[PatDixonNYC]

Originally Posted by Keith

For the record, you're being a dickhead too.

I've already said, weirdo, that if the age of 15 is your picture hangup than dismiss that from my points …

My personal problem with the 15-year-old age picture thing, is that you used my refusal to respond to questions about that as some sort of evidence that I was being shifty during our discussion. Since it turned out I was right and that you were talking out of your ass, I think you owe me an apology for that.

Originally Posted by Keith

and address my many other points, like Woody meeting Soon Yi when she wasn't even at double digits in age...

Page 7 of Judge Wilk's decision in the custody case Allen V. Farrow:

“UNTIL 1990, ALTHOUGH HE HAD HAD LITTLE CONTACT WITH ANY OF THE PREVIN CHILDREN, MR. ALLEN HAD THE LEAST TO DO WITH SOON-YI. ‘SHE WAS SOMEONE WHO DIDN’T LIKE ME. I HAD NO INTEREST IN HER, NONE WHATSOEVER.’ 1990, MR. ALLEN, WHO HAD FOUR SEASON TICKETS TO THE NEW YORK KNICKS BASKETBALL GAMES WAS ASKED BY SOON-YI IF SHE COULD GO TO A GAME. MR. ALLEN AGREED.”

also concerning his own kids, Dylan and Satchel:

"HE DID NOT BATHE HIS CHILDREN. HE DID NOT DRESS THEM, EXCEPT FROM TIME TO TIME, AND THEN ONLY TO HELP THEM PUT ON THEIR SOCKS AND JACKETS."

I know that doesn't prove anything, just that if he was such a pedophile, you'd think he would've wanted to be around at bath time.

HERE'S THE LINK, AGAIN:
Allen v. Farrow Custody Ruling, June 7, 1993

Originally Posted by Keith

and the witnesses that saw Woody being highly inappropriate.

You mean "witness."
Ms. Alison Stickland, a baby sitter employed by Casey Pascal, a friend of Mia's with whom she had gone shopping the entire day, is the one who says she saw something here that had be been bothering her.

You're placing the opinion of a baby sitter who says she saw something that "had been bothering her" over the expert opinions of the Yale-New Haven Child Abuse Clinic, Dr. Coates and Dr. Schultz, all of whom concluded and testified without reservation that Woody Allen didn't molest Dylan.

That's not a question, I'm saying that's what you're doing.

Originally Posted by Keith

You know I said this to you already. I won't fight you on it. But you'll hang onto this point because I don't know how to prove to you how wrong those pictures were, meanwhile you're ignoring everything else that is being said just to be right and not look dumb.

You can't prove those pictures were wrong, Keith. You just don't have any proof of that.

So let me get this straight. The fact that Woody Allen met Soon-Yi when she was 10, and then started dating her 10 years later.

And the fact that Casey Pascal's babysitter, was troubled by the fact that Woody Allen had his head in his daughter's lap.

In the face of the expert testimony of doctors, social workers, family members, the lack of any physical evidence, the lack of any criminal prosecution or civil case, the fact that Dylan's story was reportedly "rehearsed" and "inconsistent" and the conclusion of the research team (not hired by Woody, hired by the prosecution) that WOODY ALLEN DID NOT MOLEST HIS DAUGHTER: meeting Soon-Yi at 10 and what this babysitter says she saw, are the only points of evidence you need to substantiate a claim of sexual abuse.