Russell Brand

[Wassapp]

AIBU to think... 'here we go again?'

Anyone watching? I've always said 'innocent until proven guilty' but also 'there is no smoke without fire'.

Having been sexually assaulted myself, one of the stories seem so similar to mine.

What's your thoughts?

This is the most confusing post, I know. I just don't know how I feel.

If this somehow went to trial, and Brand was convicted, his supporters still wouldn’t abandon him.

Take Trump. He was found civilly liable for rape* earlier this year. His supporters immediately dismissed the judgment as the Establishment being out to get Trump. I doubt he lost a single supporter.

*he was actually only found liable of sexual assault, because the definition of rape is very narrow in New York. In most other jurisdictions, the relevant offence would be rape. The judge made this clear.

The suggestion is that he is such a threat, even before he started his YouTube channel, that this extremely detailed and long term plan has been activated. But those I know in one of the above industries couldn’t give a toss what he comes out with. So why would they bother?

No I think all that’s true as well. He was a disgusting creep.

Well maybe you have better insight into the ‘establishment’ than me then. It seemed plausible. He’s awakening an antiestablishment response in people. In the same way you have all these business leaders and entrepreneurs calling for people to go back to the office. They’re just worried about the commercial properties they’ve invested in lying empty.

If Brand feels he's been defamed, he can afford to sue.

And if he's innocent, I think he should. I don't think for a minute that the allegations made are false, but if they are, he can settle the matter through legal channels.

I just don’t feel like he is a big enough threat to anyone in power for this to have been orchestrated. And the reason why it’s bothering me so much is because it’s being used an excuse for alleged rape (I’m not referring to you). Same for Andrew Tate. It’s frightening really that such men can potentially get away with crimes because supporters automatically believe it’s a smear campaign.

That’s why I have been asking the same question over, to try and understand exactly what people who support him believe is really happening.

He was on the panel of Roast Battle with Katherine Ryan and Jonathan Ross. He only did one series, I think Ryan did all of them (3 or 4?). It does look awkward, Ryan and Brand sat together that is. He has the same look that he did in that clip of Bob Geldof calling him a cunt.

I’ll tell you who’s behind those attacks on Trump - Baroque Obama.

@SingingNettles 🤣 genius!

I didn’t say that. I said:

At times it seemed they were looking for extra material to add to the general impression which undermined the more serious allegations as it demonstrated there was a clear impression they wanted you to be left with.

Personally, I think him allowing his phone number to be passed on to audience members was a weak inclusion, and the suggestion that uni students who had a ONS with him were calling runners ‘the next day’ to cry that he hadn’t called them back stretched credibility.

There were other bits that made me roll my eyes, like the clip where he quips on a talk show “you don’t want to be there when the laughter stops”.

And as I said above, with all that being said, I thought the central and most serious allegations were credible.

You win the internet today 😂

Fair enough. You obviously have more knowledge of the timeline specifics than I do. Presumably these are published as the correct timeline.

Yet isn’t there something vague about point 1 ?

The puzzling thing to me is who made Sunday Times aware of the allegations?

Was it journalists making the allegations? Before the victims did ?

Who exactly made the allegations in 2019 ? Who did they make the allegations to in 2019

It wasn’t Alice, - 2021
it wasn’t Nadia - 2023
It wasn’t Phoebe - this year
It wasn’t Jordan who declined to be interviewed

I’m probably getting this wrong and I can’t even answer my own questions because it’s all so vague and confusing.

This is why we have police investigations and trials.

Again I know the system is letting us down but I’d rather see it fixed.

If RB is guilty of any of this I’d much prefer to see him in prison rather than hibernating for a few years before coming back as a victim and with a new show.

This is precisely why the shamefully low conviction rate is so problematic. Because "innocent until proven guilty", but so few of those actually guilty are ever actually found guilty, its almost as if whether a sexual assault took place is a matter of opinion and debate.

I was raped. My attacker was never charged. He is still a rapist. Not allegedly, not maybe, not perhaps. He raped me. He is a rapist. Whether he goes to prison or not. It still happened.

Women should believe other women when we say we have been sexually assaulted or raped. Is it not bad enough with male led victim blaming and rape apologists implying women ask for it by what they wear, where they go, how they act or what they say?

Cases like this should really be the time for women to come together and say "actually, this is not good enough". RB's public comments about women ALONE should have been enough for people to go "this is not someone who respect women, is an ally of women's rights or to be trusted with vulnerable women".

Why did this not happen?

They do their best but are still reliant on the journalists to present them with fact and not withhold other relevant materials.

Confirmation bias exists.

Mistakes have been made and TV channels have had to apologise for such mistakes in the past.

That's fine. Brand can sue. He hasn't but he could. He had plenty of notice of this stuff, quite a lot more than most.

You forgot Andrew Tate and Elon Musk and Eric and Trump Jr!

Again, bending over backwards to defend him, for reasons unknown.

Certainly a mistake could have been made, although given how litigious he's proven himself to be, I'd be suprised.

But you're claiming all of it is a mistake? Testimonies and multiple streams of evidence (forensic, digital, police etc) from five seperate parties?

Not sure how this is an example of confirmation bias either - it is completely true to say if one victim comes forward, others will feel empowered to, but you seem to be spinning this as some kind of hysterical mass fantasy from young women.

I agree ehupo that it used an awful lot of filler/sensationalism/cut quotes and therefore came across as more tabloid than a usual Dispatches documentary - but they were trying to build up a picture and add to the "he's telling you who he is/life is reflected in his art" narrative.
The handing out of numbers/"pimp" narrative was to show power imbalance and no moral compass, that he had no issue with crossing boundaries to get his end away. The "pimp" narrative was to place the runners/assistants/PAs in a Weinstein analogy.
When I saw Shame in 2006 live, Brand was very upfront in saying he was up for sleeping with groupies, form an orderly queue after the show, he'd meet you in the foyer ha ha ha. Many a true word spoken in jest - I have no doubt that some probably took him up on it.
Does that make him a terrible person? No - what makes him a terrible person is an alleged sense of entitlement within a relationship that he can bareback (when many partners would be very careful about that due to unwanted pregnancy and potential for STDs), objectifying women and not taking No for an answer.
I've been choked in oral twice - many my age will have undergone the head being pushed down and like the takedown of Aziz Ansari, put it down to "bad sex"/miscommunication. But to do that so a punch is needed to stop you, if true, and then monetise it through comedy (write what you know) is vile. If true, because the timeline overlaps (we assume the stand up is based on lived experience when the testimony could be based on the stand up).
As I said on another thread, my only surprise is that after hundreds of interviews, they only had four women prepared to speak out/have an actor read their testimony. Because there has been speculation on at least two other occasions of possible wrongdoing. Those were never going to be included as there was no case to answer.
The build up of the picture of a person, however, using their own boorish behaviour/shocking behaviour and by going through their books line by line to find it - Brand's transparency there has him hoisted by his own petard. I read his autobiographies and was quite shocked at the time by how raw and open they were: he had no qualms about revealing the worst of himself. At the time I was impressed by the lack of ego/admissions of selfishness because so may memoirs are bland/reveal nothing or are flattering to the author/ghost written to put the subject in a good light. Brand's made for hard reading at times but sounded honest.

"I went willingly to his bedroom, but I wasn't expecting what happened," is precisely how they've been getting away with it, and in this instance, bragging about, for decades.

Piece of shit.

It's interesting that people perceive his books as lack of ego. To me, they are highly narcissistic in their extent. He constantly makes a bid for his own exceptional status, peppered with faux humble insights.

Honestly I understand where you are coming from.

My abuser was arrested, charged and found not guilty.

Despite this I knew I was believed and supported by the police. That meant a lot to me.

It was the CPS that dropped the ball.

You are so right to mention women being blamed for their clothes, behaviours etc.

This should not be allowed - therefore we need to change the system.

Where I differ from you is that I personally know a woman who did make false allegation and I don’t believe every single thing every single woman says.

I’m not trying to be hurtful towards you. What happened to you is sickening and it’s awful that you haven’t had the justice you deserve.

If we worked on the system women like us would have greater chances of justice.

I hope one day we do.

I see that he is still touring! Now that this has come out, how many people will cancel and get a refund?

Blimey

Dunno. He's on glue though if he thinks this going away. No one bothers to do this for three years for one article and television programme.

Yes I understand that does happen-a valid poi t and not personally hurtful- very very rarely though-and for what it is worth, I find it abhorrent behaviour to falsely accuse. However it is so rare in comparison to when sexual assault/rape has taken place, I think we need to shift towards believing women who come forward.

It has taken over 20 years for me to publicly call it what it was. It takes an enormous amount of courage.

I have explained myself clearly.

You are resorting to personal attacks on me and reframing my words so you can imply I am a rapist defender instead of engaging in a fair debate.

In fact it is extremely upsetting to be accused of ‘bending over backwards to defend him.’

I have not defended him at all.

My posts are about using the legal system/fixing the legal system rather than trial by media.

lack of ego
Oh no, he came across as a narc absolutely but what I meant was - usually you want to be the hero of your own story, it's human nature - yet Brand was going balls out to do a warts and all tell-all, citing the worst of his behaviours, attitudes and addictions at the time.

But that's the point of the "hiding in plain sight" argument: you think you've read the excesses, the embarrassments, the darkest days when you've actually been hoodwinked/groomed yourself.