MovieChat Forums > Allen v. Farrow (2021) Discussion > UNBIASED articles, documentaries and lin...

UNBIASED articles, documentaries and links about the Allen vs. Farrow case

posted 4 years ago by kukuxu (5409)
17 replies | jump to latest

From Robert Weide:
https://ronanfarrowletter.wordpress.com/2019/04/08/the-truth-about-woody-allen-part-i/
https://ronanfarrowletter.wordpress.com/2019/04/08/the-truth-about-woody-allen-part-ii/
https://ronanfarrowletter.wordpress.com/2017/12/13/qa-with-dylan-farrow/
https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-woody-allen-allegations-not-so-fast

From Rick Worley, author of the documentary linked below:
https://ronanfarrowletter.wordpress.com/2020/07/20/the-rise-and-fail-of-ronan-farrow/

And Insider article resuming the case:
https://www.insider.com/woody-allen-mia-farrow-soon-yi-previn-relationship-kids-9-2018

Open letter by Moses Farrow:
http://mosesfarrow.blogspot.com/2018/05/a-son-speaks-out-by-moses-farrow.html

Soon Yi speaks for Vulture:
https://www.vulture.com/2018/09/soon-yi-previn-speaks.html

And a exhaustive documentary by Rick Worley checking every fact and uploaded to youtube. Of course, you won't see it in HBO, Netflix or Amazon:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muyaCg2dGAk

And finally, food for thoughts. There's actually a real pedophile predator in the Farrow family. Mia's brother, who went to jail after facing 39 charges for molestation and who (go figure) has been always defended by Mia.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2478439/John-Villers-Farrow-Mia-Farrows-brother-jailed-sexually-abusing-2-boys.html

An excerpt from Weide's article linked above:

Following are the top ten misconceptions, followed by my response in italics:

#1: Soon-Yi was Woody’s daughter. False.

#2: Soon-Yi was Woody’s step-daughter. False.

#3: Soon-Yi was Woody and Mia’s adopted daughter. False. Soon-Yi was the adopted daughter of Mia Farrow and André Previn. Her full name was Soon-Yi Farrow Previn.

#4: Woody and Mia were married. False.

#5: Woody and Mia lived together. False. Woody lived in his apartment on Fifth Ave. Mia and her kids lived on Central Park West. In fact, Woody never once stayed over night at Mia’s apartment in 12 years.

#6: Woody and Mia had a common-law marriage. False. New York State does not recognize common law marriage. Even in states that do, a couple has to cohabitate for a certain number of years.

#7: Soon-Yi viewed Woody as a father figure. False. Soon-Yi saw Woody as her mother’s boyfriend. Her father figure was her adoptive father, André Previn.

#8: Soon-Yi was underage when she and Woody started having relations. False. She was either 19 or 21. (Her year of birth in Korea was undocumented, but believed to be either 1970 or ’72.)

#9: Soon-Yi was borderline retarded. Ha! She’s smart as a whip, has a degree from Columbia University and speaks more languages than you.

#10: Woody was grooming Soon-Yi from an early age to be his child bride. Oh, come on! According to court documents and Mia’s own memoir, until 1990 (when Soon-Yi was 18 or 20), Woody “had little to do with any of the Previn children, (but) had the least to do with Soon-Yi” so Mia encouraged him to spend more time with her. Woody started taking her to basketball games, and the rest is tabloid history. So he hardly “had his eye on her” from the time she was a child.

[–] prometheus1816 (1060) 4 years ago

Bravo for posting all this. The fact no one has mentioned Uncle John's actual arrest, conviction, and imprisonment for rape and grooming of two ten year old boys for five to seven years is glaring. The Farrow Mafia and their "supporters" lose all credibility for not bringing him up. Also the suicides of three of Farrow's Asian children....

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

Yeah. And in this case there's not even a political gain, like in the Gina Carano case. I guess this is pure virtue signaling. Once a person is marked as a prey for the witch hunt, the mob starts to compete to be the ones who torches the fire. In a witch hunt, being marked is all it takes. 😕

[–] prometheus1816 (1060) 4 years ago

Gina Carano did it to herself. She'd had several warnings about her tweets and she ignored every single one. The posting of that photo of the Jewish woman running away from those boys who were chasing after tearing her clothes off of her is in no way equitable to Woody Allen's situation. What Carano did, she did to herself. What has been happening to Woody Allen is a systemic campaign to ruin him based on a jealous, vindictive woman named Mia Farrow. So please, don't even try to say they are. Gina Carano did this to herself. Woody Allen did nothing to anyone and is being subjected to a decades long smear campaign all because Mia Farrow is a woman scorned.

[–] joi2049 (5572) 4 years ago

NOTHING that you posted here has anything to do with the CHILD CUSTODY case (ALLEN vs
FARROW) where WOODY SUED MIA for CUSTODY of DYLAN.

What you've posted here is just a list of RED HERRINGS which try to DIVERT ATTENTION away from the way that WOODY MOLESTED DYLAN back when she was only 7 yrs old.

🙄

[–] prometheus1816 (1060) 4 years ago

It has everything to do with the custody case since all these allegations stem from that custody case and Mia Farrow's need to win at all costs including accusing a man of sexual abuse of a child. According to TWO accredited experts in child sexual abuse, they cleared Allen and accused Farrow of coaching her child. Three of Mia Farrow's Asian adopted children all have committed suicide. Two other of her Asian adopted children accuse her of horrible abuse including sleeping with two of her children while she was naked and they were 11. That 11 year-old happens to be Ronan Farrow. The other is Fletcher Farrow. So that is in total seven of her 14 children who have been abused by THEIR MOTHER. And let's not forget Mia's very own brother, John Charles Villiers-Farrow was accused, arrested, convicted, and incarcerated for grooming, molesting, and raping two kids under the age of ten and whose abuse continued for six to seven years after the initial incident. So far all the abuse comes from the Farrow matriarch and her brother.....but let's talk about a proven innocent man. There is nothing "red herring" about it. The cold hard facts is Woody Allen IS indeed innocent. And Mia Farrow is a sick woman carrying out this decades long vendetta by making her young impressionable daughter believe something happened to her when nothing did. So please!

[–] AckbarsRevenge (3800) 4 years ago

I think you're wasting your time responding to this assclown (troll?) who's spamming with quite litigable false claims.

[–] prometheus1816 (1060) 4 years ago

I just don't understand anyone who isn't willing to look at the links Kukux has posted. They're valid and shows what kind of a megalomaniac Mia is.

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

Check his profile. He's one of those users that only posts in the 'Politics' board.

He's posting here in a very similar way to how 'only-Politics' users post in that board. Not for nothing that the 'Politics' board is a dump of garbage that has been abandoned by mods to rot.

[–] joi2049 (5572) 4 years ago

they cleared Allen and accused Farrow of coaching her child.

On my other TOPIC COURT DOCUMENTS have already been posted that say there was NO PROOF whatsoever that MIA ever coached DYLAN to say what she said, which also means this is still another BIG FAT LIE that WOODY ALLEN told.

https://moviechat.org/tt13990468/Allen-v-Farrow/603e603e9185a41a2ca872a9/Heres-The-1993-Woody-Allen-Custody-Ruling-In-Its-Damning-Detailed-Entirety

Wilk (the CHILD CUSTODY JUDGE) writes:

1. “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. Mr. Allen's resort to the stereotypical "woman scorned" defense is an injudicious attempt to DIVERT ATTENTION from his failure to act as a responsible parent.

2014-02-07-nocrediblewomanscorned.png

2. The Yale New Haven study report is “sanitized and, therefore, less credible” owing to a variety of factors.

📌📌📌📌📌

[–] brux (14773) 4 years ago

Hardly, the custody case is irrelevant. The judge was deciding custody the best he could at the time, not guilt or innocent in a fake child molestation case. He did not have the information or evidence to weigh in on that.

If you think all of those factual points are red herrings, you don't think how to think.

[–] brux (14773) 4 years ago

There is another Robert Weide article you might be interested in:

THE RISE AND FAiL OF RONAN FARROW
JULY 20, 2020 ~ RBWEIDE
https://ronanfarrowletter.wordpress.com/2020/07/20/the-rise-and-fail-of-ronan-farrow/

This explains Ronan's lies and claims about things he could not know, but got from his mother's book and claimed they were firsthand testimony.

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

I forgot to say thanks. I've edited the opening comment and included it.

[–] brux (14773) 4 years ago

I got Woody Allen's autobiography, "Apropos Of Nothing" sometime after it came out and set it down and did not get back to it even though it was really funny and fascinating. I had gotten the Kindle version and most of my reading is non-fiction, a majority of it being political, some science fiction, and biography, science and programming. I had not gotten back to it. After this whole Allen V. Farrow thing, and particularly the lunatic postings here that are supportive of Mia Farrow, and having watched the easy to suss out BS of the fake-u-mentary I got the Audible version of Apropos of Nothing and picked up where I had left off, sometime before Allen met Mia.

Wow, what revelations, and all in a simple, direct and straightforward style of writing with citations of documented fact and the testimony of Soon-Yi, Moses, Woody's sister, and some other inside sources of information. Virtually everything militates against accepting almost anything Mia and Dylan Farrow claim. All of her biggest claims, the most creepy are stories that have evolved over the years, decades, into Woody being a total monster.

The main problem here is that Woody seems to have thought the Farrow's claims were so ridiculous that he did not seen to counter them, except in court and legal contexts and so he did not counter any of the bad PR that was coming out against him. He tried to let Dylan now he had not forgotten her and loved her, and years later wrote her some letters. Woody's letters to Dylan were intercepted by Ronan, who told Woody Dylan was not interested - more than once. Ronan whose mother lied about his father. Ronan whose mother slept with him, occasionally naked until he was 11 and spent almost all of her time with him to the neglect of her other children, especially her foreign born and sometimes handicapped adoptees. Ronan whose mother changed his name three times, and who in her quest to push Ronan into politics saying he must be taller, had his legs surgically lengthened. And Woody was the abusive one? I don't buy a bit of that story any more.

Not to mention Ronan's dishonest lies about what he saw and understood at age 4, it puts his adult work in his books, which I strongly admired into question.

[–] AckbarsRevenge (3800) 4 years ago

So true. I've also read it. You forgot to mention in your list of Woody supporters that even Mia Farrow's own psychiatrist (I think) testified against her.
I found it interesting to read about her habit of constantly giving the children new names. Charles Manson did the exact same thing in his little "family" in his days. Seems to be a trademark of overly narcissistic, megalomaniac people.

[–] brux (14773) 4 years ago

I can just hope that at some point all of this just snaps and it blows back on her and reveals her vicious, abusive hateful side of how she treated Woody, her adopted children, and her real children, and what she is doing publicly without a hint a shame. This is truly nauseating.

One wonders about the fake-news we see in politics when it has been so easy for Mia Farrow to push her agenda on the world with no pushback, no objectivity, and how she has provoked the emotions of people against Woody far beyond anything that I think is closed to valid ... even if he actually had done what was claimed. Maybe that is bit much, but imagine how vulnerable anyone is to a media like this. This is not democracy, this is not due-process. This is totally wrong.

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

I wish, but that's not likely to happen. That requires the concept of fairness (fair play, fair trial), the ability to support the right thing no matter the side. That's something typical in north European cultures, actually it's one of the assets that made them wealthy. In Mediterranean countries and in South America, however, what rules is the concept of vendetta. There's a very popular idiom in Spanish: "al enemigo, ni agua", which translates more or less like "to the enemy, not even water".

North European cultures are in decline and being replaced. I don't see Woody Allen getting a fair public trial anytime soon, because customs that supported that are in decline and being replaced.

[–] brux (14773) 4 years ago

> North European cultures are in decline and being replaced.

I don't really see that. They let in a lot of foreigners, but like Britain in the past those foreigners are just as British as the original Brits in time. Also, the concepts you are associating with Northern Europeans are relatively new. When I was a kid it was a well known fact that the northern European countries had high suicide rates and high inequality. They have successfully reversed that and changed their societies. Particularly Finland. Michael Moore's Capitalism: A Love Story shows this to be true over all of Europe, and to some extent taking root in North Africa. My conclusion is that this is a function of industrialization, communication and education and not something intrinsic to race.

You're kind of using some White Nationalist terminology there which is interesting since Woody is a Jew? ;-)

Oh, by the way, if you do not know about it there is yet another YouTube channel that is supportive of the facts in the Woody Allen case. It is called TheWoodyProblem. ( I'm assuming they are talking about his name and not the state of a certain body part. )

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrPpix3dJkYVwpgyEtGnFHg/videos