Dispatches/Sunday Times investigation: Russell Brand accused of rape and sexual assault

[ancoats]

The press broke Saville. Weinstein. The Catholic Church being a den of pedos in the US to name but 3 off the top of my head. That’s what investigative journalists do.

but all at a time it was too late for many victims

 

[SebastianBlue]

It’s also potentially a flaw in the legal system - the hurdle of beyond reasonable doubt cannot easily be achieved with one word against another - it generally needs more evidence.

Absolutely.

And one people seem to not want to acknowledge when arguing that these types accusations should be reported in the media or discussed on forums like ours.

When, in reality, the vast majority of historical cases of sexual abuse and rape have gone unreported and, subsequently uninvestigated, largely because those accused and those that would investigate were under no pressure to be held to account.

 

[SebastianBlue]

but all at a time it was too late for many victims

Yes, because the offenders were much more easily able to suppress the accusations from the public view, limiting any pressure to investigate, either by journalists or authorities.

 

[ancoats]

You do get how investigative journalism has always worked, right..?

I’m not sure where it’s come from that the only wrongdoing that should be reported on or considered is that that’s illegal either.

why does it go to the media first and not to a court or jury? and verdict, many many top rich people have a media block reporting it or speaking about it, When it suits the bigwigs the power stops any reports

 

[ancoats]

Yes, because the offenders were much more easily able to suppress the accusations from the public view, limiting any pressure to investigate, either by journalists or authorities.

it's all about how much value and power they hold, Jimmy Saville was protected by the bigwigs for years and years
and it wasn't until the bigwigs were no more that the media was allowed to run the witch hunt

 

[Two Gun Bob]

The 'Sachs-gate' show was prerecorded by Brand's own production company, and was aired without scrutiny from the BBC, so it wasn't directly sanctioned by the Corporation. The mistake they made was trusting brand and his production company. Ultimately they were held responsible.

The BBC issued an apology stating that the calls were grossly offensive and a breach of editorial standards. The corporation apologised specifically to Sachs and Baillie.

The evening before this formal apology, David Barber, head of Specialist Music and Compliance at Radio 2, also resigned. Like Douglas (controler of radio2), he had been aware of the contents of the show, and had sanctioned the segment's broadcast.

 

[meltonblue]

why does it go to the media first and not to a court or jury? and verdict, many many top rich people have a media block reporting it or speaking about it, When it suits the bigwigs the power stops any reports

Because that’s exactly how investigative journalism works, why would it go to a court or jury first?

 

[SebastianBlue]

it's all about how much value and power they hold, Jimmy Saville was protected by the bigwigs for years and years
and it wasn't until the bigwigs were no more that the media was allowed to run the witch hunt

Exactly.

Without the media reports, he was not held to account and was allowed to continue with his horrific abuse for years.

I understand the desire to not want to assume someone guilty until they have had their day in court. That is a noble and important endeavour.

But that is wholly different from some of the arguments being made that the media should not report the accusations or that we should not debate them on forums like this one, when that has most often been the only thing that has actually lead to such offenders being held to account.

For centuries sexual abusers were able to act with impunity because they could bury the accusations (and sometimes the accusers). Barring media reporting and public scrutiny will just revert society to that state of the horrific abuse with no consequence.

 

[ancoats]

The only person 'milking' anything in this situation is Brand himself. Once he technically became unemployable he turned to social media. I don't condone anybody that has done wrong as a stream of income. He prays on people insecurities by using conspiracy theories to convince them that everyone is out to get them, and only he knows the 'truth'.

Funny how his well trodden anti-media stance now comes to his defence after the revelations of the Dispatches program. He's been working on this defence ever since he quietly slipped away from the main stream media.

it's that platform (social media) that the government fear the most, So what do they do ? That's right they do a job on him and make a case that he can not defend himself on Tv

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

The BBC issued an apology stating that the calls were grossly offensive and a breach of editorial standards. The corporation apologised specifically to Sachs and Baillie.

The evening before this formal apology, David Barber, head of Specialist Music and Compliance at Radio 2, also resigned. Like Douglas, he had been aware of the contents of the show, and had sanctioned the segment's broadcast.

I stand corrected. I was under the impression that particular show hadn't been listened to by BBC execs before broadcast.