Reply To: Russell Brand

Iron Bru Forums Non Football Russell Brand Reply To: Russell Brand

#272578
SideriteSiderite
Participant
Offline
Registered On: December 12, 2014
Topics: 104

The Saville point is to say that judicial process isn’t the barometer of public opinion, and in a world of free speech it won’t be. Also, if we are holding the court as the ultimate test for what we can think, then we cannot think people like Saville, Slobodan Milosevic, Fred West (he did confess, so to a lesser extent) and others should be treated as guilty.

I think the assumption that women who do come forward must be ideologically motivated is precisely why many women don’t come forward. Never mind that these women have shown documents from the time, including showing their visits to rape centres after the event a decade ago. My, that would be a long con for some ideological put down alone. The charge of political motivation against these women, without due reason (when we have more evidence and questions against Brand) is quite abhorrent, I have to say. You say Brand was promiscuous, but another question is that out of so many women, is it unlikely that some weren’t manipulated like those alleged? Given Brand’s nature, I don’t think that’s absurd.

Time after time, we hear how we must bear in mind that the perpetrator might not be guilty with these accusations, but we rarely hear such call for calm against the women. No, they get slammed as ideologically driven or trying to put a good man down every time, with no evidence. 99% of rape claims don’t lead to a guilty verdict (most dropping before court). Does this mean 99% of charges are false? That would be silly, but this is where this argument leads to. Many victims are manipulated, go back on statements and the standard in court is (rightfully) high, so it may be hard to prove on a legal basis. This doesn’t mean innocence; not guilty does not necessarily mean innocent, it means that there isn’t enough evidence to prove guilt without doubt. As such, I don’t think we should be slaves to that when considering the judgement of someone.

The Times and Dispatches did a rounded investigative piece, with accusations going back years. The political element is linked to why Channel 4 came out now, not the accusations from women. Still, political decisions do not discount the piece. The accusations are grim, his own admissions are grim; I am more bothered about the welfare of likely victims now having to face judgement over Brand. I would say that accusations should go to the police, but there’s been many words said by victims as to why this is hard for many, including the disbelief from others and others taking a dim view of them. Unfortunately, with sexual crimes, society seems to find it easier to judge victims as liars over the accused being a deviant.

1 user thanked author for this post.