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

5 hours ago he posted an anti-vaccine article which links MMR vaccine to autism.
5 hours ago.
He clearly isn't feeling too bothered about the trial if he's posting on Instagram about anti-vaxxers and a family selfie?!

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5591683-can-we-talk-about-laura-gallacher?reply=155506114&utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=share

Such a weird photo

Sorry not meaning to derail but the more I search up stuff on Brand the more weird shit I find on him

Who is that in the middle?!

Justin Bieber when he was a young boy

Oh no. That poor man 😪

You're not wrong on anyyhing here but in all honesty I'm not getting the impression that there was a significant age gap between Brand and his accusers at the the time of these alleged crimes.

He'd only have been 24 at the time of the first, remember. She'd been at least 21, I'd think.

Woman number 5 was only 21 when he brutally raped her and Brand must have been mid 30s by then

poor girl. Imagine that being your 21 year old daughter

Woman no 1 was 19 i think? First time away from home at the Labour Party conference

She was 28, he was 24 x

There are many historical tales of cult leaders leading cults with multiple wives and SA. I think TH could slot easily in as a cult leader in an alternative life. Laura is obviously under some sort of coercion and she reminds me of a cult member that cannot refuse or argue with a leader.

The court did sit yesterday. It heard from several witnesses, including friends and work colleagues of the woman who gave evidence the day before, who all stated she’d told them about the rape by RB.
A statement from the medical professional who treated her afterwards was also read out. The victim told her she’d been raped by RB.
Also a friend described how they’d bumped into RB at the Edinburgh Festival, and the victim became extremely upset, thinking he was following her. RB recognised her and after that started texting her, asking to meet her for sex again.
Im looking forward to hearing how RB tries to explain all of this evidence away.

He is so grubby. In my view so narcissistic and cold. Horrid

I think the defence can't argue about the fact that anal sex occured or that multiple people were told. The defence can try to undermine her testimony by suggesting she is an unreliable witness and my fear is that alcohol consumption is going to be brought up as well as maybe mental health problems (low self esteem) making her impulsive with regard to sexual encounters. I can just see the defence trying to make her out as an alcoholic nutjob but the woman has been strong in her appearances so far and will presumably have been prepared by the prosecution so hopefully the defence will fail.

Sadly I think that it could go either way and there's a good chance that he's going to be found not guilty on all of them.

The only thing that might help is that he said sorry in response to the animal accusation. You know what I mean. Own goal there on his part.

AND I'm sad to say evidence from other men saying he'd been erratic.

No doubt that the defence will make out that they're jealous of him or something along those lines.

The first accusation of PIV rape may be believed by the jury. The anal rape one may not be.

On balance, I think he's guilty on all of them.

Oh yes in my opinion guilty but like the majority of rape cases there is some witness to the lack of consent. More hopefully conviction rates for rape once in court are above 50%.

I do think that the defence is going to be grim reading for a lot of people and probably not as well promoted by the press. The defence of rapists in courts is not something that aligns with a societal desire to prevent VAWG.

Yes it’s reported that he did say “sorry” but how can it be proved beyond reasonable doubt that he did? It’s a bit of a stumbling block unless the witness can provide evidence.

See, I think the opposite about the anal rape example. The fact the victim is so open about the other things she did willingly makes it very, very clear what wasn't and what was different about this. And the "clean it up" reaction of his is something most people would recognise as horrific and abusive in itself. Also the many witnesses to her reaction afterwards are pretty compelling, including just how many of them reacted with horror and said "that was rape" regardless of anything else. I think it was the best way for the prosecution to play this and may swing the case. Whereas I fear that with the first woman, though I 100% believe her, that it'd be more a case of he said/she said that there so often are in such examples. I hope not, but that depends on the views and prejudices of the jury.

I also think that the repeat patterns of behaviour that were witnessed are likely to swing the case against him, even though they need to look at charge by charge. I certainly hope so.

I think the defence might try and play this another way. The clean it up order for Brand (did she have to hand wash the sheets?) was so odious and vile that any one listening to the woman's account would be so mortified that they would reach for rape word as the conduct was so morally poor, maybe feeling the conduct was so reprehensible a crime must have happened. If I was the womans father I would want the fucker putting away.

Maybe the defence will argue that words were put into her mouth? I hope not but I don't know how the defence are going to defend.

Yes.
I'd think most innocent men's reaction to the animal comment would be one of horror and fear. Not an apology. Frankly, I'd be absolutely freaking out.
I'm not a man but I'd strongly suspect that would be the response IF innocent.

This was 2009. Don't know if the text still exists.

Putting the notion of 'he said, she said' aside, I would find that text very damning in itself.

Indeed, as would I. It’s an admission of guilt of a brutal interaction but how can it be proved? How can the prosecution prove a text saying “sorry” was sent? The evidence is testimony based. What I can’t get over is his nonchalance. Is he so deluded and his life so deeply immersed in sex that he can no longer tell truth from lies?

I think he is mentally unwell but will the prosecution be able to prove this. The nonchalance is chilling but there will be some that would say if he was guilty he would be mortified and shying away completely from public life.

I think it’s now been proven in the cross exam that it wasn’t Russell thay said ‘clean it up’ it was someone else who was sharing the house with him as Russell had to leave to go a gig.

She said she cleaned it up with wipes - not sure how that’s possible to be fair?

He also didn’t have to do this trial as he lives in America now but he came willingly as he wants it to be sorted out