Barbour, Lazar, Edelmann to star in TALE OF TWO CITIES- Page 6

[SueleenGay]

Posted: 7/3/08 at 12:54am

check out the Daily News article where a reporter who attended proceedings, talked about how this case was one sided from the beginning. I also remember reading from a couple of sources that the "other" girl was nothing more than a third malicious party trying to colaborate with the accuser. The "other" girl in mention (and her Mom, even) was willing to go testify in James' favor.
Gee, I guess I'm not that bad at reasearching, after all

How about some links to these articles?

Do you have any children?

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 7/3/08 at 1:12am

Call me crazy, many have, but if you have spent time in jail, I think you are a criminal.
I know many actors and other crew people who know this is not an isolated incident.

[bwaybabe2]

Posted: 7/3/08 at 1:17am

Many innocent people have spent time in jail. Do you think Martha Stewart is a criminal?
Sueleen...I'm going to give it a shot to the links, hope it works...:) --I was referring to the comment by "kentd" in the NYDN...





http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2008/02/29/2008-02-29_broadways_beast_sentenced_for_molestatio.html Updated On: 7/3/08 at 01:17 AM

[wonderfulwizard11]

Posted: 7/3/08 at 1:20am

Um, technically Martha Stewart is a criminal. She was convicted of a crime.

[SueleenGay]

Posted: 7/3/08 at 1:22am

Um, yes, Martha Stewart has a CRIMINAL RECORD. You really are just pulling our legs, aren't you?

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 7/3/08 at 1:24am

Webster's:
crime n: 1. an act in violation of a law
2. sin

criminal: a person guilty of a crime.

[bwaybabe2]

Posted: 7/3/08 at 1:34am

I know they gave her a "criminal" record...my point was that she is no more a real criminal than anyone on the street. Does she pose a threat to you, really? Actually, there's probably more real criminals out there roaming the streets, when people like Martha, etc...otherwise upstanding citizens, get nailed for framing situations.
Sueleen, I'm still getting those links...hang on.

Check out comments #21, 23, 24, 26, 27


http://glosslip.com/2008/03/06/actor-and-scientology-dabbler-james-barbour-pleads-guilty-to-sexual-crimes-with-a-minor/ Updated On: 7/3/08 at 01:34 AM

[SueleenGay]

Posted: 7/3/08 at 1:35am

Barbour initially denied the allegations, calling his accuser a conniving gold digger. But in January, he was unmasked as a liar and pleaded guilty in Manhattan Supreme Court to two counts of endangering the welfare of a child.

"When a 35-year-old man engages in sexual acts with a 15-year-old child, it is a crime, period," said prosecutor Maxine Rosenthal.

Is that the part you forgot to read?

[bwaybabe2]

Posted: 7/3/08 at 1:40am

No. That's the part YOU choose to read. Remember, that is the "prosecutor" talking, right? What, honestly, do you think she is going to say to make her case...? That she fought to keep evidence supporting Barbour, and exposing her client as something different from what was known, out of court that day?

[SueleenGay]

Posted: 7/3/08 at 1:46am

No, actually I read the whole thing. I am not really sure you are helping your case by posting these links. It is on COUR RECORD, HE ADMITTED IT, HE SPENT TIME IN PRISON AND WILL BE ON PAROLE FOR THREE YEARS. So, yes, he is a criminal.

I really don't understand why it is so hard for you to understand the basic law here.

[bwaybabe2]

Posted: 7/3/08 at 2:40am

I understand the law, but I also understand how the law can be twisted, and unfortunately have seen it first hand.

You wanted some links, and I provided them. Like I said, the NY press has been against Barbour from the start, making him look like a monster, which he is not. Would you want an article on YOUR case, defaming you, prior to even having your day in court?
I would think not.
To be honest, I really think all this is getting out of hand, as I mentioned before, just like the casting rumors.
I just have never been a supporter of the "mass frenzy", or "mass mentality", and believe in fairness, forgiveness, and understand that otherwise good people will screw up sometime in their lives. Some, we know about, some are never found out...

[StageFan2]

Posted: 7/3/08 at 6:18am

Meanwhile back at the ranch...

The cast looks terrific for the show. I still have doubts about whether or not the show will last however. There are alot of good shows opening on and off Broadway this season and with many peoples' pocketbooks being strained, they'll be forced to pick and chose what shows they attend.

This could be one of the most beautifully staged productions in the new season, but I don't think it will have the mass appeal to make it a huge draw. Coram Boy and The Seafarer were also beautiful, lovey productions, but neither was what the tourists were looking to see. That's really the burning question - will the tourists pay to see it? IMO, unfortunately no.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 7/3/08 at 10:03am

"Does she pose a threat to you, really?"

Martha might not, but if you're an underage female, you could certainly make the case that Barbour poses a threat to you.

[Eris0303]

Posted: 7/3/08 at 12:21pm

"I also have no doubt that those "some in the theater community" were also acquantainces of the girl, or nemesis of Barbour, IF it was true that they said this about him."

So it's all a conspiracy constructed by Barbour nemesisses? Quick, someone get "The Question" on the case! He'll figure it out and clear the name off poor defamed James.

"I know many actors and other crew people who know this is not an isolated incident."

Thanks for answering my question, CDP

Martha Stewart is a threat to all mankind. I find her very frightening.

[bwaybabe2]

Posted: 7/4/08 at 5:53am

Well, adamgreer, then I would also make the case for the fact that, as a 15 or whatever it is that the "legal" age is, what is it your business to accept a proposal from a man twice your age, especially knowing it would put him in a serious heap of trouble? You are a guy, right? As a woman, once a girl, I can tell you that, if one is not active sexually, seeking or accepting a situation like this is so foreign, that it would never happen. AND, especially if my parents would be around me (not to mention MY BF!), and I would never be allowed to travel ALONE to NYC to make myself even MORE available!

DAME...be careful what you do inside a theater nowdays, because in this age of terrorism, instead of simply asking you to leave the premises, they might just haul you off to jail or taser gun you down =O So I would opt for your first choice of not going to see the show...

I think I am the one who is going to start asking "how old are you?" now, Eris, because your last post sounded like a taunting 13 year old...
And..."So it's all a conspiracy constructed by Barbour nemesisses?"...you don't know how near the truth you might be here, actually. Just remember, if your lot in life is ever down, that every enemy YOU might have, will happily take the opportunity to bring you down, even lower, and viciously mud your name beyond recognition. Hope it never happens to you, but something to consider.
BTW, I want you to know that I used to read all your posts with a lot of respect, but, now, like someone said recently, they will be taken "with a grain of salt".

...actually, more disturbing to me is that you find Martha frightening...a woman who teaches you how to fold pillowcases...? Wow... =I
Updated On: 7/4/08 at 05:53 AM

[maryheart]

Posted: 7/4/08 at 8:38am

I hardly ever post, but I am an avid reader of the board.
I just have two thoughts to share and a request.

"Their but for the grace of God go I"

"Judge not lest you be judged"

Request: Can we please just talk about the SHOW????

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 7/4/08 at 1:24pm

bwaybabe2: Again, what you have described is typical of many sexual abuse cases. I know many abuse cases where the mother has sided with the perpetrator. It's also common for victims to recant (with children, only 11% disclose without recanting or denying) and change their mind about testifying against the perpetrator. Nothing you have pointed out indicates without a doubt that the girl could have been lying.

I'll remind everyone that false reports of sexual abuse happen about 1% of the time. Statistically, it is unlikely that the girl just made it all up. And, most importantly, Barbour confessed to it.

And, yes, he got a misdemeanor, but look up charges for sex-related crimes. Sexual contact without consent should have been a felony. He only got a lesser charge because he plea bargained.

Updated On: 7/4/08 at 01:24 PM

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 7/4/08 at 2:02pm

"Can we please just talk about the SHOW"?

Unfortunately, no. As long as Barbour is connected with this production, the producers have opened up this can of worms and this subject will have to be addressed. This has to be difficult for the creators and other actors whose work will be overshadowed by one man's illegal and reprehensible actions.

[Eris0303]

Posted: 7/4/08 at 3:30pm

"BTW, I want you to know that I used to read all your posts with a lot of respect, but, now, like someone said recently, they will be taken "with a grain of salt"."

I'm crying.

"...actually, more disturbing to me is that you find Martha frightening...a woman who teaches you how to fold pillowcases...? Wow... =I"

First off there's a lot more to her than that. Secondly, it was a joke.

[bwaybabe2]

Posted: 7/4/08 at 10:15pm

...irony will not cover what I said...other people think the same about you...btw, it really does not bother me if you want to continue coming accross like an immature entity who sways constantly from her views, depending on what is said.

...and, forgive me if I'm not LOL about your joke, the way you commented at the end of the other stuff, it sounded like you actually believed that ={ And you are right about the fact that there is a lot more to her, she is a human being with flaws as well, but, she is a good lady, with huge talent and the ability to impact POSITIVELY other people's lives with her work, like she has been doing for years.

CPD...please, just DON'T go see this show. EVERYONE knows what happenned with the lead actor, and plenty of us differ from your views. Like someone already posted, he was hired to do a job by his employers, so that is all there is to it. And he has been with this project long enough to deserve to be in it.
It is of no service to ANYONE to keep rambling about the same subject, when this is a filed case, and the courts have ruled, and please read what I and others have pointed out about it before.
I will restrain to post on this thread again, as I really hate to be bumping this to the top all over to perpetuate the negative imput given here, to a show that deserves better.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 7/4/08 at 11:38pm

bwaybabe2

I will go see the show because I usually see every show, but I will have difficulty watching a Man who took advantage of his position as an actor, and a good one to boot, to be intimate with an underage girl.
I won't ever understand why people are still defending him.
He brings a bad name to any actor or any other professional working on Broadway.
He has every right to work and I have every right to find his actions disgusting.

[TheatreGoer2]

Posted: 7/5/08 at 12:09am

"who sways constantly from her views, depending on what is said."

You're funny.

[Eris0303]

Posted: 7/5/08 at 12:53am

I'm not 100% sure where you're going with the mind changing comment that the poster above me strangely quoted. You're the first person to ever, in my entire life, accuse me of following the crowd. My views are not colored by what is being said around me. Like most people I do have the ability to change my mind on certain issues.

I had the opportunity see the show in Florida and I enjoyed it immensely. I thought that Barbour did an amazing job in the role of Carton. But, as time went by, I considered what sort of impact him being cast in the Broadway production would have on the show. The more I thought about it the less I thought it was a good idea. I was especially concerned about how it would impact his fellow actors. I've stated many times and if you read my posts as closely as you've claimed you would have seen me state that I don't want additional victims. If the show closes because of Barbour the entire cast will be victims. They'll have to pay the price of losing their jobs because of the actions of someone else. That isn't fair to them. The producers would also be victims but I worry about them less since many of them do have bank accounts to fall back upon. But much of the cast and crew don't and losing a job would be rather hard for them.

Before I saw the show in Florida I had a few concerns about Barbour after hearing about the allegations. But I was able to look past it because they were simply allegations. Nothing had been proven in a court of law. I was able to take the "innocent until proven guilty" view. But then came the verdict and the probation. He's been proven guilty. And that led me to rethink things. Led me to consider what the ripple effect on his casting would be. And I no long support him being in this. I will probably go see the show but I won't rush to see it nor will I pay full price.

I'm not saying the man has no right to work but I do think it's absolutely too soon. I'm not really sure that this is the right vehicle for him right this moment. I've stated before that if the show had opened in early 2009 as was originally stated things may have been different. But less than six months after his release? I'm just not so sure about that.

Last time I checked there was nothing wrong with having a sense of ambivalence regarding a situation.

And I wouldn't put much credence in the words of the person you are quoting by saying you're going to take my posts with a "grain of salt". He likes to call me a "shill" but I really only see one "shill" in this thread and it isn't me.

Now excuse me while I go back to watching "The Amazing Story of Superman". Watching Marlon Brando mess up his lines is quite amusing.

[bwaybabe2]

Posted: 7/5/08 at 2:54am

...the unenlightened way to respond to this, would be to do it in the same snipppy tone. However, I am going to "try" to rise above, and not reciprocate. I'm only going to answear, because I don't want you to go away thinking your post was a downer for me. What I have stated, will be seen by others who have some kind of discern.

This thread has gotten so "off topic" that it's not even funny ={

What you need to comprehend is that "you" are not the one who has to be ready, or think it is "too soon". The person involved does, as well as his employers. If he is ready to work, so be it. Public opinion is just that. It should not be what someone with any substance should base themselves on to make "their" decisions, and what course their lives will take.
This kind of idle speculation, based on supositions and judgemental prejudice, is not only damaging, but puts the person engulfing themselves with it in a perilous state of thinking themselves "above" all else.
Honestly, what isn't "fair" to the cast members is, the continued questioning of a show based on the bashing of someone who has already been judged and punished according to the law. And, to calm all your "fears"...I highly doubt that someone on probation for 3 years will be jumping to do anything that would put his future in question, don't you think?
I try not to judge too quickly, or speak too soon, on any subject, especially when someone's reputation, life or well being would be affected. Thus, I seem not to "change" my views with what is debated. I find that, standing on a firm rooted, thought thru philosophy, prevents me from "falling" prey to the swaying of emotions around me.
Oh...no "shill" here either, believe me. I stand openly and firmly as a supporter of this show, its creator, and its producers, regardless of what anyone else believes.

Let's wrap it up with, enough said, already. Please.
Before we do, here is another link I did not get to post (check out the next to last post (and last).


http://weeklyvice.blogspot.com/2008/01/disney-actor-james-barbour-blames-child.html Updated On: 7/5/08 at 02:54 AM

[LizzieCurry]

Posted: 7/5/08 at 3:09am

How are ya'? That's right, Bennett Vrauer, back with another commentary. Thought you'd seen the last of old Bennett, perhaps? Thought the network bigwigs would have sent Bennett and his negative.. [ makes quotes signs with his fingers, as he does before every quotationed remark ] .."Q rating" on a slow boat th ?? Well.. maybe I don't.. "look the part".. uh.. I'm not.. "svelte".. I don't.. "look comfortable on camera".. I'm not.. "sobby". I don't.. "understand what's going on in the news." I'm not.. "likeable".. I don't.. "get along with people".. uh.. when I go to work, I don't.. "make eye contact".. I guess I.. don't.. "fit the mold". I.. don't.. "wear the latest clothes".. ir, even ones that don't.. "reek"! Uhh.. I don't.. "change my underwear".. uh.. I'm not "buff".. uh.. I don't have.. "firm breasts".. uh.. I don't.. "exercise". And when I do sweat, I don't.. "shower". I'm not.. "spic-and-span".. I don't.. "clean the area between my crotch and legs". But, for the time being, I guess the network.. "enforcers".. are opting for my reproach, until Joe Consumer tells thems he'd rather get his two cents from commentators who don't.. "make babies cry".. and don't.. "drink maple syrup straight from the bottle".. and don't.. [ as he makes the quotes sign with his fingers, wires pull him in the air to create the illusion that he's made the gesture enough times to make him airborne ] .."leave old, dried-up deodorant cakes under their arm for weeks at a time".. and, uh.. I'm flying. I'm flying! I'm flying! [ the wires get caught in the lights atop the Update set, as Chris Farley hangs little more than three feet above the floor ] Holy Schnikes!