Russell Brand

Brand has committed numerous sexual assaults and rapes

1696837861552.png
 
California law - All forms of sexual assault are considered rape.
Any penetration, no matter how slight, is rape.
The FBI and DOJ also use these definitions.
 
Any penetration without consent presumably. Consent is the key issue. For acquittal it needs to be shown that the defendant had the subjective belief that the other person was consenting, whether they in fact were or not. For conviction it needs to be shown that the defendant believed that the other person was not consenting. It is the belief of the defendant that is the issue. And the standard of proof in the UK is beyond reasonable doubt so it is a high bar.
 
With regard to the latest 'shocking revelation' (really?) that Brand (for about 2 seconds) simulated a bj with a woman sitting in the audience, the crucial factor would be whether the prosecution could demonstrate mens rea, i.e. 'criminal intent'. It was maybe a clumsy action on his part as a performer, but was his intention criminal? Or was he just trying to make the audience laugh? Would be very surprised if the CPS would ever consider such behaviour as meeting the threshold for prosecution. Technically if someone simulates masturbation in front of you without your consent, that is sexual assault - but an audience member might find themselves seeing all sorts of things on stage during a live show to which they haven't necessarily consented. Not something the courts would want to get involved in.
 
Last edited:
California law -
The essential determination of whether an offender is guilty of rape lies in the outrage to the victim’s person and the feelings of the victim of the rape.
 
Redacted said:
California law -
The essential determination of whether an offender is guilty of rape lies in the outrage to the victim’s person and the feelings of the victim of the rape.
Click to expand...
The new 'shocking allegation' doesn't relate to rape.
Whilst the perception and feelings of the victim are always very important - there is no crime without criminal intent.
If someone touches a person's bum by accident, for example, no crime has taken place - regardless of how distressed the person was by what happened.
In the case of an audience member being at the receiving end of a simulated sex act for 'comic' purposes, criminal intent would be next to impossible to prove. Again, regardless of how the person at the receiving end perceived it or felt about it.
There is nothing to stop the audience member suing Brand via a civil action, though, if she wants. Mens rea only applies to criminal prosecution. But whether a lawyer would advise her she has a good case, is questionable.
 
gashonthenail said:
The new 'shocking allegation' doesn't relate to rape.
Whilst the perception and feelings of the victim are always very important - there is no crime without criminal intent.
If someone touches a person's bum by accident, for example, no crime has taken place - regardless of how distressed the person was by what happened.
In the case of an audience member being at the receiving end of a simulated sex act for 'comic' purposes, criminal intent would be next to impossible to prove. Again, regardless of how the person at the receiving end perceived it or felt about it.
There is nothing to stop the audience member suing Brand via a civil action, though, if she wants. Mens rea only applies to criminal prosecution. But whether a lawyer would advise her she has a good case, is questionable.
Click to expand...

A wide-ranging examination of the whole situation, including motives of the curators of allegations -
https://www.medialens.org/2023/the-...-julian-assange-nick-cohen-and-russell-brand/
 
Tea with the taste said:
Au contraire, this is absolutely not foolishness. There is every comparison and much similarity between the Assange and Brand cases, and much cause for concern
.
Click to expand...
There isn't. As much as people want to make Brand a martyr, there are not any similarities. Assange is literally being persecuted for releasing actual government documents, things that are true. Brand has been demonetized for sexual assault. Brand is a crazy conspiracy theorist. Assange showed up with the receipts, no conspiracies needed. Also. I was not aware Brand had spent years holed up in an embassy and now in a British prison fighting extradition. Assange was and is not a low life scumbag like Brand, it's actually insulting to compare the two.
 
Redacted said:
There isn't. As much as people want to make Brand a martyr, there are not any similarities. Assange is literally being persecuted for releasing actual government documents, things that are true. Brand has been demonetized for sexual assault. Brand is a crazy conspiracy theorist. Assange showed up with the receipts, no conspiracies needed. Also. I was not aware Brand had spent years holed up in an embassy and now in a British prison fighting extradition. Assange was and is not a low life scumbag like Brand, it's actually insulting to compare the two.
Click to expand...
The reason Julian assange was arrested in the first place was a trumped up sexual assault charge FYI
 
Redacted said:
There isn't. As much as people want to make Brand a martyr, there are not any similarities. Assange is literally being persecuted for releasing actual government documents, things that are true. Brand has been demonetized for sexual assault. Brand is a crazy conspiracy theorist. Assange showed up with the receipts, no conspiracies needed. Also. I was not aware Brand had spent years holed up in an embassy and now in a British prison fighting extradition. Assange was and is not a low life scumbag like Brand, it's actually insulting to compare the two.
Click to expand...
The comparison relevant here relates I would say to the treatment of these two individuals at the hands of the media, the powers that be, political forces, and the motives there may or may not be for the pile-on of said forces. It is not really to do with their character, back stories or whether or not either may or may not be guilty of what is suggested, or whether either is or is not some sort of martyr. It is to do with the baises and motives that may or may not be at play. Of course even the consideration of this will be dismissed by many as conspiracy theory. If that position is adopted from the get by one side of the debate then further discussion is probably rather pointless and we must agree to differ. Divide and rule is of course how we lose.
 
Tea with the taste said:
The comparison relevant here relates I would say to the treatment of these two individuals at the hands of the media, the powers that be, political forces, and the motives there may or may not be for the pile-on of said forces. It is not really to do with their character, back stories or whether or not either may or may not be guilty of what is suggested, or whether either is or is not some sort of martyr. It is to do with the baises and motives that may or may not be at play. Of course even the consideration of this will be dismissed by many as conspiracy theory. If that position is adopted from the get by one side of the debate then further discussion is probably rather pointless and we must agree to differ. Divide and rule is of course how we lose.
Click to expand...
I think we have to agree to disagree here
 
goinghome said:
Interesting that for other people, the sexual assault charges are, you could say, trumped down, as for, to my mind, these much more calculated non-consensual incidents perpetrated by senior people in Abercrombie and Fitch on would-be employees - https://www.npr.org/2023/10/03/1203263139/abercrombie-fitch-mike-jeffries-scandal
Click to expand...
there are a lot of cases of this kind of thing in the fashion industry, young people being recruited under the guise of becoming models, but who go on to be groomed and sexually assaulted. but yeah, no one seems to care. maybe because the fashion industry seems so removed from most peoples lives. whereas with someone like russell brand there's a level of familiarity, so that if someone doesnt like him, then the feeling of conferring guilt upon him in ones mind maybe makes them feel like they have a personal hand in bringing him down.
 
goinghome said:
Interesting that for other people, the sexual assault charges are, you could say, trumped down, as for, to my mind, these much more calculated non-consensual incidents perpetrated by senior people in Abercrombie and Fitch on would-be employees - https://www.npr.org/2023/10/03/1203263139/abercrombie-fitch-mike-jeffries-scandal
Click to expand...
Of course this is abhorrent and happens to people working for less famous companies as well. ALL sexual assault is abhorrent. Unfortunately sexual assault on men is not treated as seriously as it should be.
This does not make Brand less guilty.
 
How consent is allowed to be trashed en masse, challenging the holier than thou tone of those gleefully brandishing accusations against RB:

Since February 2020, victims of Pornhub have been trying to gain justice against Aylo (formerly MindGeek). The porn industry has been criticised for knowingly allowing videos of child abuse, human trafficking and sexual assaults on its platform and profiting from them...

The Traffickinghub movement seeks to pressure governments and companies around the world to introduce policies demanding reliable age and third-party consent verification for every person featured in every video on user generated pornography websites to ensure that these kinds of inhumanities never happen again...

Meanwhile, the campaign is supported by hundreds of anti-trafficking, women’s rights, and child protection organisations around the world. They are pushing on Pornhub and its parent company Aylo/MindGeek to be accountable and take criminal responsibility.

- https://www.pressenza.com/2023/10/traffickinghub-crime-scene-pornhub/
 
bhops said:
What are some of his 'crazy' conspiracy theories?
Click to expand...

It's wild to me in an era where mainstream media and various goverments have been caught lying time and time again in the most blatant and shameless ways, the "crazy conspiracy theorist" label is still tossed around so easily. There has never been a time in my life more than now where you should be questioning everything. You'd be a true fool not to be.
 
Back
Top Bottom