If you didn’t realise you were seeing actors, you weren’t paying attention - it was clearly labelled.
If you don’t like music or trailers, why not read the Times article instead? It contains the exact same information about sexual assaults and rapes.
You seem to be confused about the timeline re ‘Alice’ - she met Brand when she was at school, when he approached her on the street. She went on to work in tv, and specifically channel 4, where Brand’s name came up as a suggestion for a presenter.
I can’t find the ‘unredacted’ texts except on some dreadful You Tube channel. Do you have a link?
As has been pointed out ad infinitum, the article and documentary must reach a standard of proof prior to broadcast - otherwise those involved are open to a defamation case. Both have been legalled to death - one reason not all the allegations were included. Without a wealth of corroborating evidence, they could not go to print.
Absolutely baffled how people can be so uninformed about the way the traditional media works. Of the endless checks & balances required to broadcast or print something.
NB this is not the case on social media where any old shit can be stuck in front of an audience of hapless twits with poor critical thinking tools.