Page 35 | Russell Brand - everyone knew

Mooshamoo · 2023-09-18T16:06:49+00:00

I was watching the comedian Katherine Ryan say to Louis theroux that a British comedian is a sexual perpetrator. It is now believed that she was talking about Russell brand. She said on the video "when it eventually comes out about these type of people, Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby, this unmentionable British personality, it turns out that everyone knew. Everyone knew. ". I was wondering did anyone on here on mumsnet know anything about Russell brand? A lot of us lived in London when her was living there. And many women on here would have been a similar age to Russell brand . I lived in London for a year and I saw Russell brand out on a night out once. That was the extent of it. I was wondering did anyone on here have any experience with him, or know about a friend/acquaintance that had any experiences with him.

borninthe80esss · 19/09/2023 22:12

@Messyhair321

Removing a condom without consent is rape.
And although a court should discuss this case/cases doesn't mean they will. It's been said to death but 99% of rapists never see a court room.. Not because they aren't rapists but because the criminal justice system isn't fit for purpose.
When it comes to rape by going along with the innocent until proven guilty way of thinking society is suggesting that 99% of rape victims are liars.
This fairytale version that women can walk into a police station accuse someone of rape and have a jury listen to her is just that.. a fairytale.

Singlemum19802023 · 19/09/2023 22:13

unfortunately with any assault case like the 16yr old said happened, the detail would need to be raked over. The detail is important for both the accused and the alleged victim.

StarbucksSmarterSister · 19/09/2023 22:13

Would that not still not be rape? Given she did not consent to sex without a condom?

Legally I'm not sure, but it does show just what an absolutely disgusting creep he is.

Chickenkeev · 19/09/2023 22:14

JFC this thread is frightening altogether. So many people falling over themselves to make excuses for (at the very least) a pervy, sex obsessed freak with no consideration as to womens rights and feelings. I have a young daughter and it's not made me particularly hopeful for her future when she has to deal with these arseholes 😪

Messyhair321 · 19/09/2023 22:14

mids2019 · 19/09/2023 21:52

@sweetdreams33

A lot of journalism is investigative. I doubt that individual reporters have the motivation to single out individuals for a 'hatchet job' out of malice. The documentary would have taken a lot of time with care to ensure details were factually correct. As I said previously RB has the right to sue and if the allegations were proven false he presumably would be entitled to a considerable amount of money and the restoration of his reputation (partially); so why doesn't he do this?

what motivation is there for the complainants? The women involved certainly aren't getting money and were presumably prepared for a small number of people to doubt then so why go public? The only reason I can think of it is to try and get some kind of justice or at least make sure their voice is heard. Also remember there were a number of independent complainants and I doubt there was some conspiracy to make up a collective of false stories.

It's early days though he may sue yet. And he has done before for the same reason. He also might not actually want to spend years in court clearing his name being scrutinized much like the women involved.

I don't share your views on journalism. They're going to want to sell their story & spin it the best way they can in order to do just that regardless of what happened or the truth of the matter. They not interested in justice or even truth.

At least one of the journalists that investigated has had to withdraw their name from the list because they had previously been found to be wrong about an investigation they did, not so long ago actually. They ruined this woman's life by falsely reporting information on her, she was devastated & it ruined her life & her business. She had to sue them in order to correct it, which it probably didn't, but she's been on twitter in the last few days exposing these people & saying they're not reliable journalists. Puts it into perspective.

eastegg · 19/09/2023 22:15

lifeturnsonadime · 18/09/2023 18:35

Not being funny but are you actually reading the link I sent to you?

You may not feel it is right that anyone above the age of consent who is sexually abused is the victim of child sexual abuse but the law doesn't agree with you.

I'd suggest you take it up with the CPS rather than argue that black is white on an internet forum.

Show quote history

Don’t wish to be pedantic, but actually there’s no point taking it up with the CPS either, who are themselves only stating the law. They don’t make it.

You’re right lifeturnsonadime, of course. It’s there in black and white. And 16 year olds are treated by the courts as children, dealt with as defendants in the youth court.

Can we please put this point to bed now. A 16 year old is a child legally, albeit a child who has the legal capacity to consent to sex.

Merrymouse · 19/09/2023 22:15

Givemethereins · 19/09/2023 22:01

Absolutely milking it? His career is dead. He's being obliterated overnight and won't get any acceptable work again. He's in hiding because this is a proper stage 5 media frenzy the likes of which only Amy Winehouse would know.
I'm not.defending him but bloody hell I wouldn't wish this shit on my worst enemy.

Show quote history

His career was already relegated to the bits of media that promote conspiracy theories, and it’s likely that he will continue to find an audience there.

LexMitior · 19/09/2023 22:16

Brand should be prosecuted. End of. If he doesn't like this sort of thing then he should have wised up and kept his dick and hands to himself. Obviously he is finished in public life for good. That's what you get when your public image is a calculated outrage. Eventually you cross a line and do yourself in.

His channel of sixth former dribble is of no moment. It's like watching a dog wearing spats and a top hat.

Kudos to Katherine Ryan. Smoked him like a kipper

AliciaLime · 19/09/2023 22:18

Messyhair321 · 19/09/2023 22:04

I don't know, I guess it depends on the timing of when she said what, whether she said it at all that time, whether it was presumed between them or not . This is the job of a court if it gets that far

Show quote history

I would say that ‘no means no’ regardless of semantics.

Messyhair321 · 19/09/2023 22:18

borninthe80esss · 19/09/2023 22:12

@Messyhair321

Removing a condom without consent is rape.
And although a court should discuss this case/cases doesn't mean they will. It's been said to death but 99% of rapists never see a court room.. Not because they aren't rapists but because the criminal justice system isn't fit for purpose.
When it comes to rape by going along with the innocent until proven guilty way of thinking society is suggesting that 99% of rape victims are liars.
This fairytale version that women can walk into a police station accuse someone of rape and have a jury listen to her is just that.. a fairytale.

It wouldn't be my way of dealing with it actually. Personally speaking it wouldn't heal me to face it that way.

But with the condom, there might not have been one at all, & it might not have been discussed at the time either. I'm just reading it differently I think. I might be wrong.

Ramalangadingdong · 19/09/2023 22:20

ehupo7 · 19/09/2023 13:16

Logic all over the place

Of course there’s an extremely clear distinction between being a) a rapist and b) not being a rapist but being promiscuous and a knob

That’s not to say being promiscuous and being a rapist are mutually exclusive.

But conflating the two as one and the same is wrong – in several senses.

Show quote history

Brand himself has said that he was more than - to use you euphemism - “a bit of a knob”.

Messyhair321 · 19/09/2023 22:21

AliciaLime · 19/09/2023 22:18

I would say that ‘no means no’ regardless of semantics.

Show quote history

I mean she might have said no to not wearing condom previously & presumed that he would wear one. It's not clear that she said no right at that point, it's a text message after the event & I don't think it's cut & dried from that.

LexMitior · 19/09/2023 22:22

@ehupo7 - this guy spits on women and smashes their phones. He admits to that.

What sort of princes do you hang around with that makes that behaviour "a bit of a knob"?

StarbucksSmarterSister · 19/09/2023 22:22

At least one of the journalists that investigated has had to withdraw their name from the list because they had previously been found to be wrong about an investigation they did, not so long ago actually. They ruined this woman's life by falsely reporting information on her, she was devastated & it ruined her life & her business. She had to sue them in order to correct it, which it probably didn't, but she's been on twitter in the last few days exposing these people & saying they're not reliable journalists. Puts it into perspective.

If it's on Twitter then it's in the public domain so you can name them. Do you want to?

ehupo7 · 19/09/2023 22:27

Ramalangadingdong · 19/09/2023 22:20

Brand himself has said that he was more than - to use you euphemism - “a bit of a knob”.

Show quote history

I wasn’t talking about RB, I was responding to the general point made by the previous poster

And the RB incident with the spitting in the mouth was part of the alleged rape

Merrymouse · 19/09/2023 22:27

I mean she might have said no to not wearing condom previously & presumed that he would wear one. It's not clear that she said no right at that point, it's a text message after the event & I don't think it's cut & dried from that

“when a girl says no it means no”

what do you think she said no to? A cup of tea? Do you think she visited a rape crisis centre because she thought it would be fun?

Messyhair321 · 19/09/2023 22:29

Merrymouse · 19/09/2023 14:53

The evidence presented by C4 and the Times makes the claims very credible, but as much as anything evidence against Brand comes from Brand himself. It sounds as though you are talking in general terms, but this is a specific situation, with specific people and incidents.

The question is also not just whether he broke the law, but how the culture (partly created by him) affected the people he worked with and others. What is it like to be a BBC driver forced to collect school girls for Brand? Or a production assistant forced to pick girls out of the audience?

Show quote history

Hang on there, you can't suggest that if people were driving 16 year olds or picking girls out of the audience were forced into it. I mean... Everyone has personal responsibility & they could have said actually. No..

Or you're in danger of suggesting that everyone in that situation had no option but to play their part or lose their job or role.
I don't think that sounds right at all.

ehupo7 · 19/09/2023 22:30

LexMitior · 19/09/2023 22:22

@ehupo7 - this guy spits on women and smashes their phones. He admits to that.

What sort of princes do you hang around with that makes that behaviour "a bit of a knob"?

Sorry no idea what you’re talking about. This was in no way shape or form what I said.

If you can’t be bothered to read the convo carefully, fuck off and don’t @ me

People just desperate for an argument

Messyhair321 · 19/09/2023 22:33

Merrymouse · 19/09/2023 22:27

I mean she might have said no to not wearing condom previously & presumed that he would wear one. It's not clear that she said no right at that point, it's a text message after the event & I don't think it's cut & dried from that

“when a girl says no it means no”

what do you think she said no to? A cup of tea? Do you think she visited a rape crisis centre because she thought it would be fun?

She didn't visit a rape crisis center though. That wasn't her.
And as I said. she could have been talking about him wearing a condom. You're reading it in a very black & white way. An authority won't be, they will see that sentence in context with the rest of the messages & they talk about wearing a condom - & the context of the situation, which we don't really know about. We only know what the journalists have presented.

BoredZelda · 19/09/2023 22:42

I'm wondering if anyone else is bothered that he made hideously suggestive comments towards women live on air, on radio, on TV, on stage, and even when those women complained and tried to have something done about it nothing happened, and yet he makes a prank phone call to a man who happens to be a "national treasure" and that's what lost him his job. He deserved to be fired for it, but why did it take for a man to be abused by him for him to lose his job?

Givemethereins · 19/09/2023 22:42

FishyPoisson · 19/09/2023 17:50

It's not just the money.

Social services will take an interest, he has two very young daughters and has been proven to be a sexual predator who is now under investigation for sexual assault and rape. The daughters need to be safeguarded.

Show quote history

Holy crap. Your charging him with paedophilia and incest? And maybe I'm wrong but it seems you are lavishly hoping he gets cut out of his own children's lives?
Wooow. Maybe hang him from the gallows now huh. Let's watch him swing.

BoredZelda · 19/09/2023 22:44

Surely it's a police matter? Trial by press shouldn't be a thing.

It is now a police matter. The person who made the documentary made it clear it wasn't her place to call the police of the accusers hadn't asked her to and as a journalist you have to protect your sources.

Messyhair321 · 19/09/2023 22:49

ehupo7 · 18/09/2023 18:16

I don’t think that’s correct. 16 is the age of consent, and there’s nothing illegal about a 31 yo sleeping with a 16 yo, unless they are a teacher or care worker or in some other direct position of responsibility or authority.

That’s not to say it’s not sleazy and gross as fuck or that it shouldn’t be questioned. But it’s not ‘child abuse’ by any legal definition.

Show quote history

You all should have lived in the 80's as a teen. Girls were being dated by our teachers in those days. No-one batted an eyelid.

ehupo7 · 19/09/2023 22:53

BoredZelda · 19/09/2023 22:42

I'm wondering if anyone else is bothered that he made hideously suggestive comments towards women live on air, on radio, on TV, on stage, and even when those women complained and tried to have something done about it nothing happened, and yet he makes a prank phone call to a man who happens to be a "national treasure" and that's what lost him his job. He deserved to be fired for it, but why did it take for a man to be abused by him for him to lose his job?

Another thing I thought was quite sad about that was that Andrew Sachs didn’t speak to his granddaughter for 8 years afterwards

ehupo7 · 19/09/2023 22:54

Messyhair321 · 19/09/2023 22:49

You all should have lived in the 80's as a teen. Girls were being dated by our teachers in those days. No-one batted an eyelid.

Show quote history

Horrendous