Trial by media circus

[Maatandosiris]

The first thing to say is anyone who has committed rape absolutely needs to be brought to justice. The criminal
justice system needs to become more effective in protecting all victims of crime.

However, AIBU unreasonable to think that this weekends story about RB has been sinister for many other reasons, none of which are to do with RB.

Firstly the SM posts whipping people into a frenzy of some big reveal like some secret album release. Clues planted through various carefully placed posts, giving just enough detail to let people work things out (plus making people suggest other names) . It was an absolute circus, in the case of rape it turned accusations of serious crime into entertainment, no thought how anyone would be affected, whether ultimately guilty or innocent (maybe c4/The Times were trying to get new stories). Extremely bad taste at one end of the spectrum, devastating for innocent people at the other.

The ultimate agenda of both The Sunday Times and C4 is to make money. That’s it, neither is set up as the states arm of justice. There’s no inbuilt checks and balances. Yet somehow they are allowed to name an individual, accuse them of crimes (and effectively say they are guilty) without any of the safeguards and checks and balances of the criminal justice system applying.

People have lost all sense of justice. We have a man accused of something, an hour and a half of heavily hyped TV which holds some accusations but mainly a character assassination, The Sunday Times probably selling many more copies/getting many more subscribers with more of the sane one sided accusations.

Even on Mumsnet we have people already calling him a Rapist, people feeding into the frenzy of “he’s a creep”, “he’s a sex pest” etc etc. in other words, convicting him in their minds before this has gone anywhere near a court or jury.

How will this ever now be a fair trial? How will they find a jury who can 100% not have their views affected by this whole circus? If he is guilty will there ever be a safe conviction, how can we be confident that real justice has been done? What’s the risk of any conviction being overturned? This is not in the interests of either the alleged victim or the alleged perpetrator.

Questions are circulating all over SM as to the agendas at play. It’s fairly clear that the Sunday Times has been searching out victims. What were they saying to these people? What promises have been made?

if a crime has been committed this should be with the criminal justice system not Saturday night prime time TV with an associated heavy advertising campaign.

Im not sure whether RB is guilty or innocent, but that’s not what this post is about. AIBU to think that the way this witch hunt (which is what it is regardless of whether RB sinks or floats) is abhorrent and flies in the face of justice and that this has far wider and scarier implications for society than just this case. Who or what is next?

please explain what exactly a ‘balanced’ view would be

No I’m not saying the woman was lying, nor am I saying she is telling the truth. I, together with everyone else don’t know. I have repeatedly stated on this thread that I don’t know if TB is guilty or innocent. This is why we have courts of law to decide this. The fact people keep ignoring this clearly shows that people see what they want to see, not what is actually there. I don’t know how to spell this out any clearer.

Are you saying RB is guilty? Do you normally advocate convicting people without a trial?

Why did she go to a rape crisis centre, I don’t know. She might have been raped, who raped her? could have been RB could have been someone else.

The police are looking into it now and hopefully the women who have been brave enough to speak out get some justice.
I also wouldn't be surprised if more women come forward.
I've read some disgusting comments over the weekend.. utterly depressing.
Russell Brands days as a free man are hopefully numbered.

Maybe also people supporting RB, saying they had met him many times and found him a really nice bloke or they hadn’t seen any issues?

Ah so he’s guilty, Do you normally advocate imprisoning people who haven’t been tried?

I mean, why not go to the police, there and then?

@HollaWithDaRisinSound did you ask the same question when Saville’s victims eventually spoke out?

There have been so many threads about this over the weekend. None of those defending Brand seem to want to answer the Saville question, unless I’ve missed it.

I’ve met RB a couple of times. He didn’t sexually assault me, nor did I witness him assaulting anyone else. I found him pleasant and amusing. But I believe the testimonies of the women in the programme.

What a bizarre response.

You missed out the bit where the journo investigates the claims of your former clients, goes through them with lawyers who sign them, determining there is both significant public interest and a robust defence from any incoming defamation lawsuit.

Or the bit where you successfully sue them for defamation.

Social media is a different beast - the platforms don’t bear any responsibility for what’s published on them (thanks to the deep pockets of the SM giants lobbying hard against changes in the law) and it’s not usually worth going after Angrymom87 for her lies because it’s hard to prove loss when dealing with small fry.

We’ll if there’s no truth to the stories then RB will sue them.

My money says he won’t.

Out of interest @Maatandosiris when you watch other investigative documentaries, for example about the Grenfell disaster. When individual failings are identified in the programme, do you expect the journalists to have a segment chatting with the individual's golfing chums saying how he couldn't have turned a blind eye because he always gets a round in?

And if, within the context of a trial 11 other jury members agreed with you then he would be convicted.

Unfortunately, given the media feeding frenzy it’s unlikely that a fair trial could now ever take place, I suspect any conviction will be ultimately deemed unsafe.

This media circus is serving no one. Any victims are ultimately unlikely to get justice.

Any evidence should have been handed over to police, the programme should have been aired after any conviction.

This circus is not serving anyone apart from the shareholders of The Sunday Times (and now other papers) and Channel 4.

This is why we have courts of law to decide this

specifically who do you think decides in court? Jurors decide and they are not professionals. You’re putting a lot of weight on a process that is dependent on the opinions of your average person whilst dismissing the opinions of those in exactly that group. Especially in cases where it comes down to one word against another and there is no hard evidence it very much comes down to opinion and how the jurors ‘feel’ about the people in front of them. You’re kidding yourself if you think there’s some special element of a court room that can control that.

The CPS is the stage where professionals determine the viability of bringing a case to court and there are huge pitfalls in that stage in cases where it’s word against word.

so how did you feel
about this kind of hounding (although to a lesser extent) of Caroline Flack. Was that ok?

whats she got to do with anything?

If 90% of the documentary was a character assassination, and his guilt of would be looking at his general character and there was evidence of his character not being like that which was being presented, then yes I would expect that.

do you think the victims should be quiet then @Maatandosiris
if they felt incapable of going to police?
they need a voice

@Maatandosiris

I'm not arguing anymore.. this will be my last comment.

You're argument makes zero sense.. You think anyone who has had a good experience with Russell Brand should be able to speak out, Why?!?
My rapist is probably really nice and respectful to his wife/friends/work colleagues.. He's still a rapist! Are you seriously suggesting rape victims should have to listen to irrelevant bullshit that hammers home that it was just them he raped.. He's lovely to everyone else.
I walked into a police station covered in bruises and evidence.. He told the police I like it rough.. case fucking closed. So by your rationale because he wasn't convicted I'm making it up!!
Given the opportunity I'd go on channel 4 right now and tell my story.. and the majority wouldn't believe me. Again read the statistics.. it's not just me this happens all the time.
Also your argument about putting poor innocent men in prison.. Read the statistics.. This country is full of rapists walking the streets.. Not because there victims are not telling the truth but because our criminal justice system is completely fucked.
All of the people commenting.. Why didn't she go to the police... You! And all the hundreds like you with your ignorant opinions and comments.. You and everyone else like you are why!!!!

so how did you feel
about this kind of hounding (although to a lesser extent) of Caroline Flack. Was that ok?

whats she got to do with anything?

Because she was someone investigated for violence in a domestic setting, someone hounded by the media before trial - so I would say a very similar scenario. So how do you feel about this kind of media frenzy we’re currently seeing in the context of a woman (although in her case there were actual police charges).

Yes jurors aren’t professionals, but in court they’re armrest rules regarding evidence, what can be said. There is an appeals process. You seem to be indicating we can do away with trials and just do a vox pop on a persons guilt.

I’m sorry that this story is obviously affecting you greatly. I am not saying that people who have committed a crime don’t get off. Similarly, innocent people get found guilty.

But, as a society we have decided that the best way to decide on a persons guilt or innocence is through the legal system as this is the best way to ensure justice is served in the majority of cases.

This is clearly, and understandably, a very triggering story for you. I hope you have some support IRL and wish you nothing but healing on your journey.

I disagree. If any of these cases reached court there was always the possibility of not getting ‘justice’.

The victims (and it appears we agree that they’re victims then?) know this, along with the wider social consequences it would have for them in their personal and professional lives.

Telling their side in this way means it’s out in the open and they have been heard, after years of being too frightened to speak out. As it happens they have been largely believed and RB’s behaviour condemned. That has far reaching effects of pressurising people and corporations to address these issues as they arise, it raises other women’s standards of expectations of behaviour of men and most importantly, makes a powerful point to men about their treatment and view of women.

Regardless of the outcome of this now, more women will be empowered to recognise that they have been assaulted and are backed up by the strength of public reaction. It’s not okay and there is nothing that makes it okay.

It is incorrect to say that this report hasn’t served anyone.

The rape apologists on this post are disgusting.

No wonder women do not come forward. Dealing with people like some on this thread would make me suicidal.

The rule of law does not give women justice, it never has.

Your entire premise is faulty.

This makes absolutely no sense. With so so many people including work
colleagues describing RB’s behaviour as problematic maybe the programme makers couldn’t actually find anyone who said he wasn’t!

Whilst I abhor Bashir’s methods for getting the interview, there is no sense that anything within the broadcast wasn’t true. But of course he behaved unacceptably and against the code of ethics that the traditional media must abide by, and has been rightly admonished for this - he will never work as a journalist at a reputable place again.

No such code of ethics or legal framework for social media like the platforms Brand broadcasts on.

And no, I don’t think the News of the World is proper journalism. But again, their unacceptable practices were called out.

Now remind me again about the extensive fact and legal checking that goes into everything Brand, Hopkins, Fox et al produce?

A 2% conviction rate of the cases that actually make it to court. That will never ever ever be justice for women who have been raped.

It’s interesting that people are more up in arms about a “media circus trial” than our pathetic judicial system. If you cared as much as you proclaim you would be getting angry with the right people.