Russell Brand accused of rape and sexual assault

[angrysoba]

Brand has always been an idiot conspiracy theorist and contrarian.

His "politics" such as they are, have always been stupid and puerile.

He became famous by telling people not to vote because voting makes no difference. This was during the Conservative-led government with their policy of austerity.

Voter suppression is often music to the ears of conservatives, so they must have very much appreciated him telling younger (and presumably more liberal/left-wing) people not to vote and leaving it to an older and presumably more conservative electorate to decide who runs the country.

And after the following election, the Conservative Party went forward with their promises of a vote on Brexit. People voted to leave. So the idea that voting makes no difference was falsified at least twice while this idiot blathered on self-importantly.

In this thread, it turns out that Brand was "open-minded" on 9/11.

There is a quote about Brand from David Aaronovitch...

Quote:

One night, two weeks ago, the comedian and revolutionary Russell Brand attended a Guardian event where an Oxford-educated man with a Welsh name (Owen Jones) asked him nothing, and where he was loved-up by a simpering audience ("I've not got the emotional maturity not to fall in love with you," he was told by India from Brighton), and then went post-haste to the BBC Newsnight studio where he was asked gentle questions by an Oxford-educated man with a Welsh name, and shown a graph.
Perhaps the contrast between the two events was too sudden for a smooth adjustment. Brand was rude and surly. "This is the stuff people like you use to confuse people like us," he told the interviewer, Evan Davis, about the graph, and then added a complaint about "an Oxford-educated man being rude to me, an autodidact".
Having read his new book — which is uniquely worthless both as an exercise in writing and as a manifesto for social change — I feel able to dismiss Brand's new self-ascriptions, both as self-taught man and revolutionary. He is neither. An autodidact is not someone who, as Brand does, summons up a convenient line from Goethe cut and pasted from the endless shallows of Wikiquote (or, more probably, gets someone else to do it). An autodidact is, rather, someone who learns German and reads the original — as my father did. As to revolutionaries — successful ones tend, unlike Brand, to have plans and strategies, which is what makes them formidable, if no fun at orgies.
Far from being an autodidact, Brand creates a wall of sound and words designed to drown out the possibility of thought. He follows nothing through, sticks with nothing, but flits like a medallioned moth between sensations. Although he is certainly bright enough to learn difficult things in a rigorous way, he is nowhere near disciplined enough to do it. So you have to describe him as self-dumbed-down. He is, if you like, auto-plumbic.

Apparently in his book....

Quote:

Brand believes in God. Or a god. And it's in a chapter based on a Brandian exegesis of the Lord's Prayer, that the reader can find both the best and worst of the author. There's an arresting and genuinely well-written passage about his feelings about taking two young women home, partying with them in his Jacuzzi and then discovering himself having sex with them. "Like perfumed and gloss vultures," he writes, "they peck my carcass and a petit mort is insufficient; I am like Frankenstein here, assembled from boneyard parts." I actually began to feel sorry for his alienation, until I remembered what it was he was actually describing. Then I started to worry for the vultures.
And then he adds, appallingly, "I don't want to be led back to that. I want to be delivered from evil. For thine is the kingdom, the power and the glory, for ever and ever, Amen." Psalm 23 would have been more appropriate: what to do when your rod and your staff comfort you no longer.

The book was written after the time that has been described in the recent allegations.

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by Orphia Nay

I had to look up Dave Rubin too (he seems nice /s )

Notice how many people fail at comedy and become conspiracy theorist contrarians!

Rubin, very unfunny right-wing loony conspiracy theorist.
Jimmy ******* Dore.
Joe Rogan.
Those guys on Triggernometry, etc...

[Vixen]

'In Plain Sight' is an apposite description of how Brand compares to Savile. Both joked about their pervy natures in public broadcasts as though their creepy references were lovable peccadilloes. Yet because 'comedians' and 'characters' are supposed to be a little bit risqué, people laugh along with them and that is how they get away with it. Savile literally abused hundreds of people, many of them minors, or people stricken in hospital beds, but he never hid it. There was one memorable occasion when he told Selina Scott (iirc) that he'd like to get into a tent with her. How everybody laughed! Including Selina herself. In retrospect, we see how incredibly creepy he was. ight under our nose. Likewise Brand. OK, he made sure they were all 'over 16' but he brought his perviness into the workplace and bragged about his conquests to all and sundry. In many ways he is just like Savile.

[zooterkin]

The Sun has the story on their front page (I saw it at the MOT garage), and two of the headlines call out the BBC, despite working there being only part of his career. Standard practice for a Murdoch organ to attack the Beeb. Channel 4 are mentioned in the article, of course, but not so prominently.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Orphia Nay

I've heard Brand referred to as "Andrew Tate with hair".



What's IDW?

His public persona at least recently has been as a family man and he has supported charities dealing with women specific issues.

[Andy_Ross]

Originally Posted by zooterkin

The Sun has the story on their front page (I saw it at the MOT garage), and two of the headlines call out the BBC, despite working there being only part of his career. Standard practice for a Murdoch organ to attack the Beeb. Channel 4 are mentioned in the article, of course, but not so prominently.

"the Labour party and BBC have some very serious questions to answer about their working with Russell Brand" say the right media who have leapt to defend him, proclaim him innocent and offer him a job.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Vixen

'In Plain Sight' is an apposite description of how Brand compares to Savile. Both joked about their pervy natures in public broadcasts as though their creepy references were lovable peccadilloes. Yet because 'comedians' and 'characters' are supposed to be a little bit risqué, people laugh along with them and that is how they get away with it. Savile literally abused hundreds of people, many of them minors, or people stricken in hospital beds, but he never hid it. There was one memorable occasion when he told Selina Scott (iirc) that he'd like to get into a tent with her. How everybody laughed! Including Selina herself. In retrospect, we see how incredibly creepy he was. ight under our nose. Likewise Brand. OK, he made sure they were all 'over 16' but he brought his perviness into the workplace and bragged about his conquests to all and sundry. In many ways he is just like Savile.

I don't know anyone who didn't find him creepy before his crimes were revealed.

[Orphia Nay]

Originally Posted by Darat

His public persona at least recently has been as a family man and he has supported charities dealing with women specific issues.

I believe the women's charity, or one of them, has now cut ties with him.

[Nessie]

I would prefer trial by police investigating and in court, than a trial by the media.

Trial by media tends to happen only for selected complainers, is affected by factors such as is the person they are complaining about famous?

[Orphia Nay]

Originally Posted by Andy_Ross

"the Labour party and BBC have some very serious questions to answer about their working with Russell Brand" say the right media who have leapt to defend him, proclaim him innocent and offer him a job.

"He's innocent, but the left are bad for enabling his crimes".

[a_unique_person]

Quote:

https://www.theage.com.au/culture/ce...18-p5e5hz.html


In a 2006 interview with the UK publication The Mirror, Australian singer Dannii Minogue recalled an appearance with the comedian on his MTV chatshow, 1 Leicester Square.


Minogue had been booked on the show to discuss the release of her album The Hits & Beyond.
“He is completely crazy and a bit of a vile predator. I certainly don’t think he has cured his sex addiction, that’s for sure. He wouldn’t take no for an answer,” she said.
“He’s obviously very intelligent – but he wears more make-up than I do. Normally, I love guys with eyeliner on. It can be very sexy, but not on Russell. Absolutely no way, never, he’s just not my type.
“Throughout the whole interview, he kept making shocking remarks that I can’t even repeat. Just uttering the words would make me blush.”


Meanwhile, in a resurfaced Vogue interview from 2013, Brand’s ex-wife Katy Perry described his behaviour as “very controlling”, alluding to what she described as a “real truth” about Brand that she would not disclose.

It's been an open secret for many years now.

[Andy_Ross]

Cold War Steve.

Uncle Jimmy

A 'Savile Row' tracksuit Snigger

[Darat]

Originally Posted by a_unique_person

It's been an open secret for many years now.

Has it? By that I mean that he raped someone and sexually assaulted others.

Wasn't much to watch on telly last night so we watched the documentary. There were claims made that I knew were untrue, for example the claim about what was in his employment contract, and when I know false claims are being made it never sits well with me when I'm trying to make my mind up about the other claims made.

From the documentary it sounds like he was known at the time to be promiscuous, and his sexual preferences were for more aggressive sex than perhaps "the norm" and he didn't have set boundaries neither professionally nor personally. It didn't sound as if people knew he was sexually assaulting women and that he raped one woman at the time.

From what was in the documentary I would say the claim that he raped at least one woman seems to be true and that he sexually assaulted others.

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by Andy_Ross

Cold War Steve.

Uncle Jimmy

A 'Savile Row' tracksuit Snigger

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...ictureid=13738

Bad news if you know who all of the people in the photograph are. I think the only one I am not sure about is the one behind Coast Guy.

ETA: Is it Marianne Williamson or Sam Sorbo?

[Andy_Ross]

Originally Posted by Darat

There were claims made that I knew were untrue, for example the claim about what was in his employment contract, and when I know false claims are being made it never sits well with me when I'm trying to make my mind up about the other claims made.

You're seen his contract?

[bluesjnr]

Originally Posted by Andy_Ross

You're seen his contract?

I'm betting he's either read the initial Times article which confirms the specific allegation as untrue or it was mentioned in the documentary (I haven't seen it).

Quote:

Endemol said they have reviewed the contract and Brand did not have a clause pertaining to sexual relationships.

Just so you're on the the right track. The allegation made re the contract has been confirmed, by those who undertook the investigation, to be untrue.

[dann]

Russell Brand accuser calls his response to allegations ‘insulting’ (TheGuardian, Sep 18, 2023)

[Vixen]

OMG Have you seen the state of Ron Brand, Russell's father? Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.

He's saying we should be worrying about immigration LOL and the cost of living crisis, not about his poxy son.

[Matthew Best]

Originally Posted by Darat

There were claims made that I knew were untrue, for example the claim about what was in his employment contract, and when I know false claims are being made it never sits well with me when I'm trying to make my mind up about the other claims made.

One of the journalists who did the investigation into Brand was also responsible for this investigation:

https://bylinetimes.com/2020/02/25/t...ail-on-sunday/

So the writer wrote a defamatory article, which she knew to be false, which then caused her employers to lose a libel case and pay substantial damages. The victim of the Daily Mail's lies in the above case, Danielle Bennett, is all over Twitter pointing this out. I have some sympathy - if I knew a journalist had lied about me, then I'd not be very inclined to believe anything they said ever again. She is not saying this proves Brand is innocent, she's just saying that it behooves the press not to employ journalists who've been proved to have lied before when conducting a serious and important investigation like this one.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Andy_Ross

You're seen his contract?

Didn't need to, the claims made about it would not have been legal in the UK so know it would not have made it through any legal review, and his contract being from the company it was would have been through legal review of some kind.

[Nessie]

My father has strangely taken an interest in the case. In our daily phone call, he read extracts from Brand's My Book Wook, where he describes spitting on one woman and acts of coercive control.

This comes over as another Jimmy Saville, hiding in plain sight.

[ohms]

The Met Police have received a report of an alleged sexual assault concerning Brand:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-66843297

[TragicMonkey]

Originally Posted by Darat

I don't know anyone who didn't find him creepy before his crimes were revealed.

Right? I've only seen him occasionally, on things like Big Fat Quiz of the Year, and he always struck me as creepy. Something about his eyes, they dart around and he seems to blink less frequently than most. I'm normally not judgmental of character based on appearances but if you're in a room with Jimmy Carr and you are the one who looks weirdly unnatural there is something going on.

[Andy_Ross]

Sean Lock said of him years ago

“Probably the reason I hate him so much is because I’m a Dad and I’ve got this fear that one day my daughters will bring something like that home”

Brand was dropped from Comedy Central's Roast Battle in 2018 after Katherine Ryan alleged he was a sexual predator on-camera.

https://deadline.com/2023/09/russell...an-1235549112/

[Garrison]

Well it seems that someone has finally gone to the police, you know the people who have the power to investigate crimes unlike the BBC:
Russell Brand: Met Police receive report of alleged sexual assault in 2003

[Thermal]

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

Right? I've only seen him occasionally, on things like Big Fat Quiz of the Year, and he always struck me as creepy. Something about his eyes, they dart around and he seems to blink less frequently than most. I'm normally not judgmental of character based on appearances but if you're in a room with Jimmy Carr and you are the one who looks weirdly unnatural there is something going on.

And you can always see the whites around his unblinking eyes, which I associate with those who don't prefer Pepsi.

[theprestige]

"Our character assassination is going quite well!"

"Shouldn't the police be involved in these criminal allegations?"

"Why?"

[Nick Terry]

Zoe Williams has a good reflection on what changed in the UK media culture between the 1990s and 2000s, and thus created the environment for Brand's rise.
https://www.theguardian.com/culture/...bloid-misogyny

[IsThisTheLife]

So slow on the uptake here, it's obvious what's been going on;

as soon as hashtag MeToo took off Brand knew his disgusting sex crimes were going to be revealed to the world sooner or later by some brave woman or other, hence his clever, years-long strategy of cultivating a fan-base of "alt-right" misogynists to support him.

Unsurprisingly, the same neo-nazis supporting Brand are espousing silly conspiracy theories about a corporate media smear campaign.

[theprestige]

On that note, I'm now provisionally Team Brand.

Also I have no idea who Sean Lock is, but he sounds like a jerk.

[IsThisTheLife]

Something of a conundrum for Brand.

Inevitably many of his brave victims will now feel safe bringing complaints to the attention of the police, and presumably the latter will be compelled to investigate them.

So if he decides to bring civil suits against ... the entire corporate media, it will be under the shadow of actual criminal investigations of the allegations he says are lies.

I'd say he's *****d, mission accomplished.

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by theprestige

On that note, I'm now provisionally Team Brand.

Also I have no idea who Sean Lock is, but he sounds like a jerk.

My own take was that this should be handled by the police.

That said, there is at least one allegation that comes across as straight-up rape, and the text messages after seem to imply this too.

Quote:

They then met again in the early hours of the morning of July 1, when she arrived at his house after he had pleaded with her to come over.
“When I walked in — the door was unlocked and I just walked in,” Nadia says. “He comes running out of the bedroom naked. And I’m kind of taken aback. I’ve got a bag on my shoulder, a little dress and a coat on top.”
Nadia says Brand took her to a wall and kissed her and made a comment, something along the lines of: “I’ll keep you safe.” He then told her that “a friend” was already in the bedroom and that he wanted her to join them, according to Nadia.
“I’m like, no, that’s not happening, I don’t care, that’s not happening, we’re not doing that,” she says. “I tried to get away from him and I slipped away from the wall. And then I went to another wall that had a painting on it. A huge painting. And my bag got actually stuck underneath that, and it’s still on my arm. And at this point he’s grabbing at my underwear, pulling it to the side.”
Nadia alleges that she told Brand to get off her and that she wanted to leave, but he carried on. “I’m stuck underneath the painting and he’s pushing up against me,” she says. “He’s a lot taller than me. And he has that glazed look in his eye again. And I can’t move. And I told him, ‘Get off, get off.’” Nadia claims that Brand pushed her up against the wall and raped her, without a condom.
Brand finally finished and she says she pushed him away.
“And then he blocks the door that I’ve come into because he doesn’t want me going,” Nadia says. “He’s like, ‘Are you OK?’ I’m like, ‘No I’m not OK, you need to get away from me.’ And he’s like, ‘Let’s calm down.’”
Nadia says that Brand eventually stepped away from the door he had been blocking after Nadia told him she wanted to use the bathroom.
“I ran out and I jumped in my car — thank God I didn’t park in his driveway — and booked it out of there,” she says. “That was it. I sat on the road a little bit longer. I was in a daze.”
At 3.29am, Brand sent Nadia a text message. He wrote: “I’m sorry. That was crazy and selfish. I hope you can forgive me, I know that you’re a lovely person. X.” He tried phoning her at 3.51am, but the call went unanswered.

Nadia says she was up most of the night. She did not reply to Brand’s text until 10.59am. She wrote that he had taken advantage of her and “scared the **** out of me”. She wrote in her text to Brand: “Do you know how scary [you are] when that glaze look comes over. When a girl say[s] NO it means no. Do I have to go and get myself tested?”
Brand replied that he was “very sorry” and wrote: “You don’t need to get tested. I will make this up to you somehow with live [sic] and kindness. Not my original idea which was more sex. You’ve been lovely to me and I’m embarrassed by my behaviour. Sorry. X.”
The US phone number that Brand used to send the messages has been verified by multiple sources.
Nadia, meanwhile, had told a close friend what had happened and she took her to the Rape Treatment Center (RTC) at UCLA Santa Monica Medical Center that same day.
She has shared a full copy of her treatment records, which state that she provided her underwear and other samples as evidence, which were frozen. An officer from the Los Angeles Police Department was alerted by the centre, according to the notes, but she chose not to make a police report — saying to the centre she “didn’t think my words would mean anything up against his”. The notes also state that “she was worried that, if her assailant’s name is somehow released, then her name will be dragged through the dirt”.

So, I am provisionally on the side of the person making the allegation.

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by IsThisTheLife

So slow on the uptake here, it's obvious what's been going on;

as soon as hashtag MeToo took off Brand knew his disgusting sex crimes were going to be revealed to the world sooner or later by some brave woman or other, hence his clever, years-long strategy of cultivating a fan-base of "alt-right" misogynists to support him.

Unsurprisingly, the same neo-nazis supporting Brand are espousing silly conspiracy theories about a corporate media smear campaign.

Originally Posted by IsThisTheLife

Something of a conundrum for Brand.

Inevitably many of his brave victims will now feel safe bringing complaints to the attention of the police, and presumably the latter will be compelled to investigate them.

So if he decides to bring civil suits against ... the entire corporate media, it will be under the shadow of actual criminal investigations of the allegations he says are lies.

I'd say he's *****d, mission accomplished.

Originally Posted by IsThisTheLife

Alicia (name changed for her safety) told C4;

"I never told anyone about his anally raping me with a fifteen inch black rubber c*ck in 2007, but then I read that he's accusing the pharmaceutical corporations of wrong-doing and I knew I had to speak up".

Oh, you know women, mate. These "brave" ladies with their claims of being "raped". Bunch of liars, the lot of them, right?

Also, I am assuming she just went to the Rape Centre so that she could have some dirt on poor Russell in case Big Pharma wanted to pay her some money later. Oh, and got Brand to effectively admit to it in messages to her as well. That is so typical of women right?!

Yeah, Big Pharma was playing the long-game here.

[Puppycow]

Originally Posted by Vixen

The TIMES article, which is behind a paywall can be read here in the archives:

https://archive.ph/NwmVQ

He reminds me of Charles Manson. They could be twins.

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by Puppycow

He reminds me of Charles Manson. They could be twins.

I don't think they could.

Your link says, "Charles Milles Manson (né Maddox; November 12, 1934"

and it seems Brand was born "Russell Edward Brand[2] (born 4 June 1975)" so not only do they have different birthdays, they were born more than forty years apart.

[Puppycow]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

I don't think they could.

Your link says, "Charles Milles Manson (né Maddox; November 12, 1934"

and it seems Brand was born "Russell Edward Brand[2] (born 4 June 1975)" so not only do they have different birthdays, they were born more than forty years apart.

Of course I didn't mean literally twins. But thanks for pointing that out in case anyone was confused.

[Puppycow]

Originally Posted by IsThisTheLife

Alicia (name changed for her safety) told C4;

Edited by sarge:

removed moderated content

.

Is that a real quote? If it is genuine, it raises some questions in my mind.

The Times article mentioned something similar, but not a direct quote:

Quote:

All said they felt ready to speak only after being approached by reporters. Several said they felt compelled to do so given Brand’s newfound prominence as an online wellness influencer, with millions of followers on YouTube and other sites.

I wasn't aware that he is a "wellness influencer" these days, but it seems like they are suggesting that the necessity of reporting rape, sexual assault or the like is contingent on the fact that he is now a "wellness influencer"?

Doesn't mean they are lying, of course. But it does suggest that some other factor than the act itself is what's motivating them to come forward (to the extent they are). They didn't exactly "come forward", rather they were approached by reporters and for the most part were only willing to speak about it on condition of anonymity.

[Orphia Nay]

Originally Posted by Puppycow

Is that a real quote? If it is genuine, it raises some questions in my mind.

The Times article mentioned something similar, but not a direct quote:



I wasn't aware that he is a "wellness influencer" these days, but it seems like they are suggesting that the necessity of reporting rape, sexual assault or the like is contingent on the fact that he is now a "wellness influencer"?

Doesn't mean they are lying, of course. But it does suggest that some other factor than the act itself is what's motivating them to come forward (to the extent they are). They didn't exactly "come forward", rather they were approached by reporters and for the most part were only willing to speak about it on condition of anonymity.

It's not a real quote.

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by Puppycow

Of course I didn't mean literally twins. But thanks for pointing that out in case anyone was confused.

Sorry. I was being mischievous.

[Brainster]

Originally Posted by Puppycow

I wasn't aware that he is a "wellness influencer" these days, but it seems like they are suggesting that the necessity of reporting rape, sexual assault or the like is contingent on the fact that he is now a "wellness influencer"?

I noticed that part too and it doesn't make much sense; "newfound prominence" for a guy who has hosted the MTV VMAs and appeared in a fair number of major motion pictures?

It sounds a bit more like whoever pushed the story to the Beeb used that reason to convince the women to come forward.

That said, I can't help agreeing with those who find Brand several standard deviations above the mean for creepy.