FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Russell brand...
Russell brand...
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What have I missed?! ". Google or watch channel 4 at 9pm... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I have been watching his channel on YouTube and this has been coming for a long time. I'm intrigued to know what has been concocted. " ‘Concocted?’ You know there are four separate women involved? Have they all concocted their stories? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I've never ever liked the guy" Same here, totally self obsessed pseudo intellectual and not at all funny, however trial by social media and media is out of order. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I have been watching his channel on YouTube and this has been coming for a long time. I'm intrigued to know what has been concocted. ‘Concocted?’ You know there are four separate women involved? Have they all concocted their stories? " Have they made police reports? I have not seen this story. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I have been watching his channel on YouTube and this has been coming for a long time. I'm intrigued to know what has been concocted. ‘Concocted?’ You know there are four separate women involved? Have they all concocted their stories? " Potentially, yes. There is every possibility that people make up stories just as there is every possibility he did those things. This is somebody famous, quite easy to find a large number of people to make money from this. Unlike 4 random people coming forward to accuse Dave from number 6 of Sexual assault. If somebody can be vile enough to cause sexual assault, people can be vile enough to accuse of it without truth. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I have been watching his channel on YouTube and this has been coming for a long time. I'm intrigued to know what has been concocted. ‘Concocted?’ You know there are four separate women involved? Have they all concocted their stories? Have they made police reports? I have not seen this story." I don’t know. I do know that r@pe and SA has a ludicrously low conviction rate - which leads to decreased reporting. Plus not all SA is listened to or believed - particularly regarding celebrities. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I have been watching his channel on YouTube and this has been coming for a long time. I'm intrigued to know what has been concocted. ‘Concocted?’ You know there are four separate women involved? Have they all concocted their stories? Potentially, yes. There is every possibility that people make up stories just as there is every possibility he did those things. This is somebody famous, quite easy to find a large number of people to make money from this. Unlike 4 random people coming forward to accuse Dave from number 6 of Sexual assault. If somebody can be vile enough to cause sexual assault, people can be vile enough to accuse of it without truth. " There is another woman claiming Dispatches refused to use her story because it doesn’t fit the narrative so it is possible this story has been “concocted”. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I have been watching his channel on YouTube and this has been coming for a long time. I'm intrigued to know what has been concocted. ‘Concocted?’ You know there are four separate women involved? Have they all concocted their stories? " All stories are concocted. This is being announced by the media, who's very job it is to concoct stories. The media is invested in this story and bringing it to you, the public, before the police who are the ones who should be the first to know. Concocted is an accurate descriptor. The police should be the ones to evaluate the evidence presented to them and decide if there is proof of wrong doing before referring it to the CPS and decide if there should be a trial. No smoke without fire? Such a bs saying for serial gossip mongerers, but RB has been an excessively promiscuous personality in the past and it has been very well documented and in the open. That isn't to say anyone has been a fly on that wall to record every event. Where accusations are made they need to be investigated. An accusation should never, ever be taken as proof of guilt. That is an insane world filled with prejudice and pitchforks. A true trial by popularity. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I have been watching his channel on YouTube and this has been coming for a long time. I'm intrigued to know what has been concocted. ‘Concocted?’ You know there are four separate women involved? Have they all concocted their stories? All stories are concocted. This is being announced by the media, who's very job it is to concoct stories. The media is invested in this story and bringing it to you, the public, before the police who are the ones who should be the first to know. Concocted is an accurate descriptor. The police should be the ones to evaluate the evidence presented to them and decide if there is proof of wrong doing before referring it to the CPS and decide if there should be a trial. No smoke without fire? Such a bs saying for serial gossip mongerers, but RB has been an excessively promiscuous personality in the past and it has been very well documented and in the open. That isn't to say anyone has been a fly on that wall to record every event. Where accusations are made they need to be investigated. An accusation should never, ever be taken as proof of guilt. That is an insane world filled with prejudice and pitchforks. A true trial by popularity." Would you have said that about Jimmy Saville? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I have been watching his channel on YouTube and this has been coming for a long time. I'm intrigued to know what has been concocted. ‘Concocted?’ You know there are four separate women involved? Have they all concocted their stories? All stories are concocted. This is being announced by the media, who's very job it is to concoct stories. The media is invested in this story and bringing it to you, the public, before the police who are the ones who should be the first to know. Concocted is an accurate descriptor. The police should be the ones to evaluate the evidence presented to them and decide if there is proof of wrong doing before referring it to the CPS and decide if there should be a trial. No smoke without fire? Such a bs saying for serial gossip mongerers, but RB has been an excessively promiscuous personality in the past and it has been very well documented and in the open. That isn't to say anyone has been a fly on that wall to record every event. Where accusations are made they need to be investigated. An accusation should never, ever be taken as proof of guilt. That is an insane world filled with prejudice and pitchforks. A true trial by popularity."  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ok a couple of days ago it was leaked SA involving a celebrity, the public then go about attempting to find out who it is. Everyone watched the programme, then read the papers in the morning = Advertising revenue, Papers sold online and in the newsagents = revenue. Problem is RB speaks up ceasing public hunt for said celeb, no more surprise at 21.00 on Saturday night (maximum revenue time by the way) profit has been taken away. Sundays papers revenue stays the same as RB let cat out of the bag. Rb knows well this has been coming, all his you tubers have warned him that something would happen and as I said this should be no surprise if you follow him, if you don't and do not know much about him then I suggest you do some research. He has pissed off the media showing them to have a narrative he has showed the media in co hoots with politicians etc. he has to be silenced simple there cannot be another narrative only one narrative and that's the media narrative." I’m not comparing the two at all but Jimmy Savile regularly said they were coming for him too. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ok a couple of days ago it was leaked SA involving a celebrity, the public then go about attempting to find out who it is. Everyone watched the programme, then read the papers in the morning = Advertising revenue, Papers sold online and in the newsagents = revenue. Problem is RB speaks up ceasing public hunt for said celeb, no more surprise at 21.00 on Saturday night (maximum revenue time by the way) profit has been taken away. Sundays papers revenue stays the same as RB let cat out of the bag. Rb knows well this has been coming, all his you tubers have warned him that something would happen and as I said this should be no surprise if you follow him, if you don't and do not know much about him then I suggest you do some research. He has pissed off the media showing them to have a narrative he has showed the media in co hoots with politicians etc. he has to be silenced simple there cannot be another narrative only one narrative and that's the media narrative." If this is indeed a media witch hunt setup to silver him, concocted without proof - it would have the opposite effect, would it not? It’s a high profile case, the legal reprisal would be even bigger, and far from being silenced, RB would come out if it stronger than ever. Do you think two enormous media outlets would run this story (and advertise it hugely) if they weren’t sure about it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ok a couple of days ago it was leaked SA involving a celebrity, the public then go about attempting to find out who it is. Everyone watched the programme, then read the papers in the morning = Advertising revenue, Papers sold online and in the newsagents = revenue. Problem is RB speaks up ceasing public hunt for said celeb, no more surprise at 21.00 on Saturday night (maximum revenue time by the way) profit has been taken away. Sundays papers revenue stays the same as RB let cat out of the bag. Rb knows well this has been coming, all his you tubers have warned him that something would happen and as I said this should be no surprise if you follow him, if you don't and do not know much about him then I suggest you do some research. He has pissed off the media showing them to have a narrative he has showed the media in co hoots with politicians etc. he has to be silenced simple there cannot be another narrative only one narrative and that's the media narrative. I’m not comparing the two at all but Jimmy Savile regularly said they were coming for him too. " Why do you think he said that? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ok a couple of days ago it was leaked SA involving a celebrity, the public then go about attempting to find out who it is. Everyone watched the programme, then read the papers in the morning = Advertising revenue, Papers sold online and in the newsagents = revenue. Problem is RB speaks up ceasing public hunt for said celeb, no more surprise at 21.00 on Saturday night (maximum revenue time by the way) profit has been taken away. Sundays papers revenue stays the same as RB let cat out of the bag. Rb knows well this has been coming, all his you tubers have warned him that something would happen and as I said this should be no surprise if you follow him, if you don't and do not know much about him then I suggest you do some research. He has pissed off the media showing them to have a narrative he has showed the media in co hoots with politicians etc. he has to be silenced simple there cannot be another narrative only one narrative and that's the media narrative. I’m not comparing the two at all but Jimmy Savile regularly said they were coming for him too. Why do you think he said that? " We know why. Andrew Tate did the same thing. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ok a couple of days ago it was leaked SA involving a celebrity, the public then go about attempting to find out who it is. Everyone watched the programme, then read the papers in the morning = Advertising revenue, Papers sold online and in the newsagents = revenue. Problem is RB speaks up ceasing public hunt for said celeb, no more surprise at 21.00 on Saturday night (maximum revenue time by the way) profit has been taken away. Sundays papers revenue stays the same as RB let cat out of the bag. Rb knows well this has been coming, all his you tubers have warned him that something would happen and as I said this should be no surprise if you follow him, if you don't and do not know much about him then I suggest you do some research. He has pissed off the media showing them to have a narrative he has showed the media in co hoots with politicians etc. he has to be silenced simple there cannot be another narrative only one narrative and that's the media narrative." That doesn't mean the accusations are not true though. Yes he pissed people off, the media are not happy. So they either made up these stories, or set out to find dirt they can use, and they found it. Just because he goes against the medias narrative and has made an enemy out of them does not mean he didn't do this. The vendetta of the media is still there regardless. The media's vendetta does not mean this stuff is not true it just means they found something they can use - real or fake both are still possible. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I have been watching his channel on YouTube and this has been coming for a long time. I'm intrigued to know what has been concocted. ‘Concocted?’ You know there are four separate women involved? Have they all concocted their stories? Potentially, yes. There is every possibility that people make up stories just as there is every possibility he did those things. This is somebody famous, quite easy to find a large number of people to make money from this. Unlike 4 random people coming forward to accuse Dave from number 6 of Sexual assault. If somebody can be vile enough to cause sexual assault, people can be vile enough to accuse of it without truth. " Great analysis and fair comment. Innocent until proven guilty! Too many gossips and the media can lie. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ok a couple of days ago it was leaked SA involving a celebrity, the public then go about attempting to find out who it is. Everyone watched the programme, then read the papers in the morning = Advertising revenue, Papers sold online and in the newsagents = revenue. Problem is RB speaks up ceasing public hunt for said celeb, no more surprise at 21.00 on Saturday night (maximum revenue time by the way) profit has been taken away. Sundays papers revenue stays the same as RB let cat out of the bag. Rb knows well this has been coming, all his you tubers have warned him that something would happen and as I said this should be no surprise if you follow him, if you don't and do not know much about him then I suggest you do some research. He has pissed off the media showing them to have a narrative he has showed the media in co hoots with politicians etc. he has to be silenced simple there cannot be another narrative only one narrative and that's the media narrative. That doesn't mean the accusations are not true though. Yes he pissed people off, the media are not happy. So they either made up these stories, or set out to find dirt they can use, and they found it. Just because he goes against the medias narrative and has made an enemy out of them does not mean he didn't do this. The vendetta of the media is still there regardless. The media's vendetta does not mean this stuff is not true it just means they found something they can use - real or fake both are still possible. " ..... This thread should be closed as my earlier thread was . close RED TOPS reporting ... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I have been watching his channel on YouTube and this has been coming for a long time. I'm intrigued to know what has been concocted. ‘Concocted?’ You know there are four separate women involved? Have they all concocted their stories? Potentially, yes. There is every possibility that people make up stories just as there is every possibility he did those things. This is somebody famous, quite easy to find a large number of people to make money from this. Unlike 4 random people coming forward to accuse Dave from number 6 of Sexual assault. If somebody can be vile enough to cause sexual assault, people can be vile enough to accuse of it without truth. There is another woman claiming Dispatches refused to use her story because it doesn’t fit the narrative so it is possible this story has been “concocted”." SA can be a kiss apparently, danger of getting GBH if you tread on someone's toe in a queue I reckon. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ok a couple of days ago it was leaked SA involving a celebrity, the public then go about attempting to find out who it is. Everyone watched the programme, then read the papers in the morning = Advertising revenue, Papers sold online and in the newsagents = revenue. Problem is RB speaks up ceasing public hunt for said celeb, no more surprise at 21.00 on Saturday night (maximum revenue time by the way) profit has been taken away. Sundays papers revenue stays the same as RB let cat out of the bag. Rb knows well this has been coming, all his you tubers have warned him that something would happen and as I said this should be no surprise if you follow him, if you don't and do not know much about him then I suggest you do some research. He has pissed off the media showing them to have a narrative he has showed the media in co hoots with politicians etc. he has to be silenced simple there cannot be another narrative only one narrative and that's the media narrative. That doesn't mean the accusations are not true though. Yes he pissed people off, the media are not happy. So they either made up these stories, or set out to find dirt they can use, and they found it. Just because he goes against the medias narrative and has made an enemy out of them does not mean he didn't do this. The vendetta of the media is still there regardless. The media's vendetta does not mean this stuff is not true it just means they found something they can use - real or fake both are still possible. " Well said. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What I'm gonna say generally here....is dispatched and channel 4 face one fuck of a lawsuit if they aren't absolutely sure they are correct. Just something to bare in mind. Were exposes wrong about saville and Harris?" They can, but they can also afford to pay it. Quite easily. The payout will be pocket change to them overall. They will have caused more stigma to RB and his credibility, which I can imagine they will be happy with. There will be a fund somewhere in the budget for this kind of thing. Just look how the Jonny Deep thing played out - granted it was US and UK so slightly different circumstances but the Sun printed him as a wife beater they won. The actual case of assault it was found he didn't do it. They took the risk calling him that, and it paid off for them. They caused the damage but he was found not guilty overall. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do wonder how many people on both sides would/will back down if this was proven in court. I expect the "he did it" lot would not be convinced and still believe he did it. While lots of the "innocent until proven guilty" lot and RB supporters would be claiming it was a setup. And there we have the win/win for the media, regardless of true or false, they have done the damage they wanted to do. Not for the benefit of these women but for a vendetta. " I hope he is guilty. Because if he's not, they have ruined his life. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do wonder how many people on both sides would/will back down if this was proven in court. I expect the "he did it" lot would not be convinced and still believe he did it. While lots of the "innocent until proven guilty" lot and RB supporters would be claiming it was a setup. And there we have the win/win for the media, regardless of true or false, they have done the damage they wanted to do. Not for the benefit of these women but for a vendetta. " I can't back down as I haven't been on a side, I fucking detest trial by social/media though. These are serious allegations and should be with the police, not a director. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not exactly a shocking revelation,he is a self confessed cockhound" Now an (alleged) rapist and abuser. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What do I think? I've no idea if he's guilty or not. I've said that a lot today. I wouldn't be surprised, but I've never liked him, so I am conscious my bias will make it easier for me to believe negative stuff about him. But I find the whole "it's a media witch-hunt" thing a bit odd, and a bit feeble to my mind. Investigative journalists investigate and then write a story; that's happened FOREVER, and is often a force for good. There's no reason they should not report a story of interest, and lots of people complaining would be just as quick to shout "MSM cover up" if it wasn't reported, such as with some other high profile cases. We can't have it both ways." I’m not totally convinced! So horrible because r@p@ sexual assault & physical assault to women is fucking major and any person convicted of these crimes should be strung up by there Bollocks! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do wonder how many people on both sides would/will back down if this was proven in court. I expect the "he did it" lot would not be convinced and still believe he did it. While lots of the "innocent until proven guilty" lot and RB supporters would be claiming it was a setup. And there we have the win/win for the media, regardless of true or false, they have done the damage they wanted to do. Not for the benefit of these women but for a vendetta. I can't back down as I haven't been on a side, I fucking detest trial by social/media though. These are serious allegations and should be with the police, not a director. " What I mean is, simply accept the ruling if it were to go to court. For some "innocent until proven guilty" is just a saying they throw around as support, but when it comes down to it, if convicted they don't accept the ruling as fair. Again, some not all. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What I'm gonna say generally here....is dispatched and channel 4 face one fuck of a lawsuit if they aren't absolutely sure they are correct. Just something to bare in mind. Were exposes wrong about saville and Harris? They can, but they can also afford to pay it. Quite easily. The payout will be pocket change to them overall. They will have caused more stigma to RB and his credibility, which I can imagine they will be happy with. There will be a fund somewhere in the budget for this kind of thing. Just look how the Jonny Deep thing played out - granted it was US and UK so slightly different circumstances but the Sun printed him as a wife beater they won. The actual case of assault it was found he didn't do it. They took the risk calling him that, and it paid off for them. They caused the damage but he was found not guilty overall. " Channel 4 and The Sun are very different media publications. I work in the industry, trust me | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do wonder how many people on both sides would/will back down if this was proven in court. I expect the "he did it" lot would not be convinced and still believe he did it. While lots of the "innocent until proven guilty" lot and RB supporters would be claiming it was a setup. And there we have the win/win for the media, regardless of true or false, they have done the damage they wanted to do. Not for the benefit of these women but for a vendetta. I can't back down as I haven't been on a side, I fucking detest trial by social/media though. These are serious allegations and should be with the police, not a director. What I mean is, simply accept the ruling if it were to go to court. For some "innocent until proven guilty" is just a saying they throw around as support, but when it comes down to it, if convicted they don't accept the ruling as fair. Again, some not all. " I fully believe in innocent until proven guilty. If proven guilty of these (alleged) crimes then I say throw the book at him. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do wonder how many people on both sides would/will back down if this was proven in court. I expect the "he did it" lot would not be convinced and still believe he did it. While lots of the "innocent until proven guilty" lot and RB supporters would be claiming it was a setup. And there we have the win/win for the media, regardless of true or false, they have done the damage they wanted to do. Not for the benefit of these women but for a vendetta. " Do Channel 4/The Times have a vendetta against RB? Can't see how this is revenge for anything, but I've not followed his career closely. I agree it could become a vendetta if they didn't drop it (and I agree the press hound lots of people unfairly), but right now it's just reporting a story they must consider is true (or certainly defensible)? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Trial by media can be an awful situation, just look back to the recent ‘scandal’ of BBC news. BUT a lot of these exposes present authorities with a case and show a pattern to be investigated. Many pass on their findings to prosecutors. SA has such a low rate of prosecution we’re at a point where some feel this is their only path to justice. As to those who blank refuse to engage with the allegations - why? Not a slur, genuinely intrigued why some query the motives of those coming forward so quickly and vehemently." While I'm not straight up defending him. As I said in another post my cousin was accused of SA by his ex. The dates she gave he was not in the country at the time, not for weeks before or after those dates. She lied. People lie. People can be vile. People are greedy. I won't blindly believe accusations alone. If somebody can be "evil" enough to cause SA then people can be "evil" enough to lie about it to cause damage to somebody. By believing any accusation on word alone without deeper investigation does not do justice for those that have actually suffered, it's no better than claiming it never happened and could never happen. My heart is not closed off to victims nor is it bleeding for everyone that says something happened. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do wonder how many people on both sides would/will back down if this was proven in court. I expect the "he did it" lot would not be convinced and still believe he did it. While lots of the "innocent until proven guilty" lot and RB supporters would be claiming it was a setup. And there we have the win/win for the media, regardless of true or false, they have done the damage they wanted to do. Not for the benefit of these women but for a vendetta. Do Channel 4/The Times have a vendetta against RB? Can't see how this is revenge for anything, but I've not followed his career closely. I agree it could become a vendetta if they didn't drop it (and I agree the press hound lots of people unfairly), but right now it's just reporting a story they must consider is true (or certainly defensible)?" Mainstream media as a whole. He champions against them. He is relentless and calls out a lot of their bullshit. I don't really follow him enough for specific details and extremes that he goes to but he certainly is loud and active in clashing with mainstream media narratives (whatever they may be) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Trial by media can be an awful situation, just look back to the recent ‘scandal’ of BBC news. BUT a lot of these exposes present authorities with a case and show a pattern to be investigated. Many pass on their findings to prosecutors. SA has such a low rate of prosecution we’re at a point where some feel this is their only path to justice. As to those who blank refuse to engage with the allegations - why? Not a slur, genuinely intrigued why some query the motives of those coming forward so quickly and vehemently. While I'm not straight up defending him. As I said in another post my cousin was accused of SA by his ex. The dates she gave he was not in the country at the time, not for weeks before or after those dates. She lied. People lie. People can be vile. People are greedy. I won't blindly believe accusations alone. If somebody can be "evil" enough to cause SA then people can be "evil" enough to lie about it to cause damage to somebody. By believing any accusation on word alone without deeper investigation does not do justice for those that have actually suffered, it's no better than claiming it never happened and could never happen. My heart is not closed off to victims nor is it bleeding for everyone that says something happened. " Which I have seen happen and agree, you do have to size up accusations but sometimes that really comes across (not from you, generally) as not believing. In this case, paper and programme have been at pains to say these are separate, non-linked accounts of similar actions. Intrigued why some don’t take that on when instantly thinking it’s an agenda to bring someone down. It’s interesting the blind belief that there’s some huge machination of collusion amongst media companies and government but people coming forward must be thoroughly vetted. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Before anyone starts asking why women are only accusing russell brand now... last month a spanish footballer was assaulted on live tv in front of millions and there are still people defending the man in that instance. So thats why " The conclusion of that is the footballer has not seen justice in a court of law for the assault. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Before anyone starts asking why women are only accusing russell brand now... last month a spanish footballer was assaulted on live tv in front of millions and there are still people defending the man in that instance. So thats why The conclusion of that is the footballer has not seen justice in a court of law for the assault. " I think major questions need to be asked of the law and the justice system. It gets treat like a religion that no-one dares question. I'm not saying everyone is innocent but seriously | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"While I'm not straight up defending him. As I said in another post my cousin was accused of SA by his ex. The dates she gave he was not in the country at the time, not for weeks before or after those dates. She lied. People lie. People can be vile. People are greedy. I won't blindly believe accusations alone. If somebody can be "evil" enough to cause SA then people can be "evil" enough to lie about it to cause damage to somebody. By believing any accusation on word alone without deeper investigation does not do justice for those that have actually suffered, it's no better than claiming it never happened and could never happen. My heart is not closed off to victims nor is it bleeding for everyone that says something happened. Which I have seen happen and agree, you do have to size up accusations but sometimes that really comes across (not from you, generally) as not believing. In this case, paper and programme have been at pains to say these are separate, non-linked accounts of similar actions. Intrigued why some don’t take that on when instantly thinking it’s an agenda to bring someone down. It’s interesting the blind belief that there’s some huge machination of collusion amongst media companies and government but people coming forward must be thoroughly vetted." There is blind belief on both sides. And on both sides they are so invested in their own extreme they fail to see what is possible at the other side. If you don't think these huge powers are capable of digging around to find 4 disgruntled women of RB past and making accusations work and fit against him - you are just as bad as those that refuse to believe or accept these could also be true. It is very much in their power and the depths they won't go to (because they can) is potentially limitless. Let's not forget phone hacking of Piers Morgan - not quite the same level but goes to show mainstream media is not above getting their hands dirty and being vile with methods. As said above, another 5th woman is claiming they didn't use her story because it didn't fit enough with their narrative. Is she instantly being dishonest about it all? Why should we dismiss her but believe the other 4. Is she lieing for 5 minutes of fame? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I try to remain open to both sides (aka cynical of both sides) I must say the text messages plus visit to the r@pe centre somewhat hard to ignore. The 16yo example is creepy. And imo shows where the law is an ass. But it's hardwr to determine truth here. I hope ppl calling this a stitch up have spent five minutes having a look. Otherwise the free hit ti being an abuser is to be anti establishment. " Seeing as your one of the very few people here who can look with a balanced view, could you help me out a bit? I've read about the text message and the fact that the lady in question visited a r*pe clinic. Do you know if this was reported to authorities? Also, I've read a couple of them being in the US? Are they all US? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"While I'm not straight up defending him. As I said in another post my cousin was accused of SA by his ex. The dates she gave he was not in the country at the time, not for weeks before or after those dates. She lied. People lie. People can be vile. People are greedy. I won't blindly believe accusations alone. If somebody can be "evil" enough to cause SA then people can be "evil" enough to lie about it to cause damage to somebody. By believing any accusation on word alone without deeper investigation does not do justice for those that have actually suffered, it's no better than claiming it never happened and could never happen. My heart is not closed off to victims nor is it bleeding for everyone that says something happened. Which I have seen happen and agree, you do have to size up accusations but sometimes that really comes across (not from you, generally) as not believing. In this case, paper and programme have been at pains to say these are separate, non-linked accounts of similar actions. Intrigued why some don’t take that on when instantly thinking it’s an agenda to bring someone down. It’s interesting the blind belief that there’s some huge machination of collusion amongst media companies and government but people coming forward must be thoroughly vetted. There is blind belief on both sides. And on both sides they are so invested in their own extreme they fail to see what is possible at the other side. If you don't think these huge powers are capable of digging around to find 4 disgruntled women of RB past and making accusations work and fit against him - you are just as bad as those that refuse to believe or accept these could also be true. It is very much in their power and the depths they won't go to (because they can) is potentially limitless. Let's not forget phone hacking of Piers Morgan - not quite the same level but goes to show mainstream media is not above getting their hands dirty and being vile with methods. As said above, another 5th woman is claiming they didn't use her story because it didn't fit enough with their narrative. Is she instantly being dishonest about it all? Why should we dismiss her but believe the other 4. Is she lieing for 5 minutes of fame? " Fair enough, I hadn’t quite seen it that others may see choosing to hear out accusations (I’m not just talking RB) as blind belief but I can see it coming across that way sometimes. Don’t agree with you on phone hacking - one of the worst journalistic misadventures, possibly ever. It’s denied people justice, damaged murder hunts, ruined numerous relationships between family and friends. But much like the government, having seen things up close - there’s barely enough intelligence to tie up shoelaces let alone orchestrate a world order. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I try to remain open to both sides (aka cynical of both sides) I must say the text messages plus visit to the r@pe centre somewhat hard to ignore. The 16yo example is creepy. And imo shows where the law is an ass. But it's hardwr to determine truth here. I hope ppl calling this a stitch up have spent five minutes having a look. Otherwise the free hit ti being an abuser is to be anti establishment. Seeing as your one of the very few people here who can look with a balanced view, could you help me out a bit? I've read about the text message and the fact that the lady in question visited a r*pe clinic. Do you know if this was reported to authorities? Also, I've read a couple of them being in the US? Are they all US?" I don't believe it was reported because she didn't think she'd be believed. I get that, but also with those texts, I also don't. Possibly a fame thing. No idea on where it happened. I got the impression the 16yo was UK. But couldn't tell you why. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do wonder how many people on both sides would/will back down if this was proven in court. I expect the "he did it" lot would not be convinced and still believe he did it. While lots of the "innocent until proven guilty" lot and RB supporters would be claiming it was a setup. And there we have the win/win for the media, regardless of true or false, they have done the damage they wanted to do. Not for the benefit of these women but for a vendetta. I can't back down as I haven't been on a side, I fucking detest trial by social/media though. These are serious allegations and should be with the police, not a director. What I mean is, simply accept the ruling if it were to go to court. For some "innocent until proven guilty" is just a saying they throw around as support, but when it comes down to it, if convicted they don't accept the ruling as fair. Again, some not all. I fully believe in innocent until proven guilty. If proven guilty of these (alleged) crimes then I say throw the book at him. " This 100%. Trial by judge and jury, not media. The only problem now is that any trial would be prejudiced. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I try to remain open to both sides (aka cynical of both sides) I must say the text messages plus visit to the r@pe centre somewhat hard to ignore. The 16yo example is creepy. And imo shows where the law is an ass. But it's hardwr to determine truth here. I hope ppl calling this a stitch up have spent five minutes having a look. Otherwise the free hit ti being an abuser is to be anti establishment. Seeing as your one of the very few people here who can look with a balanced view, could you help me out a bit? I've read about the text message and the fact that the lady in question visited a r*pe clinic. Do you know if this was reported to authorities? Also, I've read a couple of them being in the US? Are they all US?I don't believe it was reported because she didn't think she'd be believed. I get that, but also with those texts, I also don't. Possibly a fame thing. No idea on where it happened. I got the impression the 16yo was UK. But couldn't tell you why. " Thanks, I'm not watching it. So you've helped a little. I do struggle in that this woman went to a clinic (I assume for testing) but didn't go to the police. It leaves the question of whether the sex was consensual, at least to begin with and he got too rough. Before anyone throws a hissy fit, I'm not saying him getting rough is acceptable. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do wonder how many people on both sides would/will back down if this was proven in court. I expect the "he did it" lot would not be convinced and still believe he did it. While lots of the "innocent until proven guilty" lot and RB supporters would be claiming it was a setup. And there we have the win/win for the media, regardless of true or false, they have done the damage they wanted to do. Not for the benefit of these women but for a vendetta. I can't back down as I haven't been on a side, I fucking detest trial by social/media though. These are serious allegations and should be with the police, not a director. What I mean is, simply accept the ruling if it were to go to court. For some "innocent until proven guilty" is just a saying they throw around as support, but when it comes down to it, if convicted they don't accept the ruling as fair. Again, some not all. I fully believe in innocent until proven guilty. If proven guilty of these (alleged) crimes then I say throw the book at him. This 100%. Trial by judge and jury, not media. The only problem now is that any trial would be prejudiced. " You know dispatches is basically a jury right? It can only provide what a court could provide on someone. It's based on facts and people's accounts. It's literally no different. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brands conduct aside. The broadcasters have some questions to answer. The all too familiar letting conduct slide because of someone’s star powers. Nonces at the Beeb seem an almost permanent fixture. " The conversation between RB and JS made my skin crawl. Whatever the whys and wherefores something is fundamentally wrong.the way he jokes about sex just mirrors how he views women... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I try to remain open to both sides (aka cynical of both sides) I must say the text messages plus visit to the r@pe centre somewhat hard to ignore. The 16yo example is creepy. And imo shows where the law is an ass. But it's hardwr to determine truth here. I hope ppl calling this a stitch up have spent five minutes having a look. Otherwise the free hit ti being an abuser is to be anti establishment. Seeing as your one of the very few people here who can look with a balanced view, could you help me out a bit? I've read about the text message and the fact that the lady in question visited a r*pe clinic. Do you know if this was reported to authorities? Also, I've read a couple of them being in the US? Are they all US?I don't believe it was reported because she didn't think she'd be believed. I get that, but also with those texts, I also don't. Possibly a fame thing. No idea on where it happened. I got the impression the 16yo was UK. But couldn't tell you why. Thanks, I'm not watching it. So you've helped a little. I do struggle in that this woman went to a clinic (I assume for testing) but didn't go to the police. It leaves the question of whether the sex was consensual, at least to begin with and he got too rough. Before anyone throws a hissy fit, I'm not saying him getting rough is acceptable. " Jimmy Savilles victims didn't go to the police either though...it's the power of a celebrity that they can threaten a winning legal battle if they ever tried anything | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I try to remain open to both sides (aka cynical of both sides) I must say the text messages plus visit to the r@pe centre somewhat hard to ignore. The 16yo example is creepy. And imo shows where the law is an ass. But it's hardwr to determine truth here. I hope ppl calling this a stitch up have spent five minutes having a look. Otherwise the free hit ti being an abuser is to be anti establishment. Seeing as your one of the very few people here who can look with a balanced view, could you help me out a bit? I've read about the text message and the fact that the lady in question visited a r*pe clinic. Do you know if this was reported to authorities? Also, I've read a couple of them being in the US? Are they all US?I don't believe it was reported because she didn't think she'd be believed. I get that, but also with those texts, I also don't. Possibly a fame thing. No idea on where it happened. I got the impression the 16yo was UK. But couldn't tell you why. Thanks, I'm not watching it. So you've helped a little. I do struggle in that this woman went to a clinic (I assume for testing) but didn't go to the police. It leaves the question of whether the sex was consensual, at least to begin with and he got too rough. Before anyone throws a hissy fit, I'm not saying him getting rough is acceptable. Jimmy Savilles victims didn't go to the police either though...it's the power of a celebrity that they can threaten a winning legal battle if they ever tried anything " But she went to a r*pe clinic. That's what leaves the question there. It's funny you know, everything some like this happens, the stock is 'but Jimmy Saville' | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I try to remain open to both sides (aka cynical of both sides) I must say the text messages plus visit to the r@pe centre somewhat hard to ignore. The 16yo example is creepy. And imo shows where the law is an ass. But it's hardwr to determine truth here. I hope ppl calling this a stitch up have spent five minutes having a look. Otherwise the free hit ti being an abuser is to be anti establishment. Seeing as your one of the very few people here who can look with a balanced view, could you help me out a bit? I've read about the text message and the fact that the lady in question visited a r*pe clinic. Do you know if this was reported to authorities? Also, I've read a couple of them being in the US? Are they all US?I don't believe it was reported because she didn't think she'd be believed. I get that, but also with those texts, I also don't. Possibly a fame thing. No idea on where it happened. I got the impression the 16yo was UK. But couldn't tell you why. Thanks, I'm not watching it. So you've helped a little. I do struggle in that this woman went to a clinic (I assume for testing) but didn't go to the police. It leaves the question of whether the sex was consensual, at least to begin with and he got too rough. Before anyone throws a hissy fit, I'm not saying him getting rough is acceptable. Jimmy Savilles victims didn't go to the police either though...it's the power of a celebrity that they can threaten a winning legal battle if they ever tried anything But she went to a r*pe clinic. That's what leaves the question there. It's funny you know, everything some like this happens, the stock is 'but Jimmy Saville'" I honestly think you have to watch it to make your mind up to be honest. There's surely no doubt he's guilty of lots of sexual assault in my eyes | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I try to remain open to both sides (aka cynical of both sides) I must say the text messages plus visit to the r@pe centre somewhat hard to ignore. The 16yo example is creepy. And imo shows where the law is an ass. But it's hardwr to determine truth here. I hope ppl calling this a stitch up have spent five minutes having a look. Otherwise the free hit ti being an abuser is to be anti establishment. Seeing as your one of the very few people here who can look with a balanced view, could you help me out a bit? I've read about the text message and the fact that the lady in question visited a r*pe clinic. Do you know if this was reported to authorities? Also, I've read a couple of them being in the US? Are they all US?I don't believe it was reported because she didn't think she'd be believed. I get that, but also with those texts, I also don't. Possibly a fame thing. No idea on where it happened. I got the impression the 16yo was UK. But couldn't tell you why. Thanks, I'm not watching it. So you've helped a little. I do struggle in that this woman went to a clinic (I assume for testing) but didn't go to the police. It leaves the question of whether the sex was consensual, at least to begin with and he got too rough. Before anyone throws a hissy fit, I'm not saying him getting rough is acceptable. Jimmy Savilles victims didn't go to the police either though...it's the power of a celebrity that they can threaten a winning legal battle if they ever tried anything But she went to a r*pe clinic. That's what leaves the question there. It's funny you know, everything some like this happens, the stock is 'but Jimmy Saville' I honestly think you have to watch it to make your mind up to be honest. There's surely no doubt he's guilty of lots of sexual assault in my eyes " I'm not gonna watch a program which has quite obviously been edited in a certain way (all programmes are). I'll wait for a real investigation by proper authorities. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"He’s upset the far left and now they are coming for him " Doesn't mean he didn't do it though. He upset somebody, which gave them reason to go digging. And by digging they found something. Just because they have a vendetta does not mean what they found is not true. Blind belief in both sides. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I try to remain open to both sides (aka cynical of both sides) I must say the text messages plus visit to the r@pe centre somewhat hard to ignore. The 16yo example is creepy. And imo shows where the law is an ass. But it's hardwr to determine truth here. I hope ppl calling this a stitch up have spent five minutes having a look. Otherwise the free hit ti being an abuser is to be anti establishment. Seeing as your one of the very few people here who can look with a balanced view, could you help me out a bit? I've read about the text message and the fact that the lady in question visited a r*pe clinic. Do you know if this was reported to authorities? Also, I've read a couple of them being in the US? Are they all US?I don't believe it was reported because she didn't think she'd be believed. I get that, but also with those texts, I also don't. Possibly a fame thing. No idea on where it happened. I got the impression the 16yo was UK. But couldn't tell you why. Thanks, I'm not watching it. So you've helped a little. I do struggle in that this woman went to a clinic (I assume for testing) but didn't go to the police. It leaves the question of whether the sex was consensual, at least to begin with and he got too rough. Before anyone throws a hissy fit, I'm not saying him getting rough is acceptable. " I've just read the times (I think) article. The texts didn't read well. "When a girl says no she means NO" It could be an escalation.. but that's not how her version went. The r@pe file apparently says “she was worried that, if her assailant’s name is somehow released, then her name will be dragged through the dirt”. (Quotes form part of article so assume a direct quote) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I try to remain open to both sides (aka cynical of both sides) I must say the text messages plus visit to the r@pe centre somewhat hard to ignore. The 16yo example is creepy. And imo shows where the law is an ass. But it's hardwr to determine truth here. I hope ppl calling this a stitch up have spent five minutes having a look. Otherwise the free hit ti being an abuser is to be anti establishment. Seeing as your one of the very few people here who can look with a balanced view, could you help me out a bit? I've read about the text message and the fact that the lady in question visited a r*pe clinic. Do you know if this was reported to authorities? Also, I've read a couple of them being in the US? Are they all US?I don't believe it was reported because she didn't think she'd be believed. I get that, but also with those texts, I also don't. Possibly a fame thing. No idea on where it happened. I got the impression the 16yo was UK. But couldn't tell you why. Thanks, I'm not watching it. So you've helped a little. I do struggle in that this woman went to a clinic (I assume for testing) but didn't go to the police. It leaves the question of whether the sex was consensual, at least to begin with and he got too rough. Before anyone throws a hissy fit, I'm not saying him getting rough is acceptable. Jimmy Savilles victims didn't go to the police either though...it's the power of a celebrity that they can threaten a winning legal battle if they ever tried anything But she went to a r*pe clinic. That's what leaves the question there. It's funny you know, everything some like this happens, the stock is 'but Jimmy Saville' I honestly think you have to watch it to make your mind up to be honest. There's surely no doubt he's guilty of lots of sexual assault in my eyes I'm not gonna watch a program which has quite obviously been edited in a certain way (all programmes are). I'll wait for a real investigation by proper authorities. " I get that but also just do please bear in mind...this is Channel 4 doing this. Who were the ones who made him famous and responsible for the allegations | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do wonder how many people on both sides would/will back down if this was proven in court. I expect the "he did it" lot would not be convinced and still believe he did it. While lots of the "innocent until proven guilty" lot and RB supporters would be claiming it was a setup. And there we have the win/win for the media, regardless of true or false, they have done the damage they wanted to do. Not for the benefit of these women but for a vendetta. I can't back down as I haven't been on a side, I fucking detest trial by social/media though. These are serious allegations and should be with the police, not a director. What I mean is, simply accept the ruling if it were to go to court. For some "innocent until proven guilty" is just a saying they throw around as support, but when it comes down to it, if convicted they don't accept the ruling as fair. Again, some not all. I fully believe in innocent until proven guilty. If proven guilty of these (alleged) crimes then I say throw the book at him. This 100%. Trial by judge and jury, not media. The only problem now is that any trial would be prejudiced. You know dispatches is basically a jury right? It can only provide what a court could provide on someone. It's based on facts and people's accounts. It's literally no different. " It’s not a court of law, so in that context, they are both light years apart. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I try to remain open to both sides (aka cynical of both sides) I must say the text messages plus visit to the r@pe centre somewhat hard to ignore. The 16yo example is creepy. And imo shows where the law is an ass. But it's hardwr to determine truth here. I hope ppl calling this a stitch up have spent five minutes having a look. Otherwise the free hit ti being an abuser is to be anti establishment. Seeing as your one of the very few people here who can look with a balanced view, could you help me out a bit? I've read about the text message and the fact that the lady in question visited a r*pe clinic. Do you know if this was reported to authorities? Also, I've read a couple of them being in the US? Are they all US?I don't believe it was reported because she didn't think she'd be believed. I get that, but also with those texts, I also don't. Possibly a fame thing. No idea on where it happened. I got the impression the 16yo was UK. But couldn't tell you why. Thanks, I'm not watching it. So you've helped a little. I do struggle in that this woman went to a clinic (I assume for testing) but didn't go to the police. It leaves the question of whether the sex was consensual, at least to begin with and he got too rough. Before anyone throws a hissy fit, I'm not saying him getting rough is acceptable. Jimmy Savilles victims didn't go to the police either though...it's the power of a celebrity that they can threaten a winning legal battle if they ever tried anything But she went to a r*pe clinic. That's what leaves the question there. It's funny you know, everything some like this happens, the stock is 'but Jimmy Saville'" Or Cosby. Or Weinstein. Or Epstein (though a parent did go to the police there, I think). I think there are lots of examples of celebrities' victims not going to the police for fear of not being believed/retribution. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I try to remain open to both sides (aka cynical of both sides) I must say the text messages plus visit to the r@pe centre somewhat hard to ignore. The 16yo example is creepy. And imo shows where the law is an ass. But it's hardwr to determine truth here. I hope ppl calling this a stitch up have spent five minutes having a look. Otherwise the free hit ti being an abuser is to be anti establishment. Seeing as your one of the very few people here who can look with a balanced view, could you help me out a bit? I've read about the text message and the fact that the lady in question visited a r*pe clinic. Do you know if this was reported to authorities? Also, I've read a couple of them being in the US? Are they all US?I don't believe it was reported because she didn't think she'd be believed. I get that, but also with those texts, I also don't. Possibly a fame thing. No idea on where it happened. I got the impression the 16yo was UK. But couldn't tell you why. Thanks, I'm not watching it. So you've helped a little. I do struggle in that this woman went to a clinic (I assume for testing) but didn't go to the police. It leaves the question of whether the sex was consensual, at least to begin with and he got too rough. Before anyone throws a hissy fit, I'm not saying him getting rough is acceptable. I've just read the times (I think) article. The texts didn't read well. "When a girl says no she means NO" It could be an escalation.. but that's not how her version went. The r@pe file apparently says “she was worried that, if her assailant’s name is somehow released, then her name will be dragged through the dirt”. (Quotes form part of article so assume a direct quote) " So she was scared of outing herself. I actually get that. I wonder how the full conscript of the messages went. I wonder if they're still available (probably not). Very hard to just see one text and know the full story. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"He’s upset the far left and now they are coming for him Doesn't mean he didn't do it though. He upset somebody, which gave them reason to go digging. And by digging they found something. Just because they have a vendetta does not mean what they found is not true. Blind belief in both sides. " I didn’t say that he didn’t do it. He’s an obvious creep. He’s being used as a pawn here though. He’s part of the battle between left and right, The main stream media don’t like alternative media | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I try to remain open to both sides (aka cynical of both sides) I must say the text messages plus visit to the r@pe centre somewhat hard to ignore. The 16yo example is creepy. And imo shows where the law is an ass. But it's hardwr to determine truth here. I hope ppl calling this a stitch up have spent five minutes having a look. Otherwise the free hit ti being an abuser is to be anti establishment. Seeing as your one of the very few people here who can look with a balanced view, could you help me out a bit? I've read about the text message and the fact that the lady in question visited a r*pe clinic. Do you know if this was reported to authorities? Also, I've read a couple of them being in the US? Are they all US?I don't believe it was reported because she didn't think she'd be believed. I get that, but also with those texts, I also don't. Possibly a fame thing. No idea on where it happened. I got the impression the 16yo was UK. But couldn't tell you why. Thanks, I'm not watching it. So you've helped a little. I do struggle in that this woman went to a clinic (I assume for testing) but didn't go to the police. It leaves the question of whether the sex was consensual, at least to begin with and he got too rough. Before anyone throws a hissy fit, I'm not saying him getting rough is acceptable. Jimmy Savilles victims didn't go to the police either though...it's the power of a celebrity that they can threaten a winning legal battle if they ever tried anything But she went to a r*pe clinic. That's what leaves the question there. It's funny you know, everything some like this happens, the stock is 'but Jimmy Saville' Or Cosby. Or Weinstein. Or Epstein (though a parent did go to the police there, I think). I think there are lots of examples of celebrities' victims not going to the police for fear of not being believed/retribution." Nope it's always Saville. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do wonder how many people on both sides would/will back down if this was proven in court. I expect the "he did it" lot would not be convinced and still believe he did it. While lots of the "innocent until proven guilty" lot and RB supporters would be claiming it was a setup. And there we have the win/win for the media, regardless of true or false, they have done the damage they wanted to do. Not for the benefit of these women but for a vendetta. I can't back down as I haven't been on a side, I fucking detest trial by social/media though. These are serious allegations and should be with the police, not a director. What I mean is, simply accept the ruling if it were to go to court. For some "innocent until proven guilty" is just a saying they throw around as support, but when it comes down to it, if convicted they don't accept the ruling as fair. Again, some not all. I fully believe in innocent until proven guilty. If proven guilty of these (alleged) crimes then I say throw the book at him. This 100%. Trial by judge and jury, not media. The only problem now is that any trial would be prejudiced. You know dispatches is basically a jury right? It can only provide what a court could provide on someone. It's based on facts and people's accounts. It's literally no different. It’s not a court of law, so in that context, they are both light years apart." Either way they both get things right alot of the time, and wrong alot of the times | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I mean...what to make of this now? Surprised? Shocked? Sadly nothing surprises me anymore but having met him he did come across as likeable. But it does also not surprise me in the slightest." What to make of what ?? He speaks truth | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Huw Edwards was banging a 16 year and giving him money for crack. The left stuck up for him. Russell should check himself into a clinic and disappear for abit " he was investigated by police. The alleged victim said it didn't happen. Was there ever any allegation of sex ? But to follow your line... The antiestablishment have stuck up for brand first, and then asked what happened second. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I try to remain open to both sides (aka cynical of both sides) I must say the text messages plus visit to the r@pe centre somewhat hard to ignore. The 16yo example is creepy. And imo shows where the law is an ass. But it's hardwr to determine truth here. I hope ppl calling this a stitch up have spent five minutes having a look. Otherwise the free hit ti being an abuser is to be anti establishment. Seeing as your one of the very few people here who can look with a balanced view, could you help me out a bit? I've read about the text message and the fact that the lady in question visited a r*pe clinic. Do you know if this was reported to authorities? Also, I've read a couple of them being in the US? Are they all US?I don't believe it was reported because she didn't think she'd be believed. I get that, but also with those texts, I also don't. Possibly a fame thing. No idea on where it happened. I got the impression the 16yo was UK. But couldn't tell you why. Thanks, I'm not watching it. So you've helped a little. I do struggle in that this woman went to a clinic (I assume for testing) but didn't go to the police. It leaves the question of whether the sex was consensual, at least to begin with and he got too rough. Before anyone throws a hissy fit, I'm not saying him getting rough is acceptable. I've just read the times (I think) article. The texts didn't read well. "When a girl says no she means NO" It could be an escalation.. but that's not how her version went. The r@pe file apparently says “she was worried that, if her assailant’s name is somehow released, then her name will be dragged through the dirt”. (Quotes form part of article so assume a direct quote) So she was scared of outing herself. I actually get that. I wonder how the full conscript of the messages went. I wonder if they're still available (probably not). Very hard to just see one text and know the full story. " I can DM you a link to an unpaywalled article. It has more. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do wonder how many people on both sides would/will back down if this was proven in court. I expect the "he did it" lot would not be convinced and still believe he did it. While lots of the "innocent until proven guilty" lot and RB supporters would be claiming it was a setup. And there we have the win/win for the media, regardless of true or false, they have done the damage they wanted to do. Not for the benefit of these women but for a vendetta. I can't back down as I haven't been on a side, I fucking detest trial by social/media though. These are serious allegations and should be with the police, not a director. What I mean is, simply accept the ruling if it were to go to court. For some "innocent until proven guilty" is just a saying they throw around as support, but when it comes down to it, if convicted they don't accept the ruling as fair. Again, some not all. I fully believe in innocent until proven guilty. If proven guilty of these (alleged) crimes then I say throw the book at him. This 100%. Trial by judge and jury, not media. The only problem now is that any trial would be prejudiced. You know dispatches is basically a jury right? It can only provide what a court could provide on someone. It's based on facts and people's accounts. It's literally no different. It’s not a court of law, so in that context, they are both light years apart. Either way they both get things right alot of the time, and wrong alot of the times " Have to agree there. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I try to remain open to both sides (aka cynical of both sides) I must say the text messages plus visit to the r@pe centre somewhat hard to ignore. The 16yo example is creepy. And imo shows where the law is an ass. But it's hardwr to determine truth here. I hope ppl calling this a stitch up have spent five minutes having a look. Otherwise the free hit ti being an abuser is to be anti establishment. Seeing as your one of the very few people here who can look with a balanced view, could you help me out a bit? I've read about the text message and the fact that the lady in question visited a r*pe clinic. Do you know if this was reported to authorities? Also, I've read a couple of them being in the US? Are they all US?I don't believe it was reported because she didn't think she'd be believed. I get that, but also with those texts, I also don't. Possibly a fame thing. No idea on where it happened. I got the impression the 16yo was UK. But couldn't tell you why. Thanks, I'm not watching it. So you've helped a little. I do struggle in that this woman went to a clinic (I assume for testing) but didn't go to the police. It leaves the question of whether the sex was consensual, at least to begin with and he got too rough. Before anyone throws a hissy fit, I'm not saying him getting rough is acceptable. I've just read the times (I think) article. The texts didn't read well. "When a girl says no she means NO" It could be an escalation.. but that's not how her version went. The r@pe file apparently says “she was worried that, if her assailant’s name is somehow released, then her name will be dragged through the dirt”. (Quotes form part of article so assume a direct quote) So she was scared of outing herself. I actually get that. I wonder how the full conscript of the messages went. I wonder if they're still available (probably not). Very hard to just see one text and know the full story. I can DM you a link to an unpaywalled article. It has more. " Please | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don’t particularly like or dislike Brand and if he is guilty of any of these allegations I hope he spends the rest of his days in prison. I missed the beginning of the programme so forgive me if I missed something but I didn’t see any actual evidence that he has committed any crimes. It was stories from anonymous alleged victims and another comedian with rumours." The lady in the US who alleged r@pe, for whom excerpts from a r@pe clinic were provided? And the second US-based lady who alleged he'd sexually assaulted her at his house and then threatened that she'd hear from lawyers, when they had to meet on the set of a film/programme? 3 other people apparently corroborated that to the programme makers (text on the screen). These were the ones that may have broken laws. The rest were unpleasant, creepy and highly distasteful, at best. His behaviour and words cannot be denied, e.g. the behaviour on Radio 2 towards a newsreader, and later a conversation on air with Savile. And then the Andrew Sachs incident. Whilst these behaviours might not constitute anything illegal, they are definitely symptomatic of a person who lacks an understanding of consent and decency. And these things are recorded for us all to listen back to. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ohhhh fuck me this is getting hilarious !!! Yet another man who speaks out about the disgusting corruption that we face on a daily basis that has now been charged with forced sex !! Can you not see the trend here ???? " men who rage against the establishment aren't good at obeying laws? Aka Lots of things can be used to explain a trend. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ohhhh fuck me this is getting hilarious !!! Yet another man who speaks out about the disgusting corruption that we face on a daily basis that has now been charged with forced sex !! Can you not see the trend here ???? " That people in power (these men included) are in a position to commit these crimes regardless of their ability to speak out. Yes these is always a pattern if you want to connect dots hard enough. Both sides so it based upon what they want to believe. Nobody is innocent, especially those with power over others. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ohhhh fuck me this is getting hilarious !!! Yet another man who speaks out about the disgusting corruption that we face on a daily basis that has now been charged with forced sex !! Can you not see the trend here ???? " Yep, the giant lizards are in the ascendancy. You've been warned, people! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ohhhh fuck me this is getting hilarious !!! Yet another man who speaks out about the disgusting corruption that we face on a daily basis that has now been charged with forced sex !! Can you not see the trend here ???? " Where are the women who speak about disgusting corruption and is there a similar trend affecting them? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I've never liked the guy... but it seems strange that the victims chose to go public on TV rather than report it to the police. Trial by media makes me very uncomfortable. Mud sticks and everyone is entitled to be considered innocent until proved guilty. Nita" I think this is what happens when they are silenced individually. Some of this sounds like Weinstein. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don’t particularly like or dislike Brand and if he is guilty of any of these allegations I hope he spends the rest of his days in prison. I missed the beginning of the programme so forgive me if I missed something but I didn’t see any actual evidence that he has committed any crimes. It was stories from anonymous alleged victims and another comedian with rumours. The lady in the US who alleged r@pe, for whom excerpts from a r@pe clinic were provided? And the second US-based lady who alleged he'd sexually assaulted her at his house and then threatened that she'd hear from lawyers, when they had to meet on the set of a film/programme? 3 other people apparently corroborated that to the programme makers (text on the screen). These were the ones that may have broken laws. The rest were unpleasant, creepy and highly distasteful, at best. His behaviour and words cannot be denied, e.g. the behaviour on Radio 2 towards a newsreader, and later a conversation on air with Savile. And then the Andrew Sachs incident. Whilst these behaviours might not constitute anything illegal, they are definitely symptomatic of a person who lacks an understanding of consent and decency. And these things are recorded for us all to listen back to. " I missed the first bit so again I do apologise. I switched it on just before the Sachs bit. Everything from then on seemed like a character assassination. No actual evidence just Dispatches claiming they’d seen stuff and talked to people without proving any of it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ohhhh fuck me this is getting hilarious !!! Yet another man who speaks out about the disgusting corruption that we face on a daily basis that has now been charged with forced sex !! Can you not see the trend here ???? That people in power (these men included) are in a position to commit these crimes regardless of their ability to speak out. Yes these is always a pattern if you want to connect dots hard enough. Both sides so it based upon what they want to believe. Nobody is innocent, especially those with power over others. " Where's the convictions over Bill Gates who's controlled the whole world with his power manipulation and vaccines ?? Once you speak against these people your arrested | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ohhhh fuck me this is getting hilarious !!! Yet another man who speaks out about the disgusting corruption that we face on a daily basis that has now been charged with forced sex !! Can you not see the trend here ???? That people in power (these men included) are in a position to commit these crimes regardless of their ability to speak out. Yes these is always a pattern if you want to connect dots hard enough. Both sides so it based upon what they want to believe. Nobody is innocent, especially those with power over others. Where's the convictions over Bill Gates who's controlled the whole world with his power manipulation and vaccines ?? Once you speak against these people your arrested " It's because supplying vaccines isn't illegal. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ohhhh fuck me this is getting hilarious !!! Yet another man who speaks out about the disgusting corruption that we face on a daily basis that has now been charged with forced sex !! Can you not see the trend here ???? That people in power (these men included) are in a position to commit these crimes regardless of their ability to speak out. Yes these is always a pattern if you want to connect dots hard enough. Both sides so it based upon what they want to believe. Nobody is innocent, especially those with power over others. Where's the convictions over Bill Gates who's controlled the whole world with his power manipulation and vaccines ?? Once you speak against these people your arrested It's because supplying vaccines isn't illegal. " but chipping people is. They are monitoring you against your will. Sent from iPhone. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police?" Watch it and listen and it'll probably make sense to you. Lots of people have been to the police to report various things, but are not taken seriously. Accusing someone high profile, who has access to expensive lawyers etc is perhaps at minimum, daunting? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police?" my guess is that Brand was rumoured to be a predator so the times et al started some investigation. And over time built the story having found people who felt they couldn't go to the law at the time. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police?" The paper found them via hundreds of contacts and conversations with others Some people never come forward after being r*ped ...they keep it as a secret forever | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police? The paper found them via hundreds of contacts and conversations with others Some people never come forward after being r*ped ...they keep it as a secret forever " And some people lie about sexual assault. It happens. I've been witness to false accusations. Not everyone lies, but let's not pretend there are not people that won't stoop to such levels. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not sure if anyone remembers Harvey Weinstein . He abused lots of women and they didn't dare speak out because of his power. However once one went public everyone did. It will be interesting to see how many other accusations surface after this. As far as govts coming for him because he speaks the truth...really. He has a YouTube channel followed by cranks and conspiracy theorists. " Lots of synergies here with language etc. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ohhhh fuck me this is getting hilarious !!! Yet another man who speaks out about the disgusting corruption that we face on a daily basis that has now been charged with forced sex !! Can you not see the trend here ???? That people in power (these men included) are in a position to commit these crimes regardless of their ability to speak out. Yes these is always a pattern if you want to connect dots hard enough. Both sides so it based upon what they want to believe. Nobody is innocent, especially those with power over others. Where's the convictions over Bill Gates who's controlled the whole world with his power manipulation and vaccines ?? Once you speak against these people your arrested It's because supplying vaccines isn't illegal. " Neither is exposing truths about corruption but you can't convict someone of that so therefore this happens | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ohhhh fuck me this is getting hilarious !!! Yet another man who speaks out about the disgusting corruption that we face on a daily basis that has now been charged with forced sex !! Can you not see the trend here ???? That people in power (these men included) are in a position to commit these crimes regardless of their ability to speak out. Yes these is always a pattern if you want to connect dots hard enough. Both sides so it based upon what they want to believe. Nobody is innocent, especially those with power over others. Where's the convictions over Bill Gates who's controlled the whole world with his power manipulation and vaccines ?? Once you speak against these people your arrested It's because supplying vaccines isn't illegal. Neither is exposing truths about corruption but you can't convict someone of that so therefore this happens " I don't follow him. What truths has he exposed? I should have paid more attention. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police? The paper found them via hundreds of contacts and conversations with others Some people never come forward after being r*ped ...they keep it as a secret forever And some people lie about sexual assault. It happens. I've been witness to false accusations. Not everyone lies, but let's not pretend there are not people that won't stoop to such levels. " as I said earlier, i try and be cyncical of both sides. But it has to be both sides. The texts plus r@pe kits have made me lean towards her not making a false claim here. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police?" Because she thought she was the only one....because he was a celebrity with a big fan base, because she felt ashamed.... Why is nobody is asking why he has a history of relations with young women? Why are we not asking why he couldn't keep his dick in his pants....why the predatory behaviours? Seems an awful lot of victim shaming going on  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police? Because she thought she was the only one....because he was a celebrity with a big fan base, because she felt ashamed.... Why is nobody is asking why he has a history of relations with young women? Why are we not asking why he couldn't keep his dick in his pants....why the predatory behaviours? Seems an awful lot of victim shaming going on "Does his supposed sex addiction explain his behaviour? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don’t particularly like or dislike Brand and if he is guilty of any of these allegations I hope he spends the rest of his days in prison. I missed the beginning of the programme so forgive me if I missed something but I didn’t see any actual evidence that he has committed any crimes. It was stories from anonymous alleged victims and another comedian with rumours. The lady in the US who alleged r@pe, for whom excerpts from a r@pe clinic were provided? And the second US-based lady who alleged he'd sexually assaulted her at his house and then threatened that she'd hear from lawyers, when they had to meet on the set of a film/programme? 3 other people apparently corroborated that to the programme makers (text on the screen). These were the ones that may have broken laws. The rest were unpleasant, creepy and highly distasteful, at best. His behaviour and words cannot be denied, e.g. the behaviour on Radio 2 towards a newsreader, and later a conversation on air with Savile. And then the Andrew Sachs incident. Whilst these behaviours might not constitute anything illegal, they are definitely symptomatic of a person who lacks an understanding of consent and decency. And these things are recorded for us all to listen back to. " The two SA allegations should most definitely be reported to the police as well as another couple of events like exposing himself to the runners. Most of the show highlighted his unpleasantness, like not calling the students after a one night stand! That’s just a bit naive on their part. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police? Because she thought she was the only one....because he was a celebrity with a big fan base, because she felt ashamed.... Why is nobody is asking why he has a history of relations with young women? Why are we not asking why he couldn't keep his dick in his pants....why the predatory behaviours? Seems an awful lot of victim shaming going on "Victim shaming (or fear of it) is why many victims of these sorts of crimes don't always come forward. Add in the aspects of celebrity, power etc. and it's astounding why people are surprised that potential victims decide to stay quiet, I think. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police? The paper found them via hundreds of contacts and conversations with others Some people never come forward after being r*ped ...they keep it as a secret forever And some people lie about sexual assault. It happens. I've been witness to false accusations. Not everyone lies, but let's not pretend there are not people that won't stoop to such levels. " 4 different women in different countries who don't know each other I believe them | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wonder if Russell Brand has a Russell Hobbs kettle, just a random thought. " Very interesting observation... ...Begging the question; does someone called 'Morphy' or indeed: 'Richard' buy Morphy Richards products? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police? The paper found them via hundreds of contacts and conversations with others Some people never come forward after being r*ped ...they keep it as a secret forever And some people lie about sexual assault. It happens. I've been witness to false accusations. Not everyone lies, but let's not pretend there are not people that won't stoop to such levels. 4 different women in different countries who don't know each other I believe them " Where did you get 4 different countries from? I've seen 2 from the US and no idea where the other 2 are from. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police? The paper found them via hundreds of contacts and conversations with others Some people never come forward after being r*ped ...they keep it as a secret forever And some people lie about sexual assault. It happens. I've been witness to false accusations. Not everyone lies, but let's not pretend there are not people that won't stoop to such levels. 4 different women in different countries who don't know each other I believe them " I believe them | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police? Because she thought she was the only one....because he was a celebrity with a big fan base, because she felt ashamed.... Why is nobody is asking why he has a history of relations with young women? Why are we not asking why he couldn't keep his dick in his pants....why the predatory behaviours? Seems an awful lot of victim shaming going on
Does his supposed sex addiction explain his behaviour?"Nope | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police? Because she thought she was the only one....because he was a celebrity with a big fan base, because she felt ashamed.... Why is nobody is asking why he has a history of relations with young women? Why are we not asking why he couldn't keep his dick in his pants....why the predatory behaviours? Seems an awful lot of victim shaming going on
Does his supposed sex addiction explain his behaviour?"Do we excuse/allow other types of addicts from criminal behaviour, e.g. if a drug addict steals to feed their habit? No, we don't. If sex addiction can also lead to sexual assault, I think we need to rethink how we treat and report sex addiction. After all, people who have other pathological sexual behaviours (that we can't really elaborate on here) should therefore also be given leniency to have their crimes "explained", no? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ohhhh fuck me this is getting hilarious !!! Yet another man who speaks out about the disgusting corruption that we face on a daily basis that has now been charged with forced sex !! Can you not see the trend here ???? " Which other man has? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police? Because she thought she was the only one....because he was a celebrity with a big fan base, because she felt ashamed.... Why is nobody is asking why he has a history of relations with young women? Why are we not asking why he couldn't keep his dick in his pants....why the predatory behaviours? Seems an awful lot of victim shaming going on
Does his supposed sex addiction explain his behaviour?
Nope"Would you expect an alcoholic to be in control of their consumption of alcohol? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police? Because she thought she was the only one....because he was a celebrity with a big fan base, because she felt ashamed.... Why is nobody is asking why he has a history of relations with young women? Why are we not asking why he couldn't keep his dick in his pants....why the predatory behaviours? Seems an awful lot of victim shaming going on
Victim shaming (or fear of it) is why many victims of these sorts of crimes don't always come forward. Add in the aspects of celebrity, power etc. and it's astounding why people are surprised that potential victims decide to stay quiet, I think. "Exactly....some of these women were 16 years old, so barely women | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don’t particularly like or dislike Brand and if he is guilty of any of these allegations I hope he spends the rest of his days in prison. I missed the beginning of the programme so forgive me if I missed something but I didn’t see any actual evidence that he has committed any crimes. It was stories from anonymous alleged victims and another comedian with rumours. The lady in the US who alleged r@pe, for whom excerpts from a r@pe clinic were provided? And the second US-based lady who alleged he'd sexually assaulted her at his house and then threatened that she'd hear from lawyers, when they had to meet on the set of a film/programme? 3 other people apparently corroborated that to the programme makers (text on the screen). These were the ones that may have broken laws. The rest were unpleasant, creepy and highly distasteful, at best. His behaviour and words cannot be denied, e.g. the behaviour on Radio 2 towards a newsreader, and later a conversation on air with Savile. And then the Andrew Sachs incident. Whilst these behaviours might not constitute anything illegal, they are definitely symptomatic of a person who lacks an understanding of consent and decency. And these things are recorded for us all to listen back to. The two SA allegations should most definitely be reported to the police as well as another couple of events like exposing himself to the runners. Most of the show highlighted his unpleasantness, like not calling the students after a one night stand! That’s just a bit naive on their part. " Apologies to the accuser but we omitted a third alleged assault, which was the alleged forcing of his penis down the throat of the 16yo and pinning her down and spitting in her mouth. The first allegation was r@pe, specifically. Forced penetration. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police? Because she thought she was the only one....because he was a celebrity with a big fan base, because she felt ashamed.... Why is nobody is asking why he has a history of relations with young women? Why are we not asking why he couldn't keep his dick in his pants....why the predatory behaviours? Seems an awful lot of victim shaming going on
Does his supposed sex addiction explain his behaviour?
Do we excuse/allow other types of addicts from criminal behaviour, e.g. if a drug addict steals to feed their habit? No, we don't.
If sex addiction can also lead to sexual assault, I think we need to rethink how we treat and report sex addiction. After all, people who have other pathological sexual behaviours (that we can't really elaborate on here) should therefore also be given leniency to have their crimes "explained", no? "I said explain his behaviour...not excuse it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police? The paper found them via hundreds of contacts and conversations with others Some people never come forward after being r*ped ...they keep it as a secret forever And some people lie about sexual assault. It happens. I've been witness to false accusations. Not everyone lies, but let's not pretend there are not people that won't stoop to such levels. 4 different women in different countries who don't know each other I believe them Where did you get 4 different countries from? I've seen 2 from the US and no idea where the other 2 are from." UK | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police? The paper found them via hundreds of contacts and conversations with others Some people never come forward after being r*ped ...they keep it as a secret forever And some people lie about sexual assault. It happens. I've been witness to false accusations. Not everyone lies, but let's not pretend there are not people that won't stoop to such levels. 4 different women in different countries who don't know each other I believe them Where did you get 4 different countries from? I've seen 2 from the US and no idea where the other 2 are from. UK " Cheers. That was my bad, I read 4 different countries but it didn't say that at all. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police? Because she thought she was the only one....because he was a celebrity with a big fan base, because she felt ashamed.... Why is nobody is asking why he has a history of relations with young women? Why are we not asking why he couldn't keep his dick in his pants....why the predatory behaviours? Seems an awful lot of victim shaming going on
Does his supposed sex addiction explain his behaviour?
Nope
Would you expect an alcoholic to be in control of their consumption of alcohol?"What a stupid comparison.....And if someone was to commit a crime whilst inebriated then I'd expect conviction...so do you think a d*unk driver who kills someone should be held accountable for it? Should somebody who ignores the word 'no' because he's addicted to sex be unpunished, absolutely not...it negates everything the victim has gone through | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police? Because she thought she was the only one....because he was a celebrity with a big fan base, because she felt ashamed.... Why is nobody is asking why he has a history of relations with young women? Why are we not asking why he couldn't keep his dick in his pants....why the predatory behaviours? Seems an awful lot of victim shaming going on
Does his supposed sex addiction explain his behaviour?
Do we excuse/allow other types of addicts from criminal behaviour, e.g. if a drug addict steals to feed their habit? No, we don't.
If sex addiction can also lead to sexual assault, I think we need to rethink how we treat and report sex addiction. After all, people who have other pathological sexual behaviours (that we can't really elaborate on here) should therefore also be given leniency to have their crimes "explained", no?
I said explain his behaviour...not excuse it"Explain it to the victim, I am sure she will understand hey. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don’t particularly like or dislike Brand and if he is guilty of any of these allegations I hope he spends the rest of his days in prison. I missed the beginning of the programme so forgive me if I missed something but I didn’t see any actual evidence that he has committed any crimes. It was stories from anonymous alleged victims and another comedian with rumours. The lady in the US who alleged r@pe, for whom excerpts from a r@pe clinic were provided? And the second US-based lady who alleged he'd sexually assaulted her at his house and then threatened that she'd hear from lawyers, when they had to meet on the set of a film/programme? 3 other people apparently corroborated that to the programme makers (text on the screen). These were the ones that may have broken laws. The rest were unpleasant, creepy and highly distasteful, at best. His behaviour and words cannot be denied, e.g. the behaviour on Radio 2 towards a newsreader, and later a conversation on air with Savile. And then the Andrew Sachs incident. Whilst these behaviours might not constitute anything illegal, they are definitely symptomatic of a person who lacks an understanding of consent and decency. And these things are recorded for us all to listen back to. The two SA allegations should most definitely be reported to the police as well as another couple of events like exposing himself to the runners. Most of the show highlighted his unpleasantness, like not calling the students after a one night stand! That’s just a bit naive on their part. Apologies to the accuser but we omitted a third alleged assault, which was the alleged forcing of his penis down the throat of the 16yo and pinning her down and spitting in her mouth. The first allegation was r@pe, specifically. Forced penetration. " Yes, there were three. They should all be reported. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police? Because she thought she was the only one....because he was a celebrity with a big fan base, because she felt ashamed.... Why is nobody is asking why he has a history of relations with young women? Why are we not asking why he couldn't keep his dick in his pants....why the predatory behaviours? Seems an awful lot of victim shaming going on
Does his supposed sex addiction explain his behaviour?
Nope
Would you expect an alcoholic to be in control of their consumption of alcohol?
What a stupid comparison.....And if someone was to commit a crime whilst inebriated then I'd expect conviction...so do you think a d*unk driver who kills someone should be held accountable for it?
Should somebody who ignores the word 'no' because he's addicted to sex be unpunished, absolutely not...it negates everything the victim has gone through"I was directly addressing your question of why the predatory behaviours, nothing more. Explain and excuse aren't the same thing | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police? Because she thought she was the only one....because he was a celebrity with a big fan base, because she felt ashamed.... Why is nobody is asking why he has a history of relations with young women? Why are we not asking why he couldn't keep his dick in his pants....why the predatory behaviours? Seems an awful lot of victim shaming going on
Does his supposed sex addiction explain his behaviour?
Nope
Would you expect an alcoholic to be in control of their consumption of alcohol?
What a stupid comparison.....And if someone was to commit a crime whilst inebriated then I'd expect conviction...so do you think a d*unk driver who kills someone should be held accountable for it?
Should somebody who ignores the word 'no' because he's addicted to sex be unpunished, absolutely not...it negates everything the victim has gone through
I was directly addressing your question of why the predatory behaviours, nothing more. Explain and excuse aren't the same thing "And I answered you saying no it didn't. Why should it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ohhhh fuck me this is getting hilarious !!! Yet another man who speaks out about the disgusting corruption that we face on a daily basis that has now been charged with forced sex !! Can you not see the trend here ???? Which other man has?" I'm guessing Tate...  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police? Because she thought she was the only one....because he was a celebrity with a big fan base, because she felt ashamed.... Why is nobody is asking why he has a history of relations with young women? Why are we not asking why he couldn't keep his dick in his pants....why the predatory behaviours? Seems an awful lot of victim shaming going on
Does his supposed sex addiction explain his behaviour?
Nope
Would you expect an alcoholic to be in control of their consumption of alcohol?
What a stupid comparison.....And if someone was to commit a crime whilst inebriated then I'd expect conviction...so do you think a d*unk driver who kills someone should be held accountable for it?
Should somebody who ignores the word 'no' because he's addicted to sex be unpunished, absolutely not...it negates everything the victim has gone through
I was directly addressing your question of why the predatory behaviours, nothing more. Explain and excuse aren't the same thing
And I answered you saying no it didn't. Why should it"I wouldn't expect any addict to be in control of the very thing they're addicted to | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ohhhh fuck me this is getting hilarious !!! Yet another man who speaks out about the disgusting corruption that we face on a daily basis that has now been charged with forced sex !! Can you not see the trend here ???? Which other man has? I'm guessing Tate... "Interestingly, Mr Tate has sent some messages of support to Mr Brand. Apparently. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police? Because she thought she was the only one....because he was a celebrity with a big fan base, because she felt ashamed.... Why is nobody is asking why he has a history of relations with young women? Why are we not asking why he couldn't keep his dick in his pants....why the predatory behaviours? Seems an awful lot of victim shaming going on
Does his supposed sex addiction explain his behaviour?
Nope
Would you expect an alcoholic to be in control of their consumption of alcohol?
What a stupid comparison.....And if someone was to commit a crime whilst inebriated then I'd expect conviction...so do you think a d*unk driver who kills someone should be held accountable for it?
Should somebody who ignores the word 'no' because he's addicted to sex be unpunished, absolutely not...it negates everything the victim has gone through
I was directly addressing your question of why the predatory behaviours, nothing more. Explain and excuse aren't the same thing
And I answered you saying no it didn't. Why should it
I wouldn't expect any addict to be in control of the very thing they're addicted to "And that makes it OK? Right you are then. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" And that makes it OK? Right you are then. " Nowhere have I said that | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ohhhh fuck me this is getting hilarious !!! Yet another man who speaks out about the disgusting corruption that we face on a daily basis that has now been charged with forced sex !! Can you not see the trend here ???? Which other man has? I'm guessing Tate...
Interestingly, Mr Tate has sent some messages of support to Mr Brand. Apparently. "Predictable as night following day... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I fucking detest trial by social/media though. These are serious allegations and should be with the police, not a director. " Here here | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" And that makes it OK? Right you are then. Nowhere have I said that " That's the implication....You are excusing his behaviours on his addictions.... But I forget, this is what you do isn't it....Why are you singling my posts out? Ohhh I remember. You don't like being challenged on your posts do you | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police? The paper found them via hundreds of contacts and conversations with others Some people never come forward after being r*ped ...they keep it as a secret forever And some people lie about sexual assault. It happens. I've been witness to false accusations. Not everyone lies, but let's not pretend there are not people that won't stoop to such levels. 4 different women in different countries who don't know each other I believe them " And good for you. People believed my cousin's ex when she said he sexually assaulted her. She lied. There was proof she lied. The stigma for some people has stuck to him. High profile case here with chances of 5 minutes of fame and likely paid very nicely for their stories up for grabs during the investigation of this by "journalists" (not law enforcement). Genuine victim or greedy - both are just as likely and potentially as true as the other. I have no doubt that even if these 4 women are honest (and I'm not saying they actually aren't) there will be a number of women popping up over the next few weeks with made up stories to sell along side potential other victims. People lie. Men lie. Women lie. And there really isn't any boundaries that some won't fear crossing with their lies. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" And that makes it OK? Right you are then. Nowhere have I said that That's the implication....You are excusing his behaviours on his addictions.... But I forget, this is what you do isn't it....Why are you singling my posts out? Ohhh I remember. You don't like being challenged on your posts do you " I don't have an issue with it. I'm deliberately not commenting on what I think of his behaviours | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" And that makes it OK? Right you are then. Nowhere have I said that That's the implication....You are excusing his behaviours on his addictions.... But I forget, this is what you do isn't it....Why are you singling my posts out? Ohhh I remember. You don't like being challenged on your posts do you I don't have an issue with it. I'm deliberately not commenting on what I think of his behaviours " I never said you had an issue. I said you were singling out my posts. No, but you are excusing his behaviours on his addictions. That is clear | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" And that makes it OK? Right you are then. Nowhere have I said that That's the implication....You are excusing his behaviours on his addictions.... But I forget, this is what you do isn't it....Why are you singling my posts out? Ohhh I remember. You don't like being challenged on your posts do you I don't have an issue with it. I'm deliberately not commenting on what I think of his behaviours I never said you had an issue. I said you were singling out my posts. No, but you are excusing his behaviours on his addictions. That is clear" I may be wrong but that particular poster reiterated on multiple occasions that it wasn't an excuse, but may EXPLAIN his behaviour. Well actually she posed the question. Unless that was someone else. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police? The paper found them via hundreds of contacts and conversations with others Some people never come forward after being r*ped ...they keep it as a secret forever And some people lie about sexual assault. It happens. I've been witness to false accusations. Not everyone lies, but let's not pretend there are not people that won't stoop to such levels. 4 different women in different countries who don't know each other I believe them And good for you. People believed my cousin's ex when she said he sexually assaulted her. She lied. There was proof she lied. The stigma for some people has stuck to him. High profile case here with chances of 5 minutes of fame and likely paid very nicely for their stories up for grabs during the investigation of this by "journalists" (not law enforcement). Genuine victim or greedy - both are just as likely and potentially as true as the other. I have no doubt that even if these 4 women are honest (and I'm not saying they actually aren't) there will be a number of women popping up over the next few weeks with made up stories to sell along side potential other victims. People lie. Men lie. Women lie. And there really isn't any boundaries that some won't fear crossing with their lies. " Forgive me, but of course I don't know your cousin. I'm going to assume he was/is not on record as having deliberately made highly inappropriate/verbally abusive comments to/about women or openly stated certain things that then formed part of later accusations? What I'm suggesting is that all of the non-sexual assault things that Brand did on radio and TV in the early 2000s to 2010s, are contributing evidence of his character. The treatment of his female news colleague at Radio 2 was a particularly abhorrent example. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" And that makes it OK? Right you are then. Nowhere have I said that That's the implication....You are excusing his behaviours on his addictions.... But I forget, this is what you do isn't it....Why are you singling my posts out? Ohhh I remember. You don't like being challenged on your posts do you I don't have an issue with it. I'm deliberately not commenting on what I think of his behaviours I never said you had an issue. I said you were singling out my posts. No, but you are excusing his behaviours on his addictions. That is clear I may be wrong but that particular poster reiterated on multiple occasions that it wasn't an excuse, but may EXPLAIN his behaviour. Well actually she posed the question. Unless that was someone else." Explain or excuse, whichever, as I said it does not make it ok | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" And that makes it OK? Right you are then. Nowhere have I said that That's the implication....You are excusing his behaviours on his addictions.... But I forget, this is what you do isn't it....Why are you singling my posts out? Ohhh I remember. You don't like being challenged on your posts do you I don't have an issue with it. I'm deliberately not commenting on what I think of his behaviours I never said you had an issue. I said you were singling out my posts. No, but you are excusing his behaviours on his addictions. That is clear I may be wrong but that particular poster reiterated on multiple occasions that it wasn't an excuse, but may EXPLAIN his behaviour. Well actually she posed the question. Unless that was someone else. Explain or excuse, whichever, as I said it does not make it ok" No one has said it did make it OK. You've clearly got your bee in a bonnet with that particular poster because you're not reading what she's writing. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police? The paper found them via hundreds of contacts and conversations with others Some people never come forward after being r*ped ...they keep it as a secret forever And some people lie about sexual assault. It happens. I've been witness to false accusations. Not everyone lies, but let's not pretend there are not people that won't stoop to such levels. 4 different women in different countries who don't know each other I believe them And good for you. People believed my cousin's ex when she said he sexually assaulted her. She lied. There was proof she lied. The stigma for some people has stuck to him. High profile case here with chances of 5 minutes of fame and likely paid very nicely for their stories up for grabs during the investigation of this by "journalists" (not law enforcement). Genuine victim or greedy - both are just as likely and potentially as true as the other. I have no doubt that even if these 4 women are honest (and I'm not saying they actually aren't) there will be a number of women popping up over the next few weeks with made up stories to sell along side potential other victims. People lie. Men lie. Women lie. And there really isn't any boundaries that some won't fear crossing with their lies. Forgive me, but of course I don't know your cousin. I'm going to assume he was/is not on record as having deliberately made highly inappropriate/verbally abusive comments to/about women or openly stated certain things that then formed part of later accusations? What I'm suggesting is that all of the non-sexual assault things that Brand did on radio and TV in the early 2000s to 2010s, are contributing evidence of his character. The treatment of his female news colleague at Radio 2 was a particularly abhorrent example. " I am not defending his behaviour but without knowing the relationship he has with his colleague we can’t really comment. Look at some of the posts between regular posters on here. Worse things have been said and laughed at by all of us on here. The fact it was Jimmy Savile makes it seem worse knowing what we know now but Brand was probably in the dark on this too. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Having met him on several occasions he did behave in a way that he is always portraying a character and not genuinely himself. I personally found him polite and a cheerful guy I understand that could have been a front I genuinely don't know what to make of it tbh" An honest opinion especially since you met him | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" And that makes it OK? Right you are then. Nowhere have I said that That's the implication....You are excusing his behaviours on his addictions.... But I forget, this is what you do isn't it....Why are you singling my posts out? Ohhh I remember. You don't like being challenged on your posts do you I don't have an issue with it. I'm deliberately not commenting on what I think of his behaviours I never said you had an issue. I said you were singling out my posts. No, but you are excusing his behaviours on his addictions. That is clear I may be wrong but that particular poster reiterated on multiple occasions that it wasn't an excuse, but may EXPLAIN his behaviour. Well actually she posed the question. Unless that was someone else. Explain or excuse, whichever, as I said it does not make it ok No one has said it did make it OK. You've clearly got your bee in a bonnet with that particular poster because you're not reading what she's writing. " Think what you like. I am reading it and I disagree | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police? The paper found them via hundreds of contacts and conversations with others Some people never come forward after being r*ped ...they keep it as a secret forever And some people lie about sexual assault. It happens. I've been witness to false accusations. Not everyone lies, but let's not pretend there are not people that won't stoop to such levels. 4 different women in different countries who don't know each other I believe them And good for you. People believed my cousin's ex when she said he sexually assaulted her. She lied. There was proof she lied. The stigma for some people has stuck to him. High profile case here with chances of 5 minutes of fame and likely paid very nicely for their stories up for grabs during the investigation of this by "journalists" (not law enforcement). Genuine victim or greedy - both are just as likely and potentially as true as the other. I have no doubt that even if these 4 women are honest (and I'm not saying they actually aren't) there will be a number of women popping up over the next few weeks with made up stories to sell along side potential other victims. People lie. Men lie. Women lie. And there really isn't any boundaries that some won't fear crossing with their lies. Forgive me, but of course I don't know your cousin. I'm going to assume he was/is not on record as having deliberately made highly inappropriate/verbally abusive comments to/about women or openly stated certain things that then formed part of later accusations? What I'm suggesting is that all of the non-sexual assault things that Brand did on radio and TV in the early 2000s to 2010s, are contributing evidence of his character. The treatment of his female news colleague at Radio 2 was a particularly abhorrent example. I am not defending his behaviour but without knowing the relationship he has with his colleague we can’t really comment. Look at some of the posts between regular posters on here. Worse things have been said and laughed at by all of us on here. The fact it was Jimmy Savile makes it seem worse knowing what we know now but Brand was probably in the dark on this too." The female newsreader complained at the time and is reported to have been extremely unhappy about the way in which Brand spoke about her on (and off) air, on more than one occasion. It was not just the Savile conversation. And the accusations about Savile had been in the open for many years, apparently an "open secret" in certain quarters of the entertainment industry. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police? The paper found them via hundreds of contacts and conversations with others Some people never come forward after being r*ped ...they keep it as a secret forever And some people lie about sexual assault. It happens. I've been witness to false accusations. Not everyone lies, but let's not pretend there are not people that won't stoop to such levels. 4 different women in different countries who don't know each other I believe them And good for you. People believed my cousin's ex when she said he sexually assaulted her. She lied. There was proof she lied. The stigma for some people has stuck to him. High profile case here with chances of 5 minutes of fame and likely paid very nicely for their stories up for grabs during the investigation of this by "journalists" (not law enforcement). Genuine victim or greedy - both are just as likely and potentially as true as the other. I have no doubt that even if these 4 women are honest (and I'm not saying they actually aren't) there will be a number of women popping up over the next few weeks with made up stories to sell along side potential other victims. People lie. Men lie. Women lie. And there really isn't any boundaries that some won't fear crossing with their lies. Forgive me, but of course I don't know your cousin. I'm going to assume he was/is not on record as having deliberately made highly inappropriate/verbally abusive comments to/about women or openly stated certain things that then formed part of later accusations? What I'm suggesting is that all of the non-sexual assault things that Brand did on radio and TV in the early 2000s to 2010s, are contributing evidence of his character. The treatment of his female news colleague at Radio 2 was a particularly abhorrent example. I am not defending his behaviour but without knowing the relationship he has with his colleague we can’t really comment. Look at some of the posts between regular posters on here. Worse things have been said and laughed at by all of us on here. The fact it was Jimmy Savile makes it seem worse knowing what we know now but Brand was probably in the dark on this too. The female newsreader complained at the time and is reported to have been extremely unhappy about the way in which Brand spoke about her on (and off) air, on more than one occasion. It was not just the Savile conversation. And the accusations about Savile had been in the open for many years, apparently an "open secret" in certain quarters of the entertainment industry. " We will never know if Brand and whoever his cohost was at the time knew about Savile. He talked down to the newsreader, did she say he was sexually inappropriate? As I said earlier if he’s guilty I hope he rots in prison but I’d like to see some actual evidence before I condemn him. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police? The paper found them via hundreds of contacts and conversations with others Some people never come forward after being r*ped ...they keep it as a secret forever And some people lie about sexual assault. It happens. I've been witness to false accusations. Not everyone lies, but let's not pretend there are not people that won't stoop to such levels. 4 different women in different countries who don't know each other I believe them And good for you. People believed my cousin's ex when she said he sexually assaulted her. She lied. There was proof she lied. The stigma for some people has stuck to him. High profile case here with chances of 5 minutes of fame and likely paid very nicely for their stories up for grabs during the investigation of this by "journalists" (not law enforcement). Genuine victim or greedy - both are just as likely and potentially as true as the other. I have no doubt that even if these 4 women are honest (and I'm not saying they actually aren't) there will be a number of women popping up over the next few weeks with made up stories to sell along side potential other victims. People lie. Men lie. Women lie. And there really isn't any boundaries that some won't fear crossing with their lies. Forgive me, but of course I don't know your cousin. I'm going to assume he was/is not on record as having deliberately made highly inappropriate/verbally abusive comments to/about women or openly stated certain things that then formed part of later accusations? What I'm suggesting is that all of the non-sexual assault things that Brand did on radio and TV in the early 2000s to 2010s, are contributing evidence of his character. The treatment of his female news colleague at Radio 2 was a particularly abhorrent example. I am not defending his behaviour but without knowing the relationship he has with his colleague we can’t really comment. Look at some of the posts between regular posters on here. Worse things have been said and laughed at by all of us on here. The fact it was Jimmy Savile makes it seem worse knowing what we know now but Brand was probably in the dark on this too. The female newsreader complained at the time and is reported to have been extremely unhappy about the way in which Brand spoke about her on (and off) air, on more than one occasion. It was not just the Savile conversation. And the accusations about Savile had been in the open for many years, apparently an "open secret" in certain quarters of the entertainment industry. We will never know if Brand and whoever his cohost was at the time knew about Savile. He talked down to the newsreader, did she say he was sexually inappropriate? As I said earlier if he’s guilty I hope he rots in prison but I’d like to see some actual evidence before I condemn him. " Re: the newsreader, the Ch4 programme played clips from Radio 2 where Brand made comments about the newsreader, about her sexual attraction, her appearance, that she was "erotic" and all sorts of other things. The programme then stated she had complained. A further audio clip of Brand included him saying (on air) that producers had asked him to stop making comments because the newsreader was upset but he doubled down and carried on. This was all broadcast on Radio 2 at the time and audio clips played on Ch4 this evening. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not a fan but why this woman have waited over 10yrs to come forward? Went to the papers before the police? The paper found them via hundreds of contacts and conversations with others Some people never come forward after being r*ped ...they keep it as a secret forever And some people lie about sexual assault. It happens. I've been witness to false accusations. Not everyone lies, but let's not pretend there are not people that won't stoop to such levels. 4 different women in different countries who don't know each other I believe them And good for you. People believed my cousin's ex when she said he sexually assaulted her. She lied. There was proof she lied. The stigma for some people has stuck to him. High profile case here with chances of 5 minutes of fame and likely paid very nicely for their stories up for grabs during the investigation of this by "journalists" (not law enforcement). Genuine victim or greedy - both are just as likely and potentially as true as the other. I have no doubt that even if these 4 women are honest (and I'm not saying they actually aren't) there will be a number of women popping up over the next few weeks with made up stories to sell along side potential other victims. People lie. Men lie. Women lie. And there really isn't any boundaries that some won't fear crossing with their lies. Forgive me, but of course I don't know your cousin. I'm going to assume he was/is not on record as having deliberately made highly inappropriate/verbally abusive comments to/about women or openly stated certain things that then formed part of later accusations? What I'm suggesting is that all of the non-sexual assault things that Brand did on radio and TV in the early 2000s to 2010s, are contributing evidence of his character. The treatment of his female news colleague at Radio 2 was a particularly abhorrent example. I am not defending his behaviour but without knowing the relationship he has with his colleague we can’t really comment. Look at some of the posts between regular posters on here. Worse things have been said and laughed at by all of us on here. The fact it was Jimmy Savile makes it seem worse knowing what we know now but Brand was probably in the dark on this too. The female newsreader complained at the time and is reported to have been extremely unhappy about the way in which Brand spoke about her on (and off) air, on more than one occasion. It was not just the Savile conversation. And the accusations about Savile had been in the open for many years, apparently an "open secret" in certain quarters of the entertainment industry. We will never know if Brand and whoever his cohost was at the time knew about Savile. He talked down to the newsreader, did she say he was sexually inappropriate? As I said earlier if he’s guilty I hope he rots in prison but I’d like to see some actual evidence before I condemn him. Re: the newsreader, the Ch4 programme played clips from Radio 2 where Brand made comments about the newsreader, about her sexual attraction, her appearance, that she was "erotic" and all sorts of other things. The programme then stated she had complained. A further audio clip of Brand included him saying (on air) that producers had asked him to stop making comments because the newsreader was upset but he doubled down and carried on. This was all broadcast on Radio 2 at the time and audio clips played on Ch4 this evening. " That must have been before I started watching. I was talking about an interview on tv. I’ll watch the full thing tomorrow night and I might change the way I feel on it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"From The Sunday Times In May 2007, Brand called Jimmy Savile, who suggested the pair could meet if Brand brought along a sister. Brand doesn’t have a sister, so instead offered to bring a female employee — agreeing, on Savile’s request, that she should be naked. “I’ve got a personal assistant,” he said. “And part of her job description is that anyone I demand she greet, meet, massages, she has to do it. She’s very attractive, Jimmy.” This was four years before Savile’s death and five years before details of the Jim’ll Fix It presenter’s crimes were exposed." Savile was being accused of sexual crimes at the time they were happening. They were described by some as an "open secret" in broadcasting. He was questioned about crimes in 2007. The Brand radio show was from this same period. https://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/oct/01/jimmy-savile-interviewed-police-sexual-allegations | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Trial by media in another case that will never see a court room. People already have him fitted for his prison clothes, so much for innocent until proven guilty by a jury of your peers eh "Thank you!! People are so naive | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
