Dispatches . Russel brand .

[fabmaccawhackythumbsaloft]

I actually like Russel brand . And I don't think he's ever hidden what he used to be in his heyday. He's always been very open about his drug use, and promiscuity.

I read his first book . I watch his videos on fb , and while I don't always agree with him, he seems to have totally overhauled his lifestyle, attitudes, is into yoga, self care, seems to be a decent husband and father .

Is this newsworthy ? Young famous comedian in heyday slept with lots and lots of women , consensually he says ?

Hes never hidden it.

On drug misuse I alWays had time for his views that it should be dealt with as a medical issue not a criminal one

What's the news story ?
I always feel like there is much glee and salivating before the media try and knock someone down.
I don't think this is a huw edwards where people would be shocked at him trying to pick up young women behind his wife's back

It seems that brand has settled down , lives a fairly mundane lifestyle and is happy with his choices .

Or am I completely missing something?

"That's funny because I strongly believe it's people like YOU who are part of the problem by encouraging women to not go to the police when a sexual assault happens and telling them they won't get heard of taken serious."

Did you read the quote from the Victims Commissioner? @beatrix1234

Nope @beatrix1234 it's definitely you that's the problem. You have one contribution to make across all the RB threads - that you think victims should only go to the police. You can't distinguish between tabloids and investigative journalism by The Times and Dispatches and you won't acknowledge anyone's explanations of why women don't report or the problems they encounter when they do. You have nothing to say about the low rate of prosecution and conviction for rape and sexual assault or the trauma for women. You want women to feel they have one legitimate avenue when they are victims and it's an avenue that very rarely gets their voices heard or offenders punished. I wonder why that is.

You have somehow blithely managed to remain uninformed about what happens to victims when they go through your beloved legal channels, and how vanishingly rare it is for a case to go to court at all, and even then rarer to obtain a conviction. (Even with repeated postings of a graph showing the figures.) The process is brutal.

Your posts on this thread are astonishing. You should be ashamed of yourself.

That’s quite an accusation of something I have never said. Not even close.

I would always encourage someone to report an assault to the police. I would also completely respect their decision and understand why if they didn’t want to. Dangerous and irresponsible is what you’re doing by failing to comprehend the reality of the world operating around you.

Let’s be clear here - you’re the one who responded to some ones account of being raped with ‘why didn’t you…’ ‘but you….’

What legal system failed? the women never went to the police

picking up on this now because it’s been quoted again…

@beatrix1234 victims of crime not having trust in the police and not reporting is a failure of the legal system. It falls at the first hurdle, particularly for victims of sexual crimes.

Your posts are nothing more than grotesque victim blaming. You keep saying you don't understand why women don't go to the police yet, it's been explained over and over in this thread and many other ongoing threads too. Without a shadow of a doubt you are very much part of the problem.

The police and court process is fucking gruelling for victims of rape - I know, I've been there. And the conviction rates have been repeatedly posted, yet you still dig your heels in with ignorant, offensive bollocks. Contrarian or just plain stupid? It's hard to tell.

@flappersdelight The police and court process is fucking gruelling for victims of rape.

So a better option is going to channel 4 and having your name or face plastered all over the tabloids? Mind boggles.

It's not a kangaroo court; it's a three year detailed investigation with witness testimony, corroborated accounts and evidence. Go and read the account of how they carried out the investigation if you can't understand the difference.

Name one victim.

The victims in the investigation are anonymous. Their names and faces aren't plastered anywhere.

Oh fuck me, I'm out.

His reputation as a serial sexual abuser has been common knowledge in the industry for many years. This investigation was thorough, taking place over several years. But it wouldn't be a mn thread on rape without a clutch of women (I hope to god none of you have daughters) wailing "pity the poor rapists!"

If you think trying to guilt trip women into reporting will help without an ounce of empathy, then you really don't get it.

You don't understand that many women don't think they will survive the process.

Since beatrix1234 seems intent on turning victim into wrong'un, I'd like to ask her a question.
What's worse? Being called a victim blaming cunt, or being one?
I'm just trying to see something....

I'm out too. But just going to leave this here for anyone on this thread who has, like me, found the rape apologism and victim blaming (with all its doubling down) distressing.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/4897710-support-for-all-victims-of-rape-sexual-assault-and-abuse?reply=129241999

They are anonymous. Their faces have not been shown. Have you not followed the story at all?

Mind boggles, indeed.

Again, you should read about the process of the investigation. For one thing, you'd then understand that he was given the opportunity to defend himself and funnily enough, he can't.

RB self confessed poor treatment of women is well documented- he used women for sex and it all smacks of misogyny. Plenty of reasons to avoid and dislike the man. Plenty of reasons for employers to walk away from a smarmy liability. It’s got to be questioned why they didn’t, if his behaviour was an open secret - to the extent they were concerned about female staff etc.
This was rightly covered and brought to light.
However, the programme also made allegations of non consensual sexual abuse and rape - crimes. Surely one sided ‘trial’ by media can’t be right …even give the current shortcomings of the legal system. If they have a dossier of evidence, hand it to the police and put media pressure on them to thoroughly investigate.

I was posting here last night and it's moved on a lot since then so apologies if this has been mentioned/discussed already but I've been thinking a lot since I watched Dispatches last night.

It's not surprising that we have the usual "Should have gone to the police." "Trial by media." and worse yet, questioning how much the women were paid for their "stories". It's depressing but not surprising. All of that lead me down the Jimmy Saville/Harvey Weinstein rabbit hole. In both cases women went to the police and nothing happened. In Saville's case he died before, finally, everything came out into the open. Was that trial by media? Weinstein was also "outed" by the media before finally facing justice.

In both instances without the media these men would still have a good public reputation despite it being known within their industries that they were dangerous, predatory men. Brand was also known to be dangerous and predatory within the industry, women were bullied by him or injunctions not to go to the police, a brief investigation was dropped. Should we differentiate him from the other two who were also subject to "trial by media". Was it a witch hunt then too or was it okay then and not now? Why?

The truth is that without intensive and brave investigative journalism the vile behaviour of all three would be open secrets never to become fully public. This is not some tabloid tell all, it's serious journalism and to pretend otherwise whilst supporting the good roll serious journalism played in taking down other sexual predators is hypocritical at best.

You don’t know that he can’t refute… only that didn’t. He didn’t engage.
We don’t know if he had evidence to the contrary. It’s very easy to be convinced when you only hear one version of events.

This isn’t saying that the alleged victims are not telling the truth …it’s just unfair to have trial by media.

I also think that it may lead to questioning the behaviour of other men in the industry and perhaps lead to action being taken against them.