Weinsteins step down as Miramax CEOs

Not as well as in 98? Is this a valid comparison?

That's an excellent point, Frederik.

https://www.google.com/amp/variety.com/2018/tv/news/catfish-host-nev-schulman-sexual-misconduct-1202814033/amp/

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2018/5/22/fryer-investigation/

harvard economist

NYPD officials say they are ready to arrest Harvey Weinstein https://t.co/aK3l2B93W5 pic.twitter.com/2qHRT7T4hC

— The Hill (@thehill) May 23, 2018

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

don't adopt.

that's your takeaway from this whole thing?

Yeah, that’s a vile thing to post.

Jesus, that poor family.

Pretty convincing post by Moses.

As always, compare it to the custody ruling from 1993: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/danny-shea/heres-the-1993-woody-alle_b_4746866.html?guccounter=1. One glaring problem: Several adults, including professionals, had noticed Allen had a deeply problematic relationship with Dylan for years before 1992, so Moses' claims that he never saw anything wrong rings false.

tomboto otm

16 women come forward to allege sexual harassment by Morgan Freeman https://t.co/M0nLysSE0E

— Sam Stein (@samstein) May 24, 2018

The Vancouver skytrain system launched announcements voiced by Morgan Freeman yesterday.

They've been pulled obviously.

Morgan Freeman seemed inevitable, this is a man who dates (dated?) his step-granddaughter

that moses farrow post is seriously disturbing and, for me, pretty hard to argue with. i basically don't know what to think about this anymore, except that tombot otm.

The basic principle of 'believe the victim' should always be applied in the absence of clear and compelling contradictory evidence. Moses Farrow offers clear contradictory testimony and some contradicting evidence. he is at last half-compelling. now all I can say is this is a hugely tangled mess that outsiders are ill-equipped to disentangle.

tombot otm

There is no evidence in his post, though?

I don't want to dive wholeheartedly into that conversation, but it's completely possible that the Farrow household was a complete mess and abusive, that Allen was a good dad to one of the kids, and that he also was a complete creep

all this does is show that the solution was ugly all around, not just on one side, with one kid saying it's implausible Allen would be inappropriate with one of the other kids, because he was nice to the writer

yep

barring a confession by one of the principals, we're never going to have certainty

The 'evidence', such as it is, consists of his factually verifiable description of the attic space where Dylan recalled the assault and the lack of toy electric trains which form such a central part of her story. But, no, he doesn't post photos of the attic to corroborate his testimony. So, you are technically correct to say no physical evidence was offered.

the situation is so confused and awful it's hard to know what to make of it. but moses makes a specific argument for why the specific abuse against dylan couldn't have happened that day, and he was a witness. has that been refuted anywhere?

Doesn't that account of Moses kinda contradicts Judge Wilks' statement?

That report put an end to any chance of criminal charges being brought against my father. A second, 14-month investigation by the New York State Department of Social Services, reached the same conclusion as Yale/New Haven: “No credible evidence was found that [Dylan Farrow] has been abused or maltreated.” Nevertheless, when a judge granted custody of Satchel and Dylan to Mia, at 15, I chose the path of least resistance, and also stayed with my mother.

Seems quite different from...

In his 33-page decision in June 1993,[9] Justice Elliott Wilk rejected Allen's bid for custody of the three children, and denied Allen immediate visitation rights with Dylan, saying of Allen's behavior toward Dylan that it was "grossly inappropriate and that measures must be taken to protect her".[9][8][63] His criticism of Allen's parenting was harsh.[64][20] Rejecting Allen's portrayal of Farrow as a "woman scorned", Wilk said there was no credible evidence that she had coached Dylan, and he criticized Allen for his "trial strategy" of turning family members and employees against one another.

criminal investigation vs. custody case

those two are about the custody if i understand correctly

Yeah, that’s a vile thing to post.

i am sorry. it certainly wasn't my intention, or the only thing that i deduced from that blogpost. But it was certainly a factor that didn't help in this situation, adopting a whole bunch of people from all kinds of circumstances into a showbiz home that probably already wasn't functioning too well (judging from that blogpost)

adoption is a very, very tricky process, even in safe, stable, households with, say 1 adopted child and 1 biological child.

JUST IN - Harvey Weinstein is expected to turn himself in to the NYPD relating to sexual misconduct charges as early as tomorrow @brynnCNN reports. #BREAKING

— Stephanie Gallman (@sgallman) May 24, 2018

Weinstein can afford some high-powered attorneys. No doubt he's lined up his legal team now.

Several adults, including professionals, had noticed Allen had a deeply problematic relationship with Dylan for years before 1992, so Moses' claims that he never saw anything wrong rings false.

besides indeed citing on this point one of mia farrow's friends, one professional french teacher, and one of the battery of child therapists this family seems to have been keeping employed even before any of this happened, this document also states for the record that mia farrow is a wonderful loving mother who adores each child equally and that it just isn't credible that she'd subject any of them to any of this if it weren't true, so if it's bedrock text of some sort then i guess there's a whole lot more in the moses post that "rings false"

no idea what happened anymore but sorry to all these kids, jesus, no one should have to be raised by any of these people tbh

So the takeaway isn't "don't adopt," it's "don't get adopted by people who don't have their shit together."

(that huffpo piece picks out the "she's not perfect!" part but if u read the whole document it's willing to go rather further than that, xp to myself)

no one should have to be raised by any of these people tbh

I came to this conclusion a long time ago (ie when the split initially happened)

dlh, that text is pretty much the final word from 1993, and is from a neutral observer. Yes, it should kinda be a bedrock text. Doesn't mean everything in it is true, but as a historical document, it's closer in time, it's official so probably less biased, etc.

well i'm sure glad you were here to tell us what really happened, guess we can close this case now

Oh stop it. I'm not saying what happened, I'm just saying how source criticism works. Sources are, among other things, measured after how close in time they are to the event in question, and whether or not they're biased.

Fred's right. He even said "Doesn't mean everything in it is true"

Maybe for another thread, but I didn't realise that Mia Farrow had 14 kids, including 10 adopted, and three are now dead, just trying to digest that.

The part of Moses' account where he blames all three deaths on Mia is really nagl tbh.

what i mean is that finding inconsistencies between texts' judgment of the appropriateness of woody allen's bedtime story technique is not v surprising or meaningful when one text is also accusing the other text's court-certified good mom of being a monstrous child abuser enabled for years by the very people whose testimony forms the basis of the other text's conclusions

like since the premise of the moses piece is that the public story is wholly untrue, i don't think it gets us any closer to choosing between them to note that in places it contradicts the public story

(nor is "biased" a concept i can imagine flying v well were i to use my new understanding of source criticism to privilege, say, the yale/newhaven investigation over dylan's own testimony)

hard to justify my arguing at length for a position that is actually just a shrug but tbh i think the stuff in the moses piece triggered me? would say i hope that stuff didn't happen but as the alternative is dylan's story i guess i just hope they didn't both happen.

The yale/newhaven story is dealt with in the custody judgment, which is why I treat that as more important.

But to be honest, I don't think most historians would give that much credit to Dylan's 2014 column either. It's more than twenty years after the fact, she was very young at the time, traumatized, she stated in a Vanity Fair piece that she couldn't remember a lot of what had happened at that time.

I don't think it's really true that the Moses statement should be given equal weight to every other statement, because it claims that everything else is a lie. If there's, like, ten statements that fit together, and one statement that goes 'they're all wrong, and only I speak the truth', well, occams razor. For instance, it's hard to fit the image of Thaddeus in that piece with what Thaddeus himself said about Mia Farrow: “It was scary to be brought to a world of people whose language I did not understand, with different skin colors. The fact that everyone loved me was a new experience, overwhelming at first.”

All I’m going to say about efforts to deflect from my sister‘s allegations: pic.twitter.com/IRrj5fzMqV

— Ronan Farrow (@RonanFarrow) May 24, 2018

hard to fit the image of Thaddeus in that piece with what Thaddeus himself said

not if you accept that Mia was an abuser. but again, probably better for another thread.

Maybe I’m ready to decide that I actually DGAFF about these celebrities and their fucked up kids. No, wait -I am. And I don’t. It’s their business.

Try not to have a completely fucked up family, everybody.

given the deep, deep nightmare i have only just learned was thaddeus' pre-adoption life i think anybody's version of mia farrow-- not to mention the other kids-- would have been a bewildering relief.

(for the same reason i do agree that implying mia drove him to suicide without otherwise describing his experience is a mistake.)

One thing I didn’t understand- Moses claims Mia was on a tear against woody, ongoing for 7 months prior the alleged day of abuse. He goes to great lengths to describe Mia’s vitriol towards woody. But he claims woody and Mia went out for dinner together that night. Idk but if I hated my ex and he was also mad at me about stuff, we would not be going out for dinner together.

none of us have ever married Frank Sinatra and after claiming to have been betrayed by a subsequent mate, said "we never really broke up" with Frank.

There are too many levels of madness in this story for nonpros to deal with.

Otm

These are crazy people