@Paul82 tin foil hat types? Better than a fattened sheep.

@TheEmperor I don't know in this particular case but many women do not go forward in " "regular life"..non famous rapes or assault out of fear and terror they will be brushed off, or they are being overly sensitive or lying etc. I can imagine the horrible fear or dread to go and actually report something like that. I had fear of my own parent for physical and mental abuse and there were times I should have called the cops, but didn't out of fear.

@TheEmperor Well there COULD be consequences to the victim..the perpetrator can act again, harass etc or more.

@TheEmperor That allegation is not true, and the British Police do make the laws anyway.

@SumKindaMunster Sexual abuse crime is difficult to report where there is an imbalance in power between the parties (as clearly exists between a former media star and "national treasure" and a group of four unconnected young women/girls). The "authorities" exist to prosecute crime where evidence is presented. The "media" include journalists trained in finding and interpreting such evidence. In this particular case, Channel 4 journalists have made allegations that put their own employer in an unfavourable light. This could be seen as a good example of journalistic integrity where a conflict of interest exists.

@ToastyPickles I completely agree!

@ArishMell I agree completely. I think this is going to raise all sorts of headaches for the BBC, with the emergence of a pre-recorded Radio 2 show in which he boasts about flashing a complete stranger just before doing the programme. This is not hearsay but fact, and should have been edited out before broadcast - but somebody wasn't doing their job. Back in 2008 (as now) the BBC were so anxious to reposition Radio 2 as being hip and appealing to a younger audience than its historical one that those in control fucked-up on so many different levels.

@TheEmperor oh it’s you again. Next

@TheEmperor 🤢

@wonkywinky I have never seen any of his shows, but the few clips I have heard were enough for me to classify him as one of those loud, self-indulgent motor-mouths who put the conjunction to in that pretentious phrase alternative comedians.

Thereby wonder if he is like it off-stage, in his everyday life. Normally, actors are not: they play personae on stage, but I do not know if Brand take his stage persona home with him.

That though, does not answer the question of whether he was the sexual offender he is accused of being. What I find disturbing and dangerous is the immediate assumption of guilt in so many circles that are likely still to condemn him even if a genuine trial in Court does prove he was innocent.

He might be an unpleasant egotist and rape is an extremely serious crime that has to be dealt with properly and severely. Nevertheless, so-called "trial by public opinion", i.e. forward judgement generated and directed by the cheaper Press for sales, and by commercial [anti-]social media for the site-owners' advertising revenue, is at least as dangerous in its own ways, socially and legally.

@SunshineGirl glad to see you have made up your mind. The use of actors in the way they were used was tacky and manipulative. They could have had the statements read out in a nuetral manner. The fact that the accusers weren't even prepared to make verbal statements with their anonymity maintained, is telling. The shows creators were playing for a particular audience, gullible and quick to make emotional leaps to dogmatic certainties.

You, no matter how power hungry you are or how ignorant of the foundations of our society don't get to decide it is inappropriate for someone to have a platform.

By your view he has no right to defend himself in the very arena in which he has been attacked.

@Activitykittens I first began to form a view on the man in 2008 when he made a "prank call" on his radio show to Andrew Sachs, another but far more talented comedian, pretending that he had had sexual intercourse with Sachs' young granddaughter. He claimed in his own autobiography to be a "sex addict" and referred himself for psychological counselling in order to save his own career. These should have been clear red flags, but the prevailing ethos of the day was uncritical sycophancy towards a successful man who was a cash cow to others. He has shown nothing but contempt for anyone who disagrees with his world view and for women in general.

One of four women at the heart of the current controversy did actually appear in person on the documentary (partly because she lives in a different legal jurusdiction and will not be party to any future criminal proceedings in the UK).

@SunshineGirl yeah the Sachs thing was a low and irresponsible act and doesn't reflect well on him

However the most distributing thing to me about the Sachs episode is her grandfather refusing to talk to her after discovering she was in a consensual sexual relationship with Brand as a 23 year old woman

This isn't the 1900s

And for what it is worth she herself thinks the allegations should be taken with a pinch of salt 🤷

@TheEmperor Rose Byrne was fabulous in this movie but Russell as Aldous Snow was just a pervert 🤢