Russell Brand: BBC and Channel 4 investigate allegations

[Nick Carter icp]

5 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

 

When a girl inists I wear a condom I'm thinking sex is on the cards. As would most men.

 

 

Didn't Brand rape then without a condom ?

[JonnyF]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

But Brand hasn’t been cancelled, he can still spout nonsense but not on platforms he doesn’t own.

So if he creates his own version of YouTube and posts a video, that is proof that he hasn't been cancelled? ????????

 

You're on top form today Chohmpherh. Good stuff ????

[Chomper Higgot]

43 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Let's add the BBC and Channel 4 to YouTube.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12535315/Russell-Brand-removed-BBC-iPlayer-sex-assault-claims.html

 

Funny how the cancellers are always left leaning.

Funny how rightwingers are defending this and other accused rapist and abusers of women.

 

I hear Andrew state is offering words of support to Brand.

 

I recall rightwingers defending Tate too.

 

 

[JonnyF]

2 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

Didn't Brand rape then without a condom ?

Who knows? There hasn't been a trial yet.

 

From the message it sounds like consensual sex without a condom.

[JonnyF]

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

Fu my how rightwingers are defending this and other accused rapist and abusers of women.

 

I hear Andrew state is offering words of support to Brand.

 

I recall rightwingers defending state too.

Strawman.

 

What people are asking for is due process instead of trial by media.

 

But you already knew that...

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

So if he creates his own version of YouTube and posts a video, that is proof that he hasn't been cancelled? ????????

 

You're on top form today Chohmpherh. Good stuff ????

Yes he can do that.

 

Getting kicked out of a private business for not following the rules is not being ‘cancelled’.

 

Brand uses a platform owned by others to conduct business, breaks the house rules and they kick him out.

 

Simple.

 

[Chomper Higgot]

2 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Who knows? There hasn't been a trial yet.

 

From the message it sounds like consensual sex without a condom.

Who knows, there hasn’t been a trial yet.

[NextG]

2 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Is that the best you've got? ???? I wasn't looking for a quote from one of your fridge magnets.

 

You won't answer because you know I am correct. Answering truthfully would highlight that. The BBC, Channel 4 and YouTube are cancelling him. They are all left leaning. 

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/evangerstmann/2021/03/22/what-is-cancel-culture/?sh=18e7a4c9bd55

 

I won’t answer because your premise is completely foolish and not worth my time in discussing. To what end? 
Idiots use ‘woke’ and ‘cancel culture’. Idiots from the ‘right’. I know that I am right about this…. 
We can argue all day about whether a news agency is ‘left leaning’. But perhaps human nature is predominantly ‘left leaning’, so what should we do about that? It’s just a stupid waste of time and energy, to no end. Better to leave you ranting about left and right on your own. 

[n00dle]

5 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Considering that it was Brand who wanted to cancel at least one of his accusers years ago by threatening to take legal action against her if she told anyone else about her allegation, I thinks its poetic justice that this has finally caught up with him. For years he's ducked these allegations with denials. 

got a link to this? genuinely curious

[JonnyF]

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

Yes he can do that.

 

Getting kicked out of a private business for not following the rules is not being ‘cancelled’.

 

Brand uses a platform owned by others to conduct business, breaks the house rules and they kick him out.

 

Simple.

 

He isn't being kicked out for not following rules.

 

He is being kicked out because of the accusations of rape.

[JonnyF]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Who knows, there hasn’t been a trial yet.

We got there in the end. My work here is done.

[JonnyF]

1 minute ago, n00dle said:

got a link to this? genuinely curious

Threatening to take legal action against someone for libel is not 'canceling' someone.

 

But Chohmpher already knows that.

[Chomper Higgot]

2 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Strawman.

 

What people are asking for is due process instead of trial by media.

 

But you already knew that...

What ‘due process’.

 

Please explain what due process is due or are you assuming there is some kind of due process?

 

Anyone comes onto my property, breaks my rules the due process they het is me kicking them out the gate.

‘Due process’ is not a thing unless it’s a written agreement in any contract to which it is alleged to apply.

 

[Hummin]

16 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Possibly, but that's not how I read it.

 

When a girl inists I wear a condom I'm thinking sex is on the cards. As would most men.

 

Here's a crazy idea. Maybe a trial would be helpful to establish what happened before we ruin his life by canceling his life's work?

Im talking about the text, since we do not know if the text is authentic are false yet.

 

 

[NextG]

3 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Strawman.

 

What people are asking for is due process instead of trial by media.

 

But you already knew that...

If it were your daughter, you would be up in arms. She already talks about ‘his reputation’. His behaviour is widely known. Obviously something was the straw that broke the camel’s back. Whether it was this incident or another of his ‘transgressions’, he doesn’t seem to have any supporters who actually know him. 
What hasn’t been mentioned, here specifically, is his father bringing him to Thailand at 16 and introducing him to prostitution. That’s the ‘elephant in the room’ here. A total detachment to the feelings of women. 

[Chomper Higgot]

4 minutes ago, n00dle said:

got a link to this? genuinely curious

I’d be curious too because that’s not a quote of anything I said.

 

3 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Threatening to take legal action against someone for libel is not 'canceling' someone.

 

But Chohmpher already knows that.

Wipe your face Johnny, it’s covered in the egg you threw at it.

[Chomper Higgot]

6 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

We got there in the end. My work here is done.

Sorry I was just pointing out your objection to an unproven allegation that you followed by insinuating an unproven allegation.

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

8 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

He isn't being kicked out for not following rules.

 

He is being kicked out because of the accusations of rape.

Have you got proof of that.

 

The statement from YouTube stated for not following community standards.

[liddelljohn]

I have always found Russell Brand to be very unfunny as a comedian and  he always seemed ;;creepy'' in a Jimmy Saville way as well , so recent revelations  do not suprise me ... we will see when it all gets to court ?????

[Bkk Brian]

10 minutes ago, n00dle said:

got a link to this? genuinely curious

Actually its from my post. I'm surprised you commenting on this without even reading the original investigative reports:

 

"One woman alleges that Brand raped her against a wall in his Los Angeles home. She was treated at a rape crisis centre on the same day, according to medical records. Text messages show that in the hours after leaving his house, she told Brand that she had been scared by him and felt taken advantage of, adding: “When a girl say[s] NO it means no.” Brand replied saying he was “very sorry”.

 

A third woman claims that he sexually assaulted her while she worked with him in Los Angeles, and that he threatened to take legal action if she told anyone else about her allegation."

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/russell-brand-rape-sexual-assault-abuse-allegations-investigation-v5hxdlmb6

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, Bkk Brian said:

Actually its from my post. I'm surprised you commenting on this without even reading the original investigative reports:

 

"One woman alleges that Brand raped her against a wall in his Los Angeles home. She was treated at a rape crisis centre on the same day, according to medical records. Text messages show that in the hours after leaving his house, she told Brand that she had been scared by him and felt taken advantage of, adding: “When a girl say[s] NO it means no.” Brand replied saying he was “very sorry”.

 

A third woman claims that he sexually assaulted her while she worked with him in Los Angeles, and that he threatened to take legal action if she told anyone else about her allegation."

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/russell-brand-rape-sexual-assault-abuse-allegations-investigation-v5hxdlmb6

 

 

Not looking good for Russell 

[Nick Carter icp]

1 minute ago, liddelljohn said:

I have always found Russell Brand to be very unfunny as a comedian and  he always seemed ;;creepy'' in a Jimmy Saville way as well , so recent revelations  do not suprise me ... we will see when it all gets to court ?????

Really unpleasant what he did to Manuel from Fawlty Towers

Left numerous messages on his answer phone stating that he'd had sex with Manuels grand daughter and then played those messages on National radio .

    It was like " Hi Your Granddaughter was well horny when she stayed around my house last week ha ha ah aha "
   

[transam]

The bloke is a tool who caters for the tool community..............????

 

 

[OneMoreFarang]

29 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

Confusing .

Those are the allegations , that he forced woman to have sex 

He has been accused of rape 

Did he follow any of those women into a dark alley and raped them there?

Or did they meet him (in part to have sex)?

 

I didn't study the details. But what I read sounded like the women wanted to see him and wanted to have sex with him and then sometimes later they thought about that maybe they didn't want to have sex in the way he wanted it.

Obviously if a woman tells a guy STOP, then he should stop.

But when a woman goes with a guy like him then what do they expect? Coffee and cake?

 

Like I wrote before, If he did something criminal then the judges should follow the evidence and convict him.

But just the fact that some women tell something to the press is at least for me not reason enough to think he is guilty.

I.e. it seems YouTube doesn't pay him any money anymore for his videos. And now?

Will they give that money to a charity or keep it for him and give it to him when he is not found guilty?

Or will they not show any advertisement with his videos?

Why do now so many "journalists" and "influencers" say that the guy was always suspicious and bad? If they knew that then why didn't they call the police? 

 

[youreavinalaff]

34 minutes ago, NextG said:

What happened to Spacey? Where there’s smoke…. Likely you don’t know much about his behaviour beyond what you read. 

The law of the land. He was found not guilty.

 

Your post proves my point. Because of what has been in the media and on social media, the law seems to mean nothing.

[Hummin]

4 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Did he follow any of those women into a dark alley and raped them there?

Or did they meet him (in part to have sex)?

 

I didn't study the details. But what I read sounded like the women wanted to see him and wanted to have sex with him and then sometimes later they thought about that maybe they didn't want to have sex in the way he wanted it.

Obviously if a woman tells a guy STOP, then he should stop.

But when a woman goes with a guy like him then what do they expect? Coffee and cake?

 

Like I wrote before, If he did something criminal then the judges should follow the evidence and convict him.

But just the fact that some women tell something to the press is at least for me not reason enough to think he is guilty.

I.e. it seems YouTube doesn't pay him any money anymore for his videos. And now?

Will they give that money to a charity or keep it for him and give it to him when he is not found guilty?

Or will they not show any advertisement with his videos?

Why do now so many "journalists" and "influencers" say that the guy was always suspicious and bad? If they knew that then why didn't they call the police? 

 

I can tell you, women who get turned down after going home with them, can be a challenge to, and a few did not accept to be turned down and forced themselves on me. 

 

As a man, I do not call it rape, but if I did the same to the women, it would be rape, and could been used against me in court, snd most likely I would had been convicted. 

[Chomper Higgot]

6 minutes ago, transam said:

The bloke is a tool who caters for the tool community..............????

He don’t view videos in discussions, but I agree with your comment.

[transam]

6 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Did he follow any of those women into a dark alley and raped them there?

Or did they meet him (in part to have sex)?

 

I didn't study the details. But what I read sounded like the women wanted to see him and wanted to have sex with him and then sometimes later they thought about that maybe they didn't want to have sex in the way he wanted it.

Obviously if a woman tells a guy STOP, then he should stop.

But when a woman goes with a guy like him then what do they expect? Coffee and cake?

 

Like I wrote before, If he did something criminal then the judges should follow the evidence and convict him.

But just the fact that some women tell something to the press is at least for me not reason enough to think he is guilty.

I.e. it seems YouTube doesn't pay him any money anymore for his videos. And now?

Will they give that money to a charity or keep it for him and give it to him when he is not found guilty?

Or will they not show any advertisement with his videos?

Why do now so many "journalists" and "influencers" say that the guy was always suspicious and bad? If they knew that then why didn't they call the police? 

 

Perhaps because only "suspicious", eh.............????

[youreavinalaff]

23 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Sorry I was just pointing out your objection to an unproven allegation that you followed by insinuating an unproven allegation.

 

 

And proving his point at the same time. Whoops.????????

[NextG]

12 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

The law of the land. He was found not guilty.

 

Your post proves my point. Because of what has been in the media and on social media, the law seems to mean nothing.

You only know what you read in the media….

Please explain to me how that statement ‘proved’ your point. There is a reason why both Spacey and Brand are being vilified. If they didn’t behave in such disgusting ways, neither would have had a ‘reputation’ in the first place.