I did. It's enlightening. Like I said, fill your boots and you'll see why it's so hard to secure rape convictions when there are sources of doubt.
Russell Brand.
- Thread starter Von Smallhausen
- Start date
I did. It's enlightening. Like I said, fill your boots and you'll see why it's so hard to secure rape convictions when there are sources of doubt.
That's not how a civilised society should operate in my eyes.
Next we just go around spraying nonce on garden walls, rapist on cars, smash a few windows, get a good mob going and force people to move town because we heard some drunk person down the pub say something we didn't like.
The victim, the accused and the police should handle things before I want to hear about them
So what would you do to them? Sounds more like you’re willing to break the law rather than them. A 30 odd year old going out with a 16 year old raises some moral questions but it’s not “unacceptable”.
Judge tells masseuse to stop harassing Russell Brand and Jemima Khan
Celebrity couple win court order in ongoing dispute with Szilvia Berki, which they say has caused considerable distress
www.theguardian.com
It's a parent's job to be protective.
Even if your daughter was 25 you'd strongly discourage her from being Branded.
It's Brand's... job... to sow his wild oats all over the damn place, and it's the law's job to make sure nobody was harmed/exploited.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 21,990
- Location
- Wilds of suffolk
This is only partially correct, I posted above the details of when its not acceptable and potentially illegal.
In this case that would mean the end of free press.
No it wouldn't. Stop being so dramatic! The press could continue to report on factual occurrences.
Edit: what it probably would do is destroy tabloids. Oh no. How sad.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 21,990
- Location
- Wilds of suffolk
Most vigilante type stuff is local rumour anyway and not press.
Would make the polices job difficult to investigate without mentioning anything that may lead to 1+1=2
Freedom of the press to report on matters of genuine public concern, like government, banks or public service scandals is important to me.
Freedom to drag people through dirt and do nothing more than settle out of court is less appealing however.
Don't watch it then, simple.
That’s getting into specifics. In most situations, there’s nothing you can realistically do other than have a word.
Alright genius.
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 21,990
- Location
- Wilds of suffolk
Well yes its specifics because the law was changed to update on the 16 its legal all is fine you seemed to believe.
Its 16 and fine unless a load of things apply. Lets face it the law was changed because a high proportion of cases that happened were teachers and people in positions of power. Abusing that power.
Whether a highly familiar and household name would constitute a position of power would be an interesting one to see tried in court.
In the example you replied to I was demonstrating that I could lie about @hurfdurf hitting me when he didn't. If that gets spread around town that he hit me for no reason his livelihood could be under threat.
Eleanor Williams: Rape lies destroyed me - Jordan Trengove
Jordan Trengove spent 73 days in prison after he was framed for multiple rapes by Eleanor Williams.www.bbc.co.uk
‘I went downhill’: man falsely accused of rape on becoming a hate figure
Jordan Trengove faced trial after being accused by Eleanor Williams after a night out in 2019
The guy she falsely accused of rape had rapist painted on his house. Was he guilty or not guilty of rape?
To assume Brand is guilty at this point is supporting mob rule.
We need a court case, or at least a police investigation to reach a conclusion.
Are you conflating the false imprisonment and criminal damage to someone’s home based on a simple accusation with companies deciding they don’t want to work with someone who was grooming a school child when he was in his 30’s, has openly admitted abusing prostitutes in his “Bookey Wookey”, and has apologised to someone via text for an vague but hinted at sexual assault after the victim went to a rape crisis centre?
No one at this stage is saying RB should be in prison, nor are they calling for him to be beaten up.
Your comparison of the two is disingenuous to the point where one must question your motives.
But that’s not the question. I suppose what I saying is I wouldn’t judge someone for disagreeing with a 30 year man messing with a 16 year old girl. Especially if that man acted as Russell Brand has. I’d actually agree with them.
Freedom of press to report predatory sexual deviants soliciting 16 year old girls?
No, I didn’t assume it was fine in every single scenario. All of those things apply even if it’s a 24 year old going out with a 17 year old and not many people would have an issue with that.
I’m more interested in what @jigger would do as that’s who I directed the question at.
Last edited:
Do you care to read about the thousands of cases likely going through the courts now?
Nah you only care about some celebrity you don't like.
If you think tabloid press is a good thing then that's your choice. Fine by me. But in my eyes their whole phone tapping and history of overstepping the mark makes me think less of them.
Good investigative journalism is on its arse anyway. 90% of crap on news sites is just regurgitated stories they picked up from social media. They never even leave the office.