Woody Allen's Tell
Channel: Jonathan Langdale
Date: 2014-02-03

Woody Allen's asks us to be logical. He doesn't answer the question in a straight forward way by first saying "no," instead, he offers his description of child abuse by a famous old man as being highly illogical. 

Woody wants to assume that child abuse is not logically. That his own circumstances, as described, are illogical and that he would never do an illogical thing. This almost supposes that there are occasions where child abuse would have been more logical? Just not that point in his career? This seems to be the most illogical thing about his statement.

He wants you to think he is saying "no," without having to really say it.

The event in question is said to have occurred in 1992.  His daughter accuses him of having done this many times in the past, just as Woody describes. 

"On August 4 (1992), Woody was in Connecticut to visit the children, and Mia and Casey went shopping, taking along Mia's two most recently adopted children—a blind Vietnamese girl named Tam, 11, and Isaiah, a seven-month-old black baby born to a crack-addicted mother. While they were gone, there was a brief period, perhaps 15 minutes, when Woody and Dylan vanished from sight. The baby-sitter who was inside searched high and low for them through the cluttered old farmhouse, but she couldn't find them. The outside baby-sitter, after a look at the grounds around the house, concluded the two must be inside somewhere. When Mia got home a short time later, Dylan and Woody were outside, and Dylan didn't have any underpants on. (Allen later said that he had not been alone with Dylan. He refused to submit hair and fingerprint samples to the Connecticut state police or to cooperate unless he was assured that nothing he said would be used against him.)"

http://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/archive/1992/11/farrow199211