Russell Brand.
- Thread starter Von Smallhausen
- Start date
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 29,639
Accounts are always behind anyway, I imagine once he files new accounts it will be even more than that.
But consider this - If he paid 2 people £100,000 a year each and generated no new income as of September 2022
He could still employ them for at least 15 years to do nothing. The remaining money would then cover PAYE and National Insurance.
Except nobody was talking about whether or not he was a lousy president. You’ve literally hallucinated a conversation that didn’t happen in the post quoted or the posts before that.
Seems like player three has joined the game in an attempt to derail this thread into another trump thread.
It shows how far society as fallen. Many tenets of society have collapsed. Now it struggles with basic justice.
Professionalism, impartiality, the legal process are all verging on being lost to mob rule.
Objectification and dehumanisation in the poison at the centre of a lot of problems these days.
Brand might be guilty. But abandoning societies principles for one person isn't good enough. We've all been damaged by this process.
Professionalism, impartiality, the legal process are all verging on being lost to mob rule.
Objectification and dehumanisation in the poison at the centre of a lot of problems these days.
Brand might be guilty. But abandoning societies principles for one person isn't good enough. We've all been damaged by this process.
I don't know how many people he employs but it's definitely more than 2, Youtubers typically hire far more than you'd imagine, a channel with 6.6 million followers producing daily videos is a small company.
Most normal, reasonable people accept that both sides need to be taken seriously and it is not appropriate to either assume someone is guilty, or act like nothing has happened.
Private companies and individuals are free to make their own decisions about whether they wish to associate with him.
I find the hysteria a bit much, but given the media's track record of harbouring and protecting known serial sex offenders in plain sight, it's hardly surprising what a circus it has become.
That goes out the window if there is even a whiff of politics.Whatever happened to "innocent until proven guilty"?
.
Oh yeah absolutely, I wouldn't disagree with that.
I guess somebody invented social media.
The real thickos have the same voice as the more enlightened.
Last edited:
No, it was in direct reply to you talking about him as if he's innocent, he is not, you were shown up with a source outlining everything about the case in particular. Deal with the loss and move on.
1) Yes he has been accused of being a bit more than touchy. What's that got to do with my reply? I wasn't saying that is all he's accused of.
2) Yes it is OK for an employer to decide they don't want an alleged sex offender strolling around the workplace. I would also absolutely expect anyone in that position to be suspended. ON FULL PAY. But I appreciate this isn't quite so simply because he is not employed.
3) Google appear to be deciding on what their advertisers opinions are. Yes Google is a private company and have every right to protect their own brand in this way. But they are only doing so because of fear of public opinion. I am still not comfortable with our society (and that includes public opinion) deciding someone's guilt on mere accusations.
This. Nothing has inherently changed. We just have the technology now that means everyone knows everything instantly.
That poster is acting like people getting judged on rumours or accusations has never happened before in the history of society
Associate
- Joined
- 17 Sep 2018
- Posts
- 1,476
Not illegal but creepy as ****:
Lisa, whose real identity is being protected, says she met Brand in 2008, when she was in her early twenties, and that she was invited to his house with a female friend of hers and they went on to have a threesome.
She says that the two women’s real names sounded vaguely similar to “Holly and Jessica”, the names of the ten-year-old girls who were murdered by Huntley in 2002.
“He started talking about Ian Huntley, the paedophile and child killer, and mentioned it quite a few times, like in a joking way, but also made up a whole song about it,” she said.
“I just couldn’t understand why you would be able to have sex and talk about a child killer at the same time.
Lisa claims that Brand offered the women alcohol from his fridge, and she found this “weird” because he was teetotal. She alleges that during the sexual encounter she and her friend started laughing, because they were “quite nervous”, and that Brand replied: “Can you two stop laughing because I don’t want to do this, I have to do it.”
She says that after leaving Brand’s house she kept in touch with him by phone and he offered to give her an endorsement quote for a book she was writing at the time.
She claims that Brand sent a quote by text and then asked her to go to his house “to finalise it”. She says she believes it was about three or four nights later that she returned to his house and, when she arrived, there was another woman there who she had not met before. She says: “It was quickly quite clear that I was there to have a threesome with him and this woman that I’d never met. And I was just like, no. No.”
When Lisa allegedly refused to have another threesome with Brand, she says he “took it quite badly” and was “very instantly quite annoyed”. Lisa was wearing skinny jeans and an Ed Hardy hoodie and she remembers Brand becoming angry and mocking her appearance by asking her why she had “turned up here dressed like a cleaner”.
Brand then allegedly told her she was no longer able to use the quote for the front cover of her book. Lisa said she ran out of his house crying and did not speak to Brand again.
Lisa, whose real identity is being protected, says she met Brand in 2008, when she was in her early twenties, and that she was invited to his house with a female friend of hers and they went on to have a threesome.
She says that the two women’s real names sounded vaguely similar to “Holly and Jessica”, the names of the ten-year-old girls who were murdered by Huntley in 2002.
“He started talking about Ian Huntley, the paedophile and child killer, and mentioned it quite a few times, like in a joking way, but also made up a whole song about it,” she said.
“I just couldn’t understand why you would be able to have sex and talk about a child killer at the same time.
Lisa claims that Brand offered the women alcohol from his fridge, and she found this “weird” because he was teetotal. She alleges that during the sexual encounter she and her friend started laughing, because they were “quite nervous”, and that Brand replied: “Can you two stop laughing because I don’t want to do this, I have to do it.”
She says that after leaving Brand’s house she kept in touch with him by phone and he offered to give her an endorsement quote for a book she was writing at the time.
She claims that Brand sent a quote by text and then asked her to go to his house “to finalise it”. She says she believes it was about three or four nights later that she returned to his house and, when she arrived, there was another woman there who she had not met before. She says: “It was quickly quite clear that I was there to have a threesome with him and this woman that I’d never met. And I was just like, no. No.”
When Lisa allegedly refused to have another threesome with Brand, she says he “took it quite badly” and was “very instantly quite annoyed”. Lisa was wearing skinny jeans and an Ed Hardy hoodie and she remembers Brand becoming angry and mocking her appearance by asking her why she had “turned up here dressed like a cleaner”.
Brand then allegedly told her she was no longer able to use the quote for the front cover of her book. Lisa said she ran out of his house crying and did not speak to Brand again.
Good shout. That is a great example of an innocent man's life being wrecked by multiple false accusations.
The most sinister explanation for these accusations is that a load of women decided to make some money out of someone who made themselves an easy target for such tactics.
That it's somehow being driven by some shadowy establishment who mobilised a load of women to silence a truth speaker is laughable.
I'm still quite conflicted by how these cases all play out though. The idealism of innocent until proven guilty is tempered by the reality of an Internet world where these things can't be kept quiet until resolved.
I also think that in these cases that even when someone is guilty of some crimes, again the reality of the world today is that there will be some false accusations made, and they don't help because they muddy the waters.
That said, I don't hold with the argument that not reporting things at the time or going to the police means it never happened or is a case of regret. Doing so often means your own life is dissected and trawled through for what are pretty low chances of getting a result, so it's understandable that these things aren't reported until the dam breaks and people feel there's safety in numbers.
That it's somehow being driven by some shadowy establishment who mobilised a load of women to silence a truth speaker is laughable.
I'm still quite conflicted by how these cases all play out though. The idealism of innocent until proven guilty is tempered by the reality of an Internet world where these things can't be kept quiet until resolved.
I also think that in these cases that even when someone is guilty of some crimes, again the reality of the world today is that there will be some false accusations made, and they don't help because they muddy the waters.
That said, I don't hold with the argument that not reporting things at the time or going to the police means it never happened or is a case of regret. Doing so often means your own life is dissected and trawled through for what are pretty low chances of getting a result, so it's understandable that these things aren't reported until the dam breaks and people feel there's safety in numbers.
That’s just a bold faced lie. I made one claim which was, he was found liable for a specific thing (which was true he was). And I said let’s see what will happen with the other cases.
And you took that to mean I’m championing his innocence.
Ironic that you talk about trump being a liar when you struggle to be honest about another persons post. Go peddle you BS elsewhere.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,342
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE MODS, CAN SOMEBODY CHANGE THE TITLE OF THIS THREAD BEFORE I EXPLODE?
He's a professional busker.
That's not an employment and getting told their pitch is revoked isn't a suspension.
Their business partner has said the deal is off and unless they're about to be sued for millions, this is something Brand signed up for.