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

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: quintessentone

Are they?

Why do you want to make me the subject of this thread?

I was responding to AlienBorg about an observation I made about you is all. Just swipe on by and this will go away for the time being.

Trial on media and on social platforms. This way anyone can be convicted of anything...online...

I want to see what will happen if the prosecution fails (let's say it goes to court).

originally posted by: Daughter2
a reply to: AlienBorg

Are you kidding? Even if there was video evidence of them making it all up the worst thing is their company would have to pay. They might and I mean might face charges but those would eventually be dropped or they would just receive a slap on the wrist.

Until false allegations carry serious prison terms nothing will ever change.

Based ^

originally posted by: Daughter2
a reply to: Oldcarpy2

There's a difference between investigating and trying to come up with dirt on an individual.

For things like this that have a substantial impact on people's lives - then I say wait until they had a chance to go over the evidence.

There was no harm in waiting. Let the police investigate - Even by their allegations he hadn't done anything for 10 years, so it's not like immediate harm was being done.

If you find the police didn't do their job - then you have a case - just like Cosby and Weinstein. But this wasn't the case of the police not doing their job.

If someone says you took papers from an office - you can get your life back if you are proven innocent.

Accuse someone of abuse, their life immediately stops and it NEVER returns to normal.

Very based ^

a reply to: AlienBorg

Repeating the opposite of what I've posted?

Again?

Ahem.

It is you that is proclaiming his innocence before a proper trial.

Pure double standards.

All the time.

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: quintessentone

Are they?

Why do you want to make me the subject of this thread?

I was responding to AlienBorg about an observation I made about you is all. Just swipe on by and this will go away for the time being.

Trial on media and on social platforms. This way anyone can be convicted of anything...online...

I want to see what will happen if the prosecution fails (let's say it goes to court).

Russell Brand has denied "very serious criminal allegations" that he claims will be made against him by a newspaper and TV company. In a video posted on YouTube and X, formerly known as Twitter, titled "So, This is Happening", the comedian denied the allegations that he described as "a litany of extremely egregious and aggressive attacks". He said that while he was "very promiscuous" at the height of his career, his relationships were "always consensual".

I would like to hear his definition of 'always consensual' vs. the women's definitions.

a reply to: AlienBorg

"Based"?

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: AlienBorg

Repeating the opposite of what I've posted?

Again?

Ahem.

It is you that is proclaiming his innocence before a proper trial.

Pure double standards.

All the time.

Isn't that where the term 'innocent before proven guilty' comes from?

"Trial on media and on social platforms. This way anyone can be convicted of anything...online...

I want to see what will happen if the prosecution fails (let's say it goes to court)."

Then stop banging on about it, online?

a reply to: AlienBorg

It seems you have already made your mind just as Andy did yesterday when he said that his victims have spoken out.....

You seem to have taken the same route without considering the presumption of innocence until proven otherwise and you started talking about forensic evidence. I want really to see what kind of physical evidence someone has from an alleged incident 20 years ago.

Wow, that record is well and truely stuck isnt it. I'm not pressuming anything. but you're making a lot of assumptions about fellow members here. Next you'll be asking for my qualifications???? Or was that you in a previous life???
Maybe a you need to do a little research. I talked about digital forensics which is something from this century and is used in a lot of trials as evidence.

This is for you..

“Assumptions are unopened windows that foolish birds fly into, and their broken bodies are evidence gathered too late.”

a reply to: quintessentone

Yes. But not claiming that he is definitely innocent and his accusers are compromised, etc?

There's a difference.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: quintessentone

Yes. But not claiming that he is definitely innocent and his accusers are compromised, etc?

There's a difference.

Oh, yes, I see the difference.

a reply to: Mahogany

By "Charges" you mean accusations pushed through UNKNOWN accusers and "ACTED" out on the MSM to protect the "Annonomous" accusers...great mindset ya got there...go back to your sheeple heard.

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

Well, let's just cancel investigative journalism?

You'd never have had Nixon and Watergate exposed.

Way to go

Have you noticed that some posters on internet forums are just as sick as this
obvious media hit piece? Displaying a complete lack of humanity for a perfectly
rational good natured human being? That more than obviously was brave enough
to expose corruption at the highest elite levels across the board?

Have you noticed their complete lack of humanity as it were vacated by their
hate for even a fellow liberal? All because he's capable of much deeper thinking
than any other liberal I've come across? Have you noticed how they also employ
week attempts to make themselves appear fair at the start of a conversation?

Then completely succumb to their seething hate as they argue against what's
so obvious to normal human beings? Have you looked into their blind ignorance
of Mr. Brands own victimhood and innocense and declare it absurd to even
address?

All while embracing the unlikely victimhood of his four acussing sluts? And
make no mistake that's what they are. Aging groupies who've agreed to cash
in using accusations that will only be tried by you tube and other left wing
media outlets. All while still apart of the same world Mr. Brand found the
inner strength to leave behind him? I'm telling my good member they're
some really sick basturds out there. And it's so cookie cutter across the
web. Sick I say sick.

a reply to: Kurokage

That's what I said earlier

Nah you're confused. Everyone has the right to a fair trial and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. So myself and others here are arguing about this and haven't made up our minds. Equally important there should be no media trials.

Going by the principle of innocence until proven guilty is the right thing to do. And I am on the right side.

You for example and Andy have made up your minds. Andy said about his victims so he believes he is guilty already and you believe the same thing.

I will also add that I have made two other threads, one about Lucy Letby who has been convicted for the murder of 7 babies and the attempted murders of another 6, and one about Kevin Spacey who was acquitted of all 9 charges against him including 7 charges of sexual assault.

This isn't my thread btw and we don't comment here to give support for a guy we don't really know.

a reply to: WilLiam1985

No. There are no "charges" yet.

If there are actual charges the evidence will not be "Annonomous".

"Sheeple"?!!!

Oh dear.....

a reply to: Saloon

"All while embracing the unlikely victimhood of his four acussing sluts?"

You speak of humanity and come up with this unbelievable misogynistic bs?!!!!!

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: AlienBorg

It seems you have already made your mind just as Andy did yesterday when he said that his victims have spoken out.....

You seem to have taken the same route without considering the presumption of innocence until proven otherwise and you started talking about forensic evidence. I want really to see what kind of physical evidence someone has from an alleged incident 20 years ago.

Wow, that record is well and truely stuck isnt it. I'm not pressuming anything. but you're making a lot of assumptions about fellow members here. Next you'll be asking for my qualifications???? Or was that you in a previous life???
Maybe a you need to do a little research. I talked about digital forensics which is something from this century and is used in a lot of trials as evidence.

This is for you..

“Assumptions are unopened windows that foolish birds fly into, and their broken bodies are evidence gathered too late.”

I was asked about my qualifications and wasn't the one who asked him what he has. I know he said he is a lawyer but he doesn't seem to be sticking to the ethical principles of innocent until proven guilty.
I am on the other had a security guard but I stick to the main ethical principles.

If you don't have physical evidence and if you bring a claim that you have been raped 20 years after the incidence then the police will most likely dismiss it.

originally posted by: Terpene
a reply to: AlienBorg

What's a media trial?

media speculating on the ongoing trial of a public media figure?

They'll either celebrate or go silent, depending on the verdict.

What's happening now.

The media have already condemned him (not all of them). They talk about victims and predators so the presumption of innocence until proven guilty has gone.

a reply to: AlienBorg

"I know he said he is a lawyer but he doesn't seem to be sticking to the ethical principles of innocent until proven guilty".

Sick and tired of you repeating lies about me.

Also, your opinions about our justice system are Ill informed and otiose .

Neither you nor I know what any evidence might be if or when any charges might arise yet here you are with your opinions.

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

ou speak of humanity and come up with this unbelievable misogynistic bs?!!!!

I think the truth is the perfect way to rejoin the conversation. I hope
I haven't upset you?