Dylan Farrow and Woody Allen Sexual Abuse, Yale Report

Mia & Dylan Farrow - New-Haven hospital, Sexual abuse evaluation

Skip the introduction about the sexual abuse allegation against Woody Allen by Dylan Farrow and go directly to the report: Child Sexual Abuse Clinic Evaluation of Dylan Farrow

Version française
Français

Short introduction to the sexual abuse allegation made by Dylan Farrow against Woody Allen

In August 1992, following a visit to Mia Farrow’s house in Bridgewater, Connecticut, Woody Allen was accused of sexual abuse on her adoptive 7 years old daughter, Dylan Farrow.

New-Haven hospital, Dylan Farrow Sexual abuse evaluation
New-Haven hospital, Dylan Farrow Sexual abuse evaluation

Yale-New Haven Hospital

Below is the report of the Child Sexual Abuse Clinic Evaluation of Dylan Farrow by the Yale-New Haven Hospital, leaked by Radar Online.

The referral was made by the Connecticut State Police at a meeting of the Police, State’s Attorney Frank Maco, and members of the Child Sexual Abuse Team.

The report completely dismisses Dylan Farrow sexual abuse allegation and clears Woody Allen: “It’s our expert opinion that Dylan was not sexually assaulted by Mr. Allen. Further, we believe that Dylan’s statements on videotape and her statements to us during our evaluation do not refer to actual events that occurred to her on August 4, 1992.”

New York State Department of Social Services

On October 7, 1993, a second independent 14-month-old investigation, from the New York State child welfare, cleared a second time Woody Allen and declared the Dylan Farrow sexual abuse allegation unfounded: “No credible evidence was found that the child named in this report has been abused or maltreated. This report has, therefore, been considered unfounded.”

RELATED CONTENT. Dylan Farrow: 8 lies in 9 paragraphs.

 

Child Sexual Abuse Clinic Evaluation of Dylan Farrow

Below is the typed transcription fir the Child Sexual Abuse Clinic Evaluation of Dylan Farrow by the Yale-New Haven Hospital, followed by the original document.

Before or after reading the report, you can follow some links and learn more about inconsistencies in Dylan Farrow’s statements, the Yale-New Haven Hospital and the Dr. Leventhal.

 

Typed transcription

Yale-New Haven Hospital
20 York Street. New Haven. CT 06504

March 17, 1993

Child Sexual Abuse Clinic Evaluation of Dylan Farrow

Dylan Farrow (BD 7/11/85, Unit # 1502912) was referred to the Child Sexual Abuse Clinic of Yale-New HavenHospital in September 1992. The referral was made by the Connecticut State Police at a meeting of the Police (BeatriceFarlekas and John Mucherino), State’s Attorney Frank Maco, and members of the Child Sexual Abuse Team. At that meeting, the history that the police had at the time was briefly presented, and the videotape (taken by Ms.Farrow) of Dylan telling what had reportedly happened to her was reviewed. Two major questions that were posed in the referral were:

Is Dylan telling the truth, and did we think that she was sexually abused?

To determine the meaning of Dylan’s statements and whether they were true, we interviewed her on nine occasions. In addition, because the family context and Dylan’s past psychiatric history are important in understanding the meaning of her statements, we met with both of her parents, two babysitters, and two psychotherapists who had evaluated and treated Dylan and Satchel.

The chronology of our evaluation is outlined below:

9/08/92 — Meeting with State Police and State’s Attorney Maco for presentation of case.

9/15/92 — Meeting of Ms. Sawyer and Detective John Mucherino to present more details of the information known by the police.

9/18/92, 9/25, 10/2, 10/9, 10/16, 10/23, 10/30, 11/6, 11/13 — Interviews of Dylan alone and interviews with Ms. Mia Farrow alone by Ms. Sawyer and Dr. Hamilton.

10/14/92 — Interview of babysitter, Kristie Groteke by Ms. Sawyer and Dr. Hamilton.

11/17/92, 11/30/92, 1/7/93 — Interviews of Mr. Woody Allen by Ms. Sawyer, Dr. Hamilton, and Dr. Leventhal.

12/04/92.— Interview of Ms. Farrow by Ms. Sawyer, Dr. Hamilton, and Dr. Leventhal (videotape reviewed with Ms. Farrow).

 

 

In summary, Dylan presented as an intelligent, verbal 7-year-old whose story telling was quite elaborate and fantasy-like at times and who manifested loose associations in her thinking. She appeared confused about what to relate to the interviewers and was very controlling of what she would say. In her statements and her play she elaborated interrelated themes. She was upset by the loss of her father and Soon-Yi and worried that her father might take her from her mother’s care. She felt protective of and worried for her mother. Dylan was very much attuned to her mother’s pain, and her mother reinforced Dylan’s losses and her negative view of her father.

Assessment of Whether Dylan was Sexually Abused:

It is our expert opinion that Dylan was not sexually abused by Mr. Allen. Further, we believe that Dylan’s statements on videotape and her statements to us during our evaluation do not refer to actual events that occurred to her on August 4, 1992. Our initial impression was formulated in December 1992 before reviewing any outside materials and before meeting with anyone outside the family except the Connecticut State Police and Kristie Groteke, a babysitter. Our opinion was reinforced by the additional information that we gathered throughout the rest of the evaluation.

In developing our opinion, we considered three hypotheses to explain Dylan’s statements. First, that Dylan’s statements were true and that Mr. Allen had sexually abused her; second, that Dylan’s statements were not true but were made up by an emotionally vulnerable child who was caught up in a disturbed family and who was responding to the stresses in the family; and third, that Dylan was coached or influenced by her mother, Ms. Farrow.

While we can conclude that Dylan was not sexually abused, we can not be definitive about whether the second formulation by itself or the third formulation by itself is true. We believe that it is more likely that a combination of these two formulations best explains Dylan’s allegations of sexual abuse. The major reasons for our opinion that Dylan was not sexually abused are the following:

(1) There were important inconsistencies in Dylan’s statements in the videotape and in her statements to us.

(2) She appeared to struggle with how to tell about the touching.

(3) She told the story in a manner that was overly thoughtful and controlling. There was no spontaneity in her statements, and a rehearsed quality was suggested in how she spoke.

(4) Her descriptions of the details surrounding the alleged events were unusual and were inconsistent.

 

Original document

Dylan Farrow abuse by Woody Allen: Yale-New Haven Hospital, Child Sexual Abuse Clinic Evaluation
Dylan Farrow abuse by Woody Allen: Yale-New Haven Hospital, Child Sexual Abuse Clinic Evaluation

 

Moses Farrow has confirmed that his mother has coached his sister Dylan Farrow

The report suggests that Mia Farrow could have coached or influenced Dylan Farrow’s sexual abuse allegation:

“…;and third, that Dylan was coached or influenced by her mother, Ms. Farrow.”

A Son Speaks Out

Moses Farrow is Woody Allen and Mia Farrow adopted son. His testimony, A SON SPEAKS OUT, by Moses Farrow, has been published on May 23, 2018, and confirms that his mother, Mia Farrow, has coached Dylan Farrow:

“Those conclusions perfectly match my own childhood experience: coaching, influencing, and rehearsing are three words that sum up exactly how my mother tried to raise us. I know that Dylan has recently referred to this brainwashing theory as “spin” by our father – but it was nothing of the sort. It was not only the conclusion reached by a state-ordered investigation, it was the reality of life in our household.”

Moses Farrow had previously publicly denounced that the allegation of sexual abuse against Woody Allen was the result of Dylan’s brainwashing by Mia Farrow:

More tweet by @MosesFarrow about the sexual abuse allegation against Woody Allen by Dylan Farrow.

In 1992, Moses Farrow was already saying that Mia Farrow had made up the sexual abuse accusation against Woody Allen

According to the Los Angeles Times:

The nanny Monica Thompson said on deposition that on one occasion almost immediately after the alleged incident, Moses Farrow, 14, another child Allen and Farrow adopted, indicated doubts about what, if anything, had taken place.

“Moses came over to me and said that he believes that Ms. Farrow had made up the accusation that was being said by Dylan,” Thompson said in an affidavit.

RELATED CONTENT. Woody Allen Sexual-Abuse Allegation: 20 Undeniable Facts

4 Comments on “Dylan Farrow and Woody Allen Sexual Abuse, Yale Report”

  1. I never had a minimum doubt about Woody Allen innocence, even before knowing all his legal questions, the two separate investigations, the official documents and the very accurate description of the Farrow’s family under the Mia’s total control done by Moses Farrow, I simply thought: is it possible that a man can act as a paedophile just for fifteen minutes of his life? And plus, why a man decided to sexually assault his daughter just when the mum is against him and openly trying to drive him in the mud? If Allen was an abuser probably would have tried to assault other girls in the family or in the movies environment, sadly he just had an affair with SoonYi and built a family with her… Even without legal evidences, and in this case there are a lot of evidences in Allen favor, the logic can suggest that allegations against Allen are simply the result of a very vindicative woman, yes a scorned woman can do everything for revenge and Mia did it. I think we can call her as the Medea of Manhattan.

  2. I agree. Nobody is a pedophile for 15 minutes out of a whole lifetime, more especially not in a house full of people with no realistic place to go.

  3. The more I read about this case the less I understand the persecution of Woody Allen. Woody Allen was subject to two substantial investigations back in the 90’s and cleared with even the criticism of coaching by Mia Farrow. Had there been any likelihood of a successful prosecution he would have been charged and had his day in court. This never happened because there was no proof and therefore no point in charging Woody Allen. A court case would have clearly found Wood Allen innocent and non of the present backlash would be happening. So now the court of ‘MeToo’ has taken the judges role and continues to peddle lies and falsehoods, giving Wood Allen no opportunity to clear his name in the World of ‘social media’. It would be good if the critics actually read up on the case.

    1. Thank you for your comment Paul. It seems that many people are just looking for a pretext to spit on Woody Allen: they don’t take care if he’s guilty or innocent. And many fake journalists are just MeTooWitchHunt groupies ready to “believe all women” (except Soon-Yi) rather than telling the truth.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.