Celebrity Sexual Harassment Charge Sheet

[Cunt]

Glen Greenwald weighed in. You guys can look up his podcast (titled - "Using Russell Brand as Pretext, UK Govt & US Media Launch Multi-Pronged War on Rumble | System Update")

Or you could find some reason to attack his character, either should be fun.

But can one of these corporate media whores expose a female drug-and-sex-addicted celebrity who has anonymous accusations of criminal sexual behaviour? This Brand one is getting boring...

[Brian Peacock]

At least you're doing your bit to keep the story alive.

[Cunt]

Has the charge sheet been generated yet? Or are anonymous accusations enough?

[JimC]

In cases like this, I think it's always preferable that the action starts with police investigation and charges, rather than the media, if only because sensational media reports make it harder for any future court case, given the effect on potential jurors of watching the media reports.

Without having any detailed knowledge of his actions, reports from a variety of sources seem to indicate that he may have acted as a sexual predator in the past. It should now be a case of the law taking its course, with evidence from possible victims being investigated thoroughly and dispassionately...

[Brian Peacock]

You're assuming what he's saying somehow reflects the reality of the situation.

[JimC]

Not really. I'm making a general point that neutral legal procedures (as long as they are not compromised by powerful interests) are a better way of achieving justice than media exposure...

[Cunt]

In cases like this, I think it's always preferable that the action starts with police investigation and charges, rather than the media, if only because sensational media reports make it harder for any future court case, given the effect on potential jurors of watching the media reports.

The media doesn't have to answer to anyone though. When they make false accusations, the reputational damage is comparable, but the risk to the accuser is much lower than lying in court.

Without having any detailed knowledge of his actions, reports from a variety of sources seem to indicate that he may have acted as a sexual predator in the past. It should now be a case of the law taking its course, with evidence from possible victims being investigated thoroughly and dispassionately...

By 'dispassionately' do you mean that the government should quietly end his ability to earn a living, and treat his associates as if they are doing something wrong by doing business with the accused?

Or was that Dame-so-and-so an asshole doing unfair things, in which case she should be called out on it?

I would treat him as if innocent. It kind of looks like motivated character attacks by hidden attackers. (Rumble did 'out' that arrogant UK government Dame, but there are obviously others)

Of course, that's because his accusers (channel 4 and other media outlets) have shown themselves to be colluding with Dame-Dimwit and jumping ahead of the justice system for some unstated reason.

[Bob]

You're assuming what he's saying somehow reflects the reality of the situation.

Relax folks, Brian here has decided what reality is for us all.

[pErvinalia]

He's got a special hate on for you, Brian.

[JimC]

He's got a special hate on for you, Brian.

Brian's not special! He hates me just as much!

[Brian Peacock]

Yeah, but everybody hates fucking centrists!

[JimC]

I'll have you know I'm at least centre left!

[Bob]

Yeah, but everybody hates fucking centrists!

You are confusing 'hate' with pity for the risible.

[pErvinalia]

Nah, it's hate, Bob. You live a pathetic existence.

[Bob]

Nah, it's hate, Bob. You live a pathetic existence.

OK.