Russell Brand denies 'serious criminal allegations' he claims are being made against him

a reply to: Itisnowagain

sexual assault in relation to the media reporting of allegations against Russell Brand

The police do have to be careful how they word any press release so as not to prejudice any case.

Again....

10 billion....that's how much is spent on advertising to try to sway the 30 million ish swing voters in US elections.

If a woman was found dead in her bath tub one day before the divorce assets were going to be divided - you bet I would suspect foul play. (This example really did happen).

Obviously Brand could reach millions of swing voters. The media has a significant financial and long-term interest in taking out someone who could change the US election.

Does this cast doubt on the credibility of the accusations - yes.

To all of you posters who are whipping up emotional reactions.

Let's talk about what would be enough "proof" to convict the media of trying to discredit someone for election purposes?
What would be enough evidence? What should happen to them? The death penalty for treason?

a reply to: Daughter2

Brand is small fry and British. I'm pretty sure alot of Americans aren't very happy when a Brit' tries to tell them how to vote?
I think you had this dumb thing called a revolution or something??

originally posted by: andy06shake


But in this instance, the Dispatches documentary that aired last night was years in the making, and the allegations date back to 2006.

So to think they just decided to chuck it together and fling it out there to distract us from god knows what is logically a tad wonky by my guesstimation.

Let's think about this for a second? Years in the making - so maybe that would put it around 20/21? So around the time Brand started to challenge the lock down and really turn against the MSM?

The allegations span around 2006 to 2012, right? Brand was much more popular during that time. So why now, a decade later? I heard nothing at the height of the metoo# movement.

Years in the making - if these allegations were already known maybe it would take months but years? Maybe because they had to hunt for them?

What's enough proof for you to bring charges against the media for election interference? What proof would you need for this crime?

a reply to: Kurokage

Nope, you are lying. He is wildly popular with the US and with swing voters. He is VERY important to the election!

a reply to: Daughter2

You know not everything is about America and it's election.

Brand became most popular around the early to mid 2000s to the 'masses'. Just like Saville it was a known secret to many that he was a predator and not to be alone with him.
He went to clinics for drug and sex addiction. it makes one wonder if he knew he would eventually be in trouble for his possible crimes and by going to a clinic could/would this help him in a future court case?

a reply to: AlienBorg

I don't know how many times I have to say that all opinions are just speculation at this stage, Asmo...I mean, Alienborg?

Yes, I m well familiar with the Cliff Richard case.

I don't know how many more times I have to tell you let's wait for some proper evidence, follow due process and let's see what happens.

Things are at an early stage, he hasn't even been interviewed by Police or charged.

I have condemned him of nothing more than being a knob head. I have lots of reasons for that opinion, not least what he did to Sachs, reading his book and watching his antics on TV and on social media.

Gary Glitter, etc, was also judged by the Court of public opinion. As have many other nonces that turned out to be guilty.

So let's just wait and see?

a reply to: Daughter2

Nope, you are lying. He is wildly popular with the US and with swing voters. He is VERY important to the election!

So are you calling me a liar here on ATS?? Can you prove he's wildly popular and important to an American election?

a reply to: Daughter2

Sigh. Why bring US elections into this?

No, 2003 now.

Do keep up?

a reply to: Kurokage

Gee, that comment you made has been made by others almost verbatim.

No, someone would not on a daily basis challenge authority and politicians if they had dirty laundry. That defies logic.

But answer my original question. If this WAS a hit piece, what should happen to everyone involved from the reporters or people on social media paid to slam him?

What evidence would you need and what should happen to those involved.

I think in the States it should be considered treason and the death penalty? What do you think?

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

I have condemned him of nothing more than being a knob head. I have lots of reasons for that opinion, not least what he did to Sachs, reading his book and watching his antics on TV and on social media.

Gary Glitter, etc, was also judged by the Court of public opinion. As have many other nonces that turned out to be guilty.

Very true and I feel the same about Brand. The guys a pure mouthy dick-head who loves himself a little to much.

a reply to: Kurokage

Odds are very good the DNA was destroyed. She was asked by them if she wanted to press charges she said no. There qoyld be no need to preserve it at that point vut I'm sure they did for a while in case she changed her mind. But I highly doubt they would wait 20 years.

From what I've read untested rape kits are disposed of in the states anywhere from 6 months to 5 years . Depends on states laws and the availability of storage. Since she refused to press charges any evidence collected would not have been tested and most likely no longer exists.

The other problem appears to be who has them stored. They can apparently be held by the lab if sent for testing. Can be on police lock up if not sent. And can be sent to state crime lab for storage. California has a law stating they will notify you if you request it before destroying the kit. In 2016 they streamlined the process and just made the database available online so with the new law all they have to do is post the pending destruction date on the database.

So Odds are very good that after 20 years they rape kit no longer exists this is what I was referring to when I said there are reasonable arguments for statute of limitations. Evidence tends to disappear with time which can affect both parties involved.

So it appears in California Brand got lucky as it will simply be his word against theirs. Though if a prosecutor decides to petsue it he has certainly said alot of crap that would turn a jury against him.

a reply to: Daughter2

Why has it always got to be about America?

It's not about America, or election interference, but about Russell Brand and the allegations against him.

Did you watch the Dispatches documentary and listen to the allegations made along with the other evidence presented?

Put it this way Daughter2 if any of the journalists, producers, legal team, or anybody else for that matter directly linked to the allegations made in said documentary is not on the ball, or caught telling lies, their careers,just like Brands if found to be guilty, will be over in a heartbeat.

I'll get you the figures but companies pay millions of dollars for a thirty second ad to reach a few hundred thousand. If you can get a million people to watch for 30 minutes - that's golden. I'm on my lunch but I'll show you my sources later but answer my question what evidence would you need to convict the MSM and people on social medial. And what should be their punishment?

a reply to: Daughter2

I don't suppose you are aware that political satire is alive and well over here. The folk behind Private Eye, Spitting Image, Have I Got News For You and many others who have challenged politicians and authority for many, many years have not been "targeted".

"But answer my original question. If this WAS a hit piece, what should happen to everyone involved from the reporters or people on social media paid to slam him?"

That's a big "if".

Where is your own evidence for that?

a reply to: Daughter2

I see no evidence of a hit piece here.
Many had tried for a long time to bring the claims made against Brand into the public domain (it was comman knowledge on the British comedy circuit) and it took a further 5 years of putting together the documentery piece, all that to stop a low bit Brit from messing in an election? really? Thats a very big strech and typical American paranoia.

a reply to: Daughter2

And what should be their punishment?

Anybody found to be telling lies about rape the punishment should be severe.

I'm on my lunch but I'll show you my sources later

I'm in the middle of my own mess as well right now, understandable.

a reply to: andy06shake

It may not be just about America but politics in general.

People do all sorts of things if they believe no one will investigate or evidence will be too hard to obtain. How many people in the media have went to jail for telling lies? Maybe a few lawsuits paid by their company but nothing really happened to them.

Look at that kid wearing the Maga hat that had his reputation destroyed by CNN. Those reporters are still working - they aren't in jail.

So the media know nothing will happen to them. But again I'll ask you what SHOULD happen to them and all their paid social media trolls?

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: Kurokage

Odds are very good the DNA was destroyed. She was asked by them if she wanted to press charges she said no. There qoyld be no need to preserve it at that point vut I'm sure they did for a while in case she changed her mind. But I highly doubt they would wait 20 years.

From what I've read untested rape kits are disposed of in the states anywhere from 6 months to 5 years . Depends on states laws and the availability of storage. Since she refused to press charges any evidence collected would not have been tested and most likely no longer exists.

The other problem appears to be who has them stored. They can apparently be held by the lab if sent for testing. Can be on police lock up if not sent. And can be sent to state crime lab for storage. California has a law stating they will notify you if you request it before destroying the kit. In 2016 they streamlined the process and just made the database available online so with the new law all they have to do is post the pending destruction date on the database.

So Odds are very good that after 20 years they rape kit no longer exists this is what I was referring to when I said there are reasonable arguments for statute of limitations. Evidence tends to disappear with time which can affect both parties involved.

So it appears in California Brand got lucky as it will simply be his word against theirs. Though if a prosecutor decides to petsue it he has certainly said alot of crap that would turn a jury against him.

Thanks for clearing that up and adding more to the statement.
The woman who claimed Brand raped her was in California at the time of the inccident.

a reply to: Daughter2

It may not be just about America but politics in general.

Well the last time Brand screamed ""vote Labour"" over here, even though he does not vote, did not have the desired result, put it that way.

The majority of sane people over here just think he's a complete cockwomble.

Or at least thats my assessment.

So the media know nothing will happen to them. But again I'll ask you what SHOULD happen to them and all their paid social media trolls?

Screaming words in block capitals aside, i don't know, but i think you might have something in mind?

Do you wish to see the likes of investigative journalism go the way of the dinosaur just because you might not like what they turn up?

And where are these paid social media trolls with reference to the accusations against Brand?