Russell Brand

[Normanton Lad]

22 minutes ago, YorkshireRam said:

Far, far, far less people have been wrongly convicted, than the amount of people who never got justice because of the flawed judicial process for cases like these. It's such a weak strawman argument. 

The justice system doesn't work for these cases, so basing moral or ethical opinion upon their verdict is short-sighted, at best. 

Not a "weak strawman argument" at all. Denying justice to the many so that the few are not convicted wrongly is part of our legal system. Read about Blackstone's ratio. 

Blackstone's ratio

 

 

[YorkshireRam]

2 minutes ago, Anon said:

So, what level of collateral damage in terms of wrongful convictions do you deem acceptable? Is 2% ok? Since you've become enlightened and decided that judicial process is unnecessary how many innocent people are you prepared to jail to boost the rape conviction rate?

It's hard to quantify wrongful convictions into meaningful metrics, so putting a percentage on it doesn't really make sense. What I would say is that wrongful convictions overall are remarkably uncommon: In the decade spanning 2007-2017 in NI, only 84 people were found to have been wrongfully convicted (but this is where the stats fail because to be classified as 'wrongfully convicted', your case has to be legally overturned- which some may not be).

Essentially though, it's not a massively high number. Yet we do know due to the flaws in the current process, that conviction rates are too low for sex offences. So even without empirical data, it's very easy to draw the conclusion that the number of sex offenders that walk free easily outnumbers the cases of wrongful conviction for the same offences. 

[Jubbs]

I suggest some of the people in here speak their views to the women in their lives and see what reaction you get. Shameful.

[YorkshireRam]

10 minutes ago, Normanton Lad said:

Not a "weak strawman argument" at all. Denying justice to the many so that the few are not convicted wrongly is part of our legal system. Read about Blackstone's ratio. 

Blackstone's ratio

 

 

But when approximately 9/10 currently are walking free, and we still have cases of wrongful conviction, I'd say ol' William Blackstone painted himself into a corner regarding these particular offences?

[Anon]

7 minutes ago, Jubbs said:

I suggest some of the people in here speak their views to the women in their lives and see what reaction you get. Shameful.

Appeal to emotion isn't a particularly effective tactic.

[Gaspode]

2 hours ago, The Last Post said:

I got confused, I thought Herpes were locals that helped mountain climbers on Mount Everest...I googled and it's Sherpas 🫢

It's not called Herpes anymore - it's been renamed to Evri.....

[Scott129]

2 hours ago, Normanton Lad said:

You don't seem to understand that C4 and The Times are just propaganda outlets. They have no more credibility than the bloke next door. 

What are the facts we know for certain?

We know that Brand has had sex with hundreds of women. He's admitted that. He's also had sex unprotected with prostitutes. He's admitted that.

What can we infer from that? Well I would say that there is a very high chance that he has herpes and he has passed this on to many women. 

If you someone has given you herpes you are not going to publicly accuse someone. No woman wants the world to know she has herpes. How else could you get back at someone who has given you this disease? I'm not saying he hasn't raped all these women but you have to look at all possible explanations. You can't take things on blind trust.

 

Genuine question mate - do you have a female partner/wife?

I can't quite put my finger on why but this post screams that you don't.

[ilkleyram]

Like others before him - Greenwood being just the latest example - Russell Brand is done for except, possibly, on social media.  Which Council or business will hire out their local arena for his stand up show, which employer (BBC/ITV/Sky/BT) will canvass his views or use him, which mainstream media outlet will pay him to write articles or present programmes, which company will employ him as an after dinner speaker?  They will all fight shy of an inevitable backlash if they were to do so. His career is already toast.

And yet.  He has not been found guilty of anything. May not be guilty of anything other than being an odious character making the most of their power like many others, male and female, have done before him.  Perhaps finding four people to tell similar stories wasn't very hard for a very, very promiscuous man (his own words). It was probably a large pool of people to ask. He has been tried and judged by Dispatches and the Sunday Times and found guilty in the court of public opinion.

I still can't see why we can't have, in these cases, anonymity on both sides until guilt is properly established. It protects both sides - how many people are, at this moment, trying to find out who the accusers really are; how much 'fishing' for other accusers are the police currently doing, to add to bonfire; how many people are putting themselves forward as victims who have never actually met Brand; how long will this process of identification and investigation take as others now put themselves forward?

If he's found to be guilty after due process he's fair game.  At that point perhaps others would step forward and have their cases established, or not.  But at the moment in our society in these type of cases guilt rather than innocence is what is presumed.  That should worry us all, imo.

[Stive Pesley]

15 minutes ago, Scott129 said:

Genuine question mate - do you have a female partner/wife?

I can't quite put my finger on why but this post screams that you don't.

Indeed - anyone on this thread with a female partner should ask her, not just her views on this case, but also ask how many times they have experienced sexual harassment of some form and how they felt about it at the time

[Leeds Ram]

Anyone reading the text receipts the investigations have found must admit that he's guilty of extremely troubling and horrible behaviour at the very least. It would not surprise me at all if his behaviour breached a criminal threshold. The investigations are thorough and have taken a long time to develop and I trust the journalists on them. I'm glad they've published the material and hopefully proceedings, either civil or criminal, will begin against this odious man.

[Scott129]

19 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

Indeed - anyone on this thread with a female partner should ask her, not just her views on this case, but also ask how many times they have experienced sexual harassment of some form and how they felt about it at the time

It's the misogynstic undertones in that post as well.

'Women are nasty and vindictive, and if you do something to wrong them, they will destroy your life because that's just how they are'.

It's a narrative that you see quite a lot in the incel movement and in Andrew Tate's work.

Edited September 18, 2023 by Scott129

[PistoldPete]

2 hours ago, Jubbs said:

I'll point you again in the direction of this statistic. I'm sick of hearing this "rape allegations ruin lives" they don't. 

Greenwood is still playing football, Ben Yedder just captained Monaco at the weekend, Ronaldo is still playing football. There's tens/hundreds of famous actors still getting jobs even though there's serious allegations against them. 

I think your post specific to the Brand case was excellent. And of course it is well known that many sex crimes go unreported leave alone convicted. 
 

But really all those stats show is the two small numbers in the chart. Relatively few men are proven to be guilty . Very few women are proven to be lying. In between there is a big blob of cases that are either one persons word against another or one persons perception against another’s with nothing proven either way. That does mean a lot of men get away with it. But what is the alternative? Change the requirement for    Beyond reasonable doubt? As I said in previous post that maybe why some women bring civil actions which can be decided on balance of probabilities. 

[Ram-Alf]

43 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

I think your post specific to the Brand case was excellent. And of course it is well known that many sex crimes go unreported leave alone convicted. 
 

But really all those stats show is the two small numbers in the chart. Relatively few men are proven to be guilty . Very few women are proven to be lying. In between there is a big blob of cases that are either one persons word against another or one persons perception against another’s with nothing proven either way. That does mean a lot of men get away with it. But what is the alternative? Change the requirement for    Beyond reasonable doubt? As I said in previous post that maybe why some women bring civil actions which can be decided on balance of probabilities. 

The Ched Evans case is a great example, 19 year old female and meets 2 pro footballers, Drink is flowing, all 3 end up in a hotel room, Footballers have left, Female wakes up and men have gone, She has no recollection of the last few hours of events, Time has passed and she files a complaint, In the meantime she posts on her Facebook account to her friend we're both going to have Pink Mini cars as she saw a pay-out looming.

Evens is found Guilty and sentenced to 5 years, There's a gagging order where the female can not have her details mentioned anywhere in the UK.

2.5 years later Evens appeal comes through, It was brought up in Court about the females past sexual activities(very loose)Evens has his conviction quashed...as it's a "he said she said".

Lets not get caught up in males are the devil and females are angels, They're both equally as good and bad as each other, Both chasing the £ and sod the detail.

As for Brand I never liked him, Swings from the left to the right to suit his own agenda and his followers, If he's brought to book and found guilty in a court of Law there's 20+ years as a convicted sexual predator...but as ilkleyram so eloquently put...he's now Toast.  

[PistoldPete]

26 minutes ago, The Last Post said:

The Ched Evans case is a great example, 19 year old female and meets 2 pro footballers, Drink is flowing, all 3 end up in a hotel room, Footballers have left, Female wakes up and men have gone, She has no recollection of the last few hours of events, Time has passed and she files a complaint, In the meantime she posts on her Facebook account to her friend we're both going to have Pink Mini cars as she saw a pay-out looming.

Evens is found Guilty and sentenced to 5 years, There's a gagging order where the female can not have her details mentioned anywhere in the UK.

2.5 years later Evens appeal comes through, It was brought up in Court about the females past sexual activities(very loose)Evens has his conviction quashed...as it's a "he said she said".

Lets not get caught up in males are the devil and females are angels, They're both equally as good and bad as each other, Both chasing the £ and sod the detail.

As for Brand I never liked him, Swings from the left to the right to suit his own agenda and his followers, If he's brought to book and found guilty in a court of Law there's 20+ years as a convicted sexual predator...but as ilkleyram so eloquently put...he's now Toast.  

In fairness the lady in the Ched Evans case did not make a complaint. It was the police that decided to bring charges, which was a big mistake for all concerned.  As was the big hooh hah following his release, conveniently ignoring the dodginess of his original conviction.  Brand is a different story altogether.  

[therealhantsram]

1 hour ago, ilkleyram said:

I still can't see why we can't have, in these cases, anonymity on both sides until guilt is properly established.

We saw how this would play out just a few weeks ago.

The Sun published a story with such flimsy evidence that they omitted the name of the BBC newsreader in question to avoid being sued.

We got 5 days of blanket coverage, speculation, BBC celebs issuing denials (yet being tainted nonetheless), and some of them pleading with the accused to name themselves to spare other people being falsely named.

It was a witch hunt and it was grim.

On balance I think it's better to simply name the individual accused as The Times have done with Brand.

 

[Ram-Alf]

20 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

In fairness the lady in the Ched Evans case did not make a complaint. It was the police that decided to bring charges, which was a big mistake for all concerned.  As was the big hooh hah following his release, conveniently ignoring the dodginess of his original conviction.  Brand is a different story altogether.  

Without going into all the finite details...how did the police know? fairies at the back of the police station.

Taken from Wales online

Police have confirmed they are investigating reports that the woman who alleged Ched Evans raped her has been named on social media.

The 27-year-old former Wales striker was found not guilty of rape by a jury at Cardiff Crown Court on Friday afternoon.

Superintendent Jo Williams, from North Wales Police , said: "An investigation is ongoing into the naming.”

The complainant's allegation had related to an incident at the Premier Inn in Rhuddlan on May 30 in 2011.

Brand isn't a different story...Females have complained...so far it's..."they said and he said"...police have yet to intervene

Edited September 18, 2023 by The Last Post

[Ram-Alf]

Police receive allegation of sexual assault 

https://news.sky.com/story/met-police-investigates-russell-brand-sex-assault-claim-12964410

[Archied]

Even the naming issue is a bloody minefield , on the one hand it can be terrible but on the other it can be the catalyst that breaks the fear and silence that often protects offenders , im pretty sure that can also be true for someone who makes false allegations and may have history for it ,

 

[RoyMac5]

15 minutes ago, Archied said:

Even the naming issue is a bloody minefield , on the one hand it can be terrible but on the other it can be the catalyst that breaks the fear and silence that often protects offenders , im pretty sure that can also be true for someone who makes false allegations and may have history for it ,

 

We'll have to trust The Met to deal with it fairly then. 

 

😄

[Mucker1884]

deleted, innit!

Edited September 18, 2023 by Mucker1884