Russell Brand

[smurfchops]

Why is all this suddenly coming out years later? 

[Ellipsis]

Some of the allegations are very specific, including text message conversations with dates and times. There is plenty for the police to look into. That said, one of the words he supposedly wrote is "favorite" ... would he have spelled it that way? 🤔

[Ellipsis]

Here's part of one of the conversations. This image is from the Times article that was behind a paywall - the image itself isn't behind the paywall:

https://nuk-tnl-deck-prod-static.s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/uploads/e2e93e91caec0e2c2c0dc6bb47ee85ac.png

 

[brainiac]

He also wrote 'behavior', which seems odd

[Ellipsis]

Yeah, sorry, I mis-remembered "favorite", it was "behavior" ...

[andy-hughes]

This trial-by-media / public oipinion is really unpleasant.

 

This morning, the Mail has waded in with page after page of high moral dudgeon, all of it conveniently forgetting that Mr Brand has yet to be charged with any offence, much less tried and convicted.

 

Nadine Dorries - the Mail's latest pet Tory rotweiler is virtually catatonic with outrage that Mr Brand's wife is daring to stay with him in the light of these accusations - how could she??????

 

Perhaps, Ms Dorries, it is because she is showing the level of loyalty any innocent man is entitled to expect from his wife.

 

But since loyalty is not a concept with which you are overly familiar, having ditched your constituents, and party, in a snit over your supposedly promised and deerved absent peerage, that's a notion that is beyond your simple comprehension.

[andy-hughes]

roadman - // but dont let someone make you think theyre innocent because they convince you not to trust the media 😂 //

OK, I'll stick with the alternative then, I'll think he's innocent because he hasn't been charged with anything yet, much less tried and convicted.

 

[nicebloke1]

RB not someone that I'm crazy about but, if innocent until proven guilty, or even charged, why destroy his income and  cancel his shows at this point in time?

[roadman]

andy hughes so you think the women are liars then because that is what you imply by saying he is possibly innocent 

[youngmafbog]

I see he has been tried and hung by some on here.  As most will know by know I totally abhor trial by media and some of the comments show it 'he looks it'.

Brand IMHO is scum, but that doesnt automatically make him guilty.  A court needs to do that.

[youngmafbog]

//andy hughes so you think the women are liars then because that is what you imply by saying he is possibly innocent //

 

What utter garbage and a twisted way of thinking.

[roadman]

Pretty basic if you ask me he is innocent and the accusers are liars or he is guilty and they are not liars 

do you not get that this is about them and not brand

[andy-hughes]

roadman - // andy hughes so you think the women are liars then because that is what you imply by saying he is possibly innocent  //

 

First of all, I am not 'saying he is possibly innocent ', I am saying he is innocent, and remains so until tried and convicted under law.

 

As to your curious assumption that because I state Mr Brand's innnocence, I am equally stating that his alleged accusers are liars, that is simply not a logical conclusion.

No-one knows anything yet, no charges have been brought, and Mr Brand's innocence is enshrined in law until he is proven otherwise.

Try this with your 'logic' - mice are grey, elephants are grey, therefore mice and elephants are the same thing.

[naomi24]

roadman. believe it or not some women do lie about having been attacked.  I'm not saying these women are lying - I don't know - but it happens - and not necessariy infrequently.  I would hate to be a man in this day and age.

 

That said, I've never liked Russell Brand - I think he's an egotisitcal, ill-mannered creep - but whether or not he's charged and found guilty of rape remains to be seen.

[andy-hughes]

roadman - //

Pretty basic if you ask me he is innocent and the accusers are liars or he is guilty and they are not liars //

No argument, there, but finding out which is which involves due legal process, and you cannot assume the guilt of either side without it.

// do you not get that this is about them and not brand //

No, it's about both.

[roadman]

he is guilty or innocent from the moment of the crime or accusation because he did it or he didnt do it there is no smoke with out fire so knowingly or not youre saying theyre making false smoke or you think there is credability by claiming he is innocent when you dont know if he is or not you just said above he is innocent because a judge hasnt ruled it well that is a rather PC world you live in and not one that i do i have my own opinions im not wet  

[Ringlet]

Why shouldn't it come out years later?  Better to find out at a later date than never find out at all. 

[andy-hughes]

roadman - // he is guilty or innocent from the moment of the crime or accusation because he did it or he didnt do it //

Yes thank you, I am aware of that.

// there is no smoke with out fire so knowingly or not youre saying theyre making false smoke or you think there is credability by claiming he is innocent when you dont know if he is or not you just said above he is innocent because a judge hasnt ruled it well that is a rather PC world you live in and not one that i do i have my own opinions im not wet  //

Confusing, but I am not 'wet' either - and the rule of law does not operate either on the 'no smoke without fire' metaphor, or, thankfully, your personal opinions.

[roadman]

you said you think he is innocent andy hughes at 1233 you are taking a stance before it has been through trial 👀 

[pastafreak]

Roadman...have you never heard the term "innocent until proven guilty "? I'd have thought it's a basic human right.

https://ministryofinjustice.co.uk/innocent-until-proven-guilty/#:~:text=The%20right%20to%20a%20fair%20trial%20includes%20the%20right%20to,accused%20beyond%20a%20reasonable%20doubt.