Russell Brand

[chris123]

I'm a bit off Austrians at the moment.

Mozart, Bruckner & Falco?

 

[Teddy Eagle]

Mozart, Bruckner & Falco?

More Oliver & Glasner.

 

[Stirlingsays]

Not true.

Pre–2023 allegations
In a 2006 interview, Dannii Minogue said Brand had sexually harassed her after she appeared on his TV show. She described him as "a bit of a vile predator", adding: "I certainly don't think he has cured his sex addiction." She said that Brand "wouldn't take no for an answer" and "throughout the whole interview he kept making shocking remarks that I can't even repeat".[13][181]

When I say complaint I mean going to Police and making a formal complaint.

This is Brand being an arsehole, it's not the same thing.

In 2007, on Brand's BBC Radio 2 comedy show, he called former Jim'll Fix It host Jimmy Savile and asked to meet him. Savile answered that that would only happen if Brand brought along his sister if he had one. In response, Brand joked: "I've got a personal assistant ... and part of her job description is that anyone I demand she greet, meet, massages, she has to do it. She's very attractive, Jimmy".[182] When he asked Savile what she should wear, Savile replied he would "prefer her to wear nothing".[182][183] The exchange between Brand and Savile was featured in the 2023 Channel 4 Dispatches documentary Russell Brand: In Plain Sight.[184]

What on earth is that doing on here in answer to complaints? This is just dickhead behaviour.

From 2006 to 2008, Brand received two complaints while he was a BBC radio host and presenter of both sexual misconduct and unprofessional workplace behaviour, with a further six complaints received afterwards.[185] In 2014, former girlfriend Jordan Martin said Brand had committed sexual assault and physical and emotional abuse during their six-month relationship in 2007.[186] She accused Brand of assaulting her at the Lowry Hotel in Salford when he became angry after discovering she had spoken to an ex-boyfriend.[186]

If this happened then why didn't she or they go to the Police? This is more 'Brand is an arsehole' stuff.

In June 2014, a masseuse accused Brand of assault at his home, and treating her "like a prostitute". Thames Valley Police closed the investigation without charges. Brand and Jemima Goldsmith won a High Court injunction for harassment.[187][188] After Brand's 2026 conviction, the think tank Tax Policy Associates published the injunction, revealing that it prohibits the accuser from discussing the alleged assault with anyone except her legal advisers or doctors.[189]

Well, she did the right thing if it happened. But the Police didn't regard her as believable.

While filming a programme with Brand in 2018, Katherine Ryan reportedly made remarks to Brand indicating he was a "sexual predator" that were not broadcast.[190] She discussed these comments on Louis Theroux Interviews (Series 1, Episode 5), broadcast in November 2022,[191] stating: "...I informed him to his face, that he was a predator", and: "...this person I believe very strongly, so do a lot of people believe very strongly, it is an open secret, is a perpetrator of sexual assault"; however, still without naming him, she remarked: "It is a litigious minefield".
Sunday Times/Channel 4 investigation (2023)

Again....this isn't a formal complaint.

It's basically the Jimmy Savile case all over again, there was plenty on him before it all went to court. Complaints were made ages ago just not pursued for similar reasons as Savile complaints were not pursued. I am going to tell you something that will hold you in good stead when it comes to cases like this "there is never smoke without fire".

I think it's wild comparing Brand to Saville.

 

[Casual]

Sex case, sex case, hang him hang him hang him.

 

[silvertop]

None of them raised a complaint before 2023 when investigators deliberately went looking.

Masses of resources went into investigating Brand. Compare this to the grooming gangs....Indeed, compare the sentences of many of those (many are now out on the street) to what went into bringing this case.

As far as I'm aware Brand's cases are of women who went for consentual sex. Also as far as I'm aware he wasn't chasing or bullying them into the bedroom.

I don't think Brand has done anything significantly different to any famous rock or pop star since the 60s......But more degenerate than most who overfilled his boots.....Most of them have silence orders, does this make them all rapists?

Please tell me how we are assured against regret sex, lies or malicious claims by women who didn't like how Brand treated them many years ago.

Yup, unlike the vast majority of other rape and sexual offence charges where next to nothing is spent and where the percentage win rate from complaint to conviction is a correspondingly risible 0.5%.

You are correct in that Brand was unlucky in that it was he who had the resources directed towards his case and not A N Other celeb. However, the fact that he has been the focus and example does not in any way excuse what he did.

And I have heard the parade of trap about the girls flocking to him and knowing what they were facing. That is reminiscent of the historic short skirt/begging for it defence; and comments about under age girls being precocious/flirty. There was never equality of arms with these women and I believe every word of their victim statements as to the long term impact on them.

And this is completely distinct from those awful cases where male students are thrown out of college because of "s e x u a l misconduct" where all they did was place their hand on the small of the back of a fully dressed female. One who never thought anything of it till she had a drunken chat with her feminist mates. That is more about colleges expelling to avoid the risk of litigation.

If there is a queue of civil claims from these women against his assets and/or substantial book deals etc. I may reconsider. But can you imagine what these women went through from complaint to conviction? Who would do that to themselves if they did not genuinely believe they had been raped or assaulted? How many didn't pursue a complaint given the horrendous personal cost?

And do you not think prosecutors made absolutely sure they had copper bottom cases before they started the cases in circumstances where the evidential burden to overcome is beyond reasonable doubt i.e. about 80% more likely than not.

That the complaints came so late in the day can be viewed in 2 ways. Firstly, the environment for bringing complaints has clearly changed, and for the better. 10 years ago the police will have been reluctant to pursue a matter where they viewed all rape complainants as flakey given the alarming drop-out rates. Where they would be up against a well healed and thus well defended person in the public eye. And what if they got it wrong? The backlash against the police would be horrendous. Remember Cliff Richard?

Secondly, the longer from the event the staler and, thus, less credible the evidence. Yet the cases were still sufficiently strong for the prosecutors to bring them; and the evidence presented was still of sufficient weight to secure those convictions.

And he was convicted. A jury of 12 decided his guilt based on the evidence in circumstances where they delivered not guilty verdicts on some of the other charges. Those convictions are now legally fact. There is no better determination we have as all the evidence was presented and carefully weighed. Not selective and/or doctored details that have undoubtedly been doing the rounds (and then been rehashed on here).

I have no reason to suspect that the jury was sensible as a whole and that they would have readily seen through what some on here seem to suggest is some show trial for woke/Me2 reasons.

One last thought. If any males on here who criticize the conviction had been fans of a famous person back in the 1960s or 1970s and had then been raped by that man, imagine had that man been prosecuted today for that offence. Put yourself into the position of having to relive the whole experience and being cross examined on the credibility of a horrific narrative you had only barely suppressed for decades. And then face someone who accuses you of making the whole thing up for attention, money, some progressive cause etc. I can only imagine your response.

 

[Part Time James]

I keep harping back to my time on a jury for a rape trial earlier this year (sorry for making it sound like I am trying to be an expert, I know I'm not). Not so high profile, but both barristers made a right hash of explaining the context of the questions/answers/evidence (or lack thereof). Us laymen had to try to piece it together. I suspect the judge understood all the relevance.

She has to wrap up by condemning the guilty party as a rapist who is going to jail for a lengthy spell. Didn't mean she thought the verdict was correct based on her observations, she isn't allowed to espouse an opinion. I echo comments that for serious issues, with difficult to understand evidence, I would not want to be subject to a jury trial.

I accept it, but I don't have full faith in it.

 

[pssguy]

As far as I'm aware Brand's cases are of women who went for consentual sex. Also as far as I'm aware he wasn't chasing or bullying them into the bedroom.

I don't think Brand has done anything significantly different to any famous rock or pop star since the 60s......But more degenerate than most who overfilled his boots.....Most of them have silence orders, does this make them all rapists?

Please tell me how we are assured against regret sex, lies or malicious claims by women who didn't like how Brand treated them many years ago.

I don't think the sexual assualt cases were
And the rape case just shows that you don't appreciate the difference between consensual vaginal sex and anal rape. The judge and jury, rightly, took a different view

 

[Forest Hillbilly]

My own personal comment.
I like the product: the destruction of a cnts life and jail time
I don't like the process of how we got here. And particularly how it is not applicable to Asian Paedo gang rapists

 

[Stirlingsays]

I don't think the sexual assualt cases were
And the rape case just shows that you don't appreciate the difference between consensual vaginal sex and anal rape. The judge and jury, rightly, took a different view

Just post at someone else if you can't make a sensible comment.

 

[Jordan555x]

When I say complaint I mean going to Police and making a formal complaint.

This is Brand being an arsehole, it's not the same thing.



What on earth is that doing on here in answer to complaints? This is just dickhead behaviour.



If this happened then why didn't she or they go to the Police? This is more 'Brand is an arsehole' stuff.



Well, she did the right thing if it happened. But the Police didn't regard her as believable.





Again....this isn't a formal complaint.



I think it's wild comparing Brand to Saville.

One there is a myriad of reasons why a woman wouldn't go to the police back then, he was a superstar celebrity, they could fear they would'nt be believed, maybe it was too traumatic and they didn't want to have to go through the exhausting court process if it got to that point? A lot of victims only come forward when they feel compelled to come forward usually when one or more victims come forward, this is not unique to Brand's case.

Also response to what I have highlighted in bold.

Russell Brand has been sentenced to 10 years and 6 months in prison after being convicted of rape and three counts of sexual assault, while the Metropolitan Police confirmed he remains under active investigation for two additional alleged rapes, including one involving a 16-year-old girl

He's also admitted he slept with a 16 year old when he was 30 in the past. He personally said that.
Also Metropolitan Police confirmed he remains under active investigation for two additional alleged rapes, including one involving a 16-year-old girl. Maybe not so different after all.

Yeah I know Saville was worse, I am simply highlighting the similarities between the two cases, star power, abuse of power, protected by those higher up in the media ect, stuff brushed under the carpet to keep the gravy train rolling ect, you are a smart guy you know exactly what I am on about.

Yeah no smoke without fire, bud.

 

[steeleye20]

I don't think the sexual assualt cases were
And the rape case just shows that you don't appreciate the difference between consensual vaginal sex and anal rape. The judge and jury, rightly, took a different view

There were three counts of rape, two of which were not guilty.

The jury could be right, or wrong, in either cases.

I don't see how it can actually be proved, or disproved.

Whose word do you want to believe?

😎

 

[Stirlingsays]

One there is a myriad of reasons why a woman wouldn't go to the police back then, he was a superstar celebrity, they could fear they would'nt be believed, maybe it was too traumatic and they didn't want to have to go through the exhausting court process if it got to that point? A lot of victims only come forward when they feel compelled to come forward usually when one or more victims come forward, this is not unique to Brand's case.

Also response to what I have highlighted in bold.

Russell Brand has been sentenced to 10 years and 6 months in prison after being convicted of rape and three counts of sexual assault, while the Metropolitan Police confirmed he remains under active investigation for two additional alleged rapes, including one involving a 16-year-old girl

He's also admitted he slept with a 16 year old when he was 30 in the past. He personally said that.
Also Metropolitan Police confirmed he remains under active investigation for two additional alleged rapes, including one involving a 16-year-old girl. Maybe not so different after all.

Yeah I know Saville was worse, I am simply highlighting the similarities between the two cases, star power, abuse of power, protected by those higher up in the media ect, stuff brushed under the carpet to keep the gravy train rolling ect, you are a smart guy you know exactly what I am on about.

Yeah no smoke without fire, bud.

No argument from me that Brand was a degenerate, zero argument.....he has lots of criticism for his own behaviour.

As a social conservative I've criticised this kind of person all my life.

However, it's about whether you are going to destroy his life based upon the evidence presented. I don't personally see that evidence as beyond a reasonable doubt. I think time will show that these accusers are untrustworthy and convicting someone based upon that isn't for me.

No one has answered my concerns over how reliable the testimony is.
No one has answered my concerns on what protections are against lies or half truths? What's the protection against regret sex? What's the protection for the guy who's just an arsehole but not actually a rapist?
I'm just getting a lot of 'trust me bro' on the jury and 'no smoke without fire' stuff.

I respect your opinion and some of the arguments made by others but I couldn't put someone behind bars based on he said/she said from a long time ago.

It's not beyond a reasonable doubt for me.

Anyway I'd rather think about other stuff as this is all a downer.

 

[DanH]

No argument from me that Brand was a degenerate, zero argument.....he has lots of criticism for his own behaviour.

As a social conservative I've criticised this kind of person all my life.

However, it's about whether you are going to destroy his life based upon the evidence presented. I don't personally see that evidence as beyond a reasonable doubt. I think time will show that these accusers are untrustworthy and convicting someone based upon that isn't for me.

No one has answered my concerns over how reliable the testimony is.
No one has answered my concerns on what protections are against lies or half truths? What's the protection against regret sex? What's the protection for the guy who's just an arsehole but not actually a rapist?
I'm just getting a lot of 'trust me bro' on the jury and 'no smoke without fire' stuff.

I respect your opinion and some of the arguments made by others but I couldn't put someone behind bars based on he said/she said from a long time ago.

It's not beyond a reasonable doubt for me.

Anyway I'd rather think about other stuff as this is all a downer.

Just one scarcely believable post after another from you on this thread.

 

[silvercobra73]

At the end of the day Brand was the architect of his own downfall by believing in his own infallability and the hype of the media. The longer his actions went unchallenged, the more he believed he could get away with anything. Common sense should have told him that it could not last and his arrogance would one day be his undoing. But the media kept goading him on to be even more outrageous because it sold newspapers and boosted tv viewing figures. Why else would a rag like the Sun give him an award for his promiscuous reputation. It's like giving Hitler an oscar for dealing with population growth.
Hopefully, history will look at him as a dinosaur from an age when the some of public could fed any old dross and dress it up as entertainment.

 

[ASCPFC]

At the end of the day Brand was the architect of his own downfall by believing in his own infallability and the hype of the media. The longer his actions went unchallenged, the more he believed he could get away with anything. Common sense should have told him that it could not last and his arrogance would one day be his undoing. But the media kept goading him on to be even more outrageous because it sold newspapers and boosted tv viewing figures. Why else would a rag like the Sun give him an award for his promiscuous reputation. It's like giving Hitler an oscar for dealing with population growth.
Hopefully, history will look at him as a dinosaur from an age when the some of public could fed any old dross and dress it up as entertainment.

Are you saying Big Brother is dross?

 

[silvercobra73]

Are you saying Big Brother is dross?

Absolutely. A programme for sad people with nothing better to do.

 

[Part Time James]

Absolutely. A programme for sad people with nothing better to do.

Sounds like one of my Google searches. What time is it on?

 

[CPFCSaturn]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2119800339918463269

This is what people are defending.

 

[rikz]

The only man in the UK with a worse defence than Sage.

 

[Cucking Funt]

Just one scarcely believable post after another from you on this thread.

I've put him on Ignore. Truly sickening but also breathtakingly ignorant.