He started a sexual relationship with his girlfriend's daughter and the sister of his children and it, quite predictably, tore the family apart. I'm comfortable judging that as creepy even though I'll never cross paths with him. As I said earlier, Soon-Yi also bears responsibility in that, but Allen far more so given their respective ages and his familial role.
One thing that is statistically likely, if Allen is a pedophile there will be more victims. If he's into teenagers there will be more stories. People will feel emboldened to speak out whether they were victims, flings or witnessed behavior they found questionable.
The only reason there are "conflicting reports" is because Allen has a legion of apologists who will gladly stand up for him, and because Allen has crafted his own story that makes both Dylan and himself the helpless victims of a deranged Mia Farrow. I suppose it's a bit like saying there's a "controversy" over evolution or climate change. The available evidence points to a very specific conclusion, but enough people are claiming there isn't enough evidence or have their own reasons for claiming the evidence is wrong that you have this element of doubt. But the doubt is manufactured--it's not based on anything substantial. Given the available facts, it seems much more likely than not that Allen behaved highly inappropriately with Dylan. How far that inappropriate behavior went is certainly up for debate, but I think the particulars matter less than that it happened at all. All I can say is, one would have to be a complete fool to leave children in Allen's care.
I don't disagree with you that that Allen's behavior was, at the very least, questionable. I'm not defending his attitudes, his choices or his actions. Hell, I certainly would not leave my own seven year-old daughter in his company, much less his care. And I have no particular care for his work or his artistic legacy, either. But the fact remains ... only a handful of people know the whole story, and it's quite possible that their remembrances have been affected by either emotion, bias, personal interest, and/or outside influences. I do wish more conclusive evidence would come forth, at least for Dylan's sake, so that she can find that peace, closure and justice (if it's warranted). But short of Allen or Mia Farrow coming forward and changing their story and bringing finality to their own feud, I don't see that as the case. As a result, I don't know for certain exactly what happened. And because of that, and without any further evidence, I cannot presume that he's guilty of a crime. To go a step further, though, Allen is certainly guilty of dubious behavior and attitudes toward girls and women younger than himself (at the very least), as well as making choices that put his family in this position to begin with. For example: This is a good point. It would seem that Allen and Soon-Yi have since built a healthy, meaningful family life together, so, good for them for their happiness. But at what cost? Certainly, we see how their decision to be together affected their family. Mia's reaction to it didn't help, either, of course. But there are times when you have to sacrifice your desires for others, especially your family. Clearly (and even though we have the benefit of hindsight, the results should have been foreseeable), this was one of those times. And now, even twenty years later, his family has still not come to terms with his choices.
I didn't say that. I intended my remarks to apply exactly as I qualified them, in this particular case and without any implication of broader generalization, as I covered not only in the part of my post that you quoted but also especially in the parts that you elected not to include. I can help clarify that, by boldfacing portions that are relevant and additionally underlining passages that are especially so: In any case, the extent of the good I can do here is what I already did years ago, on account of the fact that Allen's films don't really engage me. Someday, I'll probably catch Annie Hall, just to see what it is that Star Wars lost the Academy Awards for Best Picture, Director, and Screenplay to, and maybe Interiors, because Siskel & Ebert praised it, but neither's viewing is even on my horizon right now. This thread holds what might be described as an academic interest to me, but little else.
So as long as something's technically legal you refuse to have an opinion on it IF the person committing the act will never cross your path?
No, you've gotten it wrong—again. I said "pass judgment" not "have an opinion". I've formed an opinion just fine. It's just short of condemning the man. I don't condemn him, because there is a lack of evidence warranting his condemnation. The only facts in evidence are that he was allowed to marry Soon-Yi. Since they were married in Venice, their marriage had to be legal in both the US and Italy. She's an adult and there's no evidence that he's abusing her, so what business is it of mine to call the marriage illegitimate? Are people really comfortable second-guessing an adult's decisions which have been allowed by law, in not just one but two first-world countries? I guess they are. People seem to want to come to Soon-Yi's aid, by denying her a right to make decisions on her own. If there were evidence that he ever abused her, it would be different, and I believe I said that quite clearly, but there isn't any such evidence. In the case of Allen, I've already done all the good I can. If my path were to cross his, then it would, by definition, be necessary for me to do more. To be honest, I'd prefer not to get involved with him, assuming that that's even a possibility (which of course, it isn't). It's not even clear that there is anything for any of us not involved in their lives to do at this point, besides posture. So, you can join the mob with pitchforks and torches if you like, just leave me out of that.
And in this case, what "evidence" is that, exactly? And what "very specific conclusion"? This matter was thoroughly investigated in 1992. The various experts and authorities involved said variously that the evidence indicated no sexual abuse took place, that it was inconclusive, or that it was insufficient to sustain a charge. Of these only the first qualifies as a specific conclusion. The alleged victim was a young child at the time, and her statements upon being questioned were inconsistent; neither of these facts necessarily indicate that the allegation was untrue per se, but they do indicate that those statements cannot be considered reliable evidence of its truth. Certainly, we can no more reasonably expect statements made after such an extensive amount of time has passed—let alone time during which the alleged victim has grown from a child into an adult, and by her own admission been exposed to a whole range of private AND public influence regarding the matter that may potentially have colored her memory—to be any more reliable indicators of its truth. Unsworn statements made decades after the fact by the alleged victim are not reliable evidence. By none of the above do I intend to imply that the alleged victim should be dismissed out of hand, or that she is a liar, or that she has been brainwashed, or that her mother is deranged, or that Woody Allen bears no blame in this matter. I don't know any of that, nor do I assume it. But I do know that this is NOT a clear-cut case where a preponderance of evidence points to one conclusion. That much is an odious falsehood.
Dylan is an adult now I think her accounts are less likely to be orchestrated by her mother than they were as a child. From what I understand he was not charged at the time because she was too fragile to withstand a trial, not because there wasn't enough evidence of abuse. That coupled with the fact that the guy has some obvious issue with sexual boundaries I tend to believe it happened.
The trouble is that memory is so capricious that if she was coached by Farrow to think/say these things as a child then they're probably deeply ingrained as "real" to her now. Heck people are clearly able to fool themselves into thinking things that happened to other people actually happened to them, let alone when someone is telling them it did happen to them over and over. Which doesn't mean Allen is or isn't guilty, just that its near impossible to prove without some other evidence or, as someone said above, Farrow or Allen coming out and fessing up.
I agree we will never know with certainty one way or another, but I tend to think it's more likely it did happen then didn't because of the reasons I listed above.
What Maco said is prosecutor-speak for "there is insufficient evidence to sustain a charge." Think about it: if no physical evidence indicated any sexual abuse took place, and there were no witnesses who could credibly present testimony to that effect, then of course he had no choice but to not pursue charges. I don't think Dylan's adulthood makes her statements now any more reliable than those she made as a child. If anything, the opposite. As others have mentioned, human memories have been oft-demonstrated to be both unreliable in and of themselves, and to be susceptible to distortion/embellishment/refinement/alteration through internal and external influence. How much does any of us really remember from when we were 7, how clearly, and how accurately to objective reality? Moreover, in this case we are talking about memories involving events—and these include not only the alleged abuse, but the disintegration of her parents' relationship, the custody battle, the resulting family divide, the rampant public attention and speculation, et al.—that surely would have been difficult for a young child to fully comprehend and contextualize, so to me it seems more likely than not that she has arrived at whatever her current understanding of them may be with some help from others. I find it difficult to believe that her mother did not influence how she felt about Allen as she grew up, as at least one of her older adopted siblings has indicated, and we know from her own statements that her perspective has been influenced by survivors of sexual abuse. As for Woody Allen's "obvious issues with sexual boundaries," I am still getting a distinct whiff of people conflating Allen's relationship with Soon-Yi and what is alleged to have happened with his adopted daughter, falsely reasoning that one is somehow analogous to or indicative of the other.
Take out the accusations of child molesting and him having any sexual relationship with Soon-yi is still incredibly inappropriate.
Then call him an asshole, if you want. He might be that. But there's nothing illegal about being an asshole.
did I say there was? I said he has obvious issues with sexual boundaries. There is a boundary there even if she was adopted and even if he was never married to her mother. She is still his children's half sister.