Russell Brand

Yes, I think we are only giving our opinions based on what we've seen on TV, his behaviour, his demeanour etc. I found him entertaining at first because he was so unpredictable, but soon realised he was overly sexual and started finding him repulsive. None of this relates to his trial, it's my opinion based on what I've seen on TV. I feel sorry for the jury. They have been told to steer clear of the media but it's everywhere so they need to be careful.

Maybe there will soon be a trial for those other handsome hunks the Tate brothers. It's like all the chickens are coming home to roost lately. 😉

Someone bought me a biology of his, just binned it this morning, whilst having a clear out.
I never did get round to reading it!

Chestnut - let’s hope even more chickens come home. It’s like the pendulum swings towards acknowledgement that society has a problem with violence towards children and women, then veers speedily back to blaming children (Epstein, organised sexual abuse gangs) and women (she’d been drinking, look what she was wearing’ etc

MT62

Someone bought me a biology of his, just binned it this morning, whilst having a clear out.
I never did get round to reading it!

A biography 🤦‍♀️

MT62

MT62

Someone bought me a biology of his, just binned it this morning, whilst having a clear out.
I never did get round to reading it!

A biography 🤦‍♀️

Ha ha, a biology of Russell Brand, now that would be quite a read! Did it say his physical structure was different to a normal man? Or was it his brain patterns? Must be one of them. 🤪

Probably find out chestnut he has a small penis & no brain! 😂

😅👍Well said MT62

I dont really know why I should worry about the morality/ legality of talking about the trial when brand himself is discussing the trial on his own podcast.

Galaxy

I dont really know why I should worry about the morality/ legality of talking about the trial when brand himself is discussing the trial on his own podcast.

Crikey - is he? Is that wise?

But yes, if he can, so can we.

I think we're being cautious, and careful not to say anything that might be prejudicial.

It's a fact that as a celebrity he's caused controversy but I believe, though I could be mistaken, that interest in him waned somewhat over the years.

Anyway, I shan't comment further about him now until after the trial ends.

Galaxy

I dont really know why I should worry about the morality/ legality of talking about the trial when brand himself is discussing the trial on his own podcast.

I just tried looking for that on my computer but it looks like it's crashed! Not surprising I suppose.

I wonder how the jury manage to stop themselves looking at the news. It's not good really when the trial has such huge media attention.

His wife is back by his side. Just wonder how she feels listening to the heartbreaking and tearful testimony of the victims?
When questions posed by the prosecution were shown on the news the other night I was not impressed, a victim was being interrogated and asked why she didn’t run away or shout for help, thankfully the victim said that Brand is a big man and she is a small woman and he manhandled her quickly into a toilet.
Is innocent until proved guilty for Brand but guilty until proved innocent for the victims. No wonder women are loathed to come forwards.

Purplepixie

Never liked him. He’s got dead eyes.

I still remember what one of his assault victims said about his eyes. She said that when he was very close to her and bent on sexual assault, his eyes changed - they turned almost black.
It honestly gave me the shivers.

Chestnut. The Tate brothers ‘ handsome hunks’? I think not. I’ve always thought them rather sleazy…repellent even .

JamesandJon33

*Chestnut*. The Tate brothers ‘ handsome hunks’? I think not. I’ve always thought them rather sleazy…repellent even .

It was a joke! I never thought anyone would take that seriously. Just shows how careful you have to be with what you post. 🤦‍♀️

Chestnut well I did wonder 🤭

They seem to imply that they are handsome hunks who have to turn down battalions of eager females - though in their hearts they know they are snivelling 7-stone weakling incels who have sand kicked in their faces at the beach and couldn't get nookie in a knocking shop.

So if you search Sunday service ( I know , I know ) with the brands you will see it, on YouTube and Facebook. I dont recommend it but it is there.

Galaxy

So if you search Sunday service ( I know , I know ) with the brands you will see it, on YouTube and Facebook. I dont recommend it but it is there.

Oh my goodness, I found it. They are sitting by the window dressed in leopard skin robes and the conversation is utter rubbish along with Bible readings. I lasted 2 minutes. His verbal diarrhoea is so boring, how on earth does she stand it.

I saw an image of them in leopard skin dressing gowns demonstrating their Christian faith, well their very own brand of faith
He says he’s praying for everyone involved and believes (his) god is in the Court with him

I wonder who is caring for their three children

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/russell-brand-trial-podcast-court-sunday-service-laura-gallacher-b3069833.html

Here it is. Is he aiming for a mistrial?
Is she completely brainwashed?

JenniRen

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/russell-brand-trial-podcast-court-sunday-service-laura-gallacher-b3069833.html

Here it is. Is he aiming for a mistrial?
Is she completely brainwashed?

Just saw this, was sickening. The man can’t even keep his head down at a time like this and bravo to his wife for enabling him, and all done with the name of God added for good measure.
I think Brand is performing for his audience both on the podcast and in the court room, he thrives off publicity and is a while since he was so popular.
I could easily see him leading a cult.

Innocent until proven guilty of course.

That doesn't mean we cannot judge him as arrogant, sleazy and self-deluded and his wife as brainwashed.

I feel sorry for their children.

JenniRen

Innocent until proven guilty of course.

That doesn't mean we cannot judge him as arrogant, sleazy and self-deluded and his wife as brainwashed.

I feel sorry for their children.

Of course JenniRen but sadly his victims are not being given this privilege. Interrogated as if they are criminals by the prosecution, asked probing questions about their morality and sex lives at a time when they are at their most fragile.
Perhaps the courtroom should be reminded that the victims are ‘the victims’.

Yes, it is shocking, I agree.

They are treated as if they are guilty until proved they are telling the truth. I thought these intrusive interrogations were not allowed any more.

JenniRen

Yes, it is shocking, I agree.

They are treated as if they are guilty until proved they are telling the truth. I thought these intrusive interrogations were not allowed any more.

I believe generally a defendant's previous convictions for similar crimes to the one being tried, are not allowed to be referenced - in case it prejudices the jury's collective mind?

So I do wonder why the women's previous sexual 'history' is not treated similarly. If the jurisdiction will rest on the facts of the case(s) - then a woman's previous sexual encounters becomes irrelevant.

I can't help thinking that, as with most things in law, business, medicine - you name it - the whole of society has been set up historically to benefit men. Because in spite of reforms etc, we still very much live in a Patriarchy.