The REAL Reason Barbour Left ROCKY HORROR — Page 2

Only unfair in the way that he did serve time and get some kind of punishment, and I do believe that people should be able to move on after serving their time. That's all. I agree with everything you're saying.

Updated On: 8/19/11 at 01:02 AM

Just the lingering stench of rotten acts.

Featuring the world-famous, tap-dancin' Puritans!?!?

the man was a sexual predator and he admitted it. I don't blame the girls for coming out 10 years later and no one else should unless, sadly, you too have been sexually molested by a 40 yr old man when you were 15 then maybe you can say something.

I find it funny how many people on the Roman Polanski thread said that they would be more forgiving of him if he had come back to America at any time and served his sentence. Well, Barbour DID serve his sentence, went through a rehabilitation program, and yet is still the victim of an "it could happen here" mentality everywhere he goes. Should the man be denied from pursuing his livelihood because of one bad act? God, if he killed a man he probably wouldn't face as much scrutiny as he does now from committing one transgression over a decade ago.

By all accounts, what Barbour did was an isolated incident; at least I don't remember any other victims coming forward ever, or hearing of any others. And it's always sort of interested me personally that Barbour's victim didn't press charges until she was just about to graduate from NYU and begin an acting career in New York. She's now a semi-famous New York actress who works regularly in theatre and television. That always sort of stank of opportunism to me, but that's beside the point.

The point is: Mr. Barbour did the crime, served the time, and should now be considered a rehabilitated individual. If you disagree with that then you're really disagreeing with the foundations of the US legal system.

---

Meanwhile Mike Tyson is on the CBS family-oriented show Same Name, living with another family, with no outcry.

---

all this stuff is like saying that people shouldn't hire a very talented actor who previously had a problem with alcohol or drugs in the past. (George Hearn, Elaine Stritch, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Robin Williams, and Oprah all come to mind) They COULD start drinking again and cause a problem. Is it likely? No, but producers do not always think.



Though, on a completely different subject: Is Barbour even right for the role of Frank? I've only seen/heard him do all the leading man stuff (Carousel, Beast, Tale, Jane EYre, Assassins). I know he looks like Tim Curry though...

I don't defend statutory rape. You guys may remember that I was very vocal about Barbour's case back in the day. There was a definite power differential which means that the sex could have been not only illegal but also coercive. I defended the victim coming forward so late and visiting him repeatedly, saying that these were common for rape victims. I also pointed out that the age differential alone gave Barbour the power, this was not a case of an 18-year-old sleeping with a 15-year-old. Even if it wasn't coercive, I don't think there is any excuse (minus being lied to about said person's age), and it is definitely sleazy.

However, that said, Barbour HAS served his time and even apologized. It'd be great if he could go back and stop himself from committing the crime, but he can't. I will never look at him the same way again, but I do think he should be allowed to work without protest, especially at an adult show that kids/teens have no business being involved with. Ostracizing released sex offenders only causes higher stress for them, which can lead to their recidivism.

---

Updated On: 8/19/11 at 10:47 AM

I don't condone Barbour's actions, but I also with AC that the way the victim went about announcing everything reeked of opportunism. I remember being disgusted by her behavior just as much as his when all this came out. I also remember the anti-Scientology crap that followed everything.

This is NOT me saying I blame the victim at all, I feel terrible that she had to go through what she went through. It is just a difficult situation.

---

I don't even think the comparison between Polanski and Barbour is that strong or applicable. Polanski drugged and raped his victims, and is believed to have taken advantage of multiple very young girls. He fled the country without serving his sentence. Barbour's incident appears to be an isolated case of statutory rape. He confessed, served his sentence, attended rehabilitation, and has publicly apologized. In the eyes of the law, he IS rehabilitated. Should he not be allowed to earn a living?

I find what Barbour did disgusting and repellant. But since I believe in rehabilitation and penance, I would be a hypocrite if I said that he shouldn't be allowed to live and work in society because of what he did.

---

Rehabilitated individuals have a hard time keeping work no matter what industry they are in, because most people can never see past their crime. This is not unique to people who have a career in performance. And it does reek of hypocrisy, especially in America, where our legal system is founded on the basis of serving your sentence and being reintegrated into society.

---

Jacob, I guess I missed how she's profiting off this. What do you mean by that?

According to this, Producer2, he has to disclose it with "anybody he works for in film, television or theater for up to the next three years." Because he took a plea and wasn't charged with a felony, he doesn't have to register as a sex offender.

Honestly, he got off easy. And again, he's been working, right? Unless it's proven to be systematic (him losing work) then I don't think it can be argued that he is being prevented from making a living.






New York Times

Updated On: 8/19/11 at 12:12 PM

What I find interesting is that I don't remember any uproar when he was starring in A TALE OF TWO CITIES, a show that featured several child actors. One would hope that their parents would have said something if they felt like their children weren't safe working for Mr. Barbour.

Unless it's proven to be systematic (him losing work) then I don't think it can be argued that he is being prevented from making a living.

What bothers me about this specific situation is that it seems as if Mr. Barbour was strongholded into leaving/being let go by outside influences, such as that radio host who took to the air daily to decry Mr. Barbour's presence in his community.

---

I remember similar threads like this when he was in A Tale of Two Cities. And again, this is all following him because he works in the public eye - he took a plea, he was charged with a misdemeanor, he doesn't have to register as a sex offender. This wouldn't be following him if he wasn't an actor. And even though that's not fair, it's still the way it is. I'm sure there are plenty of guys who got stiffer penalties for doing the same thing who would agree things aren't always fair.

Here's an older thread I found about him, which is pretty much the same things that are being said here, complete with those who want the girl to take her share of blame.
Older thread