What do you reckon? Bang to rights, no smoke without fire or hit piece?

I have no idea. I don't like the man and he is undoubtedly misogynistic. But there is a very worrying aspect to all this.

The cornerstone of justice is a presumption of innocence in criminal matters. The way politicians have weighed in to this is disgraceful. Also law can't be retrospective. My personal view is that a man in his thirties having sex with a 16 year old girl should be unlawful. But the fact is, it is not against the law,

Stan A. Einstein wrote: September 19th, 2023, 10:48 am I have no idea. I don't like the man and he is undoubtedly misogynistic. But there is a very worrying aspect to all this.

The cornerstone of justice is a presumption of innocence in criminal matters. The way politicians have weighed in to this is disgraceful. Also law can't be retrospective. My personal view is that a man in his thirties having sex with a 16 year old girl should be unlawful. But the fact is, it is not against the law,

Morning Stan. Interesting points. His supporters are obviously saying it's all a conspiracy as he's got a big platform as a dissenter these days and therefore they've come after him to shut him down. The counterpoint to that is that he's known this was coming down the line for some years and in that time has been able to reinvent himself as an Alex Jones/self-help guru type and made millions from YouTube etc & cultivated a large following as a result. To try and lessen the impact in some way with supporters perhaps I suppose.

Chepstow'sFine wrote: September 19th, 2023, 10:12 am What do you reckon? Bang to rights, no smoke without fire or hit piece?

He comes off as a nasty piece of work BUT on the allegations “recollections may vary” and the way he has been hung drawn and quartered already should be terrifying for any man (or woman).

[edit] the word 'chilling' springs to mind in the case of the way he has been stripped of his ability to earn a living and been 'cancelled' by a long line of the great and not so good. I don't believe its a conspiracy and am no fan of Brand BUT its clear the 'powers that be' need no encouragement to take Brand down.

Stan A. Einstein wrote: September 19th, 2023, 10:48 am The cornerstone of justice is a presumption of innocence in criminal matters.

"Presumed innocent until proven guilty" gets trotted out a lot, but it's become a nonsense cliché.
If it were literally true no one would ever be prosecuted for anything.
Guilt certainly has to be proved in a criminal trial, and until that point the accused is in effect not guilty, but to "presume innocence" is simultaneously to presume victims are lying. It's meaningless.

Glasllwch Goalkeeper wrote: September 30th, 2023, 6:33 pm

Stan A. Einstein wrote: September 19th, 2023, 10:48 am The cornerstone of justice is a presumption of innocence in criminal matters.

"Presumed innocent until proven guilty" gets trotted out a lot, but it's become a nonsense cliché.
If it were literally true no one would ever be prosecuted for anything.
Guilt certainly has to be proved in a criminal trial, and until that point the accused is in effect not guilty, but to "presume innocence" is simultaneously to presume victims are lying. It's meaningless.

to "presume innocence" is simultaneously to presume victims are lying. It's meaningless - in cases of this nature until a guilty verdict is reached there are no 'victims' there are only alleged victims there is no corpse under the patio here and no evidence beyond testimony - as for 'lying' sadly some people (a far larger % than we are ready to acknowledge), especially those involving high profile individuals do indeed lie or at least re frame a consensual encounter as something else often years after the fact.

If my son/father/brother/nephew/mate or any man (or indeed woman) I knew were accused of such offences I would want a full and robust set of tests to be applied to the alleged victims testimonies.

Just so that people are aware - the Government, via the Attorney General Office have issued a Media Advisory Notice to warn all publishers, including social media users to not publish anything which could prejudice an investigation or potential future charge regarding this incident. If you do, you could be in contempt of Court. The Attorney General Office in the same statement say they are monitoring the situation. Be careful.

pembsexile wrote: October 2nd, 2023, 6:49 am Just so that people are aware - the Government, via the Attorney General Office have issued a Media Advisory Notice to warn all publishers, including social media users to not publish anything which could prejudice an investigation or potential future charge regarding this incident. If you do, you could be in contempt of Court. The Attorney General Office in the same statement say they are monitoring the situation. Be careful.

Well said and thank-you for pointing that out.

pembsexile wrote: October 2nd, 2023, 6:49 am Just so that people are aware - the Government, via the Attorney General Office have issued a Media Advisory Notice to warn all publishers, including social media users to not publish anything which could prejudice an investigation or potential future charge regarding this incident. If you do, you could be in contempt of Court. The Attorney General Office in the same statement say they are monitoring the situation. Be careful.

Interesting point. It's gone down pretty badly:
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/t ... r-AA1he60n

Especially after this too;
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-66875128

Personally I think the Govt have handled this incredibly badly and if they were worried about due process they should have been on it from the start.

I'll wait for the Stasi to beat my door down....