With all the allegations of sexual harassment and assault filling up a good portion of the media’s time, the investigative efforts are leaving no stone unturned. Some of the allegations go back 40 years. Most cannot be criminally prosecuted due to existing statute of limitation laws. The existing remedies appear to be ruining the lives and careers of the accused, and civil litigation to be awarded monetary damages.
For those under the age of 40, the Woody Allen — Mia Farrow Hollywood drama was entertainment news for many months, including the sexual molestation accusations against Allen; first from Farrow, and most recently by his daughter, Dylan, herself. 25 years ago this was an ongoing soap opera where the public took sides. Many men were suspicious of Allen, who was dating and ended up marrying Soon-Yi Previn, Farrow’s adopted daughter from a previous marriage. In 1992 Soon-Yi was the media focus of a sexual relationship with Allen.
Allen and Farrow were never married, and the accusations about Dylan came on the heels of the public revelation about Allen and Soon-Yi. Which brings us to the current issue of how Allen has escaped the collective rage of the #metoo movement.
One fact that is different from the others accused is that the accusations against Allen were investigated by social workers, psychiatrists, and the courts 25 years ago. While there were serious suspicions publicly and legally, no action was ever taken. The simple reason is that there was no evidence to support the accusations. Allen clearly was creepy, but that is not proof. In contrast to politicians and actors who have publicly confessed their wrongdoings, Allen has maintained his innocence for more than 25 years.
That leaves Dylan Farrow’s public op-ed to be considered. It is critical to not examine her statements because all that does is turn into a game of she said-he said. That is unfair to both Allen and Dylan. The point is to answer her question: how has Woody Allen avoided the wrath of the #metoo movement? One possibility is that Allen has already been tried in the court of public opinion before social media and the #metoo movement ever existed. Various media outlets have re-opened the investigation taken by the courts 20 years ago, but the only thing that will come of it is more speculation.
A more likely possibility is that Allen never sexually harassed or assaulted anyone in all his years as actor, director, or producer. If that were true, we can expect the victims to appear shortly. Now this does not exonerate him about the accusations from Dylan, but as far as the #metoo movement question, there is a clear absence of evidence so far. We can be assured that should accusers come forward, Allen will be near the top of the #metoo headlines and those 25 years of proclaimed innocence will undergo further scrutiny.
There is a story hidden beneath this one that the media will likely never cover. What if the answer to the question is: there is no reason to add Woody Allen to the #metoo list? The majority of the accused have confessed or resigned, perhaps because it is far easier to move out of the public eye and attempt to return to a private life (Matt Lauer, for example). They may realize there is no point in making a defense, which will be expensive and almost definitely not do anything to repair their public image. The accused will be guilty not because there were one or more witnesses to the sexual harassment and assault allegations (there are a few exceptions) but because the collective testimonies of individual people have been presented as evidence.
None of this makes Dylan a liar or Allen guilty. The lesson that may be learned when all is said and done is that Mia Farrow did Woody Allen a big favor by bringing the accusations when she did. Her accusations allowed the legal process to be conducted unencumbered by the influence of social media.
Allen is 82 years old and has apparently been happily married for the last 20. About these two pieces of information we can say: These are the facts of the case, and they are indisputable.
For those who take a different view, I leave you with this video clip.
Follow Us
I’d like to comment on one sentence: “While there were serious suspicions publicly and legally, no action was ever taken.”
What exactly qualifies as an ‘action’? I’m not talking about “legal action “, but about all kinds of actions taken by legal parties. The State prosecutor, Frank Maco, ordered investigations into the allegation (not: accusation). Was that an ‘action’? Maco declared that he would not prosecute Allen. Was that an ‘action’? Maco presented two arguments for his decision: there was no credible evidence, and he wanted to spare Dylan a (VERY probably unsuccessful) trial. Was that an action? Maco claimed he had ‘probable cause’ (even though ne NEVER explained what this consisted of). Was that an ‘action’?
I believe it is important to qualify all these actions as ‘actions taken’. It Mia’s allegation had NOT been investigated, refuted, called non-credible by two expert instances, and had NOT lead to a decision to exonerate Allen from prosecution, then things would have looked worse for Allen. As if he has ‘escaped’ legal scrutiny. He didn’t escape – he passed, evidently.
So I wonder whether you agree that the sentence “no action was taken” should be changed into “no legal action was taken” in the sens that no steps were taken to prosecute Allen.
It’s been two years since Dylan gave her interview to CBS television; Farrow family friend Nick Kristof offered Dylan an uncritical podium in the NY Times; and her allegation against Allen drew the attention of #MeToo protagonists in social and other media.
Several things have happened, but no other alleged victim has stepped forward to accuse Allen; and no other fact has come to light that is likely to incriminate him.
Moreover, Dylan has not made (and probably will not make) a formal accusation against her father. Like her mother, Dylan seems to shun the courts like the Plague, and only takes to the media to repeat her allegation. The statute of limitations has NOT run out for her to take Allen to civil court, so it is mystifying why she continues to make such a sharp allegation of a heinous crime on the one hand, but won’t subject it to legal scrutiny and due process.
It should be noted here that her mother also did NOT make a formal accusation against Allen. After she allegedly learned about the abuse, Mia did NOT go to the police, but kept Dylan at home for several days, making a videotape while ‘interviewing’ Dylan semi-nude in the bathroom, in the garden, in the house, making many stops & starts that may have had to do with her ‘coaching’ Dylan about what to answer. A few days later, Mia still did not go to the police, but took Dylan to her pediatrician. The ghings Dylan told the pediatrician did not indicate any abuse (as testified by that pediatrician). Mia took Dylan home, and took her again the next day, and now Dylan WOULD tell about abuse. Thus the pediatrician had to report it; NOT Mia. In this way, Mia avoided making a legal accusation herself. Today it is Dylan who avoids making a legal accusation.
What happened in the past two years?
Mia’s and Woody’s adopted son, Moses Farrow, has stepped forward and wrote a detailed account of the situation in the Farrow family, and particularly of the afternoon during which the ‘abuse’ is alleged to have taken place. Moses is a live witness to that afternoon, was instructed by Mia to not let Dylan and his adoptive father Woody Allen out of his sight. He vows that the abuse did NOT take place, and that Dylan and Allen did NOT leave the room together for any length of time. His nanny, Monica Thompson, had already testified in 1993 that Moses told her the abuse did not take place, and he thought his mother had made it up in order to take revenge on his father.
Furthermore, Soon-Yi has spoken out in an interview in order to support her husband and sketches an image of her adoptive mother as a parental abuser and manipulator, much in the same way as Moses had sketched her. Both of Mia’s children and their personal accounts did not receive the same kind and nature of media attention that Dylan received.
Woody Allen received a huge amount of backlash in social media as a result of Dylan’s televised allegation. The backlash became even greater when Allen defended himself in an interview on South-American television, in which he again denied the allegation, and explained why – according to him – the #MeToo movement would have no serious reason to allege him, considering the way he has always favored a respectful and equal treatment of women in the movie industry, and has never received complaints of any kind.
Amazon, his movie distributor, decided to punish Allen for this defense, and refused to distribute his movies. This shows how even an allegation that has never been validated in legal process, can still lead to social ‘punishment’ for someone probably falsely alleged. it demonstrates that #MeToo is somehow used as an alternative for due legal process, and is not bound by any ‘innocence presumption’.
The hype word today is ‘creepy’. If a male celebrity, particularly a white male with a position of power, is found to be ‘creepy’, many #MeToo adherents find reason to ‘cancel’ him – which comes down to social punishment. No evidence of any kind required. No conviction required. Not even a legal complaint is required. It is a modern-day version of ‘mob justice’ and I believe it is dangerous and should be critically followed.
This is what the Woody Allen allegation can teach us. Along with the Michael Jackson allegation, whose legacy suffered a similar fate in 2019 with the allegations made in the ‘documentary’ Leaving Neverland, and which are equally unsubstantiated in court – yet succeeded in tarnishing, if not bringing down the reputation of a celebrity.
Yet Michael’s family, friends and fans are fighting back, so there’s some hope of a turnaround in 2020. I hope there will be such a turnaround for Woody Allen too, but I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting.