A nasty, attention seeking , manipulative, arrogant bastard. Always hated him. I hope he gets 20 years and gets regularly serviced in prison.
The Juries still out for you on this I see
I actually agree with much of this. Never really liked him … but I do hope he gets a fair hearing and chance to defend himself.
It’s safe to say I was never a fan of Mr Brand
www.skybluestalk.co.uk
Election 2015
In a democracy, a demonstration is a right, however it would be very dangerous for any government of the day to take any notice of it. Would you like to see laws enacted off the back of a Sharia Law for Uk or an EDL march? What? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/cele...side-bank.html Classy...
www.skybluestalk.co.uk
It’s safe to say I was never a fan of Mr Brand
Election 2015
In a democracy, a demonstration is a right, however it would be very dangerous for any government of the day to take any notice of it. Would you like to see laws enacted off the back of a Sharia Law for Uk or an EDL march? What? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/cele...side-bank.html Classy...
He always thought he was "edgy".
I'm just glad to know what Katherine Ryan was banging on about! I wasn't paying much attention, but "both his names are things you do to cattle" now seems very obvious.
Fern Brady too with her "a little rapey wape" thing.
Also interesting to see some of the conspiracy theories, my favourite being "it's a plot by Obama". Of course!
Fern Brady too with her "a little rapey wape" thing.
Also interesting to see some of the conspiracy theories, my favourite being "it's a plot by Obama". Of course!
It's to distract from the introduction of the 20mph speed limit in Wales was some take on it.
Is social media making people stoopider, or have they always been like this but didn't have a platform?
Local ministers have already basically said that the point of it is to get vehicle speeds under 30mph - which is an absolutely fair urban speed most people don't manage to abide by.
"And I am going to sue you for these lies" were the missing words of his lengthy rant online-which rather suggests that he can't because he would lose. Not sure 4 and the Times would have gone with this so hard unless they thought they were on solid ground?
Will action be taken against him, though? I suppose they are hoping that the programme will prompt more people to come forwards? As things stand there are no charges, just things like a BBC investigation.
The metropolitan police have said they've not received any reports based on the allegations against Russell Brand ? Bit weird
Edit : just seen they've asked for information from any women who want to come forward .
Last edited:
I like the part in his video where he complained that people refer to him as a conspiracy theorist just before he talks about the big conspiracy against him.
I presume It’s because the main serious allegations from the programme were relating to incidents in the USA.
Would be surprised if there aren’t more to come though
Would it require the women to make their identity public? If so I could see him avoiding charges. The rabid cult fanbase he's cultivated combined with those of some of the people who've backed him already would have no issue threatening people, all these incel matrix lunatics.
I happen, unfortunately, to know quite a bit about false allegations. It’s the most traumatic thing that can ever happen to you. Not me, but someone I’m very close to.
Any one person can walk in off the street and accuse you of something terrible and your life is changed forever.
However, this is not one person, this is five people who didn’t know each other beforehand. And unless they all concocted fake text messages to make him look like a slimeball, and duped Chanel 4 and The Times plus their legal teams, this seems pretty serious. I can’t see any way he doesn’t end up on trial, because if these women don’t make a formal complaint and I’m Russell Brand, I’m going to sue every one of them in a big way, plus the makers of the documentary.
Will say though, this stuff about going to the media first is tasteless, he should at least be able to state his case in a court as opposed to getting destroyed by people like James Cleverley before anyone has even spoken to a police officer. He sure comes across as a sleazeball, but that’s not quite the same as being a full on rapist, there are serious facts to find in amongst all the noise, and I thought that innocence or guilt was decided in a court, not in the papers.
Any one person can walk in off the street and accuse you of something terrible and your life is changed forever.
However, this is not one person, this is five people who didn’t know each other beforehand. And unless they all concocted fake text messages to make him look like a slimeball, and duped Chanel 4 and The Times plus their legal teams, this seems pretty serious. I can’t see any way he doesn’t end up on trial, because if these women don’t make a formal complaint and I’m Russell Brand, I’m going to sue every one of them in a big way, plus the makers of the documentary.
Will say though, this stuff about going to the media first is tasteless, he should at least be able to state his case in a court as opposed to getting destroyed by people like James Cleverley before anyone has even spoken to a police officer. He sure comes across as a sleazeball, but that’s not quite the same as being a full on rapist, there are serious facts to find in amongst all the noise, and I thought that innocence or guilt was decided in a court, not in the papers.
Difficult one to remain fair and open minded about when he's such a dislikable person. Always known for putting it about, imagine some falling over themselves to be with him, but equally can see him being arrogant enough not to like someone saying no to him. Once again though, regardless of proof or evidence, a name that will be forever tarnished even if proved innocent. Not sure how this is still allowed to happen every time. Times becoming tabloid too, but guess it is part of the Murdoch, Sky/Sun.
Your first sentence, and the number of people saying similar, pretty much shows how the media can undermine the justice system.
i don’t care who you are, how odious you appear to be, how horrible you come across, you should be able to defend yourself in a court, with all the evidence to hand.
he comes across as a tosser, but I would never judge as to whether “he did it” based purely on what we’ve seen and heard so far, the only people who should be doing that are a jury, not social media and the papers.
Not sticking up for him at all, he’ll get his say in court by the looks of things, but it’s dangerous and horrible when it’s a trial by posters on social media with no access to evidence before a trial by a jury with full access to evidence
Just to remind people. Jimmy Saville died an innocent man. Before we go all “no trial no deal”.
Doubt Russell is dying tomorrow ... and I'd imagine there's plenty of time to get a conviction if the accusations are true
There's some absolute garbage being spouted on here about media/journalists.
That's two organisation staking there reputation and risking serious legal action if what they're reporting is untrue. This will have been thoroughly investigated by journalists involved, with heavy involvement from Times and Channel 4 legal departments.
Investigative journalism has a pivotal role to play in society, regardless of many people's new favourite buzz word - fake news. We're talking about exposing people with the influence and power to hush things in their industries and the public eye.
To say they should not be judged by the public prior to being tried in court is absolute rubbish, even if they were arrested without anything being leaked by the press they would still be tried by public opinion well before they ended up in court.
That's two organisation staking there reputation and risking serious legal action if what they're reporting is untrue. This will have been thoroughly investigated by journalists involved, with heavy involvement from Times and Channel 4 legal departments.
Investigative journalism has a pivotal role to play in society, regardless of many people's new favourite buzz word - fake news. We're talking about exposing people with the influence and power to hush things in their industries and the public eye.
To say they should not be judged by the public prior to being tried in court is absolute rubbish, even if they were arrested without anything being leaked by the press they would still be tried by public opinion well before they ended up in court.
Big fan of brand and his spiritual takes on the universe. Hope this turns out not to be true
We have a justice system that demands everyone deserves a fair platform. To say its Ok that it's trial by public is crazy, he is entitled to it as much as you or I. I cant stand him but his name certainly shouldn't be released. If they have evidence present it to the courts, then report on it after the trial.
Brand has the right to defend himself in court whenever he likes - if these charges are false then he can file defamation suits against Channel 4 and News Corp first thing tomorrow morning.
So of all the most traumatic things imaginable that you hope never happens to say, your children, being falsely accused of something is top of the list?
Justice has to be seen to be done - if it happens in the shadows then the rich and powerful are often free to bully their way out of facing any scrutiny.
Journalists and whistleblowers have uncovered all kinds of crimes and corruption, including some of the most heinous and notorious criminals you can think of.
You're missing the point, I'm saying that for those organisations to release such accusations means there is something substantial there. Everyone has the right to a fair trial, but as a person in the public eye he would be tried by the court of public opinion way before a trial anyway - whether he was remanded with no previous public leak, or whether he's outed by the media.
At the end of the day, without the journalist intervention to investigate the story, the accusations would probably have never come to light - it has already been over a decade. And media outlets don't carry out investigative journalism to simply hand information over to the police without releasing the story.
