Russell Brand Is He Wrong?

[richaceg]

Yes just like they silenced Harvey Weinstein and Bill Cosby and Kevin Spacey and R. Kelly! All stand up men working towards the proletariat revolution!

Harvey Weinstein had overwhelming evidence vs himself, so did R Kelly and Bill Cosby...so far it's only accusations vs. Russel Brand, if he comes out innocent...then he is most likely targeted...

 

[The Oracle]

Russel Brand is not going to "come out innocent." At best he will just escape justice. Dozens of women including an underage girl are not just 'making it up.' He's finished either way.

It's actually 4 and 16 is the age of consent in the U.K.

 

[The Oracle]

Whatever, he's still a rapist either way.

Actually he isn't because nothing has been proven in a court of law.

Personally I hope he is innocent because that means nobody was hurt.

 

[richaceg]

Except he definitely is though and those women were certainly hurt and not the liars you imagine them to be.

Why is Kevin Spacey walking away....If we're taking every complainants word for it? You're too emotional to be on a debate....

 

[richaceg]

Spacey is getting away with it because one of the key victims refused to testify, which isn't uncommon in traumatic cases, and because the jury didn't think the testimony which was provided by other victims was beyond reasonable doubt since some details were incorrect. We all know he still did it though.

I bet you were Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby, R. Kelly's side too. You have a simple binary brain that things "if in jail bad. If not good." You're too dense to be in a debate....

Without any compelling evidence, Brand could walk away...assuming he's already a rapist without any evidence and without hearing the testimonies of the witnesses is a symptom only a fool can have...I'm not saying you are....but the symptoms might prove me wrong...

 

[richaceg]

Spacey is getting away with it because one of the key victims refused to testify, which isn't uncommon in traumatic cases, and because the jury didn't think the testimony which was provided by other victims was beyond reasonable doubt since some details were incorrect. We all know he still did it though.

I bet you thought Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby, R. Kelly were innocent too. You have a simple binary brain that thinks "if in jail bad. If not good." Childlike. You're too dense to be in a debate....

Weinstein had compelling evidence that nailed him voice recorded conversation.. Thank god you don't work in the justice system of the US of A...as fucked up as it is already...I hope you're not working anywhere where someone's life will depend on you...

 

[richaceg]

Wrong. The audio you are referring to was not used in the case that resulted in Weinstein's conviction. The police even heard that audio and ignored it completely. Nor was the audio proof of rape, it was proof at most of sexual assault (he grabbed her boobs without permission).

Weinstein was not convicted on any smoking gun evidence. On the contrary, he was convicted on very thin physical evidence and it was the believability of the victim that was considered sufficient.

I already posted a link describing that here

I don't listen to bullshit post but i can play your game....Russel Brand will have his day in court...you can yap all you want about him being a rapist but without a verdict. Mr. Brand is still out there...I will away judgement until he's in cuffs and he will get his sentencing...I don't call anybody rapist until the judge brings on the hammer...that's how law works...that's how the justice system works...once all of that has been concluded, then and only then i'd call Russell Brand a rapist...for now I can call him a douchebag...but that's about as far as I can go...

 

[richaceg]

LOL! You call facts "bullshit" because I proved you wrong about Harvey Weinstein and presented the proof about how he was convicted, which didn't fit your childish worldview. You aren't interested in facts. You aren't interested in statistics. You don't even have a basic understanding of how the justice system works. It's exactly as I said, you have a simple brain that thinks "if in jail = bad but if not in jail = innocent."

You aren't intelligent enough for this discussion.

which facts were you referring? so far there are accusations...let's see who's childish? you were presented with what is a normal due process...innocent until proven guilty...you know that phrase? you seem to not acknowledge how it works...it show's who's uneducated here...

 

[poker]

Brand is not wrong in his assessment. Big Pharma has bought off both parties. Many lobbies have.

Is it possible that he pissed someone off enough to get women to accuse him? Maybe. Is it possible he’s always been a bit psycho and likes to abuse women? Also maybe. We’ll see if the women have evidence. Dates. Times. Can prove they were with him, and not random crisis actors.

However… I am more concerned that people are saying we need to discredit the allegations because it has to be a conspiracy. With no evidence of a conspiracy. Nobody coordinating it. (Actual names vs vague “Big Media”). No evidence of money being paid to women. Who contacted the women? When did this all happen? Where did they meet to discuss takedown? Who is finding it? Where are the transactions?

So…. Telling me they are baseless accusations because you like what he stands for… by making a baseless allegation yourself… just stop.

 

[Valcazar]

Brand is not wrong in his assessment. Big Pharma has bought off both parties. Many lobbies have.

That's over stating the case.
Nothing he says in that video is particularly controversial or unknown.
Money has influence and will act to improve their position.

Of course, that video also doesn't go all the way to say "They made up COVID-19 to get cash!".
Sure, he vaguely implies it, hinting even that literally nothing in the world isn't just entirely fake and made up by "the elites" for profit.
But he doesn't actually say it, and if he did, "the elites" aren't going to go after him for saying stupid shit.

Is it possible that he pissed someone off enough to get women to accuse him? Maybe.

Sure. But it wouldn't be "the shadowy elite".
It would be somebody he has pissed off personally.

Is it possible he’s always been a bit psycho and likes to abuse women? Also maybe.

Much more likely, in my opinion.

However… I am more concerned that people are saying we need to discredit the allegations because it has to be a conspiracy. With no evidence of a conspiracy. Nobody coordinating it. (Actual names vs vague “Big Media”). No evidence of money being paid to women. Who contacted the women? When did this all happen? Where did they meet to discuss takedown? Who is finding it? Where are the transactions?

So…. Telling me they are baseless accusations because you like what he stands for… by making a baseless allegation yourself… just stop.

They won't.
The point of this tactic is that you never have to give details.