The Smearing of Woody Allen
All this, Bradley knew, was the surest way to fall for the biggest lies. It’s a caution that could serve journalists and the wider public well in the case of Woody Allen’s alleged molestation, in 1992, of his then-7-year-old adoptive daughter, Dylan Farrow.
. . . .
The case is news again thanks to Farrow, who in December penned an op-ed for The Los Angeles Times titled, “Why Has the #MeToo Revolution Spared Woody Allen?”
She repeated her charges against Allen in a tearful interview last month on CBS, and her efforts seem to have had their intended effect: From Mira Sorvino to Natalie Portman, A-list actors are expressing bitter regrets for having worked with Allen.
The director is officially radioactive.
But if Farrow wants an answer to her question, it’s because we know that the charges #MeToo has leveled against men such as Harvey Weinstein or Kevin Spacey are almost certainly true.
The reason they have not been spared is because they are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
The facts, not the allegations, prove it.
Not so with Allen and Farrow.
An in-depth, contemporaneous and independent investigation into the allegations, conducted over several months by the Yale-New Haven Hospital in 1992 and 1993, noted that there were “important inconsistencies in Dylan’s statements,” and that “her descriptions of the details surrounding the alleged events were unusual and were inconsistent.”
It concluded categorically: “It is our expert opinion that Dylan was not sexually abused by Mr. Allen.”
. . . .
You don’t have to doubt Farrow’s honesty to doubt her version of events.
Nor have we learned anything else about Allen in the intervening years that might add to suspicions of guilt.
He married Soon-Yi and has been with her ever since.
Nobody else has come forward in 25 years with a fresh accusation of assault against him.
If Allen is in fact a pedophile, he appears to have acted on his evil fantasies exactly once.
Compare that to Larry Nassar’s 265 identified victims.
No comments:
Post a Comment