Law russell brand allegations

AWilder said:
Who is them?
Click to expand...
Them is a lot of things... it's the ubiquitous "they", it's the handlers, the string pullers and their lackeys, the bootlickers and the sodomite followers, it's the money lenders and the money creators, it's the button pushers and the party throwers, the people who sign the checks and who buy the politicians, it's who decides the lines for the parrots in the play... it's the blind who deny the possibility they're being manipulated and who bark when told to bark...

"Them" isn't a person or a group you can comfortably point a finger to in a line up, it's a compartmentalized system of individuals all playing their part, some who know and some who don't...
 
Scerpi said:
The media loved him back in the day when he was a horn dog progressive...

They eagerly reported on his promiscuity and his popularity... and had zero issues because he was basically a harmless, out of control actor and the flavor of the month.

Brand has acknowledged and is embarrassed of his drug fueled, sex crazed past... There's what, 4 girls in these allegations.

Guarantee Brand had several nights where there were 4 random girls he was fucking... at one time. His body count is likely in the 1,000's from that 10 year stretch.

And these news site decide NOW to go digging around in his past? Calling every girl they can find who hooked up with him. Trolling for anything negative... lol

Like any of the girls had any illusions of what was going on during those days. They knew the game and wanted in. Hilarious that they NOW have regrets after being prodded by reporters. Funny how some of these other girls the reporters contacted have also came out and said their stories were ignored. WHY???? Can't have any stories showing the Brand was actually a nice guy, despite being a party boy and sex addict. lol...

We all know why, it's a hit piece designed to take him down... And look at these sorry shitheads in this thread eating this up. How many times do these News Site have to make you look like dumbasses with their garbage reporting.

lol.. embarrassing
Click to expand...


I never followed Brand's career, so I don't know who his theoretical opponents would be. I just remember hearing the dumped Katy Perry when she was considered a goddess at the time lol.

Intriguing points on the drug fueled sex days. Chances are the women he was having sexual encounters with were dopeheads too. It's highly unlikely a bunch of folks addicted to hard drugs didn't do out of bounds shit to each other, especially given their age for when they were young the world didn't exist in the sign the "love contract".
 
badascan said:
Them is a lot of things... it's the ubiquitous "they", it's the handlers, the string pullers and their lackeys, the bootlickers and the sodomite followers, it's the money lenders and the money creators, it's the button pushers and the party throwers, the people who sign the checks and who buy the politicians, it's who decides the lines for the parrots in the play... it's the blind who deny the possibility they're being manipulated and who bark when told to bark...

"Them" isn't a person or a group you can comfortably point a finger to in a line up, it's a compartmentalized system of individuals all playing their part, some who know and some who don't...
Click to expand...

this is hilarious <45>
 
badascan said:
To imply he started a political media campaign to rally troops to his side in advance of the inevitable revelation of his misdeed is a little much, isn't it?
Click to expand...
It is, but that is kind of the gag; not everything is a conspiracy.

Sometimes, a sex and drug addict(Particularly one who, I bet, didnt often hear 'No' from women) just lets his appetites run away with him and fucks girls who are too young, or pushes things too far with a girl who wasnt willing, and ends up attempting rape before he reins himself back in and apologises profusely the following day, as seems to the case here. Remorse aside, it is still a sexual assault.

badascan said:
He made them money while being a useful tool, that's why he was "protected". He was a liability once he spoke out a little too loud, and it wasn't even that he said these things or even what he's been saying, it's that his usefulness right now is to be dragged... anyone who thinks this is organic is woefully and willfully blind...
Click to expand...

No, these rumours have been around for years, but i read that Russ has been pretty quick with the threats of litigation. Things have just finally come to a head, like they did for Weinstein etc.
 
Plastikman_Eire said:
It is, but that is kind of the gag; not everything is a conspiracy.

Sometimes, a sex and drug addict(Particularly one who, I bet, didnt often hear 'No' from women) just lets his appetites run away with him and fucks girls who are too young, or pushes things too far with a girl who wasnt willing, and ends up attempting rape before he reins himself back in and apologises profusely the following day, as seems to the case here. Remorse aside, it is still a sexual assault.



No, these rumours have been around for years, but i read that Russ has been pretty quick with the threats of litigation. Things have just finally come to a head, like they did for Weinstein etc.
Click to expand...
Maybe, sort of makes one wonder how many other criminal deviants are allowed to offend before they make enough noise for someone to finally say enough? And why are some allowed to continue while others are chosen to be stopped? Why do some face certain repressions while others are coddled and protected?

*Edit: almost as if there's potential conspiracy...
 
This is the text message. Some of the text is misaligned and copied and pasted. Looks like separate screenshots stitched together. The "Will You forgive me" part is diagonal from the text entry bar at the bottom.

Also looks like they're talking about him not using a condom as opposed to rape/sexual assault?

Now it doesn't mean he's not at fault for doing something wrong, but why the heck is the publication using doctored texts?

Brand.jpg
 
Hog-train said:
This seems like a good analysis and breakdown of all the allegations.

I will say though - why TF was he 30 years old dating a 16 year old? I don't care about the age of consent - that shit is weird.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Dude was way out of line, but that shit is legal.
 
Unknown Pleasures said:
I never followed Brand's career, so I don't know who his theoretical opponents would be. I just remember hearing the dumped Katy Perry when she was considered a goddess at the time lol.

Intriguing points on the drug fueled sex days. Chances are the women he was having sexual encounters with were dopeheads too. It's highly unlikely a bunch of folks addicted to hard drugs didn't do out of bounds shit to each other, especially given their age for when they were young the world didn't exist in the sign the "love contract".
Click to expand...

One of these days... there'll be girls coming after Pete Davidson

Of course, it'll be years later with zero evidence.
 
badascan said:
Maybe, sort of makes one wonder how many other criminal deviants are allowed to offend before they make enough noise for someone to finally say enough? And why are some allowed to continue while others are chosen to be stopped? Why do some face certain repressions while others are coddled and protected?

*Edit: almost as if there's potential conspiracy...
Click to expand...

Dunno, you only need to read threads like this to see there is still a section of society who immediately jump to a "fuck that lying bitch, bet shes just a gold digger" kind of stance.

It cant be easy or quick to build up the courage to go public against a rich, and powerful celebrity, to paint a target for trolls on your back and to forever more be known as "that chick who accused Russell Brand"

Often it seems that it's one victim who has the guts to speak out, which then emboldens others to also speak up.
 
Plastikman_Eire said:
Dunno, you only need to read threads like this to see there is still a section of society who immediately jump to a "fuck that lying bitch, bet shes just a gold digger" kind of stance.

It cant be easy or quick to build up the courage to go public against a rich, and powerful celebrity, to paint a target for trolls on your back and to forever more be known as "that chick who accused Russell Brand"

Often it seems that it's one victim who has the guts to speak out, which then emboldens others to also speak up.
Click to expand...
Hard to relate, partly because I'm not tied into public opinion but were I to be I'd like to think i'd have enough self respect to one, avoid a situation where I'm being molested or raped and two, very much immediately expose anyone who attempts such things were these things to greatly affect me regardless of who they are, or if I knew the perpetrator might continue doing these things to others...

When people show up far after the fact and "speak out" they should be questioned, not immediately believed nor denied...
 
Hog-train said:
I do not trust random screenshots of alleged text messages from a random media story. They could be doctored. They could be fake. They could be real. They could be taken out of context.

Point is - we don't know yet.
Click to expand...
Let's run through the levels of scrutiny the messages went through. You think all of the people below signed off on publishing doctored or fake messages?
-The actual reporters writing the story
-A factchecker they would have used internally to corroborate the number
-Multiple editors
-Legal counsel for the media outlet
-The publisher himself, who is a staunch Tory/conservative

If the messages aren't on the up and up, why hasn't Brand sued? He just has to file, and it would be up to the Times to prove that the messages are legit. That's a massive payday for him.
 
Joe said:
I always find it strange how people act like they know celebrities. Like they personally have a relationship with them.
Click to expand...
"I only see less than 1% of ____'s waking life, but I know they are a person of great character!"
EndlessCritic said:
On a contemporaneous basis. Not by saving up stories to unload them in a coordinated fashion.
Click to expand...
Who's saving up stories? A year is a pretty fast turn around on a story like this.
Hog-train said:
Not comparing that case with Russel Brand, but this guy breaks down the text against Brand used as "evidence." He thinks it's misleading and doctored. The texts are misaligned and obvious copy and pastes he says.
Click to expand...
Do you guys realize that text messages posted in news stories aren't screenshots? They're literally a graphic designer putting the quotes in a generic text template. This is standard practice in journalism.
 
Hog-train said:
This is the text message. Some of the text is misaligned and copied and pasted. Looks like separate screenshots stitched together. The "Will You forgive me" part is diagonal from the text entry bar at the bottom.

Also looks like they're talking about him not using a condom as opposed to rape/sexual assault?

Now it doesn't mean he's not at fault for doing something wrong, but why the heck is the publication using doctored texts?

Brand.jpg
Click to expand...
Jesus Christ. Do you see the credit? It's a graphic they made, not a screenshot.
Scerpi said:
Of course, it'll be years later with zero evidence.
Click to expand...
So do you think the medical records and texts are doctored, or that it's just pure coincidence that a women went to a rape crisis center the day she told Brand "no means no" and he apologized?
ShadowRun said:
Yea but he’s innocent until proven guilty .. hard concept to grasp I know .. just like trump which must hurt your brain
Click to expand...
Yup, which is why he's not in jail. Business aren't required to keep working with him if they don't want to. That's capitalism and freedom of association.
 
tastaylvr said:
Do you honestly think popular culture can be controlled?

cmon man
Click to expand...
How is it possible to not think that?

You can easily pick out what era something was from by the music, fashion, kinds of jokes etc. Popular culture is popular culture because it's pushed heavily in the mainstream to make it popular. It's shifted a bit now that people can upload things themselves and occasionally something will get popular organically, but there's still heavy backing for distribution of some things over others. In the case of music, it used to be all about getting "signed", and bands would conform to whatever is being pushed at the time to get attention of the handful of major labels. They even had a formula for the power chord songs to start, then they'd have their "power ballad", and all with the same outfits, hair styles, makeup etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,283,110
Messages
58,482,865
Members
176,051
Latest member
LuckyEthan

Share this page

Back
Top