Another convicted rapist we can ignore


Russell Brand has been getting increasingly weird and desperate — he has become frantically Christian. It may be that the motive driving his bizarre religiosity and political extremism may have been guilt, or maybe fear of getting called to account.

Pray harder, and chant harder, Russell. He’s been convicted of rape and three counts of sexual assault, and while he hasn’t been sentenced yet, and the judge has said, “I therefore have to remand you into custody.” He’s going to jail!

Comments

  1. gijoel says

    Always thought of him as a talentless poser. An empty man consumed with his narcissism. Glad he’s going to jail.

  2. StevoR says

    Good.

    Glad Brand will be going to jail.

    Hope an even more notorious rapist also goes to jail soon too although he may well get away by pleading insanity – which may come after he gets 25th Amendmented..

  3. says

    The late Sean Locke blew the whistle on Brand during a TV panel discussion 12 years ago, and nobody did anything back then. Just as with Jimmy Savile, Stewart Hall, Rolf Harris…

  4. drmarcushill says

    He is definitely going to jail. The judge remanded him because this will “inevitably mean a significant custodial sentence”. I saw an English legal expert’s view that the likely sentence according to the guidelines will be something like 7 or 8 years.

  5. seversky says

    i hope he gets the longest sentence allowed for these offenses. Another example of the arrogance of celebrity,

  6. says

    It’s possible he’ll get face more charges according to one of the news reports I saw yesterday. Stay tuned. Or don’t, and hope he doesn’t get out while attempting an appeal so you don’t have to hear about him again.

  7. Owlmirror says

    [Copying from Mano’s blog on the same topic]

    Something that has come to the fore about the UK legal system and Brand is that in 2014, he sued an accuser for libel, which was changed to harassment, and the victim, who lacked counsel, was given a seriously overbroad injunction that forbade her from discussing the events with almost anyone, and a bankrupting legal fine of £50,000.
     
      https://taxpolicy.org.uk/2026/11/07/russell-brand-secret-injunction/
     
    All this without a trial ever taking place.
     
    Concluding paragraph to the above article:

    The firm acting for Messrs Brand and Goldsmith was Archerfield Partners LLP. We think they have serious questions to answer.
     
    How could lawyers justify asking a court to prohibit speech that couldn’t conceivably constitute harassment – including private conversations with friends and family, and reports to the police?
     
    There are also questions for the judiciary: how could Mr Justice Jay grant an order of such breadth against an unrepresented defendant, without a trial, and without determining whether her allegations were true? Did he consider the proportionality and necessity of the order?
     
    Then there’s a bigger question. Was this a one-off? Or have other injunctions been granted, supposedly to prevent harassment, but actually silencing people even in private conversations with friends, family and the police?

  8. drmarcushill says

    Ten and a half years, with at least 2/3 served before being allowed out on licence, and subject to the conditions of being on the sex offenders register for the rest of his life. The SA sentences are being served concurrently (the longest is 18 months) but consecutive to the 9 years for rape. If the other offenses being investigated result in convictions, sentences for those (especially if he is found guilty of further rapes) are liable to be added wholly or partially to this sentence.

  9. drmarcushill says

    Reportedly, he is having a bad time inside, and finds the food “inedible”. This will cause his supporters to enter into a strange state of quantum superposition, as they are almost invariably the sort of people who claim prison is like a luxury hotel these days.

Leave a Reply