Make sure to keep up with the latest PoliticsJOE news at our subreddit: www.reddit.com/politicsjoe

Since you invoked John Major and Edwina Curry lore, there is an Indian restaurant in my home town called “A Major Curry Affair” which is just top shelf British political callback banter.

Was Ava's camera broken for most of the first 20 minutes? She had some incredibly important things to say and it would've been nice to see her saying them.

I am not a Brand apologist and I agree with EVA that we have free thought but I also feel its not great that someone currently under investigation (and therefore not proven to have done something wrong) can loose contracts and business and have their professional reputation ruined. this happened to Huw Edwards and now to R Brand. I also think that this is not the worlds biggest new story and yet its dominating all the written and social news media in the UK just now.

Arguing against trial by media,or mob justice, and arguing for innocent until proven guilty isn't fanboying. It's arguing FOR justice.

I'm a lefty. I'm not a "Russell Brand Fanboy or defender". I just believe in due process and am sick of trial's by media, that includes alternative media. If you don't believe in due process, then its unlikely you believe in democracy .

Ava speaks a deep truth. My wife took on Oxford University's business school as a whistle blower. You would not believe what Oxford University's barristers attempted - they wanted to have her entire medical record released and opened, because they wanted to see if there was anything in there they could use against her in their attempt to say she deserved not one penny of compensation. Our barrister explained that they will use anything - a shit-trawl. They wanted to say the depression they caused her was going to be there anyway. Now, imagine if she had been raped? Or if she was in an abusive relationship? Or something else. That would be open for the public to read into, because these legal bundles of documents become public record. Thankfully, the Judge refused. He then ruled against Oxford and she won.This was an employment case. imagine how awful a rape trial must be. Deep respect to the women standing up to Brand.

From a woman whose been raped twice I cant believe you dont realise just how many rapes go unreported. Often from family pressure or fear of Court interrogation.

Ava's description of what the experience might be like of reporting a case to the police and the sorts of processes involved is absolutely invaluable and should be disseminated everywhere. Maybe you can do a kind of public service announcement video with that kind of educative content. It is so unbearably frustrating to hear repeated cries of: why don't victims go to the police?!

I do wish more people are capable of simply saying "I don't know". Without due process we are inviting a deeply dangerous and structurally chaotic break down of society. People have to been given their day in a court of law despite the appalling state of how the legal system does indeed often let down victims. Having said that, I'm equally non plused by the people who claim to be sure of his innocence.

Such an important point that platforms like KZfaq and Facebook ARE mainstream media. Sure, they are more diverse and facilitate more horizontal engagement. That's down to them being a product of: The internet, which you'd think people would be used to by now.

I'm disappointed that PoliticsJOE is joining in the feeding frenzy about this. As for categorising everybody as "defenders and fanboys", there are plenty of us who don't particularly like Brand, but who object to trial by media (of anyone).

Its obviously a mistake but the fact the camera is zoomed in on scottish guy whenever the woman is talking is hilarious given the content of this video. Thank goodness he looked serious and was actually paying attention throughout 😂

I despise Brand and I acknowledge that the evidence against him seems strong but we should never lose sight of the fact that he is innocent until proven guilty and only the courts will have full access to all the information so be in a position to decide his innocence or guilt. Trial by media and public opinion is not justice.

Funny how it's always the ones you most suspect..

“Imagine a 40 year old man going back to student digs” - like a certain ex-PM and ex-mayor of London used to back in the day at the University of East London?

The BBC literally exposed Prince Andrew on mainstream Saturday night tv

I love that ‘big tuna’ is now an integral part of PubCast Lore… 😂

To all those harping on; no it's not a trial by media. Theres no such thing. There are the facts and nothing more. If you deduce from the facts that on the basis of probability that he is guilty of the accusations, then what does that tell you? Hes a free man. Hes not been charged. Hes not been deplatformed. Theres no trial by media.

Give me strength, listen to yourselves, he made his youtube channel just to provide an excuse for something he hasn't been charged with, FFS grow up.

"Why didnt they go to police??" Here in the United States, there is a famous family called the Duggars. The oldest son in the family was a prolific rapist of his sisters, and a collector of child pornography. When the sisters told their parents that they were being sexually abused by their brother, the parents at first would let the girls go to the police. The parents reported josh to a cop of their choosing, and told the cop they were sure the son was a good person and would stop, and that no criminal charges were needed. That was enough to satisfy the cop. He let them go. Later, he was found to be in possession of child pornography himself

Ah the panel is way off the mark. Disappointed & unsubscribed. The title of this "premiere" says it all.

RE Bully XLs, I read three articles from different mainstream media outlets last week and (assuming it was all factual) it leads to a very obvious solution which doesn't require any dogs to be put down. Apparently, 10% of all dog related injuries and deaths are directly attributable to Bully XLs. Apparently, half of all Bully XLs are related to a single dog called "Killer" Kimbo, who is allegedly the only known Bully XL to be imported into this country in a legal manner. Kimbo is apparently already inbred and has a reputation for aggression which has lead to some desiring to stud from him, and many of his children have been associated with incidents. Therefore, tying these together, 5% of all dog related injuries and deaths in the UK this year can be traced to a single dog *and the owner who is profiteering and cultivating dangerous dog culture. So, the solution? Do what they always bang on about with drugs when they need votes: hit the irresponsible breeders, neuter and spay Kimbo's children (because you should do that anyway for their health), and normalise muzzles and always being on a lead *directly attached to the person* while in public for the existing and otherwise likely law abiding and well behaved ones. I don't own a Bully XL, but my rescue dog i love dearly is reactive so have already been doing the above for years and ensuring there is no possible way she can do anything. With a muzzle in though, to the average person who doesn't know dog breeds they might assume mine is one and call the police (thanks to the bastard tories encouraging the public to dob in any they see to the police, and I trust the public's knowledge and judgement as much as a pasta seatbelt on a rollercoaster). I'm taking *additional* action in ordering both a bodycam for myself and a wearable dog cam for her. The reason for this is we've had off-lead dogs like labradors literally run across a field to attack mine, and even though I'm confident mine won't cause any injuries and even if she's injured by the other dogs, i don't trust the police not to do what they've already done locally and insist on firearms officers shooting her on-scene because she looks a bit "pitt-type" (which is all the police need to be able to do this). I'd actually be in favour of *all* dogs at least being on extendable leads while in public, as well as muzzled. Many would complain but as I've had so many owners ignore the bright neon yellow "nervous" warnings all over us and just let their dogs "pLAy" while on their phones across various fields and actually attack mine I say this is entirely a human fault, not canine.

They labelled brand a conspiracy theorist and then claim he set up on youtube to future proof himself from r@pe claims. . Oh the irony😂😂😂

Hes not mainstream like being the voice in a blockbuster hollywood animation last year!

If there was ever an episode to start with "LOVE POLITICS HATE NONCES" surely it was the one about Russell Brand?

An individual believing someone is guilty based on the court of public opinion is fine (although that has some massive downsides) but that is entirely different to the state assuming guilt as a starting point in criminal proceedings and expecting the defendant to prove innocence. It’s amazing that people don’t know that proving a negative claim is almost always very difficult. Wouldn’t last a second in front of the ECHR.

The most frustrating thing about the fan boys is they don't understand the legal nightmare and strength of the case the journalists needed just to do an article, let alone a full documentary. Then after years of work just say - 'nah not in court m8' or 'it's a conspiracy' without even reading/watching anything.

What the fuck was the Ed cam all about? 😂

I find it mad the standards that apply in some circles, but not in others. Take wrestling. Hear me out. Marty Scurll - One of the biggest indie stars, on the cusp of signing for one of the biggest promotions and making his national television debut, he slept with an intoxicated 16 year old fan. What happened? Immediately blacklisted from all promotions globally. Only a few tiny, desperate companies have booked him for a one-off appearances in places like Puerto Rico and Poland. His career is done. Likely permanently. But a major broadcasting personality or a politician, and the accountability and blowback is LESS?! Craziness.

I think people who moved away from TV news and reporting, people like Rogan who really was a pioneer of podcasts like this one, they did not know they would be popular, they took risks and gambled and they now have a voice and freedom that TV and Newspaper journalists simply never had. Saying that all of these shows are conspiracy theories and not serious journalism is a bit of a lazy critique. Brand often put up facts about who owned what companies and provided facts and figures to back up his arguments, I remember one where he was talking about profits for Lockheed growing every year that the war in Afghanistan dragged on. Why do news media not reoort more on corporate corruption, tax avoidence etc, there is obviously a massive market for this look at the success of Rogan and Brand. Channel 4 and the times said they spent a year investigating Brand but I never see them spending the same time looking into Conservative ministers that have engaged in work place trists (Johnson, Handcock) those with bullying and controling behaviour (Rabb, Starmer) journalism is meant to hold its mirror up to everyone and I think too often it targets some easy low hanging fruit and lets others sidestep serious consequences and punishments.

"Going to be a more sombre edition of the pubcast...so who's had a roast recently?"

The right wing trolls who have berated him for years for being 'lefty' are now excusing supporting his alleged misogyny. 🤦‍♂️

Ava's constant default to straw-manning those she disagrees with as being 'conspiracy theorists' is exhaustingly disappointing - I don't know why I expected more.

The fascination at Ed’s fish phobia is what keeps bring me back 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 love the pubcast, thanks for yet another great show

It’s not that the GBeebies presenter drank the kool-aid, it’s just shameless opportunism. She saw a golden opportunity to appeal to an audience regardless of what she believes.

Innocent until proven guilty. I'm not defending him, I'm defending human/legal rights.

Fucking hell. The Brand - Savile exchange was properly horrifying.

Ava's reasoning is the same reasoning I have for why 16 year olds shouldn't get the vote (and shouldn't pay tax and shouldn't be able to join the military). They're too young and they are still kids. By all means 16 and 17 year olds should be able to work and earn money, but not pay tax and national insurance until they're 18. If they legally have to be in education/training until 18 then they aren't really adults/free to do what they want, are they?

See? Even your later discussion about what the age of consent should be etc., shows clearly that this whole topic is not black-and-white but rather in the grey area. Because there is what is moral, what is socially acceptable or not, and what is criminal, all these things are different, and you can't put them all in one basket. And that is the whole problem! That women now want to put everything into one category of sexual assault, when all of this has context and it's simply often not the same! Most of life is always grey not black and white. I'm not a fan of Brand, and I never was, I agree with you that he is disgusting but the truth is also that you can't simply ruin people based on accusations alone, exactly because these things are complex, and have the context you don't know about. First: sorry but no matter how hard it is for women to go and report rape right after it happens, women need to change their attitude and do it because by not doing it, they also let all these predators continue to abuse others, and make the new victims!! Women even if assaulted need to take responsibility for their own fate, meaning: you want predators who hurt you punished? Do you want to help other women? Then you have to report and help to catch the guy, it's that simple and it's not much to expect from adult females, period! Stop the infantilization of adults in general. Again - even your later discussion about the age of consent proves that. You may think that the brain of the teenage girl is still not developed, and maybe in some areas it still isn't but guess what - recent research actually shows that brain changes throughout our entire lives! So we can't draw straight lines here. That is putting these complex things in one basket, as I already said, and it's simply not how life works! The truth is also every person develops differently, physically and mentally, plus, women in general develop mentally way earlier than males - that has been proven. That means, that the majority of 16, 17-year-old girls are adults, and they can absolutely make adult, healthy, conscious decisions about their sex life, their political life, their money etc. So you can't simply forbid people from doing adult activities if they want to, yes, even with much older adults! And the other side of these things happening in showbusiness is that no matter how strong of the taboo is it to discuss, the fact is many, many young women flirt and try to 'catch' these rich, famous men, try to get in their beds because fame and money are aphrodisiacs for women, period. So unless there is some hard evidence how the hell you can really tell what happened? You can't. And 'lad culture' didn't start in the 90s or 80s. It's been there forever, it was there already in the 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s etc. So if we were to apply justice for all, according to these new standards, we would have to prosecute and throw into jail all famous, great men from these eras, all great artists, leaders, musicians, actors, writers, media people etc. If you start to look at it, almost all famous men of the past had some sex scandals and controversies in their bios, similar to Brand's. Mick Jagger or President John Kennedy - the hero for today's liberals and democrats - in particular. Reading Kennedy's biographies and researching about him, it's pretty clear he was actually an abuser and rapist himself. Yet he is still treated like a god, especially in the US but around the Western world as well, he is an icon and a symbol. Because we all conveniently forget about his ugly side, we don't even want to think about it. How is this different from Brand's cult? It's the same. Because the only fact is that humans are complex. Kennedy or Picasso, or other famous men - they were all, and they are, neither just saint and great nor evil and disgusting, they were and are, all of these things. So from what point do we also allow people to get better, repent, and move on? Or are we going to arrest and destroy every single person who fails the purity tests of today, and just throw the key? Well, by doing that, there would be no one left on this Earth, no matter in what field. At some point, we will have to define better how to approach this whole complex problem: yes, take women's accusations seriously, investigate, but also stop ruining people just based on accusations, and think about the context that you may not know because these accusers see this context differently from the accused. Remember, as they say: there is my truth, your truth, and as for the universal truth, it does not exist.

It's not a fan base - its a cult

1) Beef 2) Yorkshire Puddings 3) Roast Potatoes 4) Gravy 5) Parnsips And Russell Brand is an absolute weapon

Ava's piece on women's sexual safety and rights was brilliant, but the way it is filmed, it looks like Ed is being told off

I do watch Russel Brand and like the content he provides, i like who he is now, that being said i also have to say i couldnt stand him back in the day, i dont know if he did what he is accused of but if he is he should be held accountable. Not all his subscribers profess his innocence ! We must remain open minded until it is investigated until then they are just allegations and not proven fact !

Seems a strectch to say that he was preempting this situation and creating a legion of fans that would be against the so-called mainstream media which would eventually oust him. To begin with, KZfaq being a large platform doesn't mean it is mainstream media per se. It is a mainstream medium or source, yes, but this isn't quite the same thing. By mainstream media, it is inferred that the production of the information is determined by a particular bias, aimed at a wider audience usually of a particular demographic. It is also usually a traditionally long established channel. Now, KZfaq does censor a lot of material, and they do largely promote material for young western audiences, but the producers of information are not under any specific umbrella, nor geared towards a particular demographic like say, The Daily Mail or Guardian is. You can find a wider range of perspectives on the channel. In anycase, I found myself thinking Brand is not an outright rapist, and no I am not a 'fan boy' either, I was actually put off by his venture into KZfaq and some of the content I saw him producing. I think that there is a grey area though. Perversely, a week prior to any of this I was thinking to myself about how for someone who apparently was with 1000's of women, had a clean background On another note, I found Ava's reasoning to be a bit wonky. Even though I agreed with some of the statements. For example, the issue of being innocent, or at least undetermined given until proven guilty. Using Saville as an example is not the same thing, because the guy is dead. The repercussions are not the same. Likewise, the other side point about age of consent; while I think 16 is actually still a child, the idea of having some age cut off where you can have sexual intercourse with a 16 year old is frankly bizarre, and would cause all kinds of untold problems. Better to just raise the age limit. Though of course, this would be a controversial approach. .... ok Essay done.

Someone posted this and I agree with them.If Brand is guilty then I hope he pays the ultimate price. It’s just a shame that The Times and, more specifically, The Guardian were so intent to brush the Nick Cohen allegations under the carpet. Both my parents were journalists (now in gvmnt comms) and the Cohen rumours have been around for over 20 years (Mr Octopus they called him). My mum recalls, from 25 years ago, the editor of one very large circulation publication chasing a 14/15 year old work experience girl around the offices, constantly making references to her body. He was apparently joined and goaded on by other male journalists at the paper. As disgusting as Brand has been, it doesn’t change the fact that his scrutiny of a corrupt, gaslighting, establishment controlled MSM is totally justified. So, while it’s great to see such sexual predators pay the ultimate price, in this instance, it is demonstrably less about a moral journalistic crusade of uncovering historical abuse (which is how it’s being sold) and more to do with silencing critics of encroaching western police state authoritarianism. 2

Wow....what a load of bollox...I'm out :)

As always, great job striking the balance between discussing the serious stuff but not majorly depressing everybody. The only bit I can't agree with is the discussion around age of consent; I find the way we increasingly infantilise young women quite troubling. It always comes across like we're suggesting young women are innocent naive little flowers who need to be protected because clearly they don't know what they're getting themselves into. From age 16 I've exclusively been in relationships with men who are 5-15 years older than me, and I have never felt like there was a power imbalance between us based on age. I just happen to be more attracted to older men, and all of those relationships were consensual, healthy and ended on good terms. But equally none of my relationships were with celebrities, people who were senior to me at work etc; those factors introduce the power imbalance. I'm now almost 30 and I don't think my ability to consent has changed over the last 15 years - I knew what I was getting into and I think many other young women aged 16-18 should have the right to do the same if they want to. Now obviously my experience is not necessarily the same as everyone else's, but denying young women the opportunity to consensually enter into relationships with older men because we don't trust those older men just seems like a really good way of controlling young women's behaviour and denying them agency.

I like how every now and then they drift into their own subjects. A pleasure to listen to.

Why is the Foreign Office allowing Truss overseas.

I appreciate you leading into the pubcast with some lightness - lot of grim stuff in the news, good to still have a bit of joy Parsnip vibes

The truth is as members of the media and ordinary members of the public, we just simply do not know if these allegations are true or not. No due legal process has taken place as of yet. We are moving into some very dangerous times as a society and at the risk of sounding dramatic, the way both the public and the media in particular, is behaving as of late, things like this could potentially lead to the breakdown of the systems of society. Right now every person accused of a crime is entitled to their day in court. That’s how the law works. I completely agree with Ava’s points about the conviction rates, it’s disgusting and a lot desperately needs to be looked at in our legal system as there is far too many victims and far too little justice. On Russel Brand I completely reserve my judgement. I am no more sure of his innocence as I am of his guilt. I wasn’t there. You’re quick to take swipes at conspiracy theories, whilst suggesting he’s spent ten years deliberately gearing towards conspiracy theories because he knew one day he would be in this situation. That’s just a conspiracy theory of your own making and a bit of a wild one at that. I genuinely am a MASSIVE fan of all 3 of you, both individually and as a group on here, but I’m struggling to agree with you on this one

It's amazing how his role as a sort of cheeky sex symbol is evidence of his guilt. Women clearly enjoyed this type of carry on. Now, we are expected to believe it reflected something darker. Or, worse, your ludicrous conspiracy theory that this behavior-or building a huge following-was to insulate him from such allegations! In fact, judging him by his public behaviour is no different to saying a woman "deserved it" because she was wearing a short skirt or talking to a lot of different guys in a bar.

Gosh! What a waste of an hour and fourteen minutes! Just a random unstructured conversation with annoying giggling and a desperate need for a safety pin! Finally, the state does not presume you are innocent, the justice system presumes you are innocent until proven guilty. The justice system is one of the three branches of the state. The other two branches are the executive, or the government, and the legislature, which is the two Houses of Parliament. In most democracies, these three branches of the state are separate from each other. They have roles and functions that are defined within written constitutions, preventing the concentration of power in any one branch and enabling each branch to serve as a check on the other two branches. This is known as separation of powers.

When you try and shame people who are skeptical of the ALLEGED crimes by calling them “fanboys” in the title, you straight away give away your position and lose all credibility.

I’m a huge Russell brand fan but there’s serious questions to be asked of him here. A possible rapist for sure

One of the great things about young people today is that they don't tolerate abuse like we old people did.

I agree that the age of consent should be raised, not because I think 16 year olds shouldn't be having sex, but to protect 16 year olds from predatory fully-grown adults. I think, expecially if informed by quality sex education, sexual exploration between teens is an essential part of growing up and sexual awakening, but it shouldn't be lawful for adult men to use this 'loophole' in the law to have sex with children. It's not something decent men do, and Russell Brand being indecent towards women does warrant justice. So this 'innocent until proven guilty' argument is redundant. Regardless of whether the criminal allegations are true, karma has rightfully caught up with him - and I say that as someone who enjoyed his flamboyant persona when I was younger (and didn't realise what a terribly patriarchal society my brain was being moulded by). I had no idea of the extent of his poor treatment of women - just referring to the TV and radio clips from the documentary alone. Even after learning that women in the industry, particularly on the comedy circuit, had him clocked as a predator and had been warning each other about him for years, there are still so many people online supporting him! Let's say he's innocent of rape and sexual assault - he's still considered a danger to women by colleagues in the industry! Is that not enough for these people!? It makes my heart hurt that so many men care so little about poor treatment of women and girls. Also, first time watching you but it was *so* frustrating that the camera wasn't on Ava when she was talking, especially given the subject matter.

Is Russell being investigated by the Met Police ? The police force that has approx 1000 officers either on suspension or reduced service to keep them away from the public while they are being investigated.

RB and JS radio clip, was over 20 years ago. RB has actually apologized for doing that. It's grossly unfair to judge RB on his past actions, when at the time he was lauded for it. These allegations, must go to court. Society is trying to change for the better.

I always found Brand a gobby windbag and ever so slightly creepy. But, it's just not right that people should lose jobs, contracts etc when he's not been found guilty of anything. What happened to innocent until proven guilty?

With reporting to the police or media issue, it should be a case that either both parties must be made public or kept private until a guilty conviction is made, i understand the argument to keep the victims identity a secret to protect them, but there is nothing to say this person is a victim and they have not made false allegations before.

I don't think brand was that calculated with his youtube channel. the trews were actually pretty grounded. I would wager that his way into deep conspiracy theory nonsense was due to the feedback of payoffs from youtube when he said more and more extreme things and then the added stupidity of covid conspiracy chaos which allowed him to draw in massive audiences of conspiracy theorists. i believe it was very simple greed and stupidity rather than having that kind of foresight. unless we find out that he is on the level of say andrew tate, but andrew tate is doing his conspiracy theories while actively participating in organised crime, which probably has his radars on more. unless brand is still participating in sexual assaults to this day, then maybe its similar.

RE: Brand - its not a fan-base , its a CULT

😂 Accusing people of being crazy conspiracy theorist whilst simultaneously talking about a conspiracy that Brand set his channel up in apprehension for these allegations. 😂 You lot are something else, would love to have a chat with you, would be a phenomenon to behold. How do you take yourselves seriously? I think thats part of the problem, you take things far too seriously, dramatise, dengerous stuff.

Can you lot please get your cancel culture talons into Jimmy Page and scream for him to be de-monitized for having a two year affair with a 14yr old in the 1970's?? Wait, he's not spoken out about Government/Corporate corruption.

HR, realistically, is there to protect their own jobs.

Ava is nailing this. She's so intelligent and articulate. She's got a clarity on this topic that is spot on. Way to go, Ava!

Great, sensitive and insightful podcast on this issue.

Really, open secret, and yet prominent voices didnt make it into dispatches, over a 4 year investigation?!

Quite a scary situation if allegations like this don't go to the police but go straight to the media to be tried there

As a mother, I feel that any person over the age of 25 who wishes to have a sexual relationship with a 16 year old, is a predator! I would be suspicious of my 19 year old daughter if a 30 year old man wanted to have a relationship with her! Also remember that the Amygdala does not fully mature until around the age of 25, so the emotions of a younger person are most likely to be easily abused/controlled by an older person (especially a predatory individual!)

I thought Keir Starmer was in the room- great impression Ava! Maybe try Ed Davy next

Interesting backstory to the £100 coin ... I'd never heard of it. "Man arrested for using £100 coin in Tesco wins £5,000 in damages". I think I'm gonna get me some of them!

I love the part where you're mocking Russell brand for not trusting the main stream media and in the next breath agreeing not to trust main stream media that you disagree with 😂 Similar to when you call youtube main stream media, except Brand and who ever else can get their opions and POV out uncensored... until they actively ghost ban you to censor your point.

I wish they’d release the Epstein client list

This channel is toxic. It shouts for justice yet whispers process or balance.

His past behaviour on television, such as pulling his trousers down and sitting on a woman's lap, doesn't make this look good.

Thanks for covering this in a way that is empathetic to the victims. Fanboys have a tendency to forget that they’re real people too.

Great propaganda guys. ' Brand's fanboys' is reminiscent of ' Bernie bro's' and the ' Corbyn cult'. And calling people ' conspiracy theorists' is not exactly journalism. If you really cared about this shit, wouldn't you be asking for a proper trial instead of just doing a cancellation job?

@15.00. There's probably a big correlation between rape case success rates vs everyone having the right to a duty solicitor with them in the first few interactions with the police EXCEPT rape victims. The police give you specialist officers to talk to you and they are not solicitors nor will they ever mention your right to a solicitor. If you are a woman (or for that matter anyone) talking to the police, it doesn't matter if they are specialist rape officers or look to be 'on your side' or not - as soon as they start asking about anything at all that could undermine your case by implying you are committing an offence or could be seen as personal information unrelated to the actual offence (including text messages, particular questions, etc), ASK FOR A DUTY SOLICITOR. It is your right and it is free. It won't delay anything either as the court process is much slower than 'wasting half a day waiting for a solicitor'. Do this even if you consider yourself innocent, as that isn't enough. Why? The police know all the valid guilty paths and valid defenses and will try to lead you down the ones that causes them least work/quickest outcome, and it is easy to fall for this unless there is someone who is working for you and also knows all the common paths/defences. Especially be careful when the police ask you for your opinion on anything that seems to have no bearing on the case; they are usually trying to close off a defence you could use later in court and/or cast doubt so the CPS don't take it to court. Your solicitor is trained to give the best answers to such questions. You are not. Remember; the police are never working for you (unless the case has media attention); *they are always only ever trying to close the case as quickly as possible*.

We support Russell brand, but can you now talk about the new accusations against Prince Andrew

Without ever being a fan of his comedy, or the kind of programmes and films he made, for a while, I was prepared to turn the other cheek to his known behaviour and the hearsay rumours. I used to occasionally watch his YT channel way back, when he would interview people like the rubberbandits and talk about social issues in the UK, such as housing. Things I cared about. However, at some point he left that behind and turned his attention to alt right hobby horses, chased the clicks and I just totally lost interest. On the allegations, innocent until proven guilty of course, but the sheer weight and supporting evidence is pretty damning. If the allegations are true, the man is a misogynist, a rapist and a bully who used his power to take advantage of young women, who clearly he had zero respect for. That kind of behaviour is a stark contrast to the public persona of a bawdy, cheeky but fair minded fighter for justice and truth he that he cultivated and hid in plain sight behind. What a dark double life to lead. The only mitigation I can offer is that these are historic allegations. He has had mental health and addiction issues in the past and he may be able to save himself slightly if he shows genuine remorse and can prove he's changed. However, that wont offer any comfort to his alleged victims, or alter the fact that these women should see justice for any past crimes he may have committed against them. I imagine a lot of his defenders were quite different in their stance on Prince Andrew or Jimmy Savile, who they see, I would guess as 'establishment'.

Anyone remember the witch hunt of Kevin Spacey ???

I would suggest a mushroom Wellington as a vegetarian main for a Sunday roast. Mushroom and chessnut Wellington too. DE-licious! On your second point, my pal asked a main stream comedian for gossip while having a drink two years back and he said 'Russell Brand is a rapist that has been building a crazy following online because he knew he would be found out'. Yeah, it's true, basically.

First 4 minutes is very dull.

Most people are not missing ANYTHING They are saying if he did something he should be charged, tried and punished. BUT There have been no charges or convictions and yet he is being punished. Its sick

You always know something is going to be a complete hatchet piece when people who hold differing opinions are branded (no pun) "defender and fanboys" in the title. The connected media response, despite due legal process taking place is disgusting.

hmmm - while I agree these allegations are serious, you do seem to have a preconceived idea of his content. while his headlines are a tad click-baity, he does back up much of what he says with documentary evidence, which I don't often see here. You're saying that 6 million people are 'conspiracy theorists' which is just not true. Watch some of his content - through to the end. He at least raises some interesting points about money making corporations. IF anything is proved then the law should take it's course, but lets not forget what happened with Hugh Edwards.

I'm not a fan of Russell Brand, but what most of the sensible non-fan people I have very briefly spoken to about this think, is that he is given the courtesy of due process, and if he is found guilty of anything he is punished accordingly. The 'guilty by accusation' trend is incredibly disturbing - just think how you would feel if it was you in the firing line?

Interesting that Ava casually brings up Noel fielding when it’s a pretty open secret that he likes them young and he’s no doubt going to be one of the next people to be brought to the public eye

HOLY SHIT that call between Brand and Saville was something else

Because Diana spoke out about land mines etc.... She had concerns that arms dealers would finish her up.

Have you guys considered color correcting the green tint out?

so should her parents be charged for grooming a child when they also dropped her of at his house?

i reckon guilty , why ,because so many victims have reported the very same thing , a glazed over look in his eyes , but this must go to court before any can truly say guilty , it upsets me the power of media on the mind and how many are influenced by it , and how not following the media narrative is seen as somehow being an apologist for a rapist

Could do without the 4:00 minutes talking about your food.

Hold on guys, yes the stand up gig, of Brand on stage, he used the very scenario, told in Documentary by a ‘victim’, it is truly sadistic pornographic misogamy! it’s almost like a ‘self confession’ on stage if it all is found to be true. What is also horrify is the women sitting laughing!

Im a keen viewer of this channel as well as Novara media but these takes are very disappointing and clearly loaded as they dont approve of Brands style of programming and takes ( neither do I for the most part ) You can have opinions about Brand but that's not the same as passing judgment on specific allegations. Like I said, that rape victims dont have a system and culture to support them in pursued of justice is a very serious issue but to link that with a specific allegation is missing the point.

Things changed a lot in the way the society treats children and young adults now even compared to some 20 years ago. When I was 16, I left my home town and went to study in a different city (in times before internet existed). My 17 yo daughter is finishing her last school year and thinking of going to Uni next year but not thinking of moving to a student dorm or whatsoever. Young people live with their parents much longer, way into their late 20s now, sometimes even into 30s, so it's normal that 16-18 yo are perceived and expected of things that are less adult and more youth, really. A 16 yo should date someone around their age, not someone 15 years older.