Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
It wasn't just anyone.Lets say you are person with some fame, you woudln't want anyone because their are envious or whatever, just accuse you like that, and get your reputation and job ruined, because someone lied.
This would require me to give more thought to a subject/personage I don’t care about enough to form a weighty opinion, so therefore won’t.Would you like to take the microphone away form a person who hasn't done those things, but who was alledged to have done those things regardless?
were encouraged by media outlets to "come forward" because they were looking to get a "scoop" on a high profile person)
He was a little more famous as an actor back from 2006-2013...then fell into obscurity, but recently reemerged over the past few years and gained popularity as a podcaster and "wellness influencer" of sorts.What high profile person? I was about to post who's Russel Brand? I never heard of him, lol. I gather from the thread that he is an actor but he can't be high profile because I've never even heard of the guy.
I know who Tom Hanks is. Jim Cavazeil, Sylvester Stallone, Sally Field, Meg Ryan, Sandra Bullock. Who's russel brand, lol?
Sometimes girls bite off more than they can chew. But it's high stakes for them so, sometimes it works out and sometimes it doesn't. And sometimes bad things happen.
Men who are not famous do the same things. These stories are distractions from the enemy to keep peole focused on anything except God.
He was a little more famous as an actor back from 2006-2013...then fell into obscurity, but recently reemerged over the past few years and gained popularity as a podcaster and "wellness influencer" of sorts.
Some numbers
YouTube subscribers: 6.6 million
Various other platforms (like Spotify, Podcasts, Rumble)... another 1.5 million
(perhaps his popularity was more so in England than it was here given he's British... sort of like Steve Coogan isn't exactly mainstream in the US apart from a few small roles, but in the UK, his well-known character "Alan Partridge" is something of a household name.)
So while he's not putting up "Rogan numbers" in that media space, he still has a substantial following.
It’s definitely hard to think you’re going to get away with forcing yourself on women, and then don’t…He's got Fans! Did you ever realize that Fan is short for Fanatiic?
I am not a fan of anyone and I don't watch much TV. If I am to be a fan, then it will be of Yeshua.
Poor Russel. It must be hard to be famous in tis day and age, lol. they rake you across the coals!
I heard someone say that “they let you get away with ‘it’ [sexual-touching] if you’re a ‘celebrity’!” Can’t quite recall, where, though.It’s definitely hard to think you’re going to get away with forcing yourself on women, and then don’t…
I am not sure of Russel Brands guilt or not but what I find unusual and unfair is that the UK parliament and some media are acting as judge, jury and executioner on this by asking media companies to cancel his income on his media platforms.Russell Brand allegations: What is the star accused of?
The comedian and actor denies serious allegations about his behaviour over a period of seven years.www.bbc.com
The actor and comedian is also said to have behaved inappropriately at work during the height of his fame, including by undressing, making sexual remarks and acting aggressively.
Brand denies the allegations, revealed in a joint investigation by the Sunday Times, the Times and Channel 4's Dispatches, and says his relationships have been "always consensual".
Legally, that is considered rape in California:It was also pointed out that the story of Brand supposedly raping some women and how the text showed she went to a rape crisis centre was not about rape but about Brand not wearing a condom. She went there to get a moring after pill. She was going off at Brand for not wearing a condom rather than any non consensual sex. But the journalist only highlighted certain parts of the text to make it look like it was rape.
In prosecutions under Section 261, 262, 286, 287, or 289, or former Section 288a, in which consent is at issue, evidence that the victim suggested, requested, or otherwise communicated to the defendant that the defendant use a condom or other birth control device, without additional evidence of consent, is not sufficient to constitute consent.
In Brand's case, I don't even rule out the possibility that he did those things (he's a self admitted former heavy drug user who was very promiscuous)...I just commented on how the timing is conspicuous.I think that there are those who wanted him silenced regarding his Ben Shapiro like commentaries. I'm sure they're trying to find a way to sink Shapiro too, but it's not as easy to frame him as it was Brand.
It is. And of course the reason why Brand's exploits are well known, is because he wrote books about it.In Brand's case, I don't even rule out the possibility that he did those things (he's a self admitted former heavy drug user who was very promiscuous)...I just commented on how the timing is conspicuous.
In his case it would have to be a girl from his high school years he never knew ala Brett Kavanaugh.In Shapiro's case, he's well noted for being about the most "straight-laced" as as person can be.... trying to dig up any "sexual impurity" on his part would be impossible I would think (unless there's something he's kept really well hidden, which I doubt)
Typically a sign that "they've got nothing" is when they resort to giving more broad labels like "racist"/"sexist" (like they often have to do for Shapiro).
In term of timing i dont find it particularly conspicuous. For one thing it takes time given the uks notorious libel laws for a TV programme expose to pass all the legal hurdles to get broadcast. It says something that he has been out of mainstream media(apart from youtube) for over half a decade.In Brand's case, I don't even rule out the possibility that he did those things (he's a self admitted former heavy drug user who was very promiscuous)...I just commented on how the timing is conspicuous.
In Shapiro's case, he's well noted for being about the most "straight-laced" as as person can be.... trying to dig up any "sexual impurity" on his part would be impossible I would think (unless there's something he's kept really well hidden, which I doubt)
Typically a sign that "they've got nothing" is when they resort to giving more broad labels like "racist"/"sexist" (like they often have to do for Shapiro).
Thats in Canada and as far as I understand these allegations happened in London and around England.Legally, that is considered rape in California:
261.7. Evidence that victim requested that defendant use condom or other birth control device; consent
In prosecutions under Section 261, 262, 286, 287, or 289, or former Section 288a, in which consent is at issue, evidence that the victim suggested, requested, or otherwise communicated to the defendant that the defendant use a condom or other birth control device, without additional evidence of...www.womenslaw.org
Per what was linked earlier, one (or more) of the accusers even mentioned the reason for their timing, and like I noted, it's conspicuousIn term of timing i dont find it particularly conspicuous. For one thing it takes time given the uks notorious libel laws for a TV programme expose to pass all the legal hurdles to get broadcast. It says something that he has been out of mainstream media(apart from youtube) for over half a decade.
No, it's California, the US state (also abbreviated CA). And the allegation that you referred to, about the woman who went to a rape crisis center, occurred in California.Thats in Canada and as far as I understand these allegations happened in London and around England.
I'm not sure. I thought that involved a 30 year old and the 16 year old was in England as they said it wasn't against the l;aw as the age of consent was 16. I can't keep up with it all.No, it's California, the US state (also abbreviated CA). And the allegation that you referred to, about the woman who went to a rape crisis center, occurred in California.
You said:I'm not sure. I thought that involved a 30 year old and the 16 year old was in England as they said it wasn't against the l;aw as the age of consent was 16. I can't keep up with it all.
From the article in the OP, it's pretty clear that you're referring to the first allegation, which happened in California:It was also pointed out that the story of Brand supposedly raping some women and how the text showed she went to a rape crisis centre was not about rape but about Brand not wearing a condom. She went there to get a moring after pill. She was going off at Brand for not wearing a condom rather than any non consensual sex. But the journalist only highlighted certain parts of the text to make it look like it was rape.
Four women are alleging sexual assaults between 2006 and 2013:
- One woman alleges that Brand raped her without a condom against a wall in his Los Angeles home. She says Brand tried to stop her leaving until she told him she was going to the bathroom. She was treated at a rape crisis centre on the same day, which the Times says it has confirmed via medical records
- A second woman, in the UK, alleges that Brand assaulted her when he was in his early 30s and she was 16 and still at school. She alleges he referred to her as "the child" during an emotionally abusive and controlling relationship. Looking back, she says, he "engaged in the behaviours of a groomer"
- A third woman claims that Brand sexually assaulted her while she worked with him in Los Angeles. She alleges she repeatedly told Brand to get off her, and when he eventually relented he "flipped" and was "super angry". She says he threatened to take legal action if she told anyone else about her allegation
- The fourth woman has alleged being sexually assaulted by Brand in the UK and him being physically and emotionally abusive towards her
Yeah thats why I said I can't keep up. I have got them mixed up. So the condom incident was in CA. So the question is if this is regarded as rape in not wearing a condom when asked why hasn't he been charged. Why has it taken so long.You said:
From the article in the OP, it's pretty clear that you're referring to the first allegation, which happened in California:
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?