Sunday Times & C4 due to drop a big story [Russell Brand]

[bobbo89]

Welcome. said:

Is that it???

I thought it was going to be someone of more substance than that tosser.

I believe there's more than one, just that Brand is the only one who's preemptively started damage limitation,

I've heard rumours of two more, not naming names but one hosts a very popular C4 programme that starts in just over a week and so i'd be surprised if it's him given Dispatches is C4.

The other is slightly more believable, think channel swimming children's author...

[Gweeds]

If it’s Brand no doubt he’ll already be spinning it as a ‘there’s an agenda by the establishment to get rid of me because I know too much’

[105.4]

Gweeds said:

If it’s Brand no doubt he’ll already be spinning it as a ‘there’s an agenda by the establishment to get rid of me because I know too much’

Funnily enough, he’s released a 2-3 minute long YouTube video this morning absolutely rejecting the claims made against him.

I don’t know if he’s innocent or guilty. Neither do you, and neither does 99.99999% of the rest of the population.

All I will say is that an accusation made against someone doesn’t equal guilt. We are all innocent until proven guilty, (or we admit our guilt). I think it’s important to remember that.

[bitchstewie]

Gweeds said:

If it’s Brand no doubt he’ll already be spinning it as a ‘there’s an agenda by the establishment to get rid of me because I know too much’

Judge for yourself.

[Rufus Stone]

105.4 said:

All I will say is that an accusation made against someone doesn’t equal guilt. We are all innocent until proven guilty, (or we admit our guilt). I think it’s important to remember that.

Used to be that way yes. These days with trial via media, not so much.

[Gweeds]

105.4 said:

Funnily enough, he’s released a 2-3 minute long YouTube video this morning absolutely rejecting the claims made against him.

I don’t know if he’s innocent or guilty. Neither do you, and neither does 99.99999% of the rest of the population.

All I will say is that an accusation made against someone doesn’t equal guilt. We are all innocent until proven guilty, (or we admit our guilt). I think it’s important to remember that.

Where did I forget that?

[Ian Geary]

This couldn't be more off topic if I tried. However

105.4 said:

Or I’ve just added 2+2 and got 11.

I always like to say "added 2+2 and got 22"

Just seems to work better.

As you were!

[Hub]

glazbagun said:

bhstewie said:

Bit odd then (in more ways than one didn't realise he seems to have gone down a rabbit hole).

https://x.com/rustyrockets/status/1702810015176794...

After a period of sanity he's been increasingly odd since becoming more of a YT guy, but if there's anything salacious coming out I'm prone to think it's manufactured news for a slow week/ distraction from something else.

The guy was a complete trainwreck of an ahole for almost all of his ascendancy. It would be like a scoop on Axl Rose or Mike Tyson.

Yeah, have a look at his YouTube channel, it seems to be all clickbait conspiracy theory stuff and he is probably quite influential to his followers, a bit cult like!

[CoolHands]

Guilty!

[Pflanzgarten]

Unless he's been doing something internationally heinous I can't imagine why anyone would care? He's a fruit loop conspiracy has-been.

Expect the Andrew Tate defence "the matrix is out to get me!"

[Blue62]

Rufus Stone said:

Used to be that way yes. These days with trial via media, not so much.

When did ‘these days’ start? Trial by media seems to have been a thing for quite some time though I’d agree that it’s now in your face 24/7, but that’s progress I guess! The fact that a story can generate so much interest before it’s even broken is, I think, a measure of the degree to which we’re being manipulated.

[Jockman]

I’m so excited I could rip a tissue.

[Electro1980]

Rufus Stone said:

105.4 said:

All I will say is that an accusation made against someone doesn’t equal guilt. We are all innocent until proven guilty, (or we admit our guilt). I think it’s important to remember that.

Used to be that way yes. These days with trial via media, not so much.

No it didn’t. Hearsay and rumours have always existed, and always impacted peoples reputation and lives. Innocent until proven guilty is a concept in criminal law, not on the general public making up their minds based on information. Liable and slander laws exist to prevent lies and, frankly, I am minded to believe journalists over Brand who, regardless of his past, has chosen to make a rambling video rather than use the UK laws, which would very heavily favour him if he were to take it to court.

Given how many times we have seen people use gagging orders and liable cases to stop information about them being published, the fact he is not taking that route says a lot.

[Four Litre]

105.4 said:

Gweeds said:

If it’s Brand no doubt he’ll already be spinning it as a ‘there’s an agenda by the establishment to get rid of me because I know too much’

Funnily enough, he’s released a 2-3 minute long YouTube video this morning absolutely rejecting the claims made against him.

I don’t know if he’s innocent or guilty. Neither do you, and neither does 99.99999% of the rest of the population.

All I will say is that an accusation made against someone doesn’t equal guilt. We are all innocent until proven guilty, (or we admit our guilt). I think it’s important to remember that.

It’s sad that around 70% of the population have forgotten that!

Guarantee that by first light tomorrow you will have feminist nut jobs requesting that he is strung up from a lamp post.

[Four Litre]

Electro1980 said:

Rufus Stone said:

105.4 said:

All I will say is that an accusation made against someone doesn’t equal guilt. We are all innocent until proven guilty, (or we admit our guilt). I think it’s important to remember that.

Used to be that way yes. These days with trial via media, not so much.

No it didn’t. Hearsay and rumours have always existed, and always impacted peoples reputation and lives. Innocent until proven guilty is a concept in criminal law, not on the general public making up their minds based on information. Liable and slander laws exist to prevent lies and, frankly, I am minded to believe journalists over Brand who, regardless of his past, has chosen to make a rambling video rather than use the UK laws, which would very heavily favour him if he were to take it to court.

Given how many times we have seen people use gagging orders and liable cases to stop information about them being published, the fact he is not taking that route says a lot.

How do you know he isn’t pursuing the legal route as well? Do you have first hand knowledge?

[Southerner]

First thought, obviously, is nutjob, but…. it makes you think, doesn’t it?!

[105.4]

Electro1980 said:

No it didn’t. Hearsay and rumours have always existed, and always impacted peoples reputation and lives. Innocent until proven guilty is a concept in criminal law, not on the general public making up their minds based on information. Liable and slander laws exist to prevent lies and, frankly, I am minded to believe journalists over Brand who, regardless of his past, has chosen to make a rambling video rather than use the UK laws, which would very heavily favour him if he were to take it to court.

Given how many times we have seen people use gagging orders and liable cases to stop information about them being published, the fact he is not taking that route says a lot.

And right on que, here’s Electro to prove my point.

You’re so transparent Electro. If Russell Brand had used a gagging order, you’d be saying that he was only doing so as he didn’t want the truth to come out, therefore he’s guilty.

[Gweeds]

Pflanzgarten said:

Unless he's been doing something internationally heinous I can't imagine why anyone would care? He's a fruit loop conspiracy has-been.

Expect the Andrew Tate defence "the matrix is out to get me!"

I’d imagine the police might care

[Southerner]

Gweeds said:

Pflanzgarten said:

Unless he's been doing something internationally heinous I can't imagine why anyone would care? He's a fruit loop conspiracy has-been.

Expect the Andrew Tate defence "the matrix is out to get me!"

I’d imagine the police might care

You’d think so. Might have been idea for the complainant(s) to have gone there first really, rather than Channel 4…

[andy_s]

PH sometimes: 'Entrenched ideas set, presumptions loaded, outrage ready - no idea what any of this is about but let's go!'