by her no matter what. this is insane.
Yes, a truly protective mother would not have acted like a romantic rival toward her own child!
So Woody has sexual relations then marries his birth son's step sister. Both parties have marbles missing...
Non-biologically related. Mia and Woody are more closely related than Soon Yi and Mia or Ronan.
The sibling relations in this extremely extended family are extremely unusual. Keep in mind that Mia collected children over the course of more than 25 years. Sascha and Matthew born (out of wedlock, with her best friend's husband) in 1970, and Frankie-Minh adopted in 1995. They never even *met* as kids.
As soon as Woody and Soon-Yi got together, her adoptive father André Previn came out saying that "Soon-Yi no longer exists for us". That is how 'loving' her adoptive parents were.
When her brother Moses came out publicly *denying* Dylan's abuse, she immediately stated "My brother is dead to me".
That is the kind of sibling relations we're talking about here. So spare me your "his birth son's step sister" argument, because its validity is zero.
She's saying that she doubts we'll ever know if Dylan was in fact molested or if she was projecting what she saw Woody do with Soon-yi...
@3:08 she says that Allen was receiving treatment for "that behaviour", which she has just described as "his behaviour with Dylan, was as his own witnesses said, was inappropriate, overly intense, with sexual overtones that went on for years...".... this would predate the accusation by Dylan, so is it correct that Allen was already getting treatment to address inappropriate behaviour towards Dylan with sexual overtones, and did Mia Farrow know he was getting such treatment, and if so, how could he have been allowed to adopt her and how could Mia Farrow have wanted him to adopt her, or did that only come out through the court process?
It is one of the many falsehoods the Farrows want you to blindly believe. But Dylan's therapist, who was in contact with both Mia and Woody, has flat out denied that Woody received therapy for his behavior with Dylan. She testified that Woody's behavior was not abusive, not 'sexual', and not 'romantic'. He just spent a lot of time with Dylan (while Mia appropriated Satchel) and that he needed to give her some space, and spend more time with the other children (i.e. Moses).
Here's a fragment of Dr. Coates' sworn testimony:
Q. Now, these sessions you were having with Mr. Allen were related to Satchel's therapy, is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. You were not treating Mr. Allen for any problems, were you?
A. Absolutely not.
Q. Specifically you were not treating him for any sexual problem, were you?
A. Absolutely not.
And here's another fragment, from a news report during the custody trial:
Coates testifïed that Allen's relationship with Dylan was 'inappropriately intense' but denied that it was 'romantic.'
'Mr. Allen focused on Dylan because he feit Miss Farrow was obsessed with Satchel,' she testifïed.
But she said Farrow had told her Allen was a 'negative and bad influence' on Satchel, whom Coates also treated.
'I told her I thought there was a positive relationship between Mr. Allen and Satchel,' she said. 'She did not agree with me about Satchel. She did not want him to see his father. She said she'd feel safer if Satchel was not with his father.'
Coates testifed that Farrow and Allen were included in her sessions with Dylan and Satchel but denied that she was treating Allen for 'sexual problems.'
The Farrows count on their audience *not* checking the facts, and *not* doing the research. They count on being blindly believed, for whatever vicious lie smears Woody Allen.
@@elseverwoerd thanks for that
How ironic that the interviewer is Charlie Rose.
That's not irony.
Soon-Yi was never a victim. She made her own decision to break ties with Mia and her siblings because they wanted her to stop seeing Allen
It's the other way around. Soon-Yi was disowned by Mia Farrow. As was Moses.
@@nicosiv Yes, we call that the narcissistic discard. She did the same to Allen! Along with false allegations of sex abuse and a public smear campaign that continues to this day. Mia is one sick bitch.
Let me get this right,this video which states that woodys own witness's describe his relationship with Dylan as INAPPROPRIATE OVERLY INTENSE WITH SEXUAL OVERTONES which went on for years which he was in treatment for.
Have you all lost your minds
For all you guys here in the comment section saying “Woody didn’t molest Dylan”; and “the older daughter was no victim”.
Ok, I can agree there’s enough evidence from the testimony of kids that Mia was an awful parent.
There’s not much talk about whether Woody was a good parent or not. I don’t know.
But here’s what I don’t understand - if Woody is NOT the creepy pervert that he looks like and that Dylan lied.. then WHY IN THE HECK DID HE MARRY MIA’S DAUGHTER?? That’s crossing BOUNDARIES. if my H were to die or we were to get a divorce, you can bet I WILL NOT be dating my stepson who’s 16 years younger than me!!! Neither would any emotionally healthy person.
Why are people defending WA?
I don’t get it.
Okay here's the deal. First things first, you said "my H" which I assume you mean your husband. In that case, Woody and Mia were never married. They were dating, and in all that time, they never lived together. He never slept in her home either.
Soon Yi and Mia had a falling out early on and she left her home when she was like 13-14 years old (I could be wrong about the age). She wasn't living with Mia when her affair with Woody started. And she was 19 when they first met.
If you read Moses Farrow's blog, you'll learn how awful a parent Mia was. She once even hit Soon Yi with a phone receiver because she would not approve of a thing Mia believed she did. Also, in case you're getting this wrong, Soon Yi is not the step daughter of Woody Allen and Mia Farrow. She was adopted by Mia Farrow and Andre Previn, when Mia was married to Andre Previn.
No doubt Woody Allen is a terrible parent. You don't go and have an affair with your girlfriend's step daughter. As creepy and weird and unusual as it is, it's not illegal is what I'm saying. It's not even creepy in the predator-child-molestor sense. He did not groom her or coach her or brainwash her. She was a consenting adult.
The Dylan Farrow accusations are a different chapter, and there too, as much as I'd want to believe her, her story doesn't logically add up.
@@AA-sn9lz I appreciate your answer.
@@Star-dj1kw watch thd RUclips video By the Way Woody Allen is Innocent.
@@Star-dj1kw I appreciate you being open minded and receptive to civilized rational thought unlike most people right now. We'll never know the truth but we have to do with the evidence we have. Maybe WA did do it, but then again, maybe he didn't do it. If tomorrow some conclusive evidence pops up against WA, I would be the first one to accept my mistake and renounce him.
He was not under treatment for behavior with Dylan. Dr. Coates denies this and says there was no sexual abuse. Dr. Coates said in court IT IS NOT TRUE THAT I TREATED ONLY WOODY. I TREATED MIA AND WOODY SIMULTANEOUSLY RE FAMILY DYNAMICS AND THERE WAS NO SEXUAL ABUSE.
@@marythomas1198 pleasure. Mia is lying and a sick woman!
@@marythomas1198 pleasure!
In other words IT NEVER HAPPENED,
I believe Allen to be innocent. But I'd be curious to learn more about the supposed "inappropriate, overly-intense," relationship with "sexual overtones" that Allen is said to have had with Dylan here. And if he got treatment over that, then does that imply some sort of validation to the claim? Or is there another explanation?
A reasonable request G. Monkey. Here is more detailed background about the issue, and the misleading phrases that have been tossed about in this case.
medium.com/@levine2001/the-woody-allen-controversy-reader-debunking-maureen-orths-undeniable-facts-about-the-woody-37ed3eff1989
I wonder where the "sexual overtones" come from. As far as I know, Dr Susan Coates, who had been Dylan's therapist for years, testified in the custody trial that there was NO sexual aspect to Allen's attention for his daughter; and Judge Wilk relied on that. Yes, Wilk strongly disapproved of what he saw as a "too intense" attention of Allen for his daughter "at the exclusion of all others". But neither Coates nor Wilk have declared anything about "sexual overtones". It is what Mia would have liked us all to believe - maybe Alter is echoing her client's words here.
By the way, Dylan's older brother Moses describes the relationship between Allen and Dylan as loving, and not particularly problematic - until Mia made her allegation.
With "sexual overtones" ? I'm afraid you're lying. Or maybe you just forget the word "NO" ? with "NO sexual overtones". "During the course of the evaluation, Ms. Farrow expressed her concern to Dr. Coates that Mr. Allen’s behavior with Dylan was not appropriate. Dr. Coates observed: ‘I understood why she was worried, because it [Mr. Allen’s relationship with Dylan] was intense, … I DID NOT SEE IT AS SEXUAL but I saw it as inappropriately intense because it excluded everybody else, and it placed a demand on a child for a kind of acknowledgment that I felt should not be placed on a child …’" - Supreme Court, Justice Wilk
Mia Farrow’s own lawyer says Soon-Yi and not Dylan was the greatest victim in all of this? Wow that’s pretty inconvenient for the “Allen v. Farrow” narrative.
I've been watching that, and watching the "By The Way Woody Allen Is Innocent" YT video .. that for over 2 hours goes into excruciating detail in every aspect of this, while the Allen V. Farrow you can tell just from the title that makes it sound like Allen is attacking, and this is a fair legal action with due process. But nothing of the kind. The AVF video is so distorted and one-sided.
From what I know now, and not saying this could never change, but it is more believable to me that Mia Farrow is so hurt, angry, vindictive, and hateful towards Woody that she would make something up to attack him, than it is that during a bitter divorce and custody battle Woody would choose to become a child molester of his own daughter while being watched by everyone in the household.
I don't might like the title, but for facts, interviews, research, documents, this is very impartial (except the concluding title) & an excellent watch to fill in a lot of actual information.
Rick Worley
By the Way, Woody Allen is Innocent
ruclips.net/video/muyaCg2dGAk/видео.html
The only reason he is not in prison is the fact he is Woody Allen, guilty a sin
Mrs. Alter can be heard telling evident falsehoods here twice. She says: "There is no question in my mind that his behavior with Dylan was, as his own witnesses said, inappropriate, overly intense, with sexual overtones. That went on for years. And he was under treatment for that behavior."
It is factually, verifiably UNTRUE that:
- his witnesses said that his behavior with Dylan had 'sexual overtones';
- he was under treatment for that behavior.
The truth is that Allen's witness, who was Mia's and Dylan's therapist, stated that she did NOT see Allen's behavior with Dylan as sexual. She also stated that although both Mia and Woody participated in her treatment of Dylan (who had trouble separating reality from fantasy), Allen was NOT in treatment for any sexual aspect to his behavior.
Eleanor Alter does not seem to be purposefully lying here, but she told these two falsehoods all the same.
Which is a shame.
And Alter should be called out for these plain LIES.
Could be repeating what she was told by her client?
Great post. Dr Coates was the therapist and you are correct. The older woman friend is the proverbial gossip!
This is a lie. He absolutely was in treatment for it. Its in the custody case file. And the psychotherapist said "ALLEN didnt see it as sexual., even if Mia, witnesses, or Dylan did." WHy you lying?
@@kevinf4896 wrong he was NOT IN TREATMENT. For that. Mia and Woody simultaneously saw Dr Coates. Dr Coates said she told Woody she was worried about his safety because of Mia rants. Coates said there was NO EVIDENCE OF sexual abuse. Mia refused a lie detector test. Woody was tested by foremost authority on detection. He was an FBI tester. MIA LIED RE Dylan ran to lark or Daisy after abuse and when told impossible because they were not in CT but in NYC. Mia said I mean spiritually. Coates said Woody relationship with Dylan was one of overprotection to the dismissal of the other children. That’s it. Now you have the facts. FYI Dylan changed her story some four times.
What a horrible attorney you are Ms. Alter. You actually think the timeline for when the three children were adopted matters to them. Why didn’t you just keep your mouth shut. You have nothing to offer to this conversation. Talk and talk and talk then say you do not know if the abuse took place.