Forum menu
He’s a truly obnoxious human being, and I can’t imagine how anyone watching could not believe his accusers.
Because his obnoxiousness could make him a suitable mark for spurious accusations?
I'm not saying that's the case, but picking a bloke who has publicly shown how much of a proper ****ing arsehole he is would yield more success in the court of public opinion than accusing a less shitty celebrity, would it not?
I watched the programme (in background) and I didn’t see anything close to evidence tbh.
What do you think "evidence" is?
I hope nobody runs a programme about those of us not in the spotlight and what we’ve done or said to get laid in the past.
If you heard the descriptions of the alleged offences and thought to yourself, "yeah, well, we've all done that, haven't we"...
If it’s in the interests of big companies and rich/powerful people to overlook people’s indiscretions then they will.
Why is it in the interest of Channel 4 to pick a fight with big companies and rich/powerful people like MTV/Comcast, Endemol/Banijay, the BBC and...itself?
He’s a truly obnoxious human being, and I can’t imagine how anyone watching could not believe his accusers.
Being an obnoxious human being doesn't equate to guilt, and that's the kind of statement that his lawyers will be using across the internet to reduce chances of it going to court, or if it does, getting a mistrial due to the clamour of press causing mayhem throughout.
The Met and the CPS have a tough job now, hopefully they can do it without pressure from the outside and the right outcome occurs long term.
relapsed_mandalorian
Full Member
is probably not a good choice of words on this thread.Go outside and touch the grass mate.
Ooh, touchy there pal.
I think there is a lot to be said for upping the age of consent to 18.
I'm pretty sure from my safe grading training a few yrs ago that that swx at 16 is technically legal but if the age gap is big then it falls into another law.
Plus anyone under 18 is vulnerable adult, e.g. we had a student who live alone at 16 and had a care worker to help make sense of bills, council tax etc.
Ok so if my 16 yr old daughter wants to sleep with a 30 yr old then can I stop her citing the fact that it’s illegal?
Reference the BBC car.
I wonder what exactly the process is/was for using one. Is it just something that some have access to by calling a number, could be just a taxi contract, or would have to go through some authorisation process. It’s quite possible that no one really knew what the car was being used for. The Times story mentions a taxi was sent to pick her up.
If the car was used as a BBC pool car then the BBC have ultimate responsibility
If the car was used as a BBC pool car then the BBC have ultimate responsibility
doubt it, they have responsibility that the driver has a license and isn’t banned, but what they do with or in the car is the drivers responsibility, same as most companies and their car pool / hire car policy
If the car was used as a BBC pool car then the BBC have ultimate responsibility
So, if you were order a taxi through work for dodgy behaviour without the company know what for they would be responsible?
Brands own production company ran the radio show the beeb might not have known who it was for.
The controller at the time might has some sleepless nights if she was told of his behavior
After all it’s only in the past ten years or so that a fully grown adult picking up a 16 year old from school for sex has become unacceptable behavior right..
was hard work being a 16yo lad in the mid 90's, there was more novas and xr2i's parked outside of school at 330pm than there were school buses,
If the car was used as a BBC pool car
Would be very surprised if the BBC has a pool of cars with drivers sitting around waiting to be sent off. Maybe there's a couple for the toppest of nobs, idk. More likely it's just Addison Lee or Uber.
But where specifically does this BBC car story come from? Is it in the reporting? It just seems to appear halfway through this thread. Sorry if I missed something.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/09/18/video-emerges-russell-brand-joking-i-raped-someone-once/
But where specifically does this BBC car story come from?
Its as though its a random conspiracy theory. Maybe we should do our own research?
But where specifically does this BBC car story come from? Is it in the reporting? It just seems to appear halfway through this thread. Sorry if I missed something.
It was an interview with one of victims
The car story and many more will be coming in the next few weeks, we live in a country where there's so many desperate for their 15 minutes or have an axe to grind with something that this'll just be a never ending circus, which will unfortunately cause more harm for any prosecutions, as it'll eat up valuable resource and time.
was hard work being a 16yo lad in the mid 90’s, there was more novas and xr2i’s parked outside of school at 330pm than there were school buses,
this was the story at my school too. But it tended to be 18 year old lads, not 32 year olds!
(and also, there was definitely nothing as s****y as an XR2i. But Novas with blacked out windows, definitely...)
(and, the suggestions that teachers would check up on where kids were going. I don't know if that was a thing in some places, but at my school the idea that teachers would keep tabs on 1000 kids swarming out of the exits and seeing who got in which car would be pretty far-fetched)
The notion that this is a coordinated attack by "the establishment" to discredit him is absolutely hilarious.
If that kind of thing was possible, then the likes of Ian Hislop and the rest of the Private Eye staff would've been framed years ago as they've actually done credible, honest work to out the corruption and criminality of "the establishment" compared to the swivel eyed lunatic nonsense that Brand peddles
As a UK teacher slightly earlier than the mid-nineites when Novas and XR2is really were a thing I was given a run down of a group new to me which included "x works as a prostitute"... "four car thieves".. "your head of department (a woman) was punched in the face recently", the school hierarchy did absolutely nothing about it. She was 16 by then but had clearly been working younger. In that school there was nobody picking up anybody outside the gates, not even parents, the kids made their own way home or wherever they were going. I walked not long after, no way was I going to be a part of that shambles.
was hard work being a 16yo lad in the mid 90’s, there was more novas and xr2i’s parked outside of school at 330pm than there were school buses,
Twas Escorts and Minis in the late 70s when I were a lad. Ford Escorts that is....drivers usually in their mid 20s but some were older.
I hope nobody runs a programme about those of us not in the spotlight and what we’ve done or said to get laid in the past.
Did you force yourself on 3 separate women to get laid, resulting in one going to a rape centre and counseling? If not perhaps you're ok. Also what about the text message evidence? There is some actual evidence being offered or perhaps you missed it as it was 'on in the background'
Mid-2000s it was Corsas driven by a handful of 17-19 year olds, subject to much ridicule.
Not following this closely but the cars ultimately had a driver (same or different ones) who carried out the task of picking up a 16 year old from school and taking her to 30 something Brand's house. And not asking any questions, just getting on with the job?!
edit to add - I don't know if they asked. Just thinking the things we're taught about on courses to keep an eye out for potentially bad situations, like modern slavery etc.
It was an interview with one of victims
Thank you - I hadn't picked that up.
the cars ultimately had a driver (same or different ones) who carried out the task of picking up a 16 year old from school and taking her to 30 something Brand’s house
You might be stretching the idea of a duty of care too far. Did you know you can call an Uber from the age of 13...?
Fair enough. Instructions could have simply been: pick up girl from school, take to this address. Could be her home for all they might have known. Rather than a personal chauffeur knowing full well what's going on.
Meanwhile, on the subject of "why don't supposed victims of sexual abuse speak up earlier? Aren't TV reporters just trying to make a media circus? And isn't it unfair to bring up claims from the past?", it might be worth reading today's profile of Barry Bennell, a sexual predator uncovered by Dispatches, who has just died in prison.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2023/sep/18/barry-bennell-dies-in-prison
Not following this closely but the cars ultimately had a driver (same or different ones) who carried out the task of picking up a 16 year old from school and taking her to 30 something Brand’s house. And not asking any questions, just getting on with the job?!
From the times article:
Cheers for filling me in. Well done that man.
Cougar linked the full article a few pages back. 5th post on page 4
I genuinely think that the only evidence some people in this thread would accept would be if they were there watching with their own eyes
Even then I think they'd take their evidence to their **** bank rather than the authorities as they're not seeing anything wrong.
Exactly, if you don't see a problem with it you are the problem
I genuinely think that the only evidence some people in this thread would accept would be if they were there watching with their own eyes
It's not up to us to state whether he's guilty or innocent, that's up to the courts and their job will be near impossible with the media circus that's around this now. If the evidence was irrefutable then Brand would be charged by now, the police and CPS are now working this case at least, so if there's evidence available, that'll show up in any charges they bring against him.
I have my own personal feeling towards Brand, i've never seen him much as a comedian, not my type of humour, he has always had a fake persona and self importance, which has just grown and grown over the years with his weird ability to get work as a comedian, actor, TV host.
we live in a country where there’s so many desperate for their 15 minutes or have an axe to grind with something that this’ll just be a never ending circus
Sorry if I've read this wrong, but are you suggesting women will be coming forward as sexual assault victims because they want their 15 minutes of fame?
Because that's really not how it works.
I hope nobody runs a programme about those of us not in the spotlight and what we’ve done or said to get laid in the past.
Why would you hope that?
TBH I think the biggest problem is the cult of celebrity.
Even then I think they’d take their evidence to their **** bank rather than the authorities as they’re not seeing anything wrong.
The trouble is there is no smoking gun,no video footage of unwanted penetration, no dramatic audio recording of rape.
Just a rich and ‘influential’ man with a following of x millions,lawyers and money.
Imagine sticking your head over the parapet on that one.
I also think that a blanket news ban should be imposed and invitations for others to bring any further information forward
It’s a weird one but I can’t see how you can let the courts do their job without shutting down the media feeding frenzy.
we live in a country where there’s so many desperate for their 15 minutes or have an axe to grind with something that this’ll just be a never ending circus
We also live in a country who let a prolific child abuser go to the grave without facing the consequences of his actions.
Sorry if I’ve read this wrong, but are you suggesting women will be coming forward as sexual assault victims because they want their 15 minutes of fame?
Because that’s really not how it works.
I'm saying you'll have folk going to the press to sell their stories so the press circus keeps gaining momentum, or going on TV/Instagram/etc and telling their side to whatever, all it does is add a resource burden to any charges being brought against him and make picking a jury a nightmare.
I’m saying you’ll have folk going to the press to sell their stories
No, additional victims will most-likely contact the reporters working on the story for the Sunday Times/Times, who will then have to rigorously check their claims out before any potential publication. I strongly doubt anyone's been paid for their story.
Now the police have begun an investigation, other victims may go direct to them as well too.
I hope nobody runs a programme about those of us not in the spotlight and what we’ve done or said to get laid in the past.
Yeah, you were either that type of male, who enjoyed the normalised sexual abuse of power, or you weren't. It's gone on in normal life forever, everywhere.... You just have to ask any woman about bosses, or any male in a higher position, go on ask your mum! Some men went along with it, others didn't. Finally women have a voice.
I’m saying you’ll have folk going to the press to sell their stories so the press circus keeps gaining momentum, or going on TV/Instagram/etc and telling their side to whatever
Have you actually watched the documentary or read the Times article? It certainly doesn't sound like it
The women who have come forward have done it on condition of remaining anonymous. All the coverage on channel 4 and the BBC has either been voiced by actors and filmed in a way to protect this anonymity
They are doing this anonymously due to the tirades of abuse/rape/death threats they know they will get off off his supporters and the rest of the Andrew Tate/Jordon Peterson brigade if their identity becomes public knowledge.
Thats because thats the world we now live in and Brand has already shown he is prepared to exploit this (and to hell with the consequences) by pre-empting publication with his 'is there another agenda at play?' conspiracy nonsense.
He knows full well what he's doing there
No, additional victims will most-likely contact the reporters working on the story for the Sunday Times/Times, who will then have to rigorously check their claims out before any potential publication. I strongly doubt anyone’s been paid for their story.
So you're saying the red tops won't be running any stories that aren't rigorously checked for validity, you're statement lives in a world that is black and white, it's a media circus now, just wait until we see any court drama with Russell Brand putting it on for the cameras.
argee
I have my own personal feeling towards Brand, i’ve never seen him much as a comedian, not my type of humour, he has always had a fake persona and self importance, which has just grown and grown over the years with his weird ability to get work as a comedian, actor, TV host.
It's interesting you say that, when you watch comedy I usually assume it's just an exaggerated version of the comics real personality. However rewatching some of the clips about how he pretends to be nice just long enough to get sex, the mascara blowie comments etc, it actually seems like he was just using his real persona and talking 100% honestly.
Rather grim that people watched and laughed at those sketches.
eta- of course it's also possible the girl saw that sketch and made up a story based on it. However it sounded credible, i have no reason to disbelieve it.
So you’re saying the red tops won’t be running any stories that aren’t rigorously checked for validity
The tabloids have pretty much the same legal teams as (or even better than) the broadsheets, and the same fact checking goes on for both. The differences are in terms of how stories are presented.
There's an exception that proves the rule here. The Sun didn't fully bottom out the Huw Edwards story because it was so keen to stick one on the BBC. They've taken a kicking for that, but it's actually quite rare.