History of Feminism
In reply to the discussion: The vilification of Mia Farrow on DU [View all]BainsBane
(55,389 posts)The family court judge ruled their study did not conform with professional standards. They destroyed their notes. They didn't observe Dylan and Woody together before making recommendations. The judge's ruling makes clear that the state experts in CT determined the study could not be relied on. He spells all of that out in the document linked to throughout this thread.
The fact they would not testify is particularly problematic. They would not submit to cross examination. Between that and the highly irregular move of destroying notes, the judge believed it impossible to consider it reliable.
Now, I don't know of any solid evidence that Woody paid them off. Certainly it looks suspicious. We can't know, however.
Regardless, to continue to site it that study as evidence that Dylan was not abused when it was ruled unreliable by the court is misleading, at best.
You need to read the family court ruling and quit swallowing Woody's story, the vast majority of which is entirely without merit. Your continued evocation of facts rings hollow when you have assiduously avoided engaging with he official court record. It appears to me that you are not interested in facts at all. You are determined to repeat Woody's story, even thought it is was found unreliable by the court.