JonnyF

They are weak minded people. Incapable of forming their own moral code, they need someone else to tell them what is right and wrong. They are the type of people that allow atrocities to happen because they have been told to do something by their "superiors". The "I was only following orders" mentality. Pathetic little scrotes. I'm the same as the OP in that if it doesn't harm anyone else, I'm OK with it. Couldn't give a toss what some lawmaker deems legal or illegal (other than ensuring I don't end up behind bars) especially when some laws are so blatantly stupid e.g. vaping illegal but cigarettes legal.

Yes promoters are well known for putting morals before profits ????.

It's obvious why it was cancelled. I already explained to you. Pretending to not understand changes nothing. Do you have an alternative theory? Do share your wisdom...????

Guilt written all over his face? That settles it then, throw away the key... Maybe the women made it up for a quick buck? Have you checked their faces for guilt? Please check and report back.

The event was cancelled so that's a pretty dumb question isn't it... His ilk don't generally have the guts to do the protesting anyway. They're the ones shouting "fight fight fight" from a safe distance.

Innocent or not, I wouldn't fancy getting up on stage with all this going on. I can't even imagine what it would be like to be accused of this. If it was a false accusation it would probably be even worse. I've never liked the bloke, but these social media pile-ons based on nothing more than an accusation from years back are pretty crazy.

Already linked to the Labour MP joining the Twitter pile on. Pathetic, but then what do you expect from a Labour MP?

It happens a lot. Even when there are no celebs involved. They sleep around and then regret it. So blame the man. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-cumbria-64950862 Add in the potential for an out of court settlement or payment via a civil case and it's easy to see why celebrities are accused so often depsite having no shortage of loose women to choose from without having to resort to forcing themselves on women. One of them was in a relationship with him for 6 months. Another went straight to the press. And they all came out at the same time up to 20 years after the event. Amazing.

If it's clear that everyone will boycott the show then the promoter has no choice but to cancel it. He isn't going to pay all the outgoings to host the event if people aren't going to attend, have people blocking the entrance, protesting people who attend etc. You think the promoter is cancelling it due to his conscience? It's purely a business decision based on the fact that his client has effectively been tried in the court of public opinion/social media and cancelled. But then, you already knew that...

I don't think you understand how promotional companies make their money.

Wouldn't work. They'd claim she was too drunk/high and shouldn't have been asked to sign it.

Agreed. The problem is when people's careers are ruined before it even goes to court. Then they are often found not guilty but they are forever tarnished with the reputation of being a sex pest despite there being no evidence and a not guilty verdict. It's a bit like what Amber Heard tried to do to Depp. In that case it backfired eventually (incredibly she actually won the UK case) but that's an exception to the rule. Generally, there are very little consequences for the accuser even if the claims are proved to be false so it's like a free bet for them.

Come on, whose diary ISN'T booked up for the next 20 years? Generally they tend to wait for someone else to come forward with an accusation and then make a similar accusation. I'd expect a few more to come out of the woodwork in coming days. Following the scent of money like a bear to honey. Often it's ex partners who claim that even though they slept with X,Y or Z for 6 months, they later felt violated and hence it was non consensual. Same with Spacey, they all wanted a piece of the pie. He was later found not guilty. Some of them don't even bother going to the police, they go to journalists instead. Cutting out the middle man, so to speak. It's a mad world to think that someone you slept with 20 years ago could turn up today and accuse you of rape. But that's the world we live in.

From your link. Luke Pollard, a Plymouth MP, had suggested that the show should be cancelled. He posted on X (formerly Twitter): “On Russell Brand’s gig in #Plymouth on Friday: in any other job after serious allegations of rape and sexual assault where the alleged perpetrator still has access to women, they would be suspended pending investigation. This is the equivalent of cancelling or postponing shows.” He's a Labour MP, obviously.

Don't worry, your gammon defense should hold up ????.

Links to the evidence please.

Oh dear. Someone has upset Antifa. Let the cancellation begin. ???? #believeallwomen

Why? Because the left love a bit of cancel culture when it takes out someone they disagree with. I would have thought that was obvious ????. You glee is seeping through your posts. I think I'm going to have to wipe my screen down.

You think he's guilty huh? Like Spacey was? Oh wait a minute...

I see. Cancellation has begun and he hasn't even had a chance to defend himself yet. You must be delighted.

Nothing will come of this. It will be a case of "he said she said" since I believe in these cases Brand was in a relationship with the women so any physical evidence that remains after a decade or two can be explained away as consensual. It will certainly keep him busy though. And maybe he will re-consider whether he wishes to keep unearthing the issues he has been unearthing. Isn't that the whole point?

Glad you're finally starting to get it.

Yes I am starting to think this might be aimed at powerful figures who have been sending ill gotten gains overseas since 2014 and now wish to start bringing it back now their time at the trough has been limited.

2003. Only 20 years ago then. Presumably the alleged victim has a busy diary.

The accusations against Brand stem from as long as 18 years ago. A few women have come out of the woodwork at the same time after all these years. A co-ordinated attack which he has strongly denied and stood tall, much like Dan Wooton did. I am not too sure of Brand's politics in terms of being left or right (seems like a lovey lefty to me) but I know he talks a lot about controversial issues like vaccines. I have seen absolutely no evidence to support the accusations. Edwards accusations were far more recent and as soon as they surfaced he played the mental health card, made no denial and swiftly disappeared to a mental health facility. The BBC confirmed it had seen the messages between the two. There has still been no denial fro, him and his wife basically admitted it. To me, that implies there is truth to them. I am not too sure of his politics, but as a BBC presenter I'd assume he's a lefty Remainer who pretends to be impartial but I never really looked into it. We should wait for the evidence to emerge for both, but the nature of the attack on Brand appears well co-ordinated, random and viscous whereas with Edwards it seems like a concerned relative of the alleged victim. The time it took for Brand's victims to come forward (all at the same time) is also HIGHLY suspicious to me. Seems like a way to stain his character and shut him up as he has clearly gone after some powerful entities. Nobody needs to shut up Edwards, because he is basically a puppet who reads from a teleprompter provided by his mainstream, establishment masters in exchange for cash extorted from the general public. Hope that clears things up.