Absolutely.
He's also made a lot of admissions about what he's done. Ones that are particularly notable.
A few from wiki
Brand says he had a "strange relationship" with his father, whom he saw sporadically and who took him to visit prostitutes during a trip to Thailand when Brand was a teenager
He had a father who taught him not to respect women and didn't teach healthy boundaries. By his own admission.
Brand was dismissed several days after coming to work dressed as Osama bin Laden the day after the 11 September 2001 attacks and bringing his drug dealer to the MTV studios.
Hmm yes. Knows a lot about respect and boundaries doesn't he?
He has been litigatious in the past when it comes to his behaviour. And won.
In May 2014, Brand received libel damages from The Sun after the paper had printed a story in November 2013 alleging that he had been unfaithful to Khan.
I had a look at the dates on this. None of the allegations seem to cross over the relationship. But I do wonder if something will come out on that front.
The fact that he hasn't said he will go legal (and it's extremely unlikely he'd win anyway) on this occasion is interesting given that history and his desire to protect his reputation in the past.
But this is the kicker for me.
In the October 2014 issue of Vanity Fair, Brand said of the allegations of misogyny made against him: "I have lived a life and had a frame of cultural references that make that charge quite legitimate... But as a person who's trying to live a decent, spiritual life, misogyny is not part of my current palette of behaviors... In a way, redemption is a great part of my narrative. I'm talking about disavowing previous lives, previous beliefs, previous behaviours."
That's an admission. Redemption doesn't cut it when you've left a trail of wreckage through other people's lives.
Then you look at the way he talks about women and the way he behaves around women saying it's consentual makes no sense if colleagues were putting in complaints to management. There's plenty of clips of him physically assaulting women but it's laughed off - one of the bits that's unpleasant is the look on the women's face and how uncomfortable they clearly are with it. They've been conditioned to tolerate it 'because it's just Brand being Brand and that's what he does'.
How is going up to a woman and full on planting one on the lips 'for a joke' without invitation properly consentual? All on camera - shown during the programme.
Indeed we had an example a couple of weeks ago of similar with the Spanish FA where the woman said she didn't consent, it was on TV but she's still not believed.
For me that's the most depressing issue. No amount of evidence would be enough for some. We know deep down that even if it went to court and he was found guilty there'd still be people outside protesting that he'd been stitched up unfairly. We have pretty much seen this with Letby - on these threads there were people saying the evidence wasn't enough cos they'd been following the case and thought the medis coverage showed a lack of evidence (never mind it being one of the longest murder trials in recent years due to the amount of evidence).
It comes down to people not wanting to believe it, no matter what they see with their own eyes. There will always be an excuse - it's not through the courts, they aren't perfect rape victims, he was just being funny etc etc. Because they don't want to believe. They don't want to admit what that might say about themselves. Because it interferes with their world view.
It's a theme that's increasing common. It is a whole industry in itself. And unfortunately that's why Brand will be just fine. He gets to play victim and make a fortune from it.