Woody Allen Calls Sexual Abuse Claims ‘Untrue and Disgraceful’

Woody Allen
Alexia Silvagni

Woody Allen has responded to allegations that he sexually abused his 7 year-old adopted daughter Dylan Farrow.

A rep for the filmmaker said: “Mr. Allen has read the article and found it untrue and disgraceful.  He will be responding very soon.”

“At the time, a thorough investigation was conducted by court appointed independent experts.  The experts concluded there was no credible evidence of molestation;  that Dylan Farrow had an inability to distinguish between fantasy and reality; and that Dylan Farrow had likely been coached by her mother Mia Farrow.  No charges were ever filed.”

more to come…

Filed Under:

Want to read more articles like this one? SUBSCRIBE TO VARIETY TODAY.
Post A Comment 57

Leave a Reply


Comments are moderated. They may be edited for clarity and reprinting in whole or in part in Variety publications.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  1. AF says:

    To all of you who believe unquestioningly in Woody Allen’s claims that he has nothing to hide, read this EYE-OPENING article in Vanity Fair:


    …and then tell me how you can still believe that there is “zero evidence” that Mr. Allen did anything inappropriate.

  2. If Dylan was truly lying Woody wouldn’t hesitate for one second to sue her, he can’t because it’s probably true. Think about it Woody hasn’t seen Dylan for years and she tells the world a story that makes Allen out to be a child molester. If someone said that about you and it wasn’t true you would sue them for sure. Allen would never sue Dylan because there would be an investigation into the abuse and that’s the last thing Allen wants. Dylan is more or less asking Allen to sue her knowing full well he would not dare!

  3. wks9370 says:

    Maybe I am missing something somewhere, but shouldn’t this a moot point as far as the law is concerned -“statue of limitations” expired a long time ago correct – accused of molesting his 7 yr old daughter, Dylan, who is over 18 now -correct? What am I missing here?

    In New York, it should be a moot point, unless there was another incident in the past 7 yrs and she was still under age. It can’t even be considered a cold case because the police/DA dropped the charges… This isn’t a murder case.

    Soooo, what’s the point? Somebody enlighten me here.

  4. keith says:

    I saw Mia Farrow over fifteen years ago on TV, in a street interview, admit that she made it all up to get even. She was even apologetic to Woody in it. I SAW THIS with my own eyes. Like mother, like daughter – confirmed liars.

    • AF says:

      Can you take a moment, please, and see if you can find a link to this interview online for us? Share it with the class; it might go a long way towards resolving the debate.

      • wks9370 says:

        Or just send it to Variety and have them post it for all to see along with a 20pt headlined apology for screwing with his Oscar noms. There is no way in hell they are going to open this can of worms at the Academy… and give him a statue. Hell, It may even tip the scales against Cate Blanchett and everyone else connected with “Blue Jasmine” that were nominated.

        Oh that’s right! Is he getting the Lifetime Achievement Award? or was that just for the G.G.’s… I’m sure Diane Keaton wouldn’t mind singing Woody another lullaby… I forgot what Woody commented in response to being asked what he thought about Keaton’s performance. But it was hilarious and classic “Woody Allen”…

        I’ll always picture Woody escaping from prison in “Take the money and run…”

  5. Daniel says:

    Open your eyes, haters! Soon-Yi MARRIED Woody! MARRIED him! And they’re still together after all these years. Enough said.

    • AF says:

      Daniel — Yes, he married Soon Yi. So what? This allegation is coming from Mia’s other daughter, Dylan. One thing does not prove (or disprove) the other.

      • Daniel says:

        So what??? Some people assume Woody Allen is a pedophile because of Soon-Yi, and that’s why now they tend to believe Dylan! But Soon-Yi MARRIED Woody, and they’re still together… How could a woman marry her molester and spend her life with him?? Be careful people. Facts should speak louder than rumors and allegations.

  6. AF says:

    Question: how many of you who are posting in defense of Woody Allen — assuming the caliber of evidence were exactly the same — would be screaming “hang him high” if the accused were a Roman Catholic priest?

    Yeah. I thought so.

    We don’t know what the true facts are, but that’s precisely why the latest accusation at least worthy of further investigation. Woody Allen is innocent until proven guilty; but it seems to me the main reason so many people are willing to give him a total pass (and trash the accuser along the way), is because he is a revered filmmaker and celebrity.

    • Luluinhollywood says:

      You’re JOKING, right?

      There is no ‘caliber of evidence’ or ‘these new allegations’! Have you even looked into this case, or did you just read the 3 paragraphs above? These ‘new’ allegations are 22yrs old. And as referenced above, there was no evidence & he was never even charged. This was a case of using the media to try & defame someone (whether he did it or not). The REASON I in particular don’t believe them has nothing to do with Woody being a celebrity & everything to do with me looking at the whole picture & thinking it’s fishy. If you read below you’ll see older comments speaking to both the timing of the allegations back in 1992 (arising only AFTER they split & well into a bitter public custody battle), & now- NOT when Woody & Soon-Yi adopted 2 girls, but at the same time as his lifetime achievement award, & the announcement of Ronan Farrow’s new tv show (brother & son to the accusers).

      PRIESTS- have had LANDSLIDES of actual evidence against them, countless accusers… & most still get promoted, transferred, or nothing happens at all. Their offenses have been egregious, evidence & testimony overwhelming, & still I am baffled how we AREN’T in the streets with pitchforks over it. Still mystified how they never seem to actually go to jail (they don’t have diplomatic immunity- under the law they should be treated the same as any other citizen but they are not). It’s like Allen is accused of a 22yr old hit and run & you wanna compare that to Ted Bundy.

      It sounds like you mean well, but maybe do some research 1st. I am not saying I don’t find the Soon-Yi thing strange, but that whole ‘family’ & Allen/Farrow relationship seems a bit strange & dysfunctional (while his marriage to Soon-Yi seems solid & lacking in drama- but who knows..), & yes his relationship Soon-Yi doesn’t prove anything (which honestly I think that was what Farrow was hoping for back in 1992)

      In my own personal opinion, the old adage “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned” applies to this case…

      • Luluinhollywood says:

        To AF- I was saying if he was accused of a hit & run- operative word being accused, vs something where there have been a landslide of allegations… But who cares it was just an analogy.

        What does talking to someone to make sure mean?? Either way at this point it is her word against his- unless a witness comes forward saying they physically saw something, or other hard evidence- there is no case here. Sorry. If he’s guilty, that SUCKS for Dylan.

        But the flip side is IF the accusations are false, stemming from retribution & a woman scorned who made it her life’s mission to turn her kids & the world against the man who wronged her, then 22yrs is a lot of time to work on fine tuning your fabricated story.

        I’ve known people who make up accusations about one thing, knowing them to be absolutely fabricated- but FEEL JUSTIFIED because they feel the person wronged them in another way & therefore ‘deserve’ it. Can people not even see this as a possibility? I personally know a woman who permanently lost her kids & was convicted of 70yrs in prison based mostly on the testimony of her estranged ex who lied through his teeth to vilify her. She could have gotten only a few years if she had agreed to a deal pleading guilty & therefore voluntarily giving up her kids to save her own butt– but what mother would give up their kids to save themselves? Anyway, she spent 7 yrs in max security always maintaining her innocence, until one day the ex found Jesus & recanted, testified to some botched police handling & his desire to ruin her life.

        There is a reason we are innocent until proven guilty. Because in part- some people will stop at nothing to get revenge. It should be considered just as likely as Allen’s guilt- given all the evidence, & lack of evidence.

      • AF says:

        The only reason I mentioned the priest abuse cases was to contrast the relatively robust — and well deserved — public condemnations that those men received (a few of whom were falsely accused, by the way), and compare that to the “so what?” reactions of many people towards this allegation. Exhibit “A”? Your comparison of an allegation of past sexual abuse to a 20-year-old “hit and run” accident. Unless someone died or was permanently injured in that hit and run, there is NO comparison.

        And yes, the accusations themselves are not new, but this is the first time that the now grown-up little girl has broken her silence — and she has affirmed in no uncertain terms that yes, she was abused as a child by Allen. Now, is she a delusional sock-puppet of her mother’s? Maybe. But don’t you think someone in authority ought to talk to her just to make sure?

        I think we owe that much to all the true victims of sexual abuse that are out there.

    • wks9370 says:

      You have to take into account where the claims in this matter originate from – and that’s Mia Farrow. She has been out to destroy and castrate Woody Allen since they got their divorced – way back when – how many years has it been now? 20 years?

      • Luluinhollywood says:

        **older man, not inked man oops!

      • Luluinhollywood says:

        Soon-Yi wasn’t his daughter. She was adopted by Farrow & another man. Allen & Farrow never married & kept separate homes. You can still say yuck, but there is a difference between an inked man being attracted to a 19yr old (more common that you’d like to think), & a CHILD.

  7. Gc says:

    Woody is innocent. Mia has brainwashed some of them to react very harshly towards him out of sheer revenge and hatred! SHE is the one who should be investigated! Not him. How Woody helped her and her career! Now this!

  8. At the time there were many allegations that the children were terrified of Mia, that she treated the adopted children differently than the biological ones — more like servants than children. These allegations were borne out by many of the nannies, as well as Soon Yi herself. Remember at the time Soon Yi was 19 or 21. Korea did not keep accurate records at the time she was born, and, in any case, she was found as a toddler wandering the streets all alone, so it is difficult to know her exact age. However, at the time of her allegations against Mia, , she was a grown woman who had lived long enough in Mia’s household to know exactly what was going on. There were allegations also that Mia was particularly cruel to Soon Yi because she was the only one brave enough to stand up to her. Soon Yi also told Woody that Mia mistreated Dylan. It was because of these allegations that Woody felt Dylan was, at the very least, in a harmful situation and so he began the child custody proceedings for her.
    Until recently Mia maintained that Ronan (who was actually Satchel and who changed his name several times until now he is known as Ronan) was Woody’s child. However, in a recent Vanity Fair article she played coy about Ronan’s true father, hinting, but not confirming, that he is Sinatra’s son, conceived when Farrow had an affair with Sinatra while she was still supposed to be with Woody. I wonder if Mia has collected child support from Woody all these years for Ronan. If so, and she knew that Ronan was actually Sinatra’s son, well, I leave you to draw your own conclusions about that one.
    I also question why Mia did not dredge all of these accusations out when Woody and Soon-Yi were in the process of adopting two girls. And it was no secret they were adopting; the media duly reported on it. So if Woody was truly the monster Mia wants us to believe he is, why didn’t she try to block his adopting two innocent children — i.e. potential victims? Yet she said nothing at the time. But she is bringing all of this out now — coincidentally at the time Ronan is starting his TV show and in need of publicity to give it a strong launch. She says she is bringing it out now because of the lifetime achievement award — but, really, Woody has gotten awards in the past twenty years. Wouldn’t the safety of those two girls be far more important than attempting to diminish an award given out by an organization not many people care about? That is, if indeed Woody is a monster. Or is he the victim of her lies?
    And what about the effect of all of this on those two girls, who are now teen-agers? If they are like most teens, don’t they have enough insecurities without facing the embarrassment of their father being vilified by twenty year old accusations that were never proven? Have Mia, Ronan, and Dylan given any thought to them? Or don’t they count? Nothing Mia, Dylan, or Ronan can say now is going to change what did or did not happen twenty years ago. So why is it necessary to embarrass girls who weren’t even born at the time?
    Just a number of questions to ponder.

    • Luluinhollywood says:

      Thanks for your post! I did not know there was ever any hint of allegations against Mia’s sainthood before… Where did you learn all this, is there a credible book on the subject, or we’re these all old articles..? I’d be curious to know. Your post spelled out your points very well.

  9. Luluinhollywood says:

    Sorry, you may think it’s weird or gross the fact that he fell in love & subsequently married Soon Yi. But there is a biiiig difference psychologically between falling for a 19yr old & being sexually attracted to 7yr old CHILDREN. One does not necessarily indict the other. You don’t have to like it or agree with it, but there is a difference between distasteful & criminal.

    Also- he was not her step-father. Soon-Yi was adopted by Farrow & another man- that’s why her last name is Previn. Allen & Farrow never married, & kept separate residences. Their whole relationship was strange, & relationships seems to overlap quite a bit. (he was w/Farrow since about 1980 but Farrow admits their son Ronan could be Frank Sinatra’s- born 1986- whom she says they ‘never really split’ or something- don’t know how that fits in w/this Previn guy or Allen, but to look at Ronan he certainly looks like old blue eyes, NOT Allen…)

    In addition, the timing of the accusations is suspect. They split, Allen now with Soon-Yi, they engage in a bitter, drawn out public custody battle for their 3 kids, THEN & only then did these allegations surface. Not in the 12 years they were together before that. Suspicious at the very least.

    And it makes it all the more likely that a vindictive ex would concoct such an accusation- specifically because people like you would want to blanket vilify him without using critical thinking skills or common sense. I am not saying he is innocent. I am saying one doesn’t prove the other. Now if Soon-Yi came out & said he started their relationship when she was a prepubescent child, then I would say that’s a little more damning. But that’s not the case.

    No matter which way you cut it, this is a sad story. If he’s guilty, it’s tragic. And if he’s innocent- where a vindictive ex coached an impressionable child, then possibly raised her into a vindictive adult, that is equally as tragic. The cases of false accusations of molestation, rape, etc ruin so many people’s lives. And make it harder for those children who ARE telling the truth & begging for someone to believe them. Bottom line though- I know *I* am not in a position to judge his innocence or guilt one way or the other.

  10. So let’s see — if he admits to it, he’s guilty. If he denies it, he’s still guilty because “not too many pedophiles admit to their crimes.”
    But what if he denies it and he is in fact innocent? Or is he simply guilty because the allegations have been made? In that event, I suppose we might just as well do away with the court system, and when a person is alleged to have committed a terrible thing (like pedophilia), just automatically arrest him and throw away the key?
    So, let’s see, Lisa, if someone alleges that you are a molester, and you admit it, you are guilty. But if you deny it, then you are still guilty, because “not too many pedophiles admit to their crimes.” And then your local police should simply arrest you and throw away the key. And BTW — there are many cases coming to light of females being accused of — and convicted of — pedophilia, so your gender does not make you immune to the allegation.

  11. Lisa says:

    Of course he’s going to say it’s untrue. Not too many pedophiles admit to their crimes, especially ones that have so much to lose. They aren’t going to say, Yes. I did it. Cuff me, freeze all my assets, and haul me off to prison where I will most likely die.’ Just look at Polanski – still a free man.

  12. Jon Raymond says:

    I’m so glad we’re debating this issue instead of worrying about the little trivialities like increasing child cancer, world war, and 48,000 Americans who die annually for lack of health care.

    • Lisa says:

      ‘Trivialities’? This is about a father sexually abusing his daughter and getting away with it after causing so much pain! This examines how sexual abuse is so prevalent in our society.

  13. Bob says:

    Sadly even if the allegations are true, few will care. So many worship celebrities, musicians and athletes and overlook sexual violence even when they are convicted. When you place a select few above everyone else is it any wonder some will treat others as objects to be used and abused for their amusement?

    Being able to create art, act, make music or throw a ball do not make you a better human being or more valuable than anyone else. They are diversions from the actual important things. Games and entertainment. We have gotten our priorities so backwards it is ridiculous.

    • Luluinhollywood says:

      2 more things-

      1) I do NOT take sexual violence lightly. But both sexual violence & falsely accusing someone of sexual violence are equally as tragic. And I do not believe in damning someone based on hearsay. Thank god our justice system (at least in spirit) agrees with me & not you or there would be mobs on every street corner.
      Also, people from all walks of life get away with murder all the time. To make this 22yr old accusation about his celebrity status is just silly. Both he & Farrow were famous. At the end of the day, not only was he not convicted, he wasn’t charged. So *we* aren’t in a position to know jack-sh*t.

      2) Art has had every bit the impact in the evolution of mankind over the eons as anything else. Our ability to make art, behold art, think about art- is one of the biggest attributes that separates- & elevates- us from the rest of the Animal Kingdom. But again- that doesn’t really have anything to do with this article.

    • Luluinhollywood says:

      In fact, it’s the opposite. If he weren’t famous, NONE of us would be talking about it. And the accuser wouldn’t have been published re-accusing 20+ years after the charges were dropped.

      If he did it, I would care. I just know the difference between accusation & guilt. And I’m sure you are referring to Polanski (also MUCH more complex than simple black & white). Well if you actually knew what you were talking about- he had a deal with the judge all worked out. But because he was famous, the judge reneged on the deal to get his 15min of fame. At the time even the girl & the prosecutor disagreed with the judges actions. So the same way Amanda Knox doesn’t feel the justice system handled her case objective & fairly, Polanski who had previously complied every step of the way had had enough. Again, I am not siding on who is right & wrong. But people who cannot seem to realize there are many facets to things & just wanna lynch someone with hearsay not evidence- really drives me bonkers.

      Ok, go ahead & attack me now… I know I asked for it.

    • nimportequoi says:

      I don’t believe it will be ignored – take Polanski for example.

  14. Debbie: I don’t think you read my post all the way through. I made very clear exactly what you said — that politics here — of any kind — is irrelevant to this story. Please read my post again and you will see.

    • I read every single word. And understand them all as well. I agree politics – of any kind – is irrelevant to this story, yet you needed to tell me to “get my facts straight” on the politics of the time. Really, Charles…. I do see. Again, thanks

  15. I also question the timing of all of this — awfully coincidental with Ronan’s TV show. And, if indeed this is really all about Mia claiming that Woody was a child molester, then why the hell didn’t she raise all these objections when he and Soon-Yi were adopting their two daughters? It was spread all over the news that Woody and Soon-Yi were adopting so it’s not like Mia couldn’t have known. Didn’t Mia (the human rights activist) care enough about those two innocent girls to try to protect them from what she claimed Woody had done to Dylan by bringing all this up at that time and perhaps stopping the adoptions? I would think protecting those two girls from the monster Mia claims him to be would be far more important than waiting until his Lifetime Achievement Award to bring it up again.
    And BTW — the Connecticut prosecutor did not have clean hands here either — he was subsequently disciplined for attempting to prejudice the court in the Woody/Mia custody case. He also had great political ambitions at the time (reported by the media) and he had hoped to ride the Woody criminal trail into higher office. If there had been evidence to support criminal charges, I have no doubt he would have brought them. Instead, he knew he had no case — and that had to be a big disappointment to him.

    • Luluinhollywood says:

      Wow. I did not know about the Ronan tv show. In fact, I didn’t know Ronan existed before this rehashing of 22yr old accusation. I said this in a previous thread- that’s since been deleted- but let’s not forget that the timing of the original accusation did not come during the 12 or so years Farrow was with Allen- only after their split & after a long, bitter & public custody battle. Only THEN did they come out. That makes me at least wonder…

      I am not saying I agree or disagree with the way that he handled his relationships. But there is a big difference between cheating, or being a bad boyfriend, & being a pedophile. And it wasn’t until this mess that I learned Soon-Yi wasn’t even his adopted daughter like I always heard people saying. He never married Farrow, they had separate residences, & she was adopted (& I’m assuming raised) by Farrow & another man.

  16. Leo says:

    This story curiously appeared with the launching of Ronan Farrow’s press release for his new show. It’s also been suggested that Mia posts under different identities both boosting Ronan’s image and running Woody in the ground. She wants to suggest that Frank Sinatra is RF’s father, but if you look at RF and Woody, side by side, RF has got Woody’s upturned head shape and Woody’s small hands, the same fingers, etc.

    • Luluinhollywood says:

      Oh really? I was thinking from his picture that he looked SO much like Sinatra!! Like no way in hell we was Allen’s! To me he looks like a perfect split between Farrow & Sinatra… And just look at those old blue eyes!! Seriously. I can’t see woody in his eyes, nose, lips…

      I bet it would be interesting to see how much Ronan’s twitter following got bumped up since this, & the googling of his name. Hmmm. Murky no matter how you slice it.

  17. Jadetatsu says:

    These allegations just show that Mia Farrow is still pissed at Mr. Allen for leaving her for a better woman; and to prove it she has to coax her daughter to say that her father sexually abused her. For Ms. Farrow to stoop this low to get revenge on Mr. Allen, speaks volumes of the kind of woman she really is.

    • Lisa says:

      You can’t be serious! How do you coax a 28 year old? And the ignorance surrounding sexual abuse continues….

      • Luluinhollywood says:

        It’s obvious the children sided with Mia when they split in 1992. Whether the accusation is a lie or the truth at this point we will never know.

        Sexual abuse is serious. But so is lying about it to defame someone. It is not entirely outside the realm of possibility. And to many such as myself, after looking at the WHOLE picture it seems quite possible this was the latter.

  18. Victoria says:

    The prosecutor on the case, Frank Maco, told the Associated Press today that he believed that Allen molested Dylan.

    Also the Wall Street Journal published this interesting nugget today: A spokesman for the Connecticut Division of Criminal Justice said Sunday that the prosecutor’s office won’t re-examine the case unless the office is asked to.

    Can someone out there please ask that the Division of Criminal Justice reopen this case?

  19. ThomT says:

    Your ludicrous comment says far more about you and your right leaning politics than it says about Obama. Just put your sheet back on and go on back to the 1950s.

  20. Marsha says:


  21. Regina Rose says:

    The judge overseeing the custody hearing found Allen’s conduct grossly inappropriate and Maco, saw no evidence Mia was being manipulated.

    He’s leaving that bit out.

    “As part of the case, a team of investigators at Yale-New Haven Hospital had studied Dylan’s accusations and concluded that no sexual abuse had taken place and described Dylan as having “difficulty distinguishing fantasy from reality.”

    But the custody judge had termed Allen’s conduct with Dylan “grossly inappropriate,” and Maco said he saw no evidence that Mia was manipulating Dylan. ”


    • Lisa says:

      Did the hospital conduct a physical exam of Dylan Farrow? This may help her case.

      • Dylan Farrow was examined by several doctors within four days after the alleged rape and all of them concluded there was no physical evidence to support the allegations, thus hurting, rather than helping her case. Physical examinations, when such allegations are made, are required by law and thus are done automatically.

  22. Soon-Yi was never his daughter. It may still be weird and uncomfortable, but he never even lived with the Farrows.

  23. Nanc says:

    Can the tea party/GOP get any lower then that statement? Does your political bias and hateful rhetoric know no bounds? This is a tragic insight to the life of innocent child and allegations of abuse. Somehow your evil small mindless has turned it into a selfish need to attack a political leader. Your beyond compassion and hope.

  24. Bruce says:

    Soon-Yi was NOT his daughter. He didn’t raise her. He didn’t live with her. He was not a father figure to her. She is the adopted daughter of Andre Previn and Farrow. Why can’t you folks get the facts straight before you comment? It’s tiresome.

    • Renee says:

      He was her mother’s longterm boyfriend (12 years), and the adoptive father of three of her younger siblings. That’s a father-figure, and it’s much worse than Allen just being the mother’s boyfriend.

  25. Hunter says:

    You should read the article by Robert Weide about this.

    • morris says:

      At the very least Soon Yi was the teenage daughter of the woman he had children with, and the sister of children he fathered. If you don’t find that bad enough, there is something very wrong with your moral compass.

  26. Mark Hayden says:

    This is CT. The charges can be upheld still.

More Film News from Variety