Russell Brand

[kuck]

...
I’m in the Brand is a twat camp, but I’m really sceptical of what’s going on here.  It does look like a coordinated effort.

...

Interesting. Who's doing this coordinating?

[Thecunninglinguist]

The only thing I can't understand is why anyone is even vaguely surprised at these allegations.

[robbie54321]

For the record I’m not a Tommy Robinson fan at all, and I’m not a Katy Hopkins fan but to cancel them and not allow them bank accounts is the sign of a pernicious paternalistic government that says the general population cannot listen to there bile and decide for itself so we will control there speech for you.   

15minute towns and the controlling ulez charge is more population control. Covid showed that the population will do what its told as long as you keep them scared.

Anyway back to Brand, the allegations look awful however, it’s taken 10 years for this to come up, why?
Could it be because brand is one of the most outspoken critics of paternalist control

Just a by the by Maajid Nawaz lost his job on LBC for daring to ask the questions that Brand asks

[PepeMAGA]

dont know if anyone has said this before but;

isnt channel 4 doing to Russell Brand what the Sun got shot down for with Hugh Edwards, only with more detail and less anonimity?

I havent watched the program so I might be wrong, but shouldnt the women take this up with the authorities so they can investigate.

I would add I dont like Brand, dont find him funny and think he's done some awful things in his time (reference Andrew Sachs harrassment, dressing like Bin laden days after the attack). for both he should have been blacklisted imo.
also he's unfunny.
that aside, I think this kind of thing should go through the proper channels.

regarding conspiracies that hes being silenced for speaking out about stuff, entirely possible and would make sense women being rounded up for a documentary.
goes back to my original point though, its for the Police to investigate.

[kuck]

....
15minute towns and the controlling ulez charge is more population control. Covid showed that the population will do what its told as long as you keep them scared.
...

Could you share a source for this information, please?

[Jonestown]

goes back to my original point though, its for the Police to investigate.

The Met have issued a statement saying essentially that they are aware of the allegations made in this matter but have so far received no complaints from anyone and nothing by way of substantiation from Channel 4 or The Sunday Times. Make of that what you will.

[timsussex]

So we have
Philip Schofield
Huw Edwards
Russell Brand

I dont like any of them but would anyone care to list the crimes they have been charged with ? 

let alone convicted of ?

[DevilTimed]

If you think the previous President of the United States was "anti establishment", then you are buying into the grift.

Tate too - he isn't "anti establishment" - he is just selling kids and young men the shit they want to hear to sell them hustling courses.

Turns out that manipulative self serving blokes might be like that in the bedroom and relationships. Shock horror.

[Kev40ish]

So we have
Philip Schofield
Huw Edwards
Russell Brand

I dont like any of them but would anyone care to list the crimes they have been charged with ? 

let alone convicted of ?

Tried by social media is all they have been guilty of.. however would they not have sued the paper for defamation of character or false accusations if they thought they could clear their name 

[robbie54321]

External Link/Members Only

The anti trump rhetoric is laughable

Do I need to list the what Trump has said to challenge the establishment? Disagrees with the Iraq war, disagrees with the war in Ukraine, managed to get 3 (I think) Arab/ Israeli peace treaties, told NATO and particularly Germany not to rely on Russian supply’s and also to dig in regarding NATO payments.
He tock on manufacturing in the US and Threatened not to use or heavily tax US companies is they manufacture off shore.

Don’t be fooled by the Biden and Left wing surge. When they tell you that it’s illegal to pay for sex but legal to sell it maybe then you will see how our freedoms are being taken away by people who know best

[timsussex]

Tried by social media is all they have been guilty of.. however would they not have sued the paper for defamation of character or false accusations if they thought they could clear their name 

any honest lawyer (assuming such a thing exists given their fee is at stake ) would advise against it
Having every detail of your life forensically examined
is it true that you paid a prostitute in 1994, cheated on your wife in 1996 in or attended a party in 1998 where cocaine was used ?
How many of us would fancy those questions and thats before we get to the women eager to 'tell all' in response to a few grand from the Sun ?
and when all the saucy bits on the front page of the tabloids so even if you won your reputation would be in tatters and most of the public is a firm believer in no smoke without fire

[kuck]

External Link/Members Only

The article makes it sound like a good idea, and I have to agree. It does mention conspiracy theorists spreading lies about it, though. What am I missing?

[RedKettle]

So we have
Philip Schofield
Huw Edwards
Russell Brand

I dont like any of them but would anyone care to list the crimes they have been charged with ? 

let alone convicted of ?

I do not understand the point you are making. It seems to be accepted the first two committed no crimes, the issues are related to whether what they did was appropriate in their jobs. Not criminal matters. So no obviously we cannot list the crimes they have been charged with.

For Brand we may get to that stage once the police get involved, or they may decide no case. So again obviously no list yet of crimes charged with.

[RedKettle]

External Link/Members Only

The anti trump rhetoric is laughable

Do I need to list the what Trump has said to challenge the establishment? Disagrees with the Iraq war, disagrees with the war in Ukraine, managed to get 3 (I think) Arab/ Israeli peace treaties, told NATO and particularly Germany not to rely on Russian supply’s and also to dig in regarding NATO payments.
He tock on manufacturing in the US and Threatened not to use or heavily tax US companies is they manufacture off shore.

Don’t be fooled by the Biden and Left wing surge. When they tell you that it’s illegal to pay for sex but legal to sell it maybe then you will see how our freedoms are being taken away by people who know best

Pretty much everyone disagrees with the Iraq war. Trump has said many things about Ukraine, including that he would force Putin out. Many political people have worked on Middle East peace treaties with like trump fuck all success.

[JontyR]

isnt channel 4 doing to Russell Brand what the Sun got shot down for with Hugh Edwards, only with more detail and less anonimity?

I thought the point about the Sun / Edwards thing was that it wasn't the person that was supposedly "the victim" raising the issue, and they hadn't checked the story with them.

Here there is testimony from several women who were the recipients of Brand's "Attention". As well as the reporting of how there were groups who warned each other because of his behaviour. Which insinuated that there were otehr cases where the individuals concerned didn't want to report what had happened.

[daviemac]

External Link/Members Only

The anti trump rhetoric is laughable

Do I need to list the what Trump has said to challenge the establishment? Disagrees with the Iraq war, disagrees with the war in Ukraine, managed to get 3 (I think) Arab/ Israeli peace treaties, told NATO and particularly Germany not to rely on Russian supply’s and also to dig in regarding NATO payments.
He tock on manufacturing in the US and Threatened not to use or heavily tax US companies is they manufacture off shore.

Don’t be fooled by the Biden and Left wing surge. When they tell you that it’s illegal to pay for sex but legal to sell it maybe then you will see how our freedoms are being taken away by people who know best

What has American politics got to do with this thread?

[webpunter]

He's not going to be prosecuted so if he is guilty (and I'm not saying he is) he's got away with it.

I wouldn't be so sure about that
The bbc news mentioned that the Met are getting interested
Likewise the LAPD, which they added have a track record of pursuing #me2 individuals
Two of the four complainants based UK & two in LA

In addition to the four direct complaints there are apparently numerous others mentioning incidents
& there is chatter from the media community suggesting that Brand's behaviour was an open secret in the industry
The bbc & C4 in defensive mode document searches & check, finding not a lot at the mo

Who knows whether he is guilty of anything, or not ?
If one maybe two individuals making a complaint it can be she said he said
Not four direct, others & industry noise
& this is where things are at the moment, me thinks there will be more individuals coming forward

As the 'article' on the bbc news references its all about the relative power positions
It doesnt help him that one of the women was 16 at the time
I doubt very much if The Sunday Times didnt have a watertight case with lots of evidence, otherwise they wouldn't have published
They will have taken legal advice, lots of it

Overall too much 'noise' from too many sources
If a betting company were offering odds on him being guilty or not i know where my money would be
On guilty, as definitive as ManU / Chelsea / Liverpool / Spurs not winning the Prem this year
 

[timsussex]

I do not understand the point you are making. It seems to be accepted the first two committed no crimes, the issues are related to whether what they did was appropriate in their jobs. Not criminal matters. So no obviously we cannot list the crimes they have been charged with.

For Brand we may get to that stage once the police get involved, or they may decide no case. So again obviously no list yet of crimes charged with.

I have a problem with anyone (no matter how much of a twat they are) losing their job and having their lives destroyed for doing something that isnt illegal just something lots of people disapprove of.

shouldnt be too hard for any punter to understand that !

Innocent until proved guilty used to be a thing now its guilty without being even being charged or tried yet alone found guilty

I believe we all should have the right to a proper trial by our peers not by the media - thats beyond a slippery slope

[bigden40]

I wouldn't be so sure about that
The bbc news mentioned that the Met are getting interested
Likewise the LAPD, which they added have a track record of pursuing #me2 individuals
Two of the four complainants based UK & two in LA

In addition to the four direct complaints there are apparently numerous others mentioning incidents
& there is chatter from the media community suggesting that Brand's behaviour was an open secret in the industry
The bbc & C4 in defensive mode document searches & check, finding not a lot at the mo

Who knows whether he is guilty of anything, or not ?
If one maybe two individuals making a complaint it can be she said he said
Not four direct, others & industry noise
& this is where things are at the moment, me thinks there will be more individuals coming forward

As the 'article' on the bbc news references its all about the relative power positions
It doesnt help him that one of the women was 16 at the time
I doubt very much if The Sunday Times didnt have a watertight case with lots of evidence, otherwise they wouldn't have published
They will have taken legal advice, lots of it

Overall too much 'noise' from too many sources
If a betting company were offering odds on him being guilty or not i know where my money would be
On guilty, as definitive as ManU / Chelsea / Liverpool / Spurs not winning the Prem this year

The Met “getting interested” is overstating it, they’ve said exactly what they need to in the circumstances. 

And Jesus, have you learned nothing from recent cases?

“There's lots of noise, they must have a watertight case if they’d published, they will have taken legal advice”.  Fuck's sake, this has not stopped the media getting it wrong many times.  They have a salacious story against a well known person and they’ve run with it.

The only thing I can say with certainty is that a man who has serious allegations against him deserves due process. He’s getting trial by media. It’s not right.

[Blackpool Rock]

For the record I’m not a Tommy Robinson fan at all, and I’m not a Katy Hopkins fan but to cancel them and not allow them bank accounts is the sign of a pernicious paternalistic government that says the general population cannot listen to there bile and decide for itself so we will control there speech for you.   

15minute towns and the controlling ulez charge is more population control. Covid showed that the population will do what its told as long as you keep them scared.

Anyway back to Brand, the allegations look awful however, it’s taken 10 years for this to come up, why?
Could it be because brand is one of the most outspoken critics of paternalist control

Just a by the by Maajid Nawaz lost his job on LBC for daring to ask the questions that Brand asks

In terms of Hopkins i'm not sure exactly what the score is with closing her bank account, I was thinking it was probably something to do with her almost being made bankrupt then doing an IVA to dig herself out of the shit.
From the recent storm i'm aware you have to have a certain amount of money to hold an account with Coutts (Though no idea whether she had an account with them or elsewhere) so they aren't going to want a financial deadbeat holding an account.

Found this from Hopkins though saying she had her bank account stopped decades ago so would have only been in her early or mid 20's 
External Link/Members Only

Not sure why she would have had a bank account stopped way back then but i'd say it isn't anything to do with these other recent bank account closure issues, not sure being outspoken would have generated such actions back then.

[Mikeh38]

Apparently the women were paid 75k each to appear on the programme and why would you wait 19 years to come forward with allegations of rape surely you would go to the police first and not some poor tv documentary, can't stand Brand but this is a media witch hunt.

[Jonestown]

Apparently, and who would have guessed it, more women have come forward to make allegations against Brand, however they have taken these allegations of no doubt serious criminal behaviour not to the police, but to the BBC and The Times.

[CanOfRedBull]

Apparently the women were paid 75k each to appear on the programme and why would you wait 19 years to come forward with allegations of rape surely you would go to the police first and not some poor tv documentary, can't stand Brand but this is a media witch hunt.

Do you have a source that states they were paid £75K to appear on the TV programme?

[catweazle]

Do you have a source that states they were paid £75K to appear on the TV programme?

I instantly doubt anything that starts with "Apparently...."

[kuck]

Seems to be pattern. Defenders of Mr Brand first say they don't like him or his comedy, then spew out some apologetics and whataboutery.
 
Probably makes them think they are being "objective" 

[PumpDump]

Here we go again, a forum full of men, who have to pay for sex, turning on another man because of some unproved allegations by anonymous women. You should be sticking up for other men and not condemning them unless they have been proven guilty. Do you not realise that if one hooker made a similar allegation against you, you could be in the same position as Russell Brand. Most people, rightly or wrongly, think you lot (me included) are despicable individuals who take advantage of women, yet here you are moralising about Russel Brand. The hypocrisy sickens me.

[MLawro93]

Here we go again, a forum full of men, who have to pay for sex, turning on another man because of some unproved allegations by anonymous women. You should be sticking up for other men and not condemning them unless they have been proven guilty. Do you not realise that if one hooker made a similar allegation against you, you could be in the same position as Russell Brand. Most people, rightly or wrongly, think you lot (me included) are despicable individuals who take advantage of women, yet here you are moralising about Russel Brand. The hypocrisy sickens me.

What the hell...

[Adoniron]

Apparently the women were paid 75k each to appear on the programme and why would you wait 19 years to come forward with allegations of rape surely you would go to the police first and not some poor tv documentary, can't stand Brand but this is a media witch hunt.

Channel 4 and The Timrs have said that despite the claims being made on Twitter, the women weren't paid anything.

[kuck]

...
 Do you not realise that if one hooker made a similar allegation against you, you could be in the same position as Russell Brand.
...

If one made an allegation against you, I'd give you the benefit of the doubt.
If five did, however, you'd have to shout "witch hunt" 500 times before I thought you were actually a nice guy.

[cunnyhunt]

Here we go again, a forum full of men, who have to pay for sex, turning on another man because of some unproved allegations by anonymous women. You should be sticking up for other men and not condemning them unless they have been proven guilty. Do you not realise that if one hooker made a similar allegation against you, you could be in the same position as Russell Brand. Most people, rightly or wrongly, think you lot (me included) are despicable individuals who take advantage of women, yet here you are moralising about Russel Brand. The hypocrisy sickens me.

Don’t ever think you and I are similar in some way.

[lillythesavage]

Here we go again, a forum full of men, who have to pay for sex, turning on another man because of some unproved allegations by anonymous women. You should be sticking up for other men and not condemning them unless they have been proven guilty. Do you not realise that if one hooker made a similar allegation against you, you could be in the same position as Russell Brand. Most people, rightly or wrongly, think you lot (me included) are despicable individuals who take advantage of women, yet here you are moralising about Russel Brand. The hypocrisy sickens me.

What sickens me is, one being a 16 year old. Picked up from the school gates by a BBC supplied car and driver.

You may have to pay for sex, so assume everyone here does? That is not the case, different people have different reasons to punt  .

[PumpDump]

What sickens me is, one being a 16 year old. Picked up from the school gates by a BBC supplied car and driver.

You may have to pay for sex, so assume everyone here does? That is not the case, different people have different reasons to punt  .

I don't have to pay for it either. I choose to.

Whatever happened to presumed innocent until proven guilty. Apparently a cornerstone of the justice system and so-called British values but seems to go out the window anytime a man is accused of rape.

[daviemac]

I don't have to pay for it either. I choose to.

Whatever happened to presumed innocent until proven guilty. Apparently a cornerstone of the justice system and so-called British values but seems to go out the window anytime a man is accused of rape.

I prefer to wait to see what evidence emerges and not defend someone who may well be guilty. Your defence of him makes you as bad as those you are slagging off for condemning him.

[Munter84]

I used to think Brand was an unfunny champagne socialist twat who shrouded himself in the language of social justice and yet conveniently offered no real solutions, and more recently I surprised myself by finding him actually quite intelligent and courageous as a free speech proponent and classical Liberal. That's all completely unrelated to whether he's innocent or not, just context and preamble.

While the rule of law, protection of the innocent and punishment of the guilty are all cornerstones in my personal morality, I'm cynic enough to notice the coincidences of this Brand case, and I suspect that there is more to the story than four women spontaneously deciding, after over a decade of silence, to find their voices. Whether Brand is guilty, innocent, or somewhere inbetween, is something I'm completely unqualified to speculate about.

I do note however that the quickest way to get an inconvenient man silenced, defunded and generally ostracised these days is to simply claim he's been violent, abusive or coercive towards women. I'm of course very grateful that we live in a modern, enlightened age where misogyny and sexism are no longer ignored and swept under the carpet, however it's a travesty of justice that this movement has allowed the pendulum to swing so far the other way. The objective of #metoo was to protect women and bring abusers to justice, not to be a weaponised social paradigm shift that makes all men everywhere guilty until proven innocent.

We must always - ALWAYS - protect the principle of Innocent Until Proven Guilty. Erode that, and we have thrown justice out of the window and handed power to the mob.

[PumpDump]

I prefer to wait to see what evidence emerges and not defend someone who may well be guilty. Your defence of him makes you as bad as those you are slagging off for condemning him.

Where did I defend him?

[timsussex]

Mason Greenwood - another twat that hasn't been convicted of anything came off the bench at his new club in Spain to cries of "Die Greenwood Die"

[PumpDump]

I used to think Brand was an unfunny champagne socialist twat who shrouded himself in the language of social justice and yet conveniently offered no real solutions, and more recently I surprised myself by finding him actually quite intelligent and courageous as a free speech proponent and classical Liberal. That's all completely unrelated to whether he's innocent or not, just context and preamble.

While the rule of law, protection of the innocent and punishment of the guilty are all cornerstones in my personal morality, I'm cynic enough to notice the coincidences of this Brand case, and I suspect that there is more to the story than four women spontaneously deciding, after over a decade of silence, to find their voices. Whether Brand is guilty, innocent, or somewhere inbetween, is something I'm completely unqualified to speculate about.

I do note however that the quickest way to get an inconvenient man silenced, defunded and generally ostracised these days is to simply claim he's been violent, abusive or coercive towards women. I'm of course very grateful that we live in a modern, enlightened age where misogyny and sexism are no longer ignored and swept under the carpet, however it's a travesty of justice that this movement has allowed the pendulum to swing so far the other way. The objective of #metoo was to protect women and bring abusers to justice, not to be a weaponised social paradigm shift that makes all men everywhere guilty until proven innocent.

We must always - ALWAYS - protect the principle of Innocent Until Proven Guilty. Erode that, and we have thrown justice out of the window and handed power to the mob.

Excellent post, and explained so much more eloquently than I could have.

[kuck]

...
I do note however that the quickest way to get an inconvenient man silenced, defunded and generally ostracised these days is to simply claim he's been violent, abusive or coercive towards women.
...

Absolutely terrible that this is allowed to happen. Who do you have in mind when you say inconvenient men that have been silenced? Ansari? Spacey? Weinstein? Freeman? R Kelly? Neil deGrasse Tyson? Cosby?

[PumpDump]

Absolutely terrible that this is allowed to happen. Who do you have in mind when you say inconvenient men that have been silenced? Ansari? Spacey? Weinstein? Freeman? R Kelly? Neil deGrasse Tyson? Cosby?

The point is there are many men who commit crimes against women, however only the ones who speak up against the establishment are investigated, whereas other who support the establishment are protected.

[kuck]

The point is there are many men who commit crimes against women, however only the ones who speak up against the establishment are investigated, whereas other who support the establishment are protected.

Nice one, would love to see some examples.

[Alelcourt]

Nice one, would love to see some examples.

Well it's a catch 22, you wouldn't know of them because they'll be protected

[Blackpool Rock]

The point is there are many men who commit crimes against women, however only the ones who speak up against the establishment are investigated, whereas other who support the establishment are protected.

What about all the recent cases where serving or ex police officers have been exposed, surely if anyone is the definition of an establishment person / job then it's a copper 

[Cullen]

The idea that 'the establishment' or 'big pharma' are engaged in some elaborate attempt to silence irrelevant blowhards like Russell brand or Andrew Tate is as insane as the idea that the former President of the United States and privately-educated multi-billionaire Donald Trump is 'anti-establishment'.

[jackdaw]

The open hunting season has started….the Met is “investigating” a case from 2003.

I bet there’ll be loads of forensic evidence, exact dates, and time. NOT!

Seriously how can anyone prove anything beyond reasonable doubt on a case reported for the first time 20 years after the event? And if accuser does not specify exact time, place, date…then how can accused disprove the allegation even if it has no foundation?

[Munter84]

Absolutely terrible that this is allowed to happen. Who do you have in mind when you say inconvenient men that have been silenced?

That post makes the fourth time you ask a pointed question demanding proof or examples from a poster in this thread, and you do so one more time after this post. Seems to me like you're spoiling for an argument, but you won't be getting one - at least not from me.

These are fresh allegations about Brand, and neither you nor I have the facts to hand. All we can do is watch how this plays out, presumably there will be a legal process, and I'm sure we are both hoping for a fair and unbiased trial in which fact is separated from fiction, and justice served.

[robbie54321]

Munter 84

It’s pretty much what I was trying to say but not as eloquently as your good self

I will just add the question what is Rape?
Is persuading some one to have sex with you rape? What if Money is used as part of the persuasion?

Is rape just grabbing someone against there will or drugging someone to have forced sex?

What is sexual assort for that Matter and is that more subjective?

Let’s not forget what the Nordic model calls sexual assort. We would all get our collar felt😂

To be accused of rape 20 years after the event is something else though.

[JontyR]

Munter 84

It’s pretty much what I was trying to say but not as eloquently as your good self

I will just add the question what is Rape?
Is persuading some one to have sex with you rape? What if Money is used as part of the persuasion?

Is rape just grabbing someone against there will or drugging someone to have forced sex?

What is sexual assort for that Matter and is that more subjective?

Let’s not forget what the Nordic model calls sexual assort. We would all get our collar felt😂

To be accused of rape 20 years after the event is something else though.

It's quite simple. Rape is having sexual relations with someone who hasn't consented of their own free will.

It doesn't stop being rape after a certain period of time either.

[JontyR]

While the rule of law, protection of the innocent and punishment of the guilty are all cornerstones in my personal morality, I'm cynic enough to notice the coincidences of this Brand case, and I suspect that there is more to the story than four women spontaneously deciding, after over a decade of silence, to find their voices. Whether Brand is guilty, innocent, or somewhere inbetween, is something I'm completely unqualified to speculate about.

It was hardly sponaeneous though was it? Just because they appear on the same programme and are rpesented together doesn't mean that they haven't been in discussions for some time.

Also its a very personal and isolating thing. You hear of victims blaming themselves etc. The knowledge there are others can be incredibly empowering.

Serial Killers have snuck under the radar for years because the cases are individual and spread out. It makes it all the more shocking and unbelivable when it comes out.  It's the same with repeat offenders for other crimes. Including sexual assault and rape.

[David1970]

That post makes the fourth time you ask a pointed question demanding proof or examples from a poster in this thread, and you do so one more time after this post. Seems to me like you're spoiling for an argument, but you won't be getting one - at least not from me.

These are fresh allegations about Brand, and neither you nor I have the facts to hand. All we can do is watch how this plays out, presumably there will be a legal process, and I'm sure we are both hoping for a fair and unbiased trial in which fact is separated from fiction, and justice served.

I have to say I agree with Kuck, when people make controversial statements they should back them up with proof. If some states that the earth is flat, then I would ask them to back it up with proof. That’s not spoiling for an argument, that’s asking some to back up there controversial statement with facts.

[daviemac]

Where did I defend him?

You should be sticking up for other men

Like I said I prefer to wait until the facts are known so I will not be 'sticking up for him'.

One can look very foolish condemning someone who turns out to be innocent, however one can look equally foolish for defending the guilty.