Russell Brand... your thoughts?

[Perkins : Reborn]

I mean if you feel like reporting each instance I guess I could correct them by hand.

Reacharounds may be required if there’s too many though

I only meant the title! Thanks for changing it and indulging my neuroses.

 

[Jnowhere]

Didn't like him many years ago and still don't. I could care less about him, except I wish he would stay in the UK.

 

[Perkins : Reborn]

You couldn't care less.

Could care less means you care to some extent.

But he's a wrongun alright.

 

[gannetsarewe]

Polymarket now at 71% on 'Russell Brand will be found guilty of sexual offence by end of 2027'

I don't understand gambling but as I understand it, Polymarket begins on evens i.e. 50%/50% BUT I believe once the trial began, betting stopped. But by an odd co-indicence around 71% of Polymarket users are male. I don't know if that tells us anything because as Bukowski put it 'you bet on the winner, not the odds'.

Burlington on in old money or 30/100.

 

[Ismene2]

Katgerine ryan was calling him a predator back in 2018 so its been known about for a while

 

[4DQSAR]

I haven't watched it myself but Page 94 (the Private Eye podcast) noted that RB continues to broadcast his weekly podcast 'What, me?' or whatever it's called, mostly in his pajamas or with his soon-to-be-ex-wife, both in bathrobes.

It has shades of someone who thinks that saying so makes it so.

I'm told it's a mixture of his opinion on being a defendent and a lot about his finding god (I can only presume they shared a cell at some point). I think the prosecution closing with the fact that when interviewed, Brand stated he couldn't remember anything but in court his recall was laser-like is just the cherry on the cake. He has no defence BECAUSE he failed to mention when questioned things he later relied on in court.

It's fine to simply state 'I wish to answer but would like to ask my legal council first' and then voluntarily be intervieweed a second time and answer those questions. That is still considered 'mentioned when questioned' and is not prejudicial to one's defence. But a jury will draw their own conclusions because the police WOULD explain why a person is being questioned and I think anyone asked about such serious things would try their best to be as helpful as possible. It may be fragmentary but the more truthful things you recall, the better if is for you.

Now anyone who has performed jury service will know that the judge gives a stern lecture that ONLY evidence (from the latin 'ēvidentia', that which is seen) presented in court should be condidered. Certainly in a highly newsworthy case the Judge would explicitly state that Jurers shouldn't watch or listen to anything potentially prejuditual. I mean right down to discussing the case with their partner.

If I'm honest, even before ANY investigation began, the fact that on the day after 9/11 RB hosted his MTV show dressed in a dishdasha, wearing sun-glasses and proclaiming the terrorist acts in the USA were (and I quote) 'Yesterday's news' and that we should simply 'move on' was the point where my suspicions that he is a psychopath were confirmed. Before that I just didn't think he was funny.

The fact he was given a second chance in the UK hosting Big Brother with a contract specifying 'no shagging the contestants' and was caught shagged the contestants was, to me, one more chance than he SHOULD have been given.

But the former he excused as his drug addiction (hence he has yet to admit fault), the latter he sex addiction (hence he has yet to admit fault) is classic of someone who either cannot or will not accept responsibilities for their actions. A judge certainly CAN look back at such things when considering sentencing.

 

[Ismene2]

He stopped doing his videos on the day he gave evidence.

 

[Shambles]

Katgerine ryan was calling him a predator back in 2018 so its been known about for a while

I personally know a BLer whose friend slept with Brand. She wasn’t raped or owt, but did say he was utterly gross and threw her out pretty much immediately after the deed was done.

Douchey behaviour that falls short of sexual abuse but definitely says a lot about the man’s character

 

[Ismene2]

I wasnt impressed with his pulling technique - said his main chatup line was "You are very, very beautiful" and then in bed he said "I want to come in your arse".

If you talked to a woman like that where I come from the local crack dealers would've taken your ass out a long time ago.

One bit of bullshit I noticed - he said the hospital stopped him visiting his son.For a start he's not guilty of anything yet so thats a lie. The clever thing is because of patient confidentiality if anyone tries to check the hospital will refuse to say anything.

What kind of stretch do you think he'll get? A fifteen? He's gonna have to be spending some money inside to stay safe.

 

[4DQSAR]

Well, we heard the summing up of both the prosecution and the defence.

But when the defence is essentially 'He's scum - but that isn't a crime', it's not great.

There are five or six charges and it could take a while as the jury will need to discuss all of them.

If found guilty he will likely be segregated not as 'solitary confinement' as Tommy-Ten-Names claimed but because lifers will most certainly go after him.

Am I right that a convict can only spend £30/week INSIDE so I assume you mean someone will be paying OUTSIDE? That said, unsure who might do that.

 

[Bleaney]

Am I right that a convict can only spend £30/week INSIDE so I assume you mean someone will be paying OUTSIDE? That said, unsure who might do that.

Dunno about the first part, but didn't you say earlier that you thought his driver / security guy was possibly an Irish traveler, with possible criminal connections?

Even if Brand couldn't get anyone, apart from his wife, to testify in court as to his character and behavior, he'll probably have connections that can help with protecting him inside prison, if he does go down, even if it's all based on nothing but his money.

 

[lost weekend]

I wasnt impressed with his pulling technique - said his main chatup line was "You are very, very beautiful" and then in bed he said "I want to come in your arse".

If you talked to a woman like that where I come from the local crack dealers would've taken your ass out a long time ago.

One bit of bullshit I noticed - he said the hospital stopped him visiting his son.For a start he's not guilty of anything yet so thats a lie. The clever thing is because of patient confidentiality if anyone tries to check the hospital will refuse to say anything.

What kind of stretch do you think he'll get? A fifteen? He's gonna have to be spending some money inside to stay safe.

I'm sure he will be hearing the very same words soon enough

 

[4DQSAR]

Dunno about the first part, but didn't you say earlier that you thought his driver / security guy was possibly an Irish traveler, with possible criminal connections?

Even if Brand couldn't get anyone, apart from his wife, to testify in court as to his character and behavior, he'll probably have connections that can help with protecting him inside prison, if he does go down, even if it's all based on nothing but his money.

Well, I think I also pointed out that huge wealth in itself is a flag that a convict should be considered high risk hence the rather apt term of 'being on the ghost train' i.e. being transferred from wing to wing and prison to prison on the basis that yes, while money on the OUTSIDE certainly can help, it takes a while to even locate a convict after a transfer and if whoever runs a wing might well offer credit, if it's to someone on the ghost train, they KNOW that person will likely be gone at some random point.

So if nothing else, just paying back double (credit being 100% per week) on the outside to a long series of different criminal gangs would in itself be really difficult. If YOU become known as the money tap, almost anyone could CLAIM a debt is owed.

I thought about this a LOT and I know that HMPs have sort of councilling sessions where the goal is for a guilty person to ACCEPT fault. That failing to take part or trying to con a forensic psychiatrist leaves a person Bexter Basics.

 

[Ismene2]

I heard something about Ian Watkins being milked for thousands - his mother or whoever had to bank transfer money to people outside to keep him safe. Tho Watkins was in general population when he was killed which seems odd. I guess if you've got him paying money they would make sure nobody touched him.

 

[4DQSAR]

Even if RB didn't immediatly go under the numbers (rule 45 - OI), he WOULD likely be segregated at least initially. While not as Tommy-Ten-Names claimed, it IS by definition segragated. Expect 21-hour-a-day lockup. For someone who NEVER expects to be released such as IW, it's quite possible that he concluded that the risks were worth it.

A prisoner segregated out of Own Interests can still work, can still recieve money BUT crucially, to get enhanced Brand would need to enroll in the SOTP (Sex Offender Treatment programme) that is based on admission of fault. Now for convicts who themselves were sexually abused as children, there are ways around this BUT If RB is dumb enough to think he can fool a forensic psychiatrist, it won't go too well for him.

Whatever else, due to his high profile, there will always be prisoners willing to pass on details during prison visits. Whenever a red-top rag needs 300 words in a hurry - they WILL have copy banked.

But I think that's the one thing we can all agree on - RB has never admitted fault for anything ever. I, for one would trust a forensic psychiatrist in knowing if any admissions were honest or just to tick a box.

MsDiz is obviously the person who REALLY understands all of this stuff so I'm keen to know what if anything they choose to share if and when RB is found guilty.

 

[Ismene2]

I liked that defence line "He's had a thousand women and only six say he raped them". That's up there with Nutty Sutty in his parole hearing "I havnt killed anyone in 30 years"

 

[4DQSAR]

I liked that defence line "He's had a thousand women and only six say he raped them". That's up there with Nutty Sutty in his parole hearing "I havnt killed anyone in 30 years"

Well, RB got Ian Winter KC as his leading defence council. So he cannot claim he didn't get the best representation possible.

As I noted, in such serious cases a 'taxi rank' system is used i.e. Ian Winter KC just got the fare. I can imagine idiots giving the guy static merely for doing his job. If RB says he's innocent, his defence must act on that presumption. What they REALLY think may be quite different.

Juries can be quite bizarre but I felt the risk run with THAT as the closing sentence is just 1 jury members saying 'well, only one in six rapes are reported...'

But whatever else, justice is SEEN to be done. We didn't see the evidence presented or have access to the full transcript of the trial. For a start we have no idea if a Goodyear hearing (indication) was made which is where a defence can ask the judge what their client is likely to get if they put their hands up. If I'm honest, I don't believe RB would go for that - he's never responsible, is he? It's always an addiction and not HIS addiction, if you see what I mean.

 

[Ismene2]

I imagine the floodgates will open once he goes down - you dont rape six and then say "Thats enough", I bet theres dozens more in the wings.

 

[4DQSAR]

I imagine the floodgates will open once he goes down - you dont rape six and then say "Thats enough", I bet theres dozens more in the wings.

There WERE a lot more reports after the Channel 4 programme. Ian Winter KC claimed that it 'poisoned the well' which again, is a double-edged sword because if there is a huge power-distance i.e. a rich and famous person who could afford to persue a CIVIL action against allagations made by a victim, chances are the the ratio is, in reality, a lot bigger than one-in-six.

In fact RB messed up when he openly admitted 'consensual but exploitative sex' with a 16 year old girl.

I've known (not in the Biblical sense) girls who at 16 were more mentally mature than a lot of women ten years their senior. But equally I've know (again, not in the Biblical sense) girls at 16 who really were just kids.

All I know for sure is that there is no way on earth I would have left my little sister in a room with RB. She's no dummy but she is small in stature. But that IS just my opinion.

 

[Ki3ly]

I can't keep up. I get my updates here now. But don't worry .... I research everything.