Russell Brand

Having a penis rammed down your throat and having to punch them off you because you are choking isn't consensual....it's rape.
It's also an allegation. By an anonymous person voiced by an actor on TV to make it seem 'real'.
And, who knows? People into S&M might do something like that all the time. Maybe with a 'safe word' included for when they want to stop. Different strokes and all that.
 
looks like russels chopper is for the chop.
watched despatches last night,i have said before on here why does it take 17 years for the newspapers and channel 4 to find these women to get their side of the story,these women should have went to the copshop as soon as they left brands flat.0.8 percent of rape cases ends in a conviction so i dont think russel will be in the jail anytime soon.
in britain it was always innocent till proven guilty nowadays it is guilty as charged.
 
Totally scurrilous behaviour on the part of Channel 4 and The Sunday Times and has all the hallmarks of a hit job. Throw enough mud because, as we all know, some of it will always stick. All designed to destroy his career. I thought we were supposed to be concerned about the mental health of people accused of bahviour such as this? Or is that only when the alleged perpetrator works for the BBC or ITV?
The papers in the UK this morning all have headlines saying 'Russell Brand accused of rape and sexual assault', implying that he is facing criminal charges. Total rubbish. They have basically got some anonymous people to allege x, y, and z. None of them have been to the police. Total muck raking.
Interesting that the documentary brought in Jonathan Ross too, recently facing 'criticism' for supporting the great Graham Linehan. I wouldn't be surprised if Moz's previous friendship with Brand is added to the long list of 'j'accuse' against him. Guilt by association. The message to other 'celebrities' is clear - don't talk about politics, do as you're told. We can do this to any of you. As Noel said about Harry Styles - now wear this dress and shut up.

Even I, sick and depraved, a traveller to the grave, I would never be you

I saw Russell Brand perform in the National Stadium Dublin on 27 July 2007. This was one of his most notorious shows. For my money he delivered as promised; outrageous, fluent, engaging, cogent, and funny. He did invite females in the audience to come get him after the show, and the line was not short for an even more 'intimate show' with this charming beast. It was all part of his schtick and exploited for humour. But obviously, so much can go wrong when strangers dive straight into the deep end. What are intentions? How believe what anyone says, know who anyone is? Yet if it's so wrong, Tinder and Grinder and similar platforms facilitating stranger dates could not exist. So while unsavoury, not illegal. And he really was upfront about it.

There have been previous similar allegations, logged on his Wikipedia page
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell_Brand

His agent dropping him for the reason they were 'misled' is laughable. The Guardian snaps back into unprofessional vulgar smearing form, with Jack Seale saying, "Even in the best-case scenario for Brand – the one in which all these specific, independent accusations turn out to be false – we view him as a sleazy, sexist creep because he has told us."

He said, she said. He seems to have been less culpable than Jonathon Ross over the 2008 Andrew Sachs scandal but was the one blamed and punished. Likewise, after his short marriage to Katy Perry, done without a prenuptial agreement. he could have claimed half of the estimated $44 million she earned during their marriage, but declined.

He's been with his wife Laura since 2015 and they have 2 children. After seeking treatment for his addictions, he turned to spirituality and created several public channels to teach and share his experiences. Gradually he introduced some commentary on current affairs, slots which quickly became very popular, if still incorporating spiritual elements but also featuring a wide range of interviewees and solid research sources, with a comedic slant. As an accidental investigative reporter, he showed real flair before striking 'too close to home and too near the bone' e.g. he had the lowdown on White House rot long before msm reported official findings.

Of near certain relevance is this


He'll have to explain yet again how he's a different person who disapproves of former behaviors, and apologise for any hurt caused. It's unlikely to be the alleged victims who keep baying for blood since they only came forward once pressed by the media. "The women who have made the allegation explained that they only felt ready to tell their stories after being approached by reporters."

Those who want to shut him up and chill other alternative media sources by making an example of him will try to drag this out interminably and hamper and fetter him into impotence as occurs with SLAPPs, Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation. The web of connections he has created is now very extensive though, and unlike Assange's misfortunes, this might prove to be the crucial haven for the fallen angel, man-child and seer that is Russell Brand.

Here's his interview with an impatient Moz, Wrestle With Russell. I think if Morrissey was to comment, he would partly echo his message about Sinead.
 
seems there are more comedians who were doing the same as russel who will be named.
 
No......that's not rape. If you've got to that point, that's about personal boundaries.
The legal definition of rape in England and Wales is when someone intentionally penetrates another person's vagina, anus or mouth with their penis.
 
He's an establishment figure. He has a background in Hollywood, TV and has friends in the media. He's pushing views that are popular with conservatives and are pushed by conservative elites, such as Fox news. Nothing he is saying is radical or anything. He's just another rich grifter.
Which is why he’s had many left leaning types like Jimmy Dore, RFK Jr and Vandana Shiva on his show? The whole ‘Brand is right-wing’ is such a lazy accusation from binary thinkers.
 
there should be anonimity till the accused is actually charged.even if he is found innocent his career is over same as phillip schofie;d,i still dont know what he did wrong apart from being a bit of a dick on the set of this morning.
 
Even I, sick and depraved, a traveller to the grave, I would never be you

I saw Russell Brand perform in the National Stadium Dublin on 27 July 2007. This was one of his most notorious shows. For my money he delivered as promised; outrageous, fluent, engaging, cogent, and funny. He did invite females in the audience to come get him after the show, and the line was not short for an even more 'intimate show' with this charming beast. It was all part of his schtick and exploited for humour. But obviously, so much can go wrong when strangers dive straight into the deep end. What are intentions? How believe what anyone says, know who anyone is? Yet if it's so wrong, Tinder and Grinder and similar platforms facilitating stranger dates could not exist. So while unsavoury, not illegal. And he really was upfront about it.

There have been previous similar allegations, logged on his Wikipedia page
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell_Brand

His agent dropping him for the reason they were 'misled' is laughable. The Guardian snaps back into unprofessional vulgar smearing form, with Jack Seale saying, "Even in the best-case scenario for Brand – the one in which all these specific, independent accusations turn out to be false – we view him as a sleazy, sexist creep because he has told us."

He said, she said. He seems to have been less culpable than Jonathon Ross over the 2008 Andrew Sachs scandal but was the one blamed and punished. Likewise, after his short marriage to Katy Perry, done without a prenuptial agreement. he could have claimed half of the estimated $44 million she earned during their marriage, but declined.

He's been with his wife Laura since 2015 and they have 2 children. After seeking treatment for his addictions, he turned to spirituality and created several public channels to teach and share his experiences. Gradually he introduced some commentary on current affairs, slots which quickly became very popular, if still incorporating spiritual elements but also featuring a wide range of interviewees and solid research sources, with a comedic slant. As an accidental investigative reporter, he showed real flair before striking 'too close to home and too near the bone' e.g. he had the lowdown on White House rot long before msm reported official findings.

Of near certain relevance is this


He'll have to explain yet again how he's a different person who disapproves of former behaviors, and apologise for any hurt caused. It's unlikely to be the alleged victims who keep baying for blood since they only came forward once pressed by the media. "The women who have made the allegation explained that they only felt ready to tell their stories after being approached by reporters."

Those who want to shut him up and chill other alternative media sources by making an example of him will try to drag this out interminably and hamper and fetter him into impotence as occurs with SLAPPs, Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation. The web of connections he has created is now very extensive though, and unlike Assange's misfortunes, this might prove to be the crucial haven for the fallen angel, man-child and seer that is Russell Brand.

Here's his interview with an impatient Moz, Wrestle With Russell. I think if Morrissey was to comment, he would partly echo his message about Sinead.

"fallen angel, man-child and seer": not enough vomit in the world to do justice to this pish.

Seems likely he courted the tinfoil hat brigade because he knew the rapiness couldn't be concealed forever and they're the only loons who make it a badge of pride to excuse the inexcusable ("hey, that's just what THEY want you to think").
 
An investigation this detailed and prepared won’t have spilt all the beans in one go. There’ll be more to come, with further stories ready to repel the initial objections.
Correct, as with most co-ordinated hit jobs we will see the drip drip drip of information
 
When it comes to allegations of that nature what matters is what a jury 'believes'. Let these women go the police and let the police investigate the allegations. Let's see what comes of them, if anything.
Why? It wont make a damned bit of difference to you. If it went all the way to trial and the jury found him guilty you'd still refuse to accept it and would find some other excuse ("the jury was biased by the media reports", most likely). The fact you put inverted commas round the word believes shows that.

You're defending an abuser and you are determined to keep defending him no matter what happens. Stop pretending you are neutral. We see you.
 
The legal definition of rape in England and Wales is when someone intentionally penetrates another person's vagina, anus or mouth with their penis.

So..that's all consensual sex then.
 
Well, that explains a lot. :lbf:
Yes, the media were so convinced of the facts that they didn't take the allegations to the police but saved them up for 9pm on a Saturday night. What's that you say? Wasn't this the same media that told us Jimmy Saville walked on water and did miracles?
No. No media ever said that.

However, you're right to make the comparison. Brand's behaviour is textbook Savile. Abusing people, even on live TV, and getting away with it because he has the power afforded to a famous TV star and it fits with the persona ('amusing sex pest' for Brand, 'dirty old uncle' for Savile). You should be cheering the media for exposing him rather than being too meek to do so like they were with Savile. And yet you're attacking them for it. Why is that?
 
looks like russels chopper is for the chop.
watched despatches last night,i have said before on here why does it take 17 years for the newspapers and channel 4 to find these women to get their side of the story,these women should have went to the copshop as soon as they left brands flat.0.8 percent of rape cases ends in a conviction so i dont think russel will be in the jail anytime soon.
in britain it was always innocent till proven guilty nowadays it is guilty as charged.
One of the reasons it has taken so long is because Brand used his money and power to threaten, intimidate, and silence his victims. He had a super-injunction to silence the media from reporting it. Yes, that great champion of free speech with his super-injunction...
 
Which is why he’s had many left leaning types like Jimmy Dore, RFK Jr and Vandana Shiva on his show? The whole ‘Brand is right-wing’ is such a lazy accusation from binary thinkers.

Just because someone has "left wing" or "progressive" people on their show it doesn't make them so (see Joe Rogan, for example, who had Bernie Sanders, amongst others, on his show). And you accuse me of being binary for being able to spot obvious right-wing talking points.

RFK Jr was obviously invited on because of his appeal to conspiracy theory lot, which Brand now grifts for, what with his incorrect assertions that vaccines cause autism and just general nonsense he spouts.
 
Just because someone has "left wing" or "progressive" people on their show it doesn't make them so (see Joe Rogan, for example, who had Bernie Sanders, amongst others, on his show). And you accuse me of being binary for being able to spot obvious right-wing talking points.

RFK Jr was obviously invited on because of his appeal to conspiracy theory lot, which Brand now grifts for, what with his incorrect assertions that vaccines cause autism and just general nonsense he spouts.
'Right-wing talking points' like discussing organic agriculture with Vandana Shiva? :lbf::lbf:

And what 'right-wing talking points' did he discuss with recent guests Sam Harris, Noem Chomsky and Cornell West :ROFLMAO:
 
I sometimes wonder if anyone on this site has ever had sex. You waffle on like you know anything about the power-dynamics that arise from f*******. Laughable.
 
Pervert
 
Back
Top Bottom