With all that's been said about the allegations against Woody Allen, this ruling by the judge against Allen is the place to start.
It is very detailed and extensive and settles many factual "questions" that the media haven't covered well.
In short, Allen was already in therapy for acting inappropriately towards Dylan. The therapist who was apparently more on Allen's side found him fairly obsessed with her (I believe before the relationship with Soon-Yi even came out) although she says she didn't see it as "sexual." Obviously she'd be motivated not to see that, given who he was and that at that time there weren't accusations of actual abuse against him.
Links:
https://www.scribd.com/document/205403621/Allen-v-Farrow-Custody-Ruling-June-7-1993
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/danny-shea/heres-the-1993-woody-alle_b_4746866.html
view the rest of the comments →
Are_we_sure ago
The custody trial did not litigate the fact of whether or not he abused Dylan. It simply wasn't the issue before the court. And since that was the case it made the custody issue a lot easier.
This is not actually the case (This is because you need find the actual testimony that occurred to get the full flavor of this case.) This therapist was a psychologist who specialized in children and her primary patient was Satchel (now Ronan) Farrow, but she was familiar with family dynamic
Here's the full quote of what she said.
https://www.thenation.com/article/woody-and-mia-modern-family-timeline/ This link is a very good timeline of the facts in this case.
There's no basis to say this therapist was on Allen's side as opposed to be on the side of the truth. She knew Dylan quite well and had examined her previously. What would she not be on Dylan's side?
The Farrow side basically dismissed any professional testimony that was against their case as biased towards Woody Allen. They never did explain why the doctors would not be biased towards the child in a case of actual abuse or biased towards the truth. They only became biased after they gave their opinion. Dr Coates was first doctor called Mia Farrow called about this accusation.
I have no idea how you could speak to the doctor's motivations, let alone her obvious motivations. There's no reason to expect her to be biased. And you are wrong, as to when she made these comments. This was testimony under oath at the custody trial. This was months of after the original accusation of abuse that Dr. Coates was the first medical professional to hear about.
There is still to this day, only a single accusation. And none of the doctors or psychologists involved in this accusation would say that any abuse occurred which is why both NY and CT concluded no abuse occurred.
Psalm100 ago
Are_we_sure ago
How, can you share his reservations if you've never seen the report?
by the way this part is interesting
inconclusive means this guy couldn't say abuse occurred either.