The Secret Report From 1993 That EXONERATED Woody Allen

[Major Nikon]

[font color="color" size="5" face="face"]Doctors Told Cops That Dylan Farrow’s Sex Abuse Story Was ‘Fantasy-Like,’ Influenced By Mom Mia — Read It Here[/font]

“She told the story in a manner that was overly thoughtful and controlling. There was no spontaneity in her statement and a rehearsed quality was suggested in how she spoke.”

That was the bombshell finding medical professionals at Yale-New Haven Hospital in Connecticut delivered in 1993, concluding that iconic movie maker Woody Allen did NOT sexually abuse his adopted daughter Dylan, then seven, RadarOnline.com has exclusively learned.

Until now, the report — Connecticut law enforcement officials relied on it when deciding not to charge Allen with a crime — has remained a closely-guarded secret, available to those only involved in the police investigation.

But today, RadarOnline.com can reveal the content of two crucial pages of the document, provided to this website in the wake of Dylan’s detailed account of the alleged abuse to the New York Times, during which she claimed she was once sexually assaulted by Allen while sitting on the floor playing with a train set, aged seven.

http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2014/02/woody-allen-dylan-farrow-sexual-abuse-secret-report-exonerated/

http://amradaronline.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/yale-new-haven-hospital-allen.pdf

[DURHAM D]

1. Wow. Woody is still workin' it.

Love RadarOnline- just this week they published the Elizabether Hurley / Bill Clinton story. They have great sources.

Is Tom Sizemore the source on this one too?

[seabeyond]

2. clinton/hurley/sizemore. that is where i heard this source. thank you. nt

[Major Nikon]

4. Wow. Ad hominem over a scanned document on letterhead

Speaking of Clinton, the Lewinsky scandal was broke by Drudge. I guess we should go back and take another look at that one. John Edwards will be pissed about this as well.

[kcr]

3. The reporters for Radar Online came from The Enquirer and The Star

Real reliable source

[Major Nikon]

6. So are you saying the document is fake?

[kcr]

11. I'm saying

The headline is pure tabloid bullshit. Then I saw the source and figured it out.

[Major Nikon]

12. The headline is correct

What makes you think it is bullshit?

Even if you were somehow convinced it was, that doesn't make the document any less relevant.

[Gravitycollapse]

14. The document is almost certainly real.

It seems unreasonable to believe it is not.

[kcr]

15. It's tabloid bullshit. Sources said. What sources?

"A source said: “The allegations against Allen came from biased and unreliable sources, including Dylan, who this report described as a ‘dreamy child who ‘had difficulty distinguishing fantasy from reality’ and Farrow and her friends and family, who harbored a great deal of animosity towards Allen."

Bat Boy level tabloid nonsesne.

[HERVEPA]

19. Well, actually, the enquirer is a pretty reliable source.

[kcr]

21. Hardly n/t

[bravenak]

5. I like reading the comments section.

Seems like radar readers don't believe the excerpts anymore than the judge believed the full report.
I believe Dylan.

[itsrobert]

7. Looks like this backs up what Moses Farrow has said

Interesting. Not sure who to believe.

[Gravitycollapse]

8. Nothing that report says is revelation. It was all known before.

Which mean this is, in essence, sensationalism. Essentially all of the claims made in the newly released two pages were already explained in the court documents from Allen v. Farrow.

[Major Nikon]

10. It contains several facts I hadn't seen before

It lists when and by whom Dylan was interviewed and when Farrow was present. It lists all the people the official investigation interviewed. It also says Dylan was upset over the loss of her father, which seems to contradict Farrow.

Had you seen any of that somewhere else? If so, where?

[Gravitycollapse]

13. Some, if not all, of those on the list are mentioned in Allen v. Farrow.

The babysitter, Kristie Groteke, is mentioned in both. As far as the others, I cannot be sure without going back and closely examining the court decision.

[Major Nikon]

16. I've seen some of what's in it

However, much of that came from Allen's assertions which you rejected in another post.

[cali]

9. Please don't do this.

[dionysus]

17. by now, what's the point? there's people who will always believe he is guilty, those who believe the

opposite, and those wise people who realize they weren't there and will never know what happened.

[stevenleser]

18. That is why I voted that I would rather not see this in GD and LBN

it's immovable object meets an irresistible force. The two sides argue the same points over and over again calling each other the same nasty names, etc. and it is not resolvable.

[Major Nikon]

20. Things get resolved in GD?

When did this happen?

[stevenleser]

22. Sometimes. But this cannot be prosecuted because of the statute of limitations so it has

no potential end save one of the parties admit to being wrong.