Russell Brand

[Matlock]

I think you're very much on the same page as myself and the mrs as we watched it here last night.

I think if anything the editing was quite poorly done, as you say blurred lines - the guy made his fame essentially for being a junkie/sex addict who was liable to do and say anything - it's not a massive leap to the allegations from there.

I get the feeling there will more repercussions on those in charge of the production companies he was working for , channel 4 etc at the time as they seemed to have just swept it under the rug and/or ignored it. Whilst his actions may or may not have been illegal, it was certainly beyond acceptable limits - and they neglected their duty of care towards employees etc.

And on that note - would those who reported it at the time to Channel 4 etc have a case against the channel for failing to protect them - that would seem to be more of a slam dunk (from my absolute laymans pov of course!!)

I would think so. If they were writing into his contracts (which I know is disputed) that he was not to be left alone with female staff then that is an admission that they knew he was a danger.

 

[Browser Brody]

Yeah, it is interesting (and I know what you mean about that word!)

I thought that the documentary itself kinds blurred lines between stuff that was creepy and gross but perfectly legal, and stuff that (if true) is criminal behaviour. I'm not mad about that as an approach tbh.

Like in the Belfast rape cases, those guys behaved very badly, but not illegally. But it ended up with this sense that they should be convicted for the whatsapp messages they sent etc, when that stuff isn't criminal.

There is no doubt that Brand is a letch, he gleefully admits that himself. But that doesn't automatically mean he is a rapist.

I was struck watching the doc though at how much the line has moved since the early 2000s in terms of what is acceptable. Nowdays, he would be cancelled for the contents of the the Jimmy Saville interview alone!

His podcast in the mid 00’s was fantastic , he never done anything funnier or more entertaining.
But yeah, some of the content was fairly out-there all right. Plenty of hours recorded of potential evidence that might incriminate him in some way.

He had a great straight man co-host in Matt Morgan who used to call him on his bullshit. Noel Gallagher was hilarious on it also.

Yer man Matt has fallen out with Russell in recent years for some reason.

 

[Frank O’Connor]

The press and TV go after lots of people on the public eye. If you talk shit on stage about sex and women, chances are, someone will do a bit of digging. It is also more likely to stick if what you are saying is fairly over the line. In other words, I don't think the press were out to get him more than your average footballer, actor or politician.
In more recent years consent has definitely been highlighted as a serious issue. Back in the 90's (when I was young) a man saying he got someone drunk and he got the ride was accepted pretty widespread. Or words or actions to that effect. So yes, as times move on your do realise what happened in the past was really not okay. His jokes may have gone over people's heads in a way at the time, but watching them now, I think a lot of people would find them pretty unfunny.

Also, men who rise to the top tend to be quite narcissistic and relish power (though the only thing I liked about Brand was that he admitted his vulnerabilities in terms of mental health).

 

[gaffer falls]

Where are we heading in the West?

UK Parliament sends letters to social media platforms demanding demonetization of Russell Brand

“Although it may be politically and socially easier for Rumble to join a cancel culture mob, doing so would be a violation of our company’s values and mission.”

thepostmillennial.com

 

[Sham Corkman]

Where are we heading in the West?

UK Parliament sends letters to social media platforms demanding demonetization of Russell Brand

“Although it may be politically and socially easier for Rumble to join a cancel culture mob, doing so would be a violation of our company’s values and mission.”

thepostmillennial.com

Looks like they don’t even want to wait for it to go through any kind of justice system, I suppose why bother.

Shur the guy is guilty, no need for any kind of thorough hearing, investigation or a proper review and gathering of the evidence, or right of reply. Might as well do one of those premium rate phone/text in pools to determine the sentence too.

Might as well fully embed the China social credit system for all as we are at it.

The guy might not be sweetness and light and may have committed crimes, but he should be entitled to due process. Innocent until proven guilty and all that.

 

[Kilworthcamp]

Looks like they don’t even want to wait for it to go through any kind of justice system, I suppose why bother.

Shur the guy is guilty, no need for any kind of thorough hearing, investigation or a proper review and gathering of the evidence, or right of reply. Might as well do one of those premium rate phone/text in pools to determine the sentence too.

Might as well fully embed the China social credit system for all as we are at it.

The guy might not be sweetness and light and may have committed crimes, but he should be entitled to due process. Innocent until proven guilty and all that.

Cardassian law​

https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Cardassian_Dukat in 2369
"On Cardassia, the verdict is always known before the trial begins. And it's always the same."
"In that case, why bother with a trial at all?"
"Because the people demand it. They enjoy watching justice triumph over evil every time. They find it comforting."
– Gul Dukat and Commander Benjamin Sisko, 2370 ("The Maquis, Part II")

 

[Jim Comic]

the walls are closing in on rb

It'S Kubrickian! GIF – Get Him To The Greek Kubrick Jonah Hill – discover and share GIFs

Click to view the GIF

tenor.com

 

[Do the opposite.]

Looks like they don’t even want to wait for it to go through any kind of justice system, I suppose why bother.

Shur the guy is guilty, no need for any kind of thorough hearing, investigation or a proper review and gathering of the evidence, or right of reply. Might as well do one of those premium rate phone/text in pools to determine the sentence too.

Might as well fully embed the China social credit system for all as we are at it.

The guy might not be sweetness and light and may have committed crimes, but he should be entitled to due process. Innocent until proven guilty and all that.

Speak out against system and cards are marked. He is a plonker but did talk sense during the last few years but if guilty deserves what he gets. But the media hate him so its going to be hard if he is innocent.

 

[Matlock]

Looks like they don’t even want to wait for it to go through any kind of justice system, I suppose why bother.

Shur the guy is guilty, no need for any kind of thorough hearing, investigation or a proper review and gathering of the evidence, or right of reply. Might as well do one of those premium rate phone/text in pools to determine the sentence too.

Might as well fully embed the China social credit system for all as we are at it.

The guy might not be sweetness and light and may have committed crimes, but he should be entitled to due process. Innocent until proven guilty and all that.

Agreed.

There is a conflation here of behaviour that is creepy and unpleasant but 100% legal (which he undoubtably engaged in and admits to) and allegations that are 100% criminal and he denies.

There is a sense that even if he isn't jailed for rape, he should be jailed for his treatment of Andrew Sach's granddaughter or his conversation with Jimmy Saville, or all of the inappropriate comments he has made to women over the years. That is a dangerous road to go down imo.

He's a gowl of monumental proportions, but that isn't a criminal offence.

 

[nelly sham]

When I saw it first, i mixed him up with Jo Brand. Lol.

Or the tarot card fella!


I'm getting the word ... 'nonce'.