Jump to content

Russell Brand and why the allegations took so long to surface


Social Media

Recommended Posts

image.png

 

It came as little surprise that the darker corners of the internet were ablaze with conspiracy theories this week, after Russell Brand used his YouTube channel to call the allegations of sexual assault and rape against him a “coordinated attack” and a “serious and concerted agenda” to control his voice.

But even among more mainstream voices, questions were raised about the timing. Toby Young, a former editor at the Spectator, asked if there was a “more innocent” reason why the Times, the Sunday Times and Channel 4 Dispatches had “waited this long to produce their findings”, while the British business magnate Alan Sugar tweeted that it was “strange” that multiple people had come forward at the same time.

 

Others wondered why it had taken so long for the story to be published despite rumours swirling about Brand’s behaviour for years. In the Dispatches documentary Russell Brand: In Plain Sight, the comedian Daniel Sloss said he had heard “allegations and rumours” about Brand, while Deadline reported that Brand was dropped from Comedy Central’s Roast Battle in 2018 after another comedian, Katherine Ryan, repeatedly accused him of being a “sexual predator”.

The reason, according to multiple experts, is simple: publishing stories like this in England and Wales is extremely difficult, and fraught with risk.

“People often think that we have a law that protects free speech here. We don’t. We have a law that protects reputation,” says Caroline Kean, a partner at Wiggin who represented the journalist Catherine Belton when she was sued by multiple Russian billionaires. “Getting stories out like this may sound easy to people who watch a lot of crime dramas, but it’s actually incredibly difficult.”

 

FULL STORY

Guardian.png

 

 

Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

 

  • Sad 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, daveAustin said:

Take the benevolent Cliff Richard, for example. The bloke is now a complete wreck because one person with low character decided to accuse him of something,

These rumours have been around for many years, I first heard it when working for the BBC in the 1980s.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A disrespectful tool even without all the allegations against him. Nice to see him owned by Rod Stewart sticking up for his daughter after Brand publicly mocked her at the G2 awards.

 

"Rod reacted to Brand's comments later in the evening when he accepted his Outstanding Achiever award in recognition of his career in music. Standing on stage as he collected his gong, Rod ordered Brand to "stand up" as he asked the comic: "You went with my daughter, did you?"

Brand seemingly retracted his original statements, claiming "I never touched that girl" during the exchange with Rod. Maggie May singer Rod hit back, telling Brand: "“F***ing right, you didn’t. You mustn’t come up here and boast. I speak here as a father."

https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/rod-stewart-pleased-put-russell-30991879

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Yes he is a tool. I can't stand him.

 

That doesn't mean we can vilify him and take away his right to earn a living on the basis of an unproven accusation.

 

Innocent until proven guilty. Due process. Kind of important concepts, even for people we don't like or have opposing political views.

I said I he's a tool so more than happy to vilify him, I notice you did the same........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This time getting put in checkmate by Bob Geldof when Brand was hosting the NME awards and deliberately mispronounced Sir Bob's name. Announcing the winner Russell said: "Of course the winner is Live Aid so please welcome to the stage Sir Bobby Gandalf."

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Social Media said:

image.png

 

It came as little surprise that the darker corners of the internet were ablaze with conspiracy theories this week, after Russell Brand used his YouTube channel to call the allegations of sexual assault and rape against him a “coordinated attack” and a “serious and concerted agenda” to control his voice.

But even among more mainstream voices, questions were raised about the timing. Toby Young, a former editor at the Spectator, asked if there was a “more innocent” reason why the Times, the Sunday Times and Channel 4 Dispatches had “waited this long to produce their findings”, while the British business magnate Alan Sugar tweeted that it was “strange” that multiple people had come forward at the same time.

 

Others wondered why it had taken so long for the story to be published despite rumours swirling about Brand’s behaviour for years. In the Dispatches documentary Russell Brand: In Plain Sight, the comedian Daniel Sloss said he had heard “allegations and rumours” about Brand, while Deadline reported that Brand was dropped from Comedy Central’s Roast Battle in 2018 after another comedian, Katherine Ryan, repeatedly accused him of being a “sexual predator”.

The reason, according to multiple experts, is simple: publishing stories like this in England and Wales is extremely difficult, and fraught with risk.

“People often think that we have a law that protects free speech here. We don’t. We have a law that protects reputation,” says Caroline Kean, a partner at Wiggin who represented the journalist Catherine Belton when she was sued by multiple Russian billionaires. “Getting stories out like this may sound easy to people who watch a lot of crime dramas, but it’s actually incredibly difficult.”

 

FULL STORY

Guardian.png

 

 

Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

 

I wonder if Katy Perry had any insight to his behavior 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

I see your bigotry is not limited to Christians.

 

Bravo. You must be proud of yourself.

 

Bigotry....lol

 

Off topic unfounded nonsense, suggest you re visit the thread and topic from a few months ago on that. 

 

As for Brand, I note you agree he's a tool.

Edited by Bkk Brian
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

More conspiracy nonsense.

 

Oddly, the media reporting allegations against Brand span the political spectrum.

Spectrum, that's hilarious. Do you have a link that supports that? 

18 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

 

It might just be, and I’m putting this out there, that the serious allegations against Brand are newsworthy, especially given he’s famous.

 

 

I agree, that's why it's curious he's gotten a pass up until now. 

 

If he has forcibly raped someone, I hope he is executed. 

 

 

Edited by Yellowtail
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

The UK don’t execute criminals.

 

He’s under investigation, he hasn’t been charged with any crime.

Yet people want to ruin his life. 

 

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

 

It’s not at all unusual for sex abusers to commit their crimes over many years before being brought to Justice.

Do you have any data/links that support this or is it just your opinion? 

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

The UK’s media sits on a spectrum between rightwing through to left wing.

I meant mainstream media, not podcast and whatnot. 

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

The allegations against Brand were investigated and exposed by both right and left leaning media.

Do you have any data/links/example that support this or is it just your opinion? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...