HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017371.jpg

4.2.12
WC: 191694

true, Woody’s actions would demonstrate extreme insensitivity to Mia Farrow’s family. Here is
how the appellate court ultimately characterized Woody’s behavior.

“In January of 1992, Mr. Allen took the photographs of Ms. Previn [Soon Yi] which were
discovered on the mantelpiece in his apartment by Ms. Farrow and were introduced into
evidence...Mr. Allen in his trial testimony stated that he took the photos at Ms. Previn's
suggestion and that he considered them erotic and not pornographic. We have viewed the
photographs and do not share Mr. Allen's characterization of them. We find the fact that
Mr. Allen took them at a time when he was formally assuming a legal responsibility for
two of Ms. Previn's siblings to be totally unacceptable. The distinction Mr. Allen makes
between Ms. Farrow's other children and Dylan, Satchel and Moses is lost on this Court.
The children themselves do not draw the same distinction that Mr. Allen does. This is
sadly demonstrated by the profound effect his relationship with Ms. Previn has had on the
entire family. Allen's testimony that the photographs of Ms. Previn “... were taken, as I
said before, between two consenting adults wanting to do this ...” demonstrates a chosen
ignorance of his and Ms. Previn's relationships to Ms. Farrow, his three children and Ms.
Previn's other siblings. His continuation of the relationship, viewed in the best possible
light, shows a distinct absence of judgment. It demonstrates to this Court Mr. Allen's
tendency to place inappropriate emphasis on his own wants and needs and to minimize and
even ignore those of his children. At the very minimum, it demonstrates an absence of any
parenting skills.”

Mia asked me to call Woody and tell him to stop doing what he was doing. She told me that
Woody admired me and that he kept a copy of my book Chutzpah on his bed table.

I asked Mia to have Woody call me but he apparently refused so I decided to write him a letter,
which I asked his lawyer to give him. In the letter, I urged Woody to try to resolve the matter
privately:

“I still believe that matter can be resolved without even more escalation and damage to all
parties. As you and Mia both know, I am a great admirer of your work, and I do not want
to see your career and your life destroyed. Right now you are on that road and something
must be done to head it off, not only for your sake, but for the sake of the children and for
Mia.”

I don’t know whether he ever got the letter. I received no reply. Mia then asked me to contact
his lawyers and see if the matter could be resolved without any public disclosure. I said I would
try. I called his lawyers and they agreed to a meeting in New York. I brought with me to the
meeting a law school classmate, David Levett, who was a leading lawyer in Connecticut and was
knowledgeable about the Connecticut law relating to such issues. Our goal, and Mia’s, was to
bring about some resolution of this troubling matter without any publicity, which she felt would
be harmful to her children.

284

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017371