Moses Farrow, the adopted son of Woody Allen and Mia Farrow, came to his father’s defense in a detailed blogpost Wednesday, insisting that the Hollywood director did not rape his sister Dylan and accusing their mother of being abusive and manipulative.
Moses, 39, was adopted by Mia Farrow from South Korea in 1980, and Allen adopted him as well in 1992, along with Dylan.
Just a few months later, Mia and Woody split up after it emerged that the filmmaker was having an affair with his adopted daughter Soon-Yi Previn.
Son speaks out: Moses Farrow on Wednesday hit out at his adoptive mother Mia (pictured together in 2002), claiming that she brainwashed his sister Dylan into falsely accusing Woody Allen of molesting her as a child
During a bitter custody battle that ensued between Mia Farrow and Allen, alleegetins arose that the Manhattan director sexually assaulted Dylan when she was seven years old.
Allen, who went on to marry Previn in 1997, was investigated over the rape claims but was never charged with a crime.
In his 4,600-word personal essay titled ‘A Son Speaks Out,’ Moses Farrow, who now works as a therapist, writes that on August 4, 1992 – the day of the alleged assault – he was present in the family’s country house in Bridgewater, Connecticut, and that Allen was never alone with Dylan.
‘Along with five kids, there were three adults in the house, all of whom had been told for months what a monster Woody was,’ he writes. ‘None of us would have allowed Dylan to step away with Woody, even if he tried.’
In her viral 2014 open letter published in the New York Times, which opened Allen to a new round of scrutiny, Dylan described in detail the alleged rape in the attic.
‘He told me to lay on my stomach and play with my brother’s electric train set,’ she recalled. ‘Then he sexually assaulted me. He talked to me while he did it, whispering that I was a good girl, that this was our secret, promising that we’d go to Paris and I’d be a star in his movies.
‘I remember staring at that toy train, focusing on it as it traveled in its circle around the attic. To this day, I find it difficult to look at toy trains.’
But according to Moses, Dylan’s narrative is riddled with falsities: there was no electric train in the attic because it was a cramped, unfinished crawl space where the children were not allowed to play because it bristled with exposed nails and mousetraps.
‘The idea that the space could possibly have accommodated a functioning electric train set, circling around the attic, is ridiculous,’ Moses writes. ‘Now, whenever I hear Dylan making a public statement about what allegedly happened to her that day when she was barely seven, I can only think of that imaginary train set, which she never brought up during the original investigation or custody hearing.’