Russell Brand - everyone knew

[Mooshamoo]

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.

You can't consent to being raped so age of consent is irrelevant. Legally, child abuse is forcing or enticing a child under 18.

What difference does it make if she visited him? Grooming can still apply. She was 16. Please stop minimising it. And I say that as someone who has been in a similar position to you. Abuse is abuse, it doesn’t need a hierarchy.

Can anyone weigh in with some legal knowledge?

I would assume that the American lady with whom he exchanged texts apologizing for his behavior, will end up having a strong legal case.

What about the others? I’m guessing that it’ll be impossible to prove either way?

This is about rape, not sex.

I am very sorry for what you went through, itvis inimaginably awful. Alice was subject to sexual abuse, grooming and emotional abuse. You are both victims of horrible men.

Alice was on radio 4 woman's hour and she explains it well (better then I can). She says that as an adult in her 30s her feelings towards teenagers, are almost maternal, certainly not sexual. She is asking for a change of law, so they it would ge illegal for older men to have sex with 16 year old. Seems v sensible.

I think there's a few reasons.

1 - Reporting to the police rarely gets anywhere. You must have seen the stats about how few people get charged for rape.

2- His lawyers are shit hot. The accused might get bribed, or threatened to withdraw their statement. One of the women in the program made a statement and then decided not to proceed because she didn't want to have to deal with him or his lawyers.

3- Media trials like this are really successful when they know there are many more victims, as it allows these people to report their experiences.

4 - These sort of investigations are REALLY expensive. It's unlikely the police would have the money or resource to run something of this scale.

I think we can all agree that Brand is an utter sleazeball with an ego the size of a small planet. He is undoubtably loving all the publicity which is raising his otherwise insignificant profile. He only exists in an obscure internet podcast world and now he has been promoted into the MSM which he apparently eschews. Don't give it oxygen!

Ive seen him out and about a few times. Definitely had that cool factor which probably made him appealing to the Kate Moss/Sadie Frost types. I could see how women would throw themselves at him. Definitely not someone id think is boyfriend material but he did have this charm. Id lump Noel Fielding in with him, those who live in a time warp fashion wise!

No sorry but she wasn’t. What happened to her was awful but there’s a reason there’s an age of consent.

I agree with this.

Legally you are wrong.

Child rape applies to children under the age of consent.

And age IS a factor in consent because children under the age of 16 can NEVER consent

Factually you are wrong though.

Here is the link to the CPS website https://www.cps.gov.uk/crime-info/sexual-offences

Here is the wording.

A child is defined as any person under the age of 18. Child sexual abuse involves forcing or inciting a child to take part in sexual activity, whether or not the child is aware of what is happening and not necessarily involving a high level of violence.
This may involve physical contact including rape or oral sex, or non-penetrative acts such as masturbation, kissing, rubbing and touching outside of clothing. They may also include non-contact activities, such as involving children in looking at, or in the production of, sexual images, watching sexual activities, encouraging children to behave in sexually inappropriate ways, or exploiting or grooming a child in preparation for abuse (including via the internet) or prostitution. Child sexual abuse can be committed by both men and women, or other children.

I think if airtime and public outrage are what trigger and keep the momentum of an police investigation then it's worth it. Particularly regarding empowering other victims to come forward.

Given how litigious he is I doubt he's enjoying this kind of publicity tbf.

A grown man (by which I mean someone older than University age, I guess, 23+) and a 16-18 year old girl was seen as more-or-less OK, certainly more OK than it is now, by huge sections of society until about 10 years ago. The man’s mates might have eye-rolled and called him a cradle snatcher, women would have thought he was a bit of a sleaze bag, but that was the extent of it. The age of consent was seen as something quite sacrosanct, ping and you were done. Extreme examples like Chris Moyles’ countdown to Charlotte Church being “legal” were criticised and seen as gross but they were allowed, weren't they?

There was also the “ironic” sexism/racism of Loaded, later Vice, which provided cover for a lot of legit sexists and racists. This was the context when I was going out into the world in the late 90s and early 2000s. (I’m an old millennial.) These days there are more discussions of power dynamics and how two under-18s is a different dynamic to one under-18 year old and someone in a position of influence. But I don’t remember these discussions about power dynamics being widely considered until the 2010s.

Tl;dr there were other comedians dating 6th formers and even year 11s and people would just eyeroll about it.

Legally YOU are wrong. Go back up thread and read the link sent that states that it’s child abuse when referring to anyone under the age of 18.

You are wrong - legally she was the age of consent. So she was not a child in the eyes of the law.I’m not trying to compete FFS but there absolutely is a difference between people like me who were six and people above the age of fucking consent. I’m not saying it’s ok I’m saying it was child abuse.

I dont know huge amounts about him but this doesnt surprise me, most perpetrators have also been victims either of abuse or trauma as children.

Which makes it worse in some ways for me, victims who turn into perpetrators.

The thing about 'everyone knew', interests me in terms of whether there were people who refused to work with him, were there any?

He raped her. Don’t care who was dating who, he raped her. He abused her.

Stop excusing these disgusting men.

I think Karma has got him there. I hope he spends his nights having nightmares about someone treating his daughters like he treats women. Although his Bake-off appearance, where he made a biscuit of his wife's vagina giving birth and called it ' his greatest achievement' makes me think he couldn't really give a damn about humiliating his wife, so not sure he'd be that bothered about hus daughters.

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.

It
was
child
abuse

Stop minimising it. Learn the facts. Legally, it was child abuse.

The age of consent doesn’t change the fact she was a child. This isn’t a matter of opinion, it’s a fact. Furthermore, there is a significant difference between consensual sex and rape, the latter isn’t somehow made acceptable by the victim being the age of consent.

If someone is convicted of raping a 16 or 17 year old, their offence is usually rape, not child sex offences/child rape.

Ive not known it to be categorised otherwise but it may be and I just havent seen it but quite frankly its not really the focus of the discussion is it?

I doubt there'll be a police investigation, but this has propelled him into the spotlight and, as one journalist stated today, this is feeding his ego and making him more 'relevant' than he would have been otherwise.