Russel has spoken

[Whyismyfacealwaysdry]

On Instagram, has anyone seen? What are your thoughts?

In the article that accompanied the Times investigation in which they detailed how they carried it out, they confirmed that they did pass evidence to the police as well as confirming that the women weren't paid for their testimony.

Im not a fan of his but boy are the media able to take someone down at speed.

You mean the speed of a three year, multi team, thorough investigation that will have gone through countless legal teams before going to print / to press?

I really don’t know how to express this easily understandable premise any simpler for you. It is irrelevant what I think. The justice system has to be predicated on innocent until proven guilty.

Say your husband had an affair. The other woman slammed a door into her face and slashed her arm. She went to the press and claimed you had attempted to kill her. - would you be happy if everyone was walking round saying you had attempted to kill someone, had your kids removed, were sacked from your job?

Or would you want to be judged fairly on a court of law?

Yeah, the justice system, not society.

Yes this was in answer as to whether that was right handing it to the police against the woman’s wishes

Of course this is driven by the dislike of the man. Trial by media, social or otherwise, never is and never has been viewed as an alternative to trial in the courts. The two forms of “trial” have always existed and don’t always come to the same conclusions - having a criminal conviction does not guarantee ignominy (it can even enhance a public reputation), and being acquitted does not always rescue a tarnished reputation (although it can if the reputation was built on being vile and the law seems to confirm, due to insufficient evidence conclusively to prove otherwise, that the vileness was socially acceptable and not deeply problematic).

In other words, it is not the law that builds up a celebrity’s reputation and not the law that does it down, it’s the court of public opinion - always has been, always will be. Whether or not he is legally “proven” to be a rapist, is irrelevant to whether or not he is ultimately viewed as someone who, for decades, has said and done vile things in public and been applauded for them, which behaviours have now become deeply unfashionable. Many think that a man like Russell Brand should never have been built up and encouraged to behave in the ways he did, and it is within the remit of those who deliberately built him up also to help pull him down. The law has nothing to do with that process, which is why powerful, wealthy rapists do get to ponce around for decades and evade any kind of justice, until the levers they used to get themselves into their positions of power are turned against them somehow.

If a credible accusation of a violent crime is made, most people would be suspended from their job and social services might be involved to assess the children's safety. If a baseless and malicious accusation is made with nothing to support it, this probably wouldn't happen as it could be easily dismissed. But we aren't talking about that; we're talking about a three year long investigation, multiple victims reporting similar crimes, supporting evidence to back up what they say. So yes, anyone in that position would find themselves perhaps suspended or sacked, perhaps subject to social services, perhaps if charged then remanded in custody or bailed before a trial with restrictions placed upon them accordingly. Not treated as though they were definitely innocent until the moment a verdict is pronounced, but under suspicion and managed in accordance with that to minimise any risk of harm to others or flight.

The law has nothing to do with that process, which is why powerful, wealthy rapists do get to ponce around for decades and evade any kind of justice, until the levers they used to get themselves into their positions of power are turned against them somehow

Yes! This!

You are missing the point. And I’m not sure anyone can make it any simpler for you. If indeed she had attempted to kill her she would be guilty, irrelevant of what a court decides. The woman who suffered the attempted murder does not need to declare her innocent of that crime.

you are completely confused about a legal basis of a judicial system, which does presume innocent until proven guilty and the reality of if someone is actually did commit a crime they are guilty irrelevant of a courts findings

I think the courts are the place where these cases are heard - I do not have access to all the information so I do am not in a position to make a judgment.

And that’s your prerogative. As said, when a woman says rape. I believe her; that’s always my going in position. You’re going in position is to consider she may be lying and wait for a court case and assume the alleged rapist innocent until then.

your choice. Even if I don’t respect it.

I would say my position is not even I consider someone is lying my position in that I do not know. I think the situations are more nuanced

Of course I can. No need for multiple question marks. I have already mentioned on another thread that I don’t like the trial by media. My comment was relating to the people who are not waiting for this to go through the justice system but are very loudly saying how he is innocent and they will support him no matter what.

As a PP said, it was in his own book.

The family dog wasn't allowed upstairs. A young Russell would coax it up the stairs, then tell it off and kick it down the stairs.

Harming animals at a young age is an indicator of serious behavioural issues.

Yesterday's episode of the News Agents is worth a listen, they interviewed a journalist who knew RB at the height of his fame. He said there were moments where he genuinely thought he was a psychopath.

You don’t know what exactly? Who is telling the truth? The woman who says rape or the alleged rapist? Is that what you don’t know?

there is no nuance here, multiple women are saying rape and sexual assault. Have you heard the descriptions? Of the 16 year old who had to punch him to get him off her from ramming his penis down her throat? From the woman who was held against her will against a wall? About the woman who was screaming as he forced her on the bed? There is nothing nuanced about it.

so yes, none of us were there. None of us “know” but I believe the women. Any woman who says she was raped or sexually assaulted. And in these accusations, violently.

@Janieforever I think there was a witness who heard the woman screaming , he apologised to her for not doing anything.

I've reported historic rape to the police and one of the questions they had is " Did you tell anyone friends/family/ex boyfriends.. literally anyone. I had and this was used as evidence

Same as me , I had told my ex husband and he gave evidence in court for me.

To all the so called women who’ve never been through the justice system sit back down. It’s a long, drawn out process highly weighted to the perp. I went through it and was successful - this is rare.

It's also hard to tell anyone what's happened. You feel at fault, ashamed, and completely alone.
The women who have taken a stand are extremely brave.

Exactly.

Most of - if not all- of these women have chosen to remain anonymous. There’s no personal gain in terms of money or fame to be had for them by coming forwards.

If we choose to believe them and it turns out they’re lying (which I don’t think they are) the worst thing that happens is we’ve supported a liar. If we choose not to believe them and it turns out to be true then you’ve supported a rapist. I know which side I’d rather be on.

Also, this isn't just about Brand it's also about the culture that exists to protect abusers.
It needs to be talked about. Lessons need to be learned.
I hope we continue these conversations long after the law/media has finished with Brand.

Interestingly surgeons are the people with the highest rate of psychopathic tendencies, - it’s a fine line

Me too, I am really dismayed anyone could hear these women’s accounts and say well it’s nuanced and I don’t know, he’s innocent until a court says otherwise. I’m even more dismayed if they are women. What nuance? She was asking for it? Wanted it? She consented to it?

even the lesser crimes, but still unacceptable crimes, the bbc employee who went into his dressing room and he had his dick out and asked her to perform oral sex on him, where is the nuance there? Think it’s nuanced if one of your colleagues does that to you at work.?

@Furryrug , yes I think so, a group of them heard.

Yep. Anyone who has worked in a rape culture workplace will know the impact the men can have at the top if they are misogynistic rape culture excusers

How little power females have. Especially against litigious men

This has made me think of an owner who fostered that culture and even leaving a review on glass door, how carful would you need to be

I’d love it if he got the come back for it though

If they turn out to be lying and everyone has been supporting them that isn’t the worst that has happened though is it? An innocent man has been labelled a rapist, his wife the wife of a rapist and his kids the children of a rapist.