• 🇬🇧󠁿 🇸🇪 🇿🇦 🇮🇪 🇬🇭 🇩🇪 🇪🇺
    European & African
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • EADD Moderators: Shambles

Russel Brand... your thoughts?

I have a question for everyone.

Given that Russell Brand never truly recovered from addition because accepting fault is a key step, do we think he will be discovered to be abusing mind altering compounds to deal with the self-imposed stress in his life?

I say yes, but it will be PRESCRIBED medications and when discovered, his defence will be that it was the doctor's fault for prescribing the drugs - not his for taking a dozen pills when the prescription called for one.

Worth a survay?
 
Last edited:
I only ask because I think it's a foregone conclusion.

Markers will be (in no particular order)

- marriage collapsing
- pesonal bankruptcy
- more charges being preferred

As a mate said 'invevitable as what's discovered in the basement of Mar-A-Logo when Donald Trump dies'
 
Last edited:
4DQSAR said:
Given that Russell Brand never truly recovered from addition because accepting fault is a key step
Click to expand...
I’m mad at myself for buying into his ridiculous 12 step book. Fuck that cunt right in the ass.

I very much want him to feel what it’s like to have one of those sneaky little fishies that like pee holes in his pee hole. Stupid fucker.
 
Well - life is a learning experience.

But I do suspect that right now, he's nowhere nearly as wealthy as he would like people to think. He wouldn't be the first person who spend money they didn't have to retain the facade of success.

It may seem obvious to just write the second volume BUT self-help books generally sell slowly but steadily so he may see no royalties for years or due to his current position, never. So right now he's taking on work that pays TODAY. That seems the simplest explaination. He's spent the entire £575,000 advance and it might take YEARS for a civil action to recover the money... and going bankrupt would conveniently mean he gets away without paying...

For those people not familier with UK and US law, 'Russell's Brand' or whatever limited liability company RB uses to handle all of his various enterprises would technically be the legal entity entering bankruptcy. I feel the apposite detail are the words 'limited liability' which means in essence, RB himself will be an employee. Now if he used his business to buy his homes, investments and so on, one one hand it's very tax efficient (he can charge himself rent, for example) BUT means they can all be seized in the event of bankruptcy.

I know one trick is to hand over assets to someone who is trusted. But if RB is the psychopatchic narccicist he appears to be, he would imagine if it were the other way around i.e. someone giving him their assets as a legal loophole. He would see no moral issue with simply keeping the assets so ironically, his own personality disorders might preclude his use of this (quite common) tactic.
 
Last edited:
Jnowhere said:
Any of them good?lol
Click to expand...

Well, that's a matter of opinion. The fact that he has managed to get 6.8 million subscribers to his Rumble channel BUT it appears only about 250,000 people view any given episode (and those platforms pay for views, not subscribers) and I haven't checked but I sense that number is in a steady decline.

Other than really odd things like hosting the semi-finals of some boxing leeague I hadn't even heard of... that's his only income.

Oh yeah - and the £180 beads he's selling. But I've noted that past performace suggests that he isn't actually selling many.

I DO have a favourite RB moment. When he begged his followers to fork out £100 to join his channel, That was in it's own way, as great a piece of art as your average Picasso oil painting.
 
From what little i have heard and seen of him he is brash maybe some desperate for fame or to be acknowledged or rich as well and not neccesarily in that order
 
I just checked and the trial of RB is scheduled to begin on June 3, 2026 and is expected to last 4-5 weeks.

Now I may be wrong but there is some sort of legal guidance that a trial SHOULD take place within a year of the defendent pleading not guilty at a lower court. But I am aware of cases involving 'high profile' people whose defence team has successfully argued that while their cliant stands accused, said client cannot continue their various business ventures. After all, if found not guilty, a defendent can apply for a Defence Cost Order and it tends to be those same high profile people who have the resources to do just that.

So while none of us knows what IS going on, I've checked and we know what ISN'T going on. But to be clear, it could equally be the CPS or defence team that have not challanged the date and for numerous reasons.

I note that RB has expended air-time suggesting that trial by jury is being undermined in the UK, but the only situation where it could possibly occur for HIS trial is if jury tampering is detected. So I'm not quite sure what benefit he sought by highlighting the fact.
 
Last edited:
Shambles said:


Jesusfuck this rapist scum is scraping the bottom of the barrel. What is it about Christianity being the final refuge of the unspeakably vile :\
Click to expand...


Russell Brand has an easy charm and the gift of the gab, but I am reminded of the many heroin addicts from my youth.

Everything was just to get money for heroin

The saying is: if you have doubts about someone's character, look at their actions rather than listening to the words.

What kind of man is Russell Brand.

And

What kind of (wo)men are we, that we are influenced by what others say about Brand?
 
F.U.B.A.R. said:
Is he rapist scum though? As far I'm aware nothing has yet been confirmed.

But if it is, then he'll probably just convert to Islam as an excuse... ;)
Click to expand...

That’s a fair point. He’s not currently convicted… but it definitely ain’t looking good on the “actually not rapist scum” side of things ;)

In anecdotal news, an EADDer once removed fucked Brand. She definitely didn’t call rape… but did call vile human being and massive red flags.

This was many, many years before the accusations when I was still enamoured. Made me think twice. Now I think thrice…
 
I have had a .3 of bastard's gear (HCl) and scored another.3 to be honest I am getting top wack of the supplier, and I am mullerd in English terms, if I don't post anymore tonight, have a happy new guys all the best for for 2026 !!🥳
 
Shambles said:
That’s a fair point. He’s not currently convicted… but it definitely ain’t looking good on the “actually not rapist scum” side of things ;)

In anecdotal news, an EADDer once removed fucked Brand. She definitely didn’t call rape… but did call vile human being and massive red flags.

This was many, many years before the accusations when I was still enamoured. Made me think twice. Now I think thrice…
Click to expand...

It seems that in modern discourse what constitutes rape is becoming broader and broader.
 
What's the opposite of the idiom 'the midas touch?'

I mentioned it because on re-reading I have questions. Was this a random act of kindness towards a drunk by a minor monarch OR an act of such brilliance that the name of the minor monarch would be more renown than the current regent of most royalist nations. If he had bet just one drachma on his name appearing in the Oxford Book of Famous Quotes' in 2024, he would likely still be dead.

Well, just think re-imagine that scene with RB. Midas 'Ask for anything you desire' and like a flash Brand retorted 'To talk more proper than anyone who likes me'.

Discount Brand/Paxman - it was hardly 'Frost/Nixon' was it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top