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

Coatigan said:
No, it is not taking sides. It is simply respecting and accepting the law and systems we have in place.
Click to expand...

Holding the opinion that you believe his accusers isn't the same not accepting the law and systems we have in place. Nobody is saying "I think he did it, so let's lock him up right now." I accept he would need to go to trial before any legal punishment could be handed out to him. But I believe his accusers.
 
I find the idea that the media is "out to get" Brand outlandish: why? Brand hovers around the coat-tails of the traditional media with his fringe views, using an eloquent-sounding stream of long words but he has nothing of substance to say that isn't better said more briefly elsewhere. The notion that he is a leader in political thought is absurd in the extreme. Like any - to quote his phrase - pound shop dictator he would rather construct an elaborate conspiracy theory for the commonplace than learn what is actually happening in the real world outside of his fantasies.

Did he do the things he is accused of? I have no idea, but on the balance of probabilities it would appear likely. In the political debates I have seen which involve him, he tries to steamroller disagreement with his views using a mixture of verbal bullying, mockery and sarcasm and when that fails he simply emits a ceaseless string on inanities to bludgeon the other person into silence so there is no reason to believe he wouldn't do the same in other aspects of his life.
 
youngbob said:
More women have come forward after the documentary. Remember, folks, it's all a conspiracy, even as the number of women accusing Brand of assault goes into the double figures.

metro.co.uk

Investigator contacted by alleged Russell Brand victim as more come forward

The actor and comedian, 48, is accused of rape, sexual assault and physical abuse.
metro.co.uk metro.co.uk
Click to expand...

Not surprised this story will run and run, obviously any new allegations will need to be verified before putting any weight behind them.
 
SebastianBlue said:
I don’t think the media runs the stories to help the victims. And I agree the accusations should be passed on to authorities for investigation. But public pressure is often the only reason that (or the investigations themselves) take place at all. So arguing that the media should not report or debate them is essentially arguing against the accusations being taken seriously, fully stop.

I understand how the system of information dissemination has worked in the past and am not so naive as to believe it was better for society.

And there is absolutely room for expressing opinions on guilt—that is not at all covered by defamation or slander law, and for good reason.

Are you arguing against free exchange of information and free speech?

I have denounced the likes of Alex Jones, Joe Rogan, Piers Morgan, and Russell Brand for being the dangerous grifters they are. But I have never said their right to speech should be curtailed, even now in Brand’s response to the allegation.
Click to expand...
When it comes to an alleged crime there is no room for expression of opinion on guilt. The same could be said for the opinions on Benjamin Mendy who as it turns out was found not guilty and now his career is ruined.
bluenova said:
I appreciate where you're coming from and can understand giving people the benefit of the doubt, but why should the only test be if he is found guilty in a court?

Suggesting that Brand is right now innocent, simply because he's not been convicted, is taking his side over the multiple women who have accused him.

Most people are aware that only something like 1% of reported rapes end up with a conviction. And that's the ones that get reported. The majority are never reported, so by suggesting the only standard of proof that we can consider is a legal one, means we're applying a ridiculously high bar for the women who have accused him.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry but this is completely mad, this isn't about taking sides, taking sides is stupid and completely unnecessary.

Every normal person is on the side of the women involved but at the minute those claims are unproven. Beyond supporting those women the only side we should be on is the side of finding truth. The only way to find truth is in court, that's why it exists.

If we only consider one side and presume guilt then quite literally any person in the street can have their life ruined and is that okay? The law thankfully protects everyone from this by presuming everyone is innocent until proven otherwise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.