Russell Brand says he couldn’t discover anybody to provide proof on his behalf in rape and sexual assault trial – newest updates | UK information
What the court docket has heard to this point
-
Russell Brand has denied all of the allegations made in opposition to him as he took to the stand to provide proof in his trial at Southwark crown court docket.
-
The comic, 51, informed the court docket that his “complete life has been consumed by these allegations”.
-
Brand mentioned he struggled to seek out anybody to provide proof on his behalf, saying the results of the September 2023 investigation by the Sunday Times, Times, and Channel 4 Dispatches had been “devastating”.
-
He informed jurors that he believed consent was “elementary, important, mandatory and, certainly, in some ways extra essential than intercourse itself”.
-
During cross-examination, Brand admitted he was “obsessed” with intercourse in his youthful years however denied being unable to operate with out it.
-
He denied the accusation that he would fake to be homosexual to make girls belief him.
Key occasions
The prosecutor, Riel Karmy-Jones, requested Brand concerning the alleged tried indecent assault in opposition to a girl who labored at MTV in 2001, who alleged the comic grabbed her arm and tried to tug her into a rest room.
She mentioned to Brand if he “fairly loved having intercourse in bogs” on the time, he replied “sure”.
Karmy-Jones requested: “Sex in bogs occurred rather a lot didn’t it?”
Brand mentioned: “Yes.”
Karmy-Jones requested if he remembered there being a wrestle when he grabbed the girl’s arm, he mentioned he didn’t recall.
Court is again in session.
Russell Brand’s cross-examination by the prosecution continues.
What the court docket has heard to this point
-
Russell Brand has denied all of the allegations made in opposition to him as he took to the stand to provide proof in his trial at Southwark crown court docket.
-
The comic, 51, informed the court docket that his “complete life has been consumed by these allegations”.
-
Brand mentioned he struggled to seek out anybody to provide proof on his behalf, saying the results of the September 2023 investigation by the Sunday Times, Times, and Channel 4 Dispatches had been “devastating”.
-
He informed jurors that he believed consent was “elementary, important, mandatory and, certainly, in some ways extra essential than intercourse itself”.
-
During cross-examination, Brand admitted he was “obsessed” with intercourse in his youthful years however denied being unable to operate with out it.
-
He denied the accusation that he would fake to be homosexual to make girls belief him.
Court has adjourned for a break till 2pm.
Brand informed the court docket he couldn’t keep in mind “prancing round” the lodge room after assembly the girl on the Labour get together convention in Bournemouth.
“She was shocked when she got here out the rest room, saying that you simply had been … prancing round,” Karmy-Jones mentioned.
Brand replied: “I don’t keep in mind.”
He mentioned it was potential he “jumped on the mattress like an ostrich”.
When accused by the prosecutor of “manipulating” his story to suit across the lady’s proof, Brand replied: “I’m actually doing my finest to reply the questions as put to me.”
Karmy-Jones put to Brand that he was “pretending to be homosexual” to realize the belief of the girl who alleged Brand raped her in a lodge room in Bournemouth in 1999.
The jury had been proven a brief extract from Brand’s guide “My Booky Wook”, revealed in 2007, through which the defendant wrote a caption subsequent to a younger image of himself.
The caption learn: “This is the precise second after I determined to behave homosexual to draw women.
“It took 15 years to provide outcomes.”
Karmy-Jones mentioned: “That’s one thing you’d do, wasn’t it? That was one thing you’d do to make women belief you?”
Brand replied: “No.”
During cross-examination, Brand informed the court docket that he “mentioned very many silly issues as a younger man”.
Responding to the prosecutor’s query about not leaving a scenario with a girl and not using a conquest, Brand informed the court docket that was like a riff of a joke made by American film-maker Woody Allen, who reportedly mentioned the one recommendation his father gave him was about “F-word” girls.
Brand admitted he was “obsessed” with intercourse in his youthful years however denied being unable to operate with out it.
Karmy-Jones requested him: “Do you settle for that on some events you’d ask these you labored with for those who may ‘exit and have intercourse now’?”
Brand mentioned: “I don’t keep in mind.”
Karmy-Jones requested: “Do you blame these girls for throwing temptation into your path?”
Brand mentioned: “No.”
Continuing her cross-examination, Karmy-Jones requested Brand whether or not he had a “aim” of sleeping with 5,000 girls. Brand informed the court docket he didn’t.
Karmy-Jones continued: “You mentioned that consent was basically mandatory and in some ways extra essential than intercourse itself, that wasn’t what you thought between 1999 and 2009 was it?”
Brand mentioned: “Consent is completely non-negotiable.”
Prosecutor Riel Karmy-Jones is now questioning Brand.
She started by asking: “You blame Dispatches, don’t you?”
Brand was momentarily silent, earlier than Karmy-Jones requested him once more whether or not he blamed Dispatches for the allegations.
She then requested Brand: “You blame the media?”
Brand was once more silent, prompting Karmy-Jones to ask “is {that a} troublesome query, Mr Brand?”
“In some methods,” Brand replied, telling the court docket that there have been several types of media and that he was part of it.
Winter moved on to the ultimate rely of sexual assault, involving a girl who mentioned she met Brand whereas engaged on a venture for Channel 4 in 2009. She alleged he demanded a therapeutic massage and put his head into her groin space, which Brand denied.
Concluding his questions for Brand, Winter mentioned: “Are you responsible or harmless of those allegations?”
“I’m harmless,” Brand mentioned.
Brand informed the court docket he invited the girl to his flat the place they’d consensual intercourse.
When requested by Winter whether or not he used a condom, Brand mentioned he did.
He mentioned he typically used condoms “in first sexual encounters, significantly and particularly if the accomplice needs that.”
Winter requested Brand whether or not they moved on to anal intercourse, Brand informed the court docket that they did and that the girl mentioned it was her first time.
Winter requested Brand whether or not the girl expressed any reluctance, to which Brand replied “coyness, one would possibly say”.
Winter continued: “Did you say something about looking for to influence her?”
Brand replied that he did, telling the court docket he mentioned “one thing alongside the strains of ‘you’ll find it irresistible’”.
Brand informed the court docket that the girl consented to persevering with intercourse and not using a condom.
“Did she inform you to cease, or that she didn’t need to proceed in that approach?” Winter requested Brand.
He replied: “No.”
Court is again in session.
Winter has now turned to rely 6, through which a girl alleged Brand anally raped her in 2009 after watching his comedy gig at Hammersmith Apollo.
Brand informed the court docket that he had a “placing” and “memorable” sexual encounter with the girl in a dressing room earlier than the alleged incident. He had saved her quantity on his cellphone with the initials “AP”, which he informed the court docket meant “anal play”.
Brand informed jurors he was “excited and enthusiastic” about assembly her once more.
Brand informed jurors he could not discover anybody to provide proof on his behalf after ‘devastating’ Dispatches documentary
Earlier, Brand informed the court docket that he had struggled to seek out anybody to provide proof on his behalf, saying the results of the September 2023 investigation by the Sunday Times, Times, and Channel 4 Dispatches had been “devastating”.
His barrister, Ian White, requested: “Were you capable of persuade a single particular person with related proof to provide to return to provide proof in your behalf?”
Brand mentioned: “I’ve not.”
Winter requested: “Would they contact you with a barge pole?”
Brand mentioned: “No.”
Brand later informed the court docket he didn’t take into account the Dispatches investigation a documentary, saying: “I name it a TV present.”
