Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Russell Brand: rape and sexual abuse allegations, grifting and general dodginess - discussion

How the fuck is it that previous convictions for sexual offences "aren't relevant" and are thus only revealed after the jury makes a decision? Shouldn't juries be made aware of an established pattern of behaviour? Seems like something that protects serial offenders rather than the innocent.
Because disclosing previous convictions would be perceived to be prejudicial, ie they might unfairly and unjustly sway the jury towards a guilty verdict.

Fun fact: Not about rape, but when my father assaulted me for the last time when I was around 24-years-old, and after neighbours had heard me screaming and called the cops... and the cops turned up and treated it as a 'domestic' breach of the peace-type incident... I subsequently went to the cop shop and urged them to press charges against my father. I pointed out that I had been taken into care at the age of 13, due to being physically abused, and I had been told when I was 21-years-old, by a senior social worker, (who I saw after I'd requested access to my care records), that the only reason my father wasn't prosecuted when I was taken into care was because the social services hadn't followed their own procedures.

Fast forward a few years later and I'd been assaulted by him, again, (because reasons, because complicated), and when I pointed out to the cops that he'd done it before and he'd do it again, the cops basically told me that the historical stuff was irrelevant, because even if they did do something about the recent assault, all the historical stuff didn't count, it couldn't be brought up in court, because he hadn't been convicted, and even if he had been convicted, it couldn't be brought up in court, because that would be prejudicial if the jury knew about any previous convictions.

And then when I asked what would it take for them to actually do something to bring my father to justice, after he'd recently assaulted me, and after I'd been taken into care as a teenager due to being physically [and emotionally and psychologically] abused by him... the CID officer told me "attempted murder," to which I replied that "there's a fine line between attempted murder and murder, and what happens if you don't get there in time the next time?" (bearing in mind the cops had only turned up because neighbours had heard my screams and called the cops).

And that was when I realised the cops, the authorities, the system, the State, would do fuck all to protect me from him, and I then became totally estranged from all members of my family for around eight years (until an uncle tracked me down through an old school friend), but I didn't get to see my beloved grandparents again before they died.

But basically, that's how I know that you can't use previous allegations or convictions against a defendant who is on trial, because that information would prejudice their right to a free trial. Other cases would only be admissible if they were charged and tried with multiple offences at the same time.
 
Breaking news on Sky, youtube has suspended the monetisation of his channel. :)

YouTube has suspended adverts on videos by Russell Brand after the comedian was accused of rape and sexual assault.

The Google-owned company said it had suspended the monetisation of Mr Brand's channel for "violating our Creator Responsibility policy".

 
el Trumpo himself for the full cigar i think .
Honestly, i don't want to know what some of my ex-mates who got into loonery have to say about all this. It scares me.
I'd be mortified and would seriously ask myself how i got into all this shit, but these people are probably proud to be part of something bigger, a deeper knowledge. And it's all so fucking cheap and obvious
 
Not to make it another Trump thread but he certainly is no stranger to amplifying conspiracies

The most recent well known being that "the election was rigged/stolen"


Also

Birtherism
Deep State
Soros etc etc

and Qanon

 
well Lennon has a history of hanging out with nonces since his EDL days not surprising he out to offer support
Hanging out?
The leader of the far-right English Defence League has come under fire after racially abusing a girl who told him she was 15-years-old on Twitter.


“Tommy Robinson, real name Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, told Twitter user ‘Asianish’ “You’re pretty fit for a Muslim”. Defending herself, she wrote back “I’m 15 and you’ve got the cheek to call Muslims paedos.”
 
Just re-read Mark Fisher's Vampire Castle essay. I didn't like it at the time and one of the reasons was that he assumed the 'online left' were just virtue-signalling when they refused to embrace a narcissistic misogynist. It didn't occur to him that maybe they were trying to protect the left from associating with a clear liability, and that they wanted to prevent more women being harmed.

For a while I too was happy that Brand was talking about left wing ideas, but as time went on he seemed more and more committed to himself rather than to any real solidarity and I gave up on him long before he drifted to the right wing conspiracy circuit.

There's a grain of truth in the essay, that people should be forgiven for not fitting in exactly with leftish values, and that working class people get punished more harshly for not fitting in. Yet Russell Brand, as a walking red flag, was clearly not a good example to use.
 
Idk what to make of the theory that he moved into the conspiracist guru market as a cunning long term plan to insulate himself for when this day inevitably rolled around. Makes perfect sense logically and have always thought he was thoroughly cynical and self motivated, but dunno. Maybe it was just win win, the uncritical adulation that sort of audience offers is a reward in itself as well as a sort of insurance plan.
 
Back
Top Bottom