Rehearsed? Not only rehearsed but in the clip showed last night it looked as if Dylan was reading her statement.
On Monday, March 1, 2021 at 2:06:12 AM UTC-5 PGage wrote: > Episode 2: Oh brother... > > I will inhibit a play by play, but will just repeat that I don’t know if > Woody Allen sexually abused his 7-year old adopted daughter, but, based on > the HBO series so far, neither does anybody else. Nothing in the second > episode can be considered reliable evidence of abuse (although with Carly > Simon they really brought out the big guns). > > But wait, that’s not really true. More precisely, the second episode is > full of evidence that young Dylan was abused, but there is no way to tell > if it was sexual abuse by her father or psychological abuse by her mother. > > Even that is not quite right, because even if Allen did what he is accused > of, what Mia did (videotaping her 7 year old daughter repeatedly in intense > interviews with leading questions (and its clear from the Gaithersburg > questions and the girls answers these have been rehearsed many times prior > to what we are seeing) is harmful, both psychologically and legally. > > So, what I take away, is she was abused by her mother, and may or may not > have been abused by her father. > > > > On Tue, 23 Feb 2021 at 10:59 PM [email protected] <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I want to clarify my statement below. Whether one believes her or not, >> Dylan Farrow has been through hell. She apparently believes that what she >> says happened, happened and whether those memories are real or implanted is >> irrelevant; they're a part of her. >> >> While she's hardly been a shrinking violet over the past hew years (the >> "By the Way ..." documentary shows numerous interviews--where she's >> perfectly composed--and mentions she has a book coming out), the story has >> never been really been challenged in a court of law, and even Mia Farrow's >> interview in Part One that reportedly claims she treated Soon-Yi calmly and >> in an adult manner after finding the photos directly contradicts her >> previous sworn testimony that she went ballistic and beat her. >> >> I don't want to see Dylan Farrow broken on the witness stand, but I do >> want to see the family's claims put under oath. >> >> --Dave Sikula >> >> On Tuesday, February 23, 2021, 9:52:32 PM PST, Paul Murray < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> It's disappointing to see serious news organizations (NYT, WaPo) taking >> the bait and covering each individual episode, giving the project a certain >> gravitas that it doesn't appear to deserve. >> >> That's especially true given the issues raised about the filmmakers' two >> previous documentaries, where some say they put advocacy over facts >> (example: "How The Hunting Ground Blurs the Truth" >> <https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2015/06/the-hunting-ground-a-closer-look-at-the-influential-documentary-reveals-the-filmmakers-put-advocacy-ahead-of-accuracy.html>; >> >> something like 19 Harvard Law professors had serious complaints about that >> doc). I have not seen any of them, nor do I intend to, based on what I've >> read. >> >> They have claimed, apparently with a straight face, that the public >> hasn't heard the Farrow side until now. As I observed earlier, they also >> told the Post critic that their film is not about Allen. >> >> Yes, they got Dylan to give an on-camera interview. That's something new, >> although that doesn't necessarily increase our factual knowledge. I believe >> that Dylan believes it happened. But that doesn't mean that it did happen. >> >> I think news organizations ought to at least wait to see all the episodes >> to cover them. Let's see what they include and also what they leave out >> that would contradict or muddy their narrative. But that ain't gonna happen >> these days. >> >> >> On Tuesday, February 23, 2021 at 8:31:53 PM UTC-5 Dave Sikula wrote: >> >> Well, they're not applying ethical journalism practices to the rest of >> it, so why should this be an exception? >> >> I'd love to see Allen sue both Farrows for defamation and get them on the >> stand under oath. It would never happen, because Allen doesn't want to go >> there and the caterwaulers who hate him would go ballistic, but it'd be >> nice to see a good lawyer shred them. >> >> --Dave Sikula >> >> On Tuesday, February 23, 2021, 12:49:46 PM PST, PGage <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> >> So, I was wondering about the use of Allen’s book (and voice) in the HBO >> doc. Why would he give permission to them, but how could they use it >> without permission? >> >> The LAT reported yesterday that Allen’s publisher (Skyhorse Publishing) >> is considering a lawsuit for copyright infringement. The Filmmakers are >> claiming it is Fair Use, which - Wow, does that seem like a stretch. Not >> only are the excerpts several and extensive, but they are not presented as >> quotations from his book (though there is on screen text attribution) but >> as parallel to sound from interviews the makers did with other sources. In >> other words, the excerpts are used not for educational purposes, not as a >> prime for discussion, but to create the misleading impression that the >> makers interviewed Allen and are providing his point of view as part of a >> balanced presentation. >> >> I have embraced a liberal view of Fair Use over the years, but this seems >> way, way over the line. >> >> >> >> https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/books/story/2021-02-22/woody-allen-documentary-memoir-lawsuit-skyhorse >> On Sun, 21 Feb 2021 at 7:56 PM PGage <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Dave’s summary of the bias and distortion is accurate, though they >> represent Woody with audio from his book, in his voice, which seems like >> they would need his permission to do? >> >> -- >> Sent from Gmail Mobile >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >> Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. >> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/tvornottv/4ZMX-YOnBtg/unsubscribe. >> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >> [email protected]. >> >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkYKgGHF-4%2BF0wepGgcRRXcHVdYHF-xjhWZsNvQWS8-h_Dw%40mail.gmail.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkYKgGHF-4%2BF0wepGgcRRXcHVdYHF-xjhWZsNvQWS8-h_Dw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >> Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. >> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/tvornottv/4ZMX-YOnBtg/unsubscribe. >> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >> [email protected]. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/09cbf70a-bde0-452e-9f56-1012e7c6023fn%40googlegroups.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/09cbf70a-bde0-452e-9f56-1012e7c6023fn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> >> -- >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "TVorNotTV" group. >> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/265386718.468301.1614149906362%40mail.yahoo.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/265386718.468301.1614149906362%40mail.yahoo.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> > -- > Sent from Gmail Mobile > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/13639112-b6a7-457e-9685-61d646c6059cn%40googlegroups.com.
