Russell Brand 🤢🤮 in the Docky Wock

[U53rName]

Credit to @thebrowncatisback for the title. Original thread is here: www.mumsnet.com/talk/in_the_news/5589048-russell-brand?callback=in&code=YTEWYJJJMZQTMJFHNS0ZNDI5LTK3N2QTZWJHYWNHZJGXNZA2&page=39&state=aa7521b41da5458084d85ced7c73c27d

It is indeed but the events must be hard to recall for all parties involved.

Your third paragraph is what I meant by "phone save". Unless he's got corroboration from his phone records/sim card for the stuff in your last paragraph then I don't believe it.

If he has the details from his phone/sim card, it will prove that he was lying when he said he had no recollection of her, won't it. Whichever way that goes, he comes out as a liar, because he has made a statement to the police that he didn't know who was being talked about and now made a statement in court on oath that he did know who was being talked about.

He not on trial for being a liar. He's on trial for rape and if he genuinely wrote that she was into anal before the rape then that helps his case.

Personally, I don't believe he did and I don't believe there is is any evidence he did.

never, ever forget this woman.'

Good grief.

It strikes me that he's really dropping himself in the dog poo here because that could be reasonably interpreted in a way that does not paint him in a good light.

Why never forget this particular woman, out of lots and lots and lots and lots of others.

What is so special about this encounter with this woman that was worthy of remembering?

Would the incident come back to haunt him some day perhaps?

I think he meant after the encounter in the dressing room not after the alleged rape

So you think he was lying in court this morning? It definitely isn’t helping to establish him as a credible witness does it.

I would have thought it didn't do much good for the testimony of a witness in its entirety if he is conclusively shown to tell lie either to the police in a statement he signs or on oath in a court, or both. But maybe that's just me and juries are expected to believe every word every witness says even if two things that witness says are directly contradictory of each other and thus cast doubt on his credibility as a whole.

(So what's the point of having a jury, in that case? Oh, never mind.)

Thanks for the clarification. Thumbs ☝️

Me 1:

Unless there is corroboration for the phone save I don't believe it and as the defence say it's all a blatant pack of lies.

Me 2:

Unless he's got corroboration from his phone records/sim card for the stuff in your last paragraph then I don't believe it.

You:

So you think he was lying in court this morning?

🤔

Trigger, is that you?

So either he didn't remember her, or he remembers her well enough to remember what he wrote about her. If he does remember her, just maybe he might remember all his other victims....

If I were on that jury I'd look at the two contradictory statements and conclude one or other must be untrue, and that he therefore says things that are untrue, and I would listen to any other evidence he gives with the knowledge that it may also be untrue.

And that definitely is about the rape charges: he denies, but then on the other hand, he tells lies....

I am appalled at how many people here are saying oral rape isn't possible. Are people being 'funny', sarcastic or just ignorant?

And people like that will be on the jury.

In the Ch4 event, Woman 6 I think, two named men were in the room and encouraged her to perform the massage. Those men must remember the programme they were working on and if RB didn’t come into the room and thrust his head into her lap, then surely they’d vouch for RB and prove Woman 6 has lied. It’s very telling that those two men (who are now comedy producers) haven’t done that.

My thoughts exactly. She knew their names.

I would have thought it didn't do much good for the testimony of a witness in its entirety if he is conclusively shown to tell lie either to the police in a statement

We are miles of into a rabbit hole of hypothetical here but:

If there was corroboration that wouldn't show him to be lying at all.

The defense would say: "At decades distance he had no recollection of the complainant, but now the police have checked his phone it turns out at the time he said she was really into anal."

Those two things are not contradictory at all.

Academic because I think he's completely made it up and there is no corroboration.

But again, trading credibility for evidence pointing towards innocence on one of the most serious offence would still be a good trade.

I don't think that a jury could say he was guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

Equally they aren't prosecution witnesses either so the same logic proves the opposite.

(Which is insane, can't they be compelled to testify to what they saw? That would sort this charge out definitively AFAIC.)

Whose reporting on the trial are you following?

Who invited the Manosphere faithful to the chat?

and they encouraged this massage? Wow.

see, I don't think there's much reasonable doubt at all.

I think they could easily with the anal rape. The texts and the amount if people she told afterwards and the HIV check

I missed the detail that it was the police who went through his phone and found the code he had put beside her name. My impression was that he came out with this on the witness stand and the police having found it was not mentioned.

I'm slightly surprised if he keeps in his phone the details of every woman he's shagged over the past twenty years, for the police to find, but maybe he has never lost any data when his phone's battery exploded or he dropped it into the loo (the commonest cause of mobile phone failure at one point; no idea if that still applies). I have to make a deliberate decision to transfer data to each new phone, and probably wouldn't bother to keep old data about someone I hadn't seen for years and had no reason to expect I would ever see again, but on the other hand I am not an obsessive sex addict. Maybe the numbers in his phone are his techie equivalent of notches on the bedpost.

I’ve now got absolutely no idea what you’re on about. Who the fuck is Trigger??

so it wasn’t made up then. Interesting… 🧐