Latest Episode
Play

Go Back   Keith and The Girl Forums Keith and The Girl Forums Show Talk

Show Talk Talk about the show

View Poll Results: Did Woody Allen molest Dyan Farrow?
Yes 106 82.17%
No 23 17.83%
Voters: 129. You may not vote on this poll

Like Tree587Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-12-2014, 08:59 AM   #71 (permalink)
PARTY! SUPER PARTY!
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: NYC, baby!
Posts: 11,998
Careful. You're going to confuse me and have me think you were into it...
WittyReference likes this.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2014, 09:55 AM   #72 (permalink)
Senior Member
2020 Marathon Kickstarter Backer24-hour Marathon 2018 Fundraiser Backer24-hour Marathon 2017 Fundraiser Backer57-hour Marathon 2015 Kickstarter Backer54-hour Marathon 2013 Kickstarter Backer
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Eastern Pa.
Posts: 440
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
Careful. You're going to confuse me and have me think you were into it...
. .

Yinz are the hardest working people in podcasting.

Last edited by Pintman; 02-12-2014 at 10:12 AM.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2014, 12:53 PM   #73 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Marie77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 13
This reminds me of jury duty I did on a DUI case. Basically a week long of back and forth on hearsay with no hardcore evidence because the woman refused a breathalyzer when she was pulled over. Due to that she was found not guilty. I completely believe she was guilty but the law states otherwise since it was all circumstantial.

So with Woody, I completely believe he is guilty based on what I've read. He molested his now wife, Soon-Yi. He molested his step daughter Dylan and he has been able to get by with this because of his status as a celebrity and that he was careful enough to never get caught. I also believe, in time, there will be more truths brought to light in this matter. Most likely from his step children with Soon-Yi when they are old enough to understand that Daddy's penis is not a toy.

Last edited by Marie77; 02-12-2014 at 12:55 PM.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2014, 01:17 PM   #74 (permalink)
Senior Member
2020 Marathon Kickstarter Backer24-hour Marathon 2018 Fundraiser Backer24-hour Marathon 2017 Fundraiser Backer57-hour Marathon 2015 Kickstarter Backer54-hour Marathon 2013 Kickstarter Backer
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Eastern Pa.
Posts: 440
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marie77 View Post
This reminds me of jury duty I did on a DUI case. Basically a week long of back and forth on hearsay with no hardcore evidence because the woman refused a breathalyzer when she was pulled over. Due to that she was found not guilty. I completely believe she was guilty but the law states otherwise since it was all circumstantial.
Good for you. That's how it's supposed to work. You upheld your oath as a juror.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marie77 View Post
So with Woody, I completely believe he is guilty based on what I've read. He molested his now wife, Soon-Yi. He molested his step daughter Dylan and he has been able to get by with this because of his status as a celebrity and that he was careful enough to never get caught. I also believe, in time, there will be more truths brought to light in this matter. Most likely from his step children with Soon-Yi when they are old enough to understand that Daddy's penis is not a toy.
Whether they can be prosecuted or not, I believe there is a special place in hell reserved for kiddie diddlers.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2014, 02:07 PM   #75 (permalink)
Senior Member
54-hour Marathon 2013 Kickstarter Backer
 
campy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 11,868
I'm listening to the show now...

Yes, there was a HUGE discrepancy of power between Woody and Soon-Yi that would most certainly have warped the dynamics between the couple. So no, a 50 year old man isn't automatically smarter then a 19 year old women or has better judgement. BUT a 56 year old man who was a father figure to a girl from the age of 7 will have an authority over her that wouldn't be normal or healthy.... DUH!

Frankly older people can date younger people, it happens. Older people who were a parental figure to the person they are dating is a big red flag, something is wrong with this adult.


So Pat Dixon, you clearly have not researched this story WHAT SO EVER for you to NOT know that those pictures of Soon-Yi were found. YET, you can say that for those of us who have decided he is guilty based on knowing he took nude pictures of his 13 year old daughter are wrong for jumping to conclusions? If all of this story happened to say a creepy neighbour or an ex coworker you would not be on KATG defending this dudes honour.

Keith, back in the late 50ties early 60ties 16 and 19 was young but not abnormal for marriage. Different times

You can be alone in a room with a kid Pat, as long as you aren't stripping them down and taking pictures of them...or nuzzling your head into their crotch.

Woody didn't get an attorney right away because he was hoping for the perception of innocence a la reverse psychology


YOU Pat Dixon, added the emphasis the phrase "SOMEONE from Allens team took the lie detector test". We, the listener, didn't read the article so can't tell if it was italicized or bolded out.

Polygraph tests today, in 2014, are not a perfect science so you can be sure that back in the 1990's they were even less reliable. I don't blame Woody Allen for not taking one with the state department and I don't blame the detectives for not bothering to test Mia Farrow.

That extra separate lie detector test was another smoke screen from Allen, goes along with the not hiring a lawyer mentality. Pretty Clever....

When the courts are saying CONSISTENT it means the stories matched.

The babysitter witnessed no panties, relevant to what MIGHT have happened. But the babysitter wasn't there so she could only say what she witnessed. Maybe Dylan took her panties off by herself and it wasn't Woody that took them off. That doesn't mean he didn't molest the child. Kids strip innocently...absentmindedly. That is normal. Nuzzling into your childs pantyless crotch (which was witnessed) is NOT innocent.

Woody Allen's professional life has NOTHING to do with ability to sexually abuse a child

EVERYTIME Keith and Chemda make a valid point Pat Dixon cries foul, claims "Hostile" says he doesn't want a fight. Pat Dixon's argument is weak because it's the devils advocate perspective and is not at all solid.

The prosecutor looked at the reality of putting a 7 year old through the media circus, intense investigator scrutiny and a long drawn out trial and decided to protect this child from any further abuse, BRAVO I say. Why would he put a child through the worst possible scenario at 7 years old if the process was futile because...after all...she was 7 YEARS OLD!!!

Imagine, for a moment, that this child was abused by her father...wouldn't you think she might be fragile?

This was a great podcast!
some.girl.23 and TxMama like this.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2014, 02:11 PM   #76 (permalink)
Senior Member
2020 Marathon Kickstarter Backer38-hour Marathon 2014 Kickstarter Backer
 
ssgtballard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Maine - its really to fucking cold to exist
Posts: 511
Quote:
Originally Posted by campy View Post
So Pat Dixon, you clearly have not researched this story WHAT SO EVER for you to NOT know that those pictures of Soon-Yi were found. YET, you can say that for those of us who have decided he is guilty based on knowing he took nude pictures of his 13 year old daughter are wrong for jumping to conclusions? If all of this story happened to say a creepy neighbour or an ex coworker you would not be on KATG defending this dudes honour.

!
Where does the age of 13 come in ?
I hate to keep this argument going on but the age of Soon-yi in the pictures and when they started the affair keeps changing without anyone giving a source.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2014, 02:17 PM   #77 (permalink)
Senior Member
54-hour Marathon 2013 Kickstarter Backer
 
campy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 11,868
13-16 whatever, he was a father figure to this girl.
You're a father SSGT, what's wrong with you? You MUST be able to say that even if Soon-Yi was at the age of consent when the relationship began, dating a girl who considered you a father from 7 years old ISn't NORMAL

Add to that that she was UNDERAGE when he took NUDE PHOTOS of her....

please.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2014, 02:20 PM   #78 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Blitzgal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 3,294
I believe that Soon-Yi was ten when they met. Regardless of whether or not he lived in their house, this is a man who started fucking his long-term girlfriend's daughter who he had known since childhood. That's twisted, no matter how you look at it.
campy and thirteen like this.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2014, 02:25 PM   #79 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Queens
Posts: 73
Woody Allen Allegations

On hearing a lot of unfair and some untrue statements made about the case from, you know, everywhere, I posted a link to Robert Weide's article about Woody Allen and the rush to judgment on my Facebook page. My post simply said "Read this before you make a decision on Woody Allen."

A KATG fan posted a link to a KATG discussion about the case, and added I could take it up with Keith Malley. Now, the LAST THING I want to do is take it up with Keith Malley. Let's be honest. He clearly has stronger feelings about it than I do, and he's yelling.

I've never officially taken a side, and I don't have to. The facts speak for themselves. Here's a question for those who attack me for simply presenting the facts of this case: Why? Are we supposed to ignore factual information in order to preserve the pristine quality of our outrage for an accusation of sexual assault which has been denied by the accused, fully researched and discredited by a team HIRED by the DA, was never criminally charged and which hasn't even been revisited in civil court.

Although the statute of limitations has passed on the criminal case, it still could be introduced as a civil trial. Woody could be dragged into civil court and found guilty just like OJ was. The burden of proof is considerably lower in civil court too. Dylan isn't so young now, and seems comfortable with the facts of the case. If the fragility of the young witness was the only thing holding this case back, then why not take it to court now, and score one for victims? Doesn't it seem fitting that Woody be tarred with the molester brush forever?!!

Oh wait…he already is. Because the burden of proof in the court of public opinion is ZERO. And it's also okay to present bullshit as fact, because we all know he's guilty right, so why check it out?

For instance, Soon-Yi was definitely NOT 15 when the polaroids were taken. I wasn't willing to accept this statement from Keith during the show, because I didn't think it was fair to make that part of the dialog without checking it out. Apparently to some of you, this makes me an asshole. So let me formally apologize right now: I'm sorry I didn't immediately accept Keith's untrue and un-researched statement as gospel. It's not because I don't trust Keith or am calling him a liar. Keith is a good friend whom I hold in high regard and I know him to be a person of high moral turpitude. But it's just my nature to check, it's free.

If you read Judge Wilk's decision, it states Soon-Yi's birth year at 1970 or 1972. It further states that Woody had almost nothing to do with any of the Farrow-Previn children, LEAST OF ALL Soon-Yi and that their friendship began when she asked to go with him to a Knicks game in 1990... She would've been, factually, at least 18, possibly 20. Their relationship slowly evolved out of going to the games together. The photos were taken some time after that. She would've been somewhere between 19-22.

You might say "big deal" but there's a big difference to most people in taking a nude photo of a girl of 15 or a woman of 19 or 21. Don't you think? And if you're going to go around calling a guy a rapist, pedophile and child molester, what does it hurt to get your facts straight? Why not be an informed Woody-hater??? That's all I'm saying.

It's not hard to understand why people who are only exposed to my public persona would see me as a misogynist. I've made significant changes in my life in the last 4-5 years, and over time developed a new understanding about my out-spoken anger towards women and the sometimes harsh way it manifested in my comedy. But once you're labeled, that it. The truth is, it's probably more fun that way for everyone, so fine. And I know that old voice can creep in sometimes, so what the hey.

But at heart, I'm not a misogynist, and misogyny has nothing to do with what I said on KATG the other day. Nor, is ANYTHING that I'm contending of a nature that would prevent a victim from coming forward. I never accused Dylan. I even stop short of accusing Mia.

It's highly doubtful that a fair airing of the actual facts and evidence of a very public situation, in which a person has been repeatedly called a rapist and child molester without sufficient evidence, would dissuade any young woman who might hear this program from reporting a sexual assault. To say such a thing is ludicrous, and I reject that idea entirely.

Looking at evidence and considering all sides doesn't amount to disbelieving the accusation. It's just discovery. You can't just take someone to prison the moment an accusation is leveled, so there's always going to be some degree of fact-checking. Think about it! It seems ridiculous to take the position that presenting and interpreting evidence and encouraging people to draw their conclusions based on facts and thought rather than raw emotion and hysteria is somehow wrong.

And by the way, not immediately believing a person's accusation doesn't amount to calling them a liar. That would imply some sort of moral judgment on my part, and I'm not saying that. It's disappointing that any form of critical thinking is interpreted as abject defense of a known rapist. What a world.

If anyone here has any questions about the case or my ideas about the case, I will gladly make myself available to tell you everything I've read. Every source I'll use is readily available to anyone, I don't have anything inside. My information is the same as yours. I'll show my work for anything I said on the show if anyone disbelieves anything I said. I'll put it in writing.

I'm asking you not to personally insult me or attack my character, as I don't intend to answer that kind of thing. I regret that some of you have taken a negative view towards me based on my ideas of fairness and the law, but I'd rather not come on this forum and have turds flung at me. Some of you have contradicted my ideas from the show, and I'm just trying to clear that up, nothing more.

I want to thank Keith and Chemda for putting up with me not agreeing with them and still being my friend. The fact that they invited me to come on the show and express my point of view on this, knowing it differed in key ways from their own, is just one of the coolest things a host of an show has done for me. I truly appreciate it.

And also thanks to those who have spoken well of me on the forums or elsewhere. Much obliged.

Thanks for your time and consideration, and sorry about the unwieldy length of this post.
Bucho, flerchin, lattaland and 8 others like this.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2014, 02:49 PM   #80 (permalink)
Senior Member
2020 Marathon Kickstarter Backer38-hour Marathon 2014 Kickstarter Backer
 
ssgtballard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Maine - its really to fucking cold to exist
Posts: 511
Quote:
Originally Posted by campy View Post
13-16 whatever, he was a father figure to this girl.
You're a father SSGT, what's wrong with you? You MUST be able to say that even if Soon-Yi was at the age of consent when the relationship began, dating a girl who considered you a father from 7 years old ISn't NORMAL

Add to that that she was UNDERAGE when he took NUDE PHOTOS of her....

please.
Where is the 16 age called out ? Woody Allen was never charged with child pornography and Mia never stated that the pictures were taken before Soon-Yi was an adult. The pictures would have been a complete win for Mia if they had been underage pictures.
Of course he is a creep for having an affair with his girlfriends daughter and the age gap is disgusting but everyone keeps putting him in a father figure role when the nannies raised Mia's kids and Woody's kids.

The difference is I am a father, I saw my daughter start as a baby and grow up to the 9 year old she is now. I have associated with her in a familial way from birth on. If you look at any of the studies on siblings who meet after adult hood their is a difference in the way they look at each other, without the family bond from a young age their is nothing to stop attraction from happening. This is the huge difference specially if Woody couldn't at the time tell the judge what his kids day to day life was let alone Mia's kids. Stop treating these two freaks as if they are you and me in our normal families.
Bucho, Scat, lattaland and 1 others like this.
__________________
http://twitter.com/ssgtballard
Quote:
Originally Posted by flerchin View Post
The SSgt has it exactly right.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:36 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
Keith and The GirlAd Management plugin by RedTyger