I never found him to be in the least bit funny as well as coming across as a rather obnoxious character, but that's another story. He's been told to expect a lengthy jail sentence, I'd reckon twelve at a guess.
Any opinions?
|
|
I have honestly never taken much notice of him and I couldn't tell you what he's been in or done. He sounds and looks delusional and narcissistic.
|
We don't know much about him apart from the Sachs incident. Always thought he needed a good wash !
Ted
|
I am 100% with you Robin and from what I am reading today there may be more charges coming.
I have to say, and this is a general statement rather than Brand in particular (cos I never really followed the case) , I am a wee bit uneasy about court cases of historical offences. Whether they be rape, abuse or whatever.
Often it is the defendants word against the victim with no hard evidence to back it up, but it was years ago and the victim can clearly provide a memory of what happened and the victim can't provide a defence.
If 5/10 years after a sexual encounter a woman comes forward and says I was raped that time as I didn't consent and its her word against his. Or if there is evidence of a few people in the same boat, it gives extra weight to the charges but does it necessarily mean that all cases were rape?
I often say but if I was a young sleeping around celeb I think I would have a legal document prepared for every conquest, pre and post doing the business!
|
>> I am a wee bit uneasy about court cases of historical offences. Whether they be rape, abuse or >>whatever.
>>
>> Often it is the defendants word against the victim with no hard evidence to back
>> it up, but it was years ago and the victim can clearly provide a memory
>> of what happened and the victim can't provide a defence.
>>
I agree with you.
Whether there would be a conviction based on the evidence had the offence been reported and investigated in a timely way is questionable. Relying on memories more than 2 decades old with limited or no hard evidence is unjust. Anyone could face such allegations with no defence save absolute denial (the Brand strategy).
Suggestion - any allegations should be made (say) within 3 years of the offence, or by the time young victims reach the age of (say) 18.
BTW - This is about fairness and justice - despite finding the Brand persona objectionable, it is easy to believe he did that of which he has been found guilty.
|
>> Suggestion - any allegations should be made (say) within 3 years of the offence, or
>> by the time young victims reach the age of (say) 18.
And in doing so deny justice to the victims of people like Epstein and Weinstein.
Women rightly asserting rape etc against Mohammed Fayed were fobbed off by the police on the basis that a rich and powerful man wouldn't be convicted. Like Savile rumours swirled around Fayed during his lifetime but the scale only became public after his death.
I think we can rely on the good sense of a properly directed jury to sort wheat from chaff even after a very long time.
|
>> And in doing so deny justice to the victims of people like Epstein and Weinstein.
Victims knowing they are time limited would do the "right thing" and ensure such harmful behaviour was stopped before numerous others could be similarly assaulted.
>> Women rightly asserting rape etc against Mohammed Fayed were fobbed off by the police on
>> the basis that a rich and powerful man wouldn't be convicted. Like Savile rumours swirled
>> around Fayed during his lifetime but the scale only became public after his death.
Allegations should be investigated as a priority - as a society we should know bettter. Police and other authorities (eg: BBC) should be held properly accountable for their failings.
>> I think we can rely on the good sense of a properly directed jury to
>> sort wheat from chaff even after a very long time.
It would be nice to think this the case. Sometimes the law is, bluntly, an ass. There is extensive research on jury biases - pre-trial, social, cognitive, personal experiences, racial,etc. That some verdicts are wrong is a virtual certainty - we just don't know how many. I do not share your confidence.
|
Consistent accounts from different complainants can amount to corroboration and I expect this is a factor in these cases of multiple offences. Although I think there has been a case in which complainants were at least alleged to have cooked up their accounts.
These are usually high profile cases and I imagine the police and the CPS are pretty careful with procedure.
|
>> I never found him to be in the least bit funny as well as coming across as a rather obnoxious character, but that's another story. He's been told to expect a lengthy jail sentence, I'd reckon twelve at a guess. >>
They'll have to let one out to find space for Brand :-) I've always found him coarse,crude and best ignored. Perhaps he is enjoying his last shot at notoriety ?
'Cold' rape cases will always be unsatisfactory, as unless the perp has been careless and performed under CCTV, it will always be one word against another, perhaps accompanied by others jumping on a new bandwagon ?
Last edited by: Andrew-T on Fri 6 Nov 26 at 10:22
|
>> 'Cold' rape cases will always be unsatisfactory, as unless the perp has been careless and
>> performed under CCTV, it will always be one word against another, perhaps accompanied by others
>> jumping on a new bandwagon ?
The standard of proof required in criminal cases in the UK is "beyond reasonable doubt".
Relying upon a memory of events 10-20 or more years ago, supported only by allegations made in respect of similar offences, separated by significant time and distance, seems unsafe to me.
|
IMHO, if several women previously unknown to each other, come forward with historical claims I would think that is a much sounder footing to prosecute the offender.
Many were frightened off coming forward due to the "huge stress" involved at the time.
However, not getting over something for years/decades could be even more stressful or dominate their lives.
|
>> The standard of proof required in criminal cases in the UK is "beyond reasonable doubt". <<
Quite so. Your point is that after 10 or 20 years there should always be 'reasonable' doubt; memories which have fermented for that long will have altered or intensified over time.
|
>> Quite so. Your point is that after 10 or 20 years there should always be
>> 'reasonable' doubt; memories which have fermented for that long will have altered or intensified over
>> time.
The risk you identify is a very real one but it shouldn't be fatal to prosecution.
The jury members will be directed on how to deal with memories that may have faded or changed over the years.
If there's doubt - they're not 'so certain that they are sure' - then they will acquit. Brand was acquitted of more charges than he was convicted of.
|
The News Agents have an episode covering this case:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4DeYoiqXDk
Not got all the way through it yet but it's interesting listening.
|
Brand's barrister has reported himself to the Bar Standards Board after remarks he made to a Times journalist after the verdict -
www.theguardian.com/culture/2026/nov/06/russell-brand-barrister-ian-winter-reports-himself-bar-watchdog-confronting-sunday-times-journalist
From the cross examination he put the victims through he comes across as every bit as bad as his client.
|
>> From the cross examination he put the victims through he comes across as every bit
>> as bad as his client.
His tone with those alleging rape etc has been quoted in the media today as victim blaming and exemplifying why Judges should be compelled to include a piece on rape myths when summing up on these cases.
|
I do like the Newsagents, enjoyed their coverage in America this week.
Though I do think Lewis Goodall is just a tad somewhere up his own backside....
|
>. Though I do think Lewis Goodall is just a tad somewhere up his own backside....
Is he still in the team?
It seems to be all Emily and Jon this week.
|
Russell Brand - Manatee
