Page 4 | Russel has spoken

Whyismyfacealwaysdry · 2023-09-22T21:31:44+00:00

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

duc748 · 23/09/2023 00:24

Xrays · 22/09/2023 23:00

He’s delusional enough to think he’s some sort of messiah. He gives me Charles Manson vibes. Horrible man.

It's funny you say that, cos the first thing that came into my mind was a vid I'd seen of Charlie Manson playing the guitar in front of this gospel church, with this maniacal look in his eyes, as if to say, ha, you suckers, I'm fooling you! Unfortunately my indifferent Google-fu skills have been unable to bring it up, but possibly some other posters will have seen it.

spookehtooth · 23/09/2023 00:26

@Furryrug don't think so, but I heard the Saville interview, saw him sitting on a woman in his underwear and hugging & kissing a woman who looked really uncomfortable. Nobody who does that can be trusted to understand what consent is

anotherside · 23/09/2023 00:26

@smilesup

Try reading it again. It was a comment observing how suddenly this guy is universally referred to as being dirty/slimy/like a serial killer … when in fact previously he was often voted as one of the sexiest men alive. Just noticing a spot of revisionism.

MissTrip82 · 23/09/2023 00:27

Dee9409 · 22/09/2023 23:41

Look he is innocent until a court of law finds him guilty. His face, his name is all over the internet. This is totally unfair, he hasn’t been convicted or found guilty. People accusing a man should also be named just as he is being named. He has NOT BEEN FOUND GUILTY

The maxim of the presumption of innocence applies in one place, and in one place only: a criminal court. It applies there because it is the forum in which the state can apply its maximum sanction. It applies literally nowhere else, nowhere, anywhere, ever. People are perfectly free to decide on someone's guilt in any other forum. People are even free to say it publicly; the only constraints are the laws of defamation or contempt if a trial is in progress.

Russell Brand is in turn free to sue the multiple media outlets whose investigative journalism over a period of years has led to this. In making this public, those media outlets will have had lengthy in-depth legal advice on the likelihood that such an action would succeed.

The most useful thing about the presumption of innocence is the people who come out to defend it and do so solely when the allegations involve crimes against women and children. Identifying the rape apologists amongst us is indeed helpful.

What's unfair is the sickeningly low rate of prosecution of rapists, and the even lower rate of conviction. What's unfair is that a man accused of rape is many many many more times likely to have done it and simply walked away without any criminal sanction than it is likely that the woman (in this case multiple women) involved has lied. What's unfair is that rape apologists care only for the damage done to the perpetrator, and not for the life-changing damage doe to the victims.

Tryingmybestadhd · 23/09/2023 00:32

My thoughts are that he is still a rapist , he knows it and no amount of conspiracy theories proven or not will change that

Furryrug · 23/09/2023 00:33

spookehtooth · 23/09/2023 00:26

@Furryrug don't think so, but I heard the Saville interview, saw him sitting on a woman in his underwear and hugging & kissing a woman who looked really uncomfortable. Nobody who does that can be trusted to understand what consent is

I agree, if this was how he behaved in public, it's not a far stretch to assume his behaviour in private was even worse.

BettyBooper · 23/09/2023 00:34

Xrays · 23/09/2023 00:37

anotherside · 23/09/2023 00:26

@smilesup

Try reading it again. It was a comment observing how suddenly this guy is universally referred to as being dirty/slimy/like a serial killer … when in fact previously he was often voted as one of the sexiest men alive. Just noticing a spot of revisionism.

Oh he’s definitely got more Manson like and messiah ish as he’s got older. I’m 43 so I remember him at the height of his fame, when he was like a weird Jonny Depp from Pirates of the Caribbean. He has always been strange, attractive to many clearly, but strange. He’s just got even more delusional and weird with age.

mayorofcasterbridge · 23/09/2023 00:43

Lemoncellocake · 22/09/2023 22:40

My view is that the comments from people supporting him on Instagram are clearly written by those who are either a) vulnerable b)uneducated or c) people who believe in conspiracy theories.

He is just a gaslighting rapist.

100% this!

AliciaLime · 23/09/2023 00:49

bossybloss · 22/09/2023 23:22

What do you call a man trapped in a paper bag? 🤣

🤣🤣 The government probably put him in there though, or big pharma, or, or big tech. Or Mainstream Media!!

mayorofcasterbridge · 23/09/2023 01:06

BlurredEdges · 22/09/2023 23:04

I don't think we need to say alleged. The Times, Sunday Times and dispatches journalists worked for three years to make this watertight.

He is hugely litigious. If this was libellous (I.e. untrue) it would have been shut down long ago.

He and his very, very expensive lawyers haven't been able to shut this down. So I for one feel confident that it's OK to refer to him as a rapist.

And I say this as someone who was a big big fan of his in the early 2000s.

Show quote history

I despised him from the first time I ever became aware of him. He is an odious creep. I was never, ever a fan. He always disgusted me.

I am always very much someone in the 'innocent until proven guilty' camp. I am happy to make an exception here. Of course he would have shut this down legally if he could - this time he can't. He is a misogynistic POS and so are all his apologists!!

MagentaRocks · 23/09/2023 01:09

Dee9409 · 22/09/2023 23:41

Look he is innocent until a court of law finds him guilty. His face, his name is all over the internet. This is totally unfair, he hasn’t been convicted or found guilty. People accusing a man should also be named just as he is being named. He has NOT BEEN FOUND GUILTY

Great idea, let’s stop even more women from seeking justice for being raped.

You do know, I’m sure, how traumatic it is for people to report sexual crimes. Why on earth would you think it a good idea to take away their anonymity?

Sueveneers · 23/09/2023 01:15

Xrays · 22/09/2023 23:00

He’s delusional enough to think he’s some sort of messiah. He gives me Charles Manson vibes. Horrible man.

That's it! Charles Manson is exactly who he reminds me of with those soulless black eyes, but I couldn't place his name.

Gooseysgirl · 23/09/2023 01:17

@mayorofcasterbridge I completely agree. He gave me the creeps the first time I saw him on Big Brother. I feel so sorry for all of the women that have been emotionally and physically harmed by him.

greenhydrangea · 23/09/2023 01:54

I've heard he smells like bum.

overtaxedunderling · 23/09/2023 01:56

MissTrip82 · 23/09/2023 00:27

The maxim of the presumption of innocence applies in one place, and in one place only: a criminal court. It applies there because it is the forum in which the state can apply its maximum sanction. It applies literally nowhere else, nowhere, anywhere, ever. People are perfectly free to decide on someone's guilt in any other forum. People are even free to say it publicly; the only constraints are the laws of defamation or contempt if a trial is in progress.

Russell Brand is in turn free to sue the multiple media outlets whose investigative journalism over a period of years has led to this. In making this public, those media outlets will have had lengthy in-depth legal advice on the likelihood that such an action would succeed.

The most useful thing about the presumption of innocence is the people who come out to defend it and do so solely when the allegations involve crimes against women and children. Identifying the rape apologists amongst us is indeed helpful.

What's unfair is the sickeningly low rate of prosecution of rapists, and the even lower rate of conviction. What's unfair is that a man accused of rape is many many many more times likely to have done it and simply walked away without any criminal sanction than it is likely that the woman (in this case multiple women) involved has lied. What's unfair is that rape apologists care only for the damage done to the perpetrator, and not for the life-changing damage doe to the victims.

Show quote history

There are several elements that (to me) make the current allegations appear counter-productive:

He has an easily evidenced income stream from a billion downloads that suggest a definite, ongoing financial loss
He presumably knows exactly who his accusers are and his expensive lawyers may have already gathered enough evidence to make at least some of them reluctant to give evidence
Institutions including Parliament seemed to have abandoned any kind of due process, which I assume may lead to unintended consequences

I worry that the mishandling of this case may preclude any form of 'fair' trial and that it may actually serve to lower the sickeningly low rate of prosecution of rapists, and the even lower rate of conviction.

HelloCello · 23/09/2023 02:03

This reply has been withdrawn

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ at the poster's request.

TroglodytesTroglodytes · 23/09/2023 02:05

I’m pleased with YouTube for not allowing him to profit from ranting about his ‘innocence’. I’ve never heard of rumble but it says in the article that it is £48 to subscribe and watch his videos!? Apart from journalists joining to watch to report content for articles, who is paying to watch this utter crap?

Pussygaloregalapagos · 23/09/2023 02:15

He is a creep. Grabs fannies at parties. yukky man.

Grumpusaurus · 23/09/2023 02:45

It defies belief just how much people are contorting themselves to denigrate and dismiss the victims, framing it as him being shut down by the Matrix/establishment or whatever other nonsense. He is part of the establishment and over privileged. That is how he got away with so much! It really is weird to see how some of the same people baying for Prince Andrew’s blood, seem to totally excuse his even more serious sexual abuse. Weirdly many reference their conspiracy theories and his supposed media persecution by mentioning Epstein when in reality, it was similar investigative journalism that actually finally brought that rich predator to justice.

There are tangible pieces of evidence that support the allegations. He is a sexual predator and admitted to it repeatedly, such as exposing himself to women. The BBC even received complaints about him showing his penis to women and someone joked on a live show that it had been a whole 26 minutes when it last happened. The BBS did nothing and the complaints were swept off the table. You remove the enablers and those trying to bury the many credible statements, it does open the gates for victims to come forward. No conspiracy there, they felt no longer isolated.

I recall how shocked a friend was after reading his book. Something that really isn’t being talked about much. He reminisces on how his mother got a little dog called Topsy from an animal shelter that had a rough start in life. Brand was nearly 8 at the time, so old enough to have developed empathy. At some point, the dog was not allowed upstairs anymore. Brand would call Topsy upstairs in a sweet friendly voice but once the dog cautiously climbed up towards him while he was beckoning it, he would tell it very sternly how it knew it should not be there and then kicked that poor dog down the stairs. Then he would go down too and in a friendly voice say "Aaaw someone kicked you down the stairs" and pet it. The poor dog was desperate for affection but never knew if it would get hurt. There was no discernible remorse in the book written as an adult! There is such malice and psychopathy in his behaviour. This shows a staggering level of intentional cruelty and gaslighting that very much reflects who he is. Animal abuse by children at that age is something that is flagged as a worrying factor. He also mentioned how he killed his Guinea pigs a while later in boarding school. That book starts off with him in some sex addict clinic. Not one of those expensive celeb ones but one used by offenders, often as part of some plea bargain. I bet his 'handlers' organised this stint in this treatment centre as part of damage control. The allegations come after that supposed treatment.

I reckon he gets off on the power of abusing women. So many people use the disgusting trope how he didn't need to rape women, as so many throw themselves at him. This isn't even about impulse control! He did this because he enjoys humiliating and denigrating women. He openly boasted about it again and again, gleefully giving us details of sexual attacks! It sickens me that he re-branded himself as this supposed champion of abused

DreamTheMoors · 23/09/2023 03:26

Whyismyfacealwaysdry · 22/09/2023 22:46

His eyes are v intense

I don’t remember the first time I saw him, but he creeped me out from the very beginning.
There’s just something icky about him.
And un-funny.

DreamTheMoors · 23/09/2023 03:59

smilesup · 23/09/2023 00:14

Yes, because a rapist surely couldn't also have had consensual sex, as well as raping someone.

Show quote history

I’m a rape survivor.
I was 15 - he was 55 and the mayor of our town. His “upstanding” family owned the most popular clothing shop in town.
He raped me on a school trip.
He convinced me that it was all my fault. The shame & horror & shock & disgust kept me silent for decades.
Then he committed suicide.
And I wore a red dress to his funeral, and people there thought I was the inappropriate one.
Sometimes you just can’t win, but I think in this case, since that fucker’s dead, I won.

GCAcademic · 23/09/2023 04:25

anotherside · 23/09/2023 00:07

@PurpleMonkeys

When we say that Saville is guilty, the assumption is that with the weight and quality of evidence available to police, had he been brought to trial, a conviction on numerous severe counts would have been, say, 99.999% likely.

That’s what we mean when we say he was not innocent. But for the other 99.9% of cases which aren’t quite as overwhelming in their amount and degree of evidence, I think it’s probably best we keep innocent till proven guilty before a jury.

Though we could certainly all save a lot of time and effort if we in future just forego the whole trial, jury, prosecution, defence malarkey and left justice to a viewers poll, or the opinion of a newspaper or investigative team, or which side can produce the more convincing 90 minute documentary.

Your faith in the justice system is breathtakingly naive. Rape has been effectively decriminalised in the U.K., the rate of conviction is so low. There are a lot of “innocent” actual rapists walking free and rising levels of sexual assault (e.g. in Scotland) because men know that they can get away with it. Investigative journalism is now one of the few recourses victims of rape and sexual assault have to a pathway to the justice system bothering to mount a prosecution case, though realistically only if the perpetrator is famous. And investigative journalism is not “opinion”, it has to pass a very strict burden of factual and legal checking as the legal costs for the newspaper would be eye-watering otherwise.

ChillysWaterBottle · 23/09/2023 04:26

MissTrip82 · 23/09/2023 00:27

The maxim of the presumption of innocence applies in one place, and in one place only: a criminal court. It applies there because it is the forum in which the state can apply its maximum sanction. It applies literally nowhere else, nowhere, anywhere, ever. People are perfectly free to decide on someone's guilt in any other forum. People are even free to say it publicly; the only constraints are the laws of defamation or contempt if a trial is in progress.

Russell Brand is in turn free to sue the multiple media outlets whose investigative journalism over a period of years has led to this. In making this public, those media outlets will have had lengthy in-depth legal advice on the likelihood that such an action would succeed.

The most useful thing about the presumption of innocence is the people who come out to defend it and do so solely when the allegations involve crimes against women and children. Identifying the rape apologists amongst us is indeed helpful.

What's unfair is the sickeningly low rate of prosecution of rapists, and the even lower rate of conviction. What's unfair is that a man accused of rape is many many many more times likely to have done it and simply walked away without any criminal sanction than it is likely that the woman (in this case multiple women) involved has lied. What's unfair is that rape apologists care only for the damage done to the perpetrator, and not for the life-changing damage doe to the victims.

Show quote history

100% this and beautifully put.

People are really telling on themselves. Imagine chucking away your integrity and decency to defend disgusting millionaire rapist Brand.

Maatandosiris · 23/09/2023 05:14

Lemoncellocake · 22/09/2023 22:40

My view is that the comments from people supporting him on Instagram are clearly written by those who are either a) vulnerable b)uneducated or c) people who believe in conspiracy theories.

He is just a gaslighting rapist.

And why do you think yYou can call someone a rapist without a fair trial. Do you not believe in the concept of innocent until proven guilty?

I have no idea whether the man is guilty of a crime or not. But I do know it’s extremely dangerous to society if we start having a presumption of guilt until proven innocent. Is this how you would approach sitting in a jury?