Vanity Fair, which is usually a shoddy liberal publication, catering to the worse of the glitter- and liber-atti agenda pushers, published an impressive list of 10 facts in the Woody Allen abuse case.

10 Undeniable Facts About the Woody Allen Sexual-Abuse Allegation By Maureen Orth

A must read.

Here’s the summary – with some comments:

1.   Mia never went to the police about the allegation of sexual abuse. [Why is this relevant? I mean, is she being accused of having gone to police as if that was a bad thing?]

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. [“Inappropriate behavior” like what? Some answers can be found in the Judge’s decision.]

3.   Allen refused to take a polygraph administered by the Connecticut state police. [Aha! One of my questions answered. I had searched for information on this polygraph but had found none. I also wondered about what questions he was asked – down to the very wording of each one. And here we find that he refused to take a polygraph by the police. Interesting. “Instead, he took one from someone hired by his legal team.” Suspicious to say the very least. Have the records of this arranged polygraph been “inadvertently” destroyed by the Allen team?]

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.  [One million in legal fees! Wow. And I’m sure that doesn’t even begin to cover the resources needed to bring an award winning film celebrity to justice! What exactly were all these lawsuits about? A book by  a thorough and honest investigative journalist is so very in order here.]

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.” [Vanity Fair has published the decision here.]

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. [A lot of seriously troubling testimony.]

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. [What I find curious is: what happened to the first pediatrician that Mia talked to? “Her lawyer told her on August 5, 1992, to take the seven-year-old Dylan to a pediatrician.” Did Mia simply not search for another psychologist for Dylan to talk to? And her lawyer counseled her in what way here?]

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. [No memory of going to the attic? If it was just another room in the house, I could see that, but an attic is a pretty specific place that stands out in someone’s memory. See, it’s not that he didn’t simply remember going as in “I don’t remember if I did.” He first stated he had never been in the attic. When proof was found that he had been there, then he admits he “may have gone to the attic.” I wager that this question wasn’t in his arranged lie detector test.]

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. [A difficult question. That was his call, and it could have been perfectly honest, with her well-being in mind. Still, it raises many other questions about the bases for his claim.]

10.   I (Maureen Orth) am not a longtime friend of Mia Farrow’s, and I did not make any deal with her.

When this scandal broke out again, I was just thinking that if Dylan were not telling the truth, what a tragedy this would be for all other abuse victims.

Any time there is a mistake or lie in a high profile case, it sets back all other victims because it reinforces the desire in the public’s mind to believe the abuse never happened, which is always a very uncomfortable and distressing realization.

I had also refrained from commenting on it, because I have too much to do to go dig up all that has been written on the case in order to be well informed about it. And without loads of information, we can be so easily swayed one way or another.

Exhibit A just above. What a difference having information makes in analyzing a case. Yes, this is obvious, but that is exactly what we need: a trial where all this information could have been exposed in detail and debated. And if Allen refused and is refusing to take a police polygraph, plus all the information above, it looks like Dylan is not mistaken. However, the problem in this case is Mia.

Now here’s someone who is seriously warped about her personal relationships. I mean Woody Allen and Frank Sinatra? How repulsive. And I know nothing about this Previn guy (as a man), but was he in any way not repulsive like the other ones?

Look at this from the Judge’s report – page 3:

In 1984, Ms. Farrow expressed a desire to have a child with Mr. Allen. He resisted, fearing that a young child would reduce the time that they had available for each other. Only after Ms. Farrow promised that their child would live with her and that Mr. Allen need not be involved with the child’s care or upbringing, did he agree.

What.In.The.World? Farrow wanted to have a child with a disgusting man who hated children, and who was apparently quite emotionally warped towards women (in addition to the children), and who had no desire to have any children with her? (Let’s not even get into the question of getting married to then have chidlren – because obviously the concept of marriage is not on the radar of such warped people).

And Farrow wants the child after getting a guarantee from Allen that this child will have no father who wants it? A guarantee that Allen will not be a father to the child that Mia wants to have with him?

I mean that is seriously dysfunctional. That is patently warped.

Read pages 4, 5, and 6 about how sick Allen’s behavior becomes towards Dylan and the other kids. And then, sadly, the children become pawns in the wranglings that develop within the relationship between the two (Mia and Woody). Just like footballs being kicked around in this ugly dispute between the two. Just nasty.

None of that, however, is Dylan’s fault.

The entire report needs to be read. On pages 23, 24, information about the social workers and other doctors. The question remains – for me – why weren’t several child abuse specialists called by Mia to talk to Dylan? Even without a trial, she could have easily arranged that.

Even though polygraphs are not very reliable, I’d like to have all three key people in this case do a respective one – one who is not arranged by their friends and lawyer pals.

And, in any case, it’s a nice thing that a lot of attention is being brought to what a garbage of a man Woody Allen has been. He should not be given a pass simply because he is capable of making movies that our morally debauched bourgeoisie is so fond of.