Immigration

[DanH]

It was a question.

I ask it because you are making an idiotic insinuation that people on here only care about rape when it is done by people who aren't White. Only an idiot would say that, and only an idiot would compare a specific case about a specific individual in specific circumstances who has not been found guilty and where there is good reason to suspect some type of stitch up, with dozens of proven organised gang rapes by numerous numbers of one demographic who have come here illegally or legally from other countries.

That is totally idiotic and typical of the kind of mentality that people like you have. People like you are not all there.

Classy, again.

And I wasn’t comparing that, was I? Just highlighting the reaction between a non-existent crime in Epsom that had people throthing at the mouth versus someone who has some actual charges hanging over them and it’s a collective shrug out of the shoulders or a tin foiled hat cover up because he’s now an online right poster boy (and literally only pivoted to that when the sh*t hit the fan because he knows the online right are thick as f*ck and will back him and help pay his bills).

All you have to do is read this thread to see the difference in attitudes.

 

[Spindle]

So you don’t believe any of the 6 women in Russell Brand’s case, then?

The Police have heard and unlike you I shall reserve my judgement until the courts have also heard.

The police also believed this bitch, so perhaps they should exercise caution.

https://www.gmp.police.uk/news/greater-manchester/news/news/2026/march/woman-who-falsely-accused-ten-men-of-raping-her-is-jailed/

 

[DanH]

The Police have heard and unlike you I shall reserve my judgement until the courts have also heard.

The police also believed this bitch, so perhaps they should exercise caution.

https://www.gmp.police.uk/news/greater-manchester/news/news/2026/march/woman-who-falsely-accused-ten-men-of-raping-her-is-jailed/

You’re extremely selective in which victims you will and won’t believe.

 

[Spindle]

You’re extremely selective in which victims you will and won’t believe.

Let's hope you never get jury service because nobody will get a fair trial with you

 

[DanH]

Let's hope you never get jury service because nobody will get a fair trial with you

Will you believe the women if he is found guilty? Or just dismiss it as a political witch hunt?

 

[Spiderman]

The CPS believe them and have enough evidence to send it to trial so I trust them more than I do the galaxy brained regulars of the Holmesdale Online.

I’m not sure Wissie will agree with you. Surely he wants to wait until verdict is reached before condemning? Unless, of course, that only works in certain ways.

 

[Badger11]

The CPS believe them and have enough evidence to send it to trial so I trust them more than I do the galaxy brained regulars of the Holmesdale Online.

Having served on a sexual assault case in the last 5 years I was amazed at how thin the evidence was. The victim was unreliable and lied multiple times in court, her evidence was contradicted by her own friends who appeared for the prosecution so you would expect they would support her.

There is a theory that has been mentioned in the media that the CPS was getting pelters from the anti rape activists about the number of cases that did not reach the threshold for holding a trial due to lack of evidence.

So the theory goes that CPS is now passing these onto to the courts rather than dismissing them. Certainly the case I was on should never have come to trial. That doesn't mean that the guy was innocent just that the evidence wasn't there.

 

[Stirlingsays]

Having served on a sexual assault case in the last 5 years I was amazed at how thin the evidence was. The victim was unreliable and lied multiple times in court, her evidence was contradicted by her own friends who appeared for the prosecution so you would expect they would support her.

There is a theory that has been mentioned in the media that the CPS was getting pelters from the anti rape activists about the number of cases that did not reach the threshold for holding a trial due to lack of evidence.

So the theory goes that CPS is now passing these onto to the courts rather than dismissing them. Certainly the case I was on should never have come to trial. That doesn't mean that the guy was innocent just that the evidence wasn't there.

You're talking sense but he's not here for that.

 

[DanH]

Having served on a sexual assault case in the last 5 years I was amazed at how thin the evidence was. The victim was unreliable and lied multiple times in court, her evidence was contradicted by her own friends who appeared for the prosecution so you would expect they would support her.

There is a theory that has been mentioned in the media that the CPS was getting pelters from the anti rape activists about the number of cases that did not reach the threshold for holding a trial due to lack of evidence.

So the theory goes that CPS is now passing these onto to the courts rather than dismissing them. Certainly the case I was on should never have come to trial. That doesn't mean that the guy was innocent just that the evidence wasn't there.

I’m not doubting your personal experience but the default position to not believe women is extremely dangerous - women are reluctant enough to come forward enough as it is.

And why were people happy enough to believe the woman in Epsom but not the 6 with the charges Russell Brand is facing?

There is absolutely no consistency.

 

[DanH]

You're talking sense but he's not here for that.

I’m here for consistency. Not believing women only when you think an immigrant might have done it.

 

[eaglesdare]

I am reminded of that Irish rugby player years ago who was accused of rape and the #metoo movement went right after him. Whole career was tarnished.

How the ‘rugby rape trial’ divided Ireland

The long read: After a trial that dominated the news, the accused were all found not guilty. But the case had tapped into a deeper rage that has not died down

www.theguardian.com

I guess it's off topic a bit...

 

[cryrst]

I’m not doubting your personal experience but the default position to not believe women is extremely dangerous - women are reluctant enough to come forward enough as it is.

And why were people happy enough to believe the woman in Epsom but not the 6 with the charges Russell Brand is facing?

There is absolutely no consistency.

Well look at it logically. Brand has consensually bedded 100s of women. Why would he rape any if they were throwing themselves at him. Were these the prettiest six and all the others were munters? It doesn’t stack up unless; and I play devils advocate. These were married or got found out so found a reason they were unfaithful. It is you who cannot look at the potential it wasn’t rape. Note potential !

 

[PalazioVecchio]

Immigration

 

[Badger11]

I’m not doubting your personal experience but the default position to not believe women is extremely dangerous - women are reluctant enough to come forward enough as it is.

And why were people happy enough to believe the woman in Epsom but not the 6 with the charges Russell Brand is facing?

There is absolutely no consistency.

My default position is to look at the evidence. If it's one person's word against another's I don't think that is sufficient to ruin someone's life. I have already said I dislike Brand so I would not be a good juror on his trial.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

I’m not sure Wissie will agree with you. Surely he wants to wait until verdict is reached before condemning? Unless, of course, that only works in certain ways.

You don’t have to wait for a guilty verdict to express an opinion about someone’s behaviour when there has been no attempt to deny it.

Whether Brand is guilty of rape, or whether he isn’t, or that he is but a lack of evidence means he is acquitted, is yet to be determined. What is not in doubt is that he has been a very unappealing character in the past and that many of the things he has done deserve the condemnation they get.

 

[Stirlingsays]

I’m here for consistency. Not believing women only when you think an immigrant might have done it.

No one who questions people but avoids and ignores questions like yourself has a right to call for consistency.

I have no criticism of people not trusting the state considering what the state has allowed to happen to our girls. As for this woman, I think all of us on Hol recognise that this could be a false alarm from someone looking for attention....kind of amusing how it sits concurrent with your believe all women on rape argument.

So you are wrong all ends up.

 

[Stirlingsays]

If Dan were accused of rape, he would be calling for evidence rather than just believing the accuser.

There would be a distinct lack of consistency.

 

[Stirlingsays]

The modern left.

 

[Stirlingsays]

Truth.

 

[beak]

My default position is to look at the evidence. If it's one person's word against another's I don't think that is sufficient to ruin someone's life. I have already said I dislike Brand so I would not be a good juror on his trial.

I don't like Brand or his brand!