Dispatches - Russell Brand

A few days before this documentary I saw a news item about a survey which said that 1 in 3 women surgeons had been assaulted by senior staff when they were younger. A woman spoke about a senior surgeon who when she was a trainee had a surgeon wipe the sweat off his forehead on the front of her uniform. When she asked if she could get a cloth for him he said what he was doing was much more fun. All this in front of operating room staff
This survey seems to have sunk without trace.
Yet RB is headlines.
So educated, experienced, high level men can abuse women publicly, and nothing happens. But one celebrity is headline news
We live in strange times.
www.theguardian.com/society/2023/sep/12/female-surgeons-nhs-sexually-assaulted-metoo

I’ve always thought he was a revolting man. Although I didn’t watch the programme about him, what I’ve heard since has done absolutely nothing to change my opinion. If anything, my opinion of him has deteriorated.

I confess that comedy and comedians come low on my list of enjoyable entertainment. I prefer wit to humour any day.

However, Russell Brand always struck me as a crude vulgarian, who thought that to be lewd and crude was humour, without any attempt to actually be funny.

^ one being Andrews Sachs' granddaughter who didn't have a bad word to say about him.^

Andrew Sachs' granddaughter now says the evidence "seems compelling".

Still not sure why the women spoke to reporters and not the Police? Read the article about this on BBC homepage just now. It reiterates what many GNs have already explained on this thread.

Yes. I know it’s been said a lot since the weekend, but there will be a lot of squirming going on in those circles I think.

I think people such as Johnathan Ross wanted to be part of what they saw as the cool gang. There were a few people waving the red flag but they were mostly ignored.

I don’t know. I think that he was popular when the Internet was pushing boundaries and ‘youth’ TV was trying to keep pace with it to hold on to audiences with spending power. There was a ‘laddish’ (and ‘ladette’) culture which was was pushed at young people. Maybe they went along with his naked misogyny as they thought it was ‘cool’ and somehow liberated? A lot of what are sold as women’s ‘freedoms’ are actually to the benefit of men, and maybe this was more of the same?

I am the wrong age group to ‘get’ him, really. I thought he was mildly amusing on the Big Brother spin-off he did, but otherwise thought he looked like he needed a bath, and found his persona (which turned out to be his personality) lewd and unpleasant. My children were too young to be fans, so I wasn’t exposed to him through them either. Small mercies, eh?

Why do people like comedians like him? He is so crude and plenty of Aussies are crude,too but he makes our lot look like saints.

The programme wasn’t trying him in a court of law. He is very unlikely to be charged with anything mentioned in the programme.

What it has done is bring to light the fact that it is now likely that anyone coming forward with evidence of illegal activity will be believed and can go to court, where the evidence will be presented to a jury.

I think that is for the best, don’t you?

There are two sides to this:
1. Disgusting behaviour - all verifiable through his many TV appearances
2. Illegal behaviour - can only be verified in a court of law.

He has definitely been found guilty of disgusting behaviour after trial by media in the last few days. This may be disgusting but it's not illegal.

Illegal behaviour, we don't even know if he has done anything illegal. Two women who went out with him have both said he was decent and polite with them, one being Andrews Sachs' granddaughter who didn't have a bad word to say about him.

Did you watch the programme? It's all in there - I can't remember verbatim.

Or you could read the article here without a paywall:

archive.ph/XFFTF

I didn’t know they have found the taxi driver, it had been reported it was a driver from the BBC.

The screaming was heard when the woman who claims she was raped in Brand’s house ?

Going to a rape centre is proof of who the rapist was ? They have DNA ?

Just want some things made more clear

Ok, but he's not being tried by media. The stories that were told are all verifiable, with witnesses to verify them. The girl was taken from school to Brand's house by taxi, and the taxi driver pleaded with her not to go in because he knew what Brand was like. There is evidence that one woman went to a rape centre, and that there were people who heard one of his victims screaming before she ran out of his house. There was a lot more in the programme, and more still in the article, but it is undeniable, apart from some of the more graphic details of what happened in private, which simply added to the verifiable accusations. There is more than enough evidence that he is a thoroughly nasty bit of work, and if criminal charges are brought there will have to be evidence of those, too.

Doodledog I am not arguing with those who believe Brand is guilty. I have said I do not like trial by media,Operation Yewtree caused so much hurt and harm.

tickinbird Channel 4 don't make programmes - they only commission them, so there is no reason why they would have known other than from the rumours you say are unconscionable.

Anniebach the story of the girl's mother was in both the documentary and in the Sunday Times article. Are you saying that you didn't watch or see either, yet are still criticising the women involved and arguing with people who did see the coverage and know the stories?

If he sues, the jury will have to decide on the balance of probability having seen the programme and listened to his version of events. It is most unlikely that he will do so. It is far more likely that the programme makers are aware of another watertight case and know that the woman will come forward to the police, who will now have no option but to prosecute. As this will be a new case, it will be tried on the basis of its own evidence.

Even if that does not happen, Brand's opportunities for preying on women are now much reduced, and other men with similar proclivities will keep a low profile. Not ideal, but better than nothing, I suppose.

The allegations have caused much damage to his career , how can there be a fair trial if he is charged , is it not up to a jury

CH 4 have released a statement saying they were unaware of his behaviour and had received no complaints about him,

If it was in plain sight and his conduct was so egregious they must have known. You can’t believe the allegations and believe CH 4 weren’t aware. As RB is on film saying, one can behave as badly as one likes and as long as they’re making money they allow it. Just sickening.

It's actually been really interesting watching who it was who tried to challenge his behaviour back then, I thought Venessa Feltz gave it a good go when he interviewed her.
And of course interesting watching those who said they didnt notice anything.

Thank you MOnica Andrew Pierce on his news channel said it

GrannyGravy13 the boradcasters and their lawyers know how to publicise these matters without prejudicing any criminal trials that may follow.

I cannot think of any tv revelation of criminal behaviour of any kind that has prejudiced the trials that followed.

Anniebach I think the information you have is wrong. When the girl was interviewed she said that her mother did everything she could to stop her meeting Brand, grounded her, and watched her, but that as she had to go to school and went out tomeet with friends, it was very difficut. She said Brand also groomed her telling her what to tell her mother to make her think that she wasn't meeting him and persuading her friends to cover for her.

Me too (no pun intended). And with yours, Ilovecheese, and yours, Iam.

The documentary was not thrown together to bring down RG. It represents three years of research and has been scrutinised by lawyers acting both for the programme makers and for Brand himself (his will have seen it before it was broadcast). It will be absolutely watertight. As a result, other women have come forward, and that would have been the intention, I'm sure. If that is the only way to get him prosecuted, that is a sad indictment on British justice, but it's better that justice is achieved that way than not at all.

X posted with you Maddyone. Absolutely agree with your post

I think you could be rightIam64 perhaps young women have seen how hard it is to get justice by reporting to the police, that they have realised that the only way to stop predatory men is by turning to the media so these men can face the glare of publicity and other women can be warned.

I agree gg13. However it’s increasingly rare for prosecution, even less for successful prosecution.

Could it be younger woman have lost hope in our criminal justice system.

The big question remains. Why do so many men behave so badly - not even allegedly in many cases. The evidence is before our eyes