General News Chat

[InversneckieDob]

"This sort of thing"?



Careful now.

[mondo_notion]

I watched it at the weekend and thought the production left a few gaps considering it was such a serious set of allegations.

A lot of accusations on film were followed up with script such as 'a member of her family confirmed they were in a relationship' and when one of the women based in the US said she ran out of Brands house crying and realised there was people there waiting for a meeting who had heard her being attacked I was surprised none of the journalists had attempted to track down these people to corroborate what she was saying.

Again, it just said 'family members' had backed it up.

[Mason89]

I watched it at the weekend and thought the production left a few gaps considering it was such a serious set of allegations.

A lot of accusations on film were followed up with script such as 'a member of her family confirmed they were in a relationship' and when one of the women based in the US said she ran out of Brands house crying and realised there was people there waiting for a meeting who had heard her being attacked I was surprised none of the journalists had attempted to track down these people to corroborate what she was saying.

Again, it just said 'family members' had backed it up.

They only had an hour. Was there not a caption up that said they’d checked all the sources? I watched it pished so I might well be talking rubbish. I would’ve thought that they’ve quadruple checked all this before putting it out though

[mondo_notion]

They only had an hour. Was there not a caption up that said they’d checked all the sources? I watched it pished so I might well be talking rubbish. I would’ve thought that they’ve quadruple checked all this before putting it out though

There was nothing stating that they had even tried to track down those potential witnesses never mind got them to confirm her story. Not that I don't believe her of course.

I also find it a bit too hypocritical that it was The Times that was partly involved in the investigation and of course it was their sister paper that was giving Brand their 'top shagger' award back in the day.

[InversneckieDob]

This time next year we’ll find out. Lovely jubbley you plonker

Del or Rodneee/Dave?
Or Uncle Albert?

[InversneckieDob]

The thing that worries me about this is that, with no real investigation, it has pretty much been decided he is guilty. You even have co*ks like Cleverly coming in and stoking the guilty narrative.

If he's guilty he deserves everything coming to him and his career to be ruined. If he isn't guilty - his career is potentially ruined regardless. Surely there needs to be a degree of silence whilst the police investigate and it, if necessary, goes to trial.

There is no place for anyone of any *** or gender abusing (mentally or physically) someone else of any *** or gender. It's not acceptable and needs to be punished and ideally eradicated (if only!). But regardless if you think the perpetrator is a tw*t or not, they deserve a fair hearing without trail by media making everyone's minds up in advance.

I've never had much time for him, and he could well be guilty. I don't know, he could well be innocent. If he's guilty, then yes, lock him up.

I'm with you.
I'm not big on trial by media/social media, I'd like to think law enforcement would be all over this gathering evidence etc.
And I wonder why they haven't been until now.
There will inevitably be political partisanship in play, though, as I recall, Brand's politics seem to have been scattergun and attention seeking.
I seem to recall him being pro-Trump and espousing tinfoil hat theories during Covid. (Though I could have that wrong, my only totally clear recollection is of him writing a fitba column in the Guardian or Observer a good while back, he's a 'ammer I recall. )

But he, and everyone, should be held accountable for criminal actions in a proper fashion. ie by people acting in the public interest, nae chasing readers/ratings.

[donsdaft]

Oh he loves it.

Gossip gossip gossip.

[Mason89]

Nobody would have a football message board account, if they didn’t like a bit of gossip. It’s not that I love it, it’s that I find the reactions to these cases fascinating.

You can tell a lot about someone from it, particularly if there’s noncing involved

[donsdaft]

No underage stuff going on here is there?

16 isn't underage.

Anyway, I’ve no idea who he is, except that I have seen his face in the paper from time to time, looked like a pööf to me.
Or at least someone who's hellova in love with himself ( which is the same thing in my book)

[Mason89]

The age of consent is set at 16, so 16 year olds don’t get criminalised for pumping each other. It’s not for folk in their 30s to send their BBC chauffeur to the school gates to pick them up, just because it’s legal

Legally obviously it’s black and white. Morally, it’s miles away from a grey area.