Some evidence would be nice.
Some evidence would be nice.
This post was removed.
Brand quite openly admits to rape in the text message.
The exchange went something like this.
Victim: I'm really angry, I said no but you did it anyway.
Brand: Sorry about that, I promise I won't do it again.
(Victim then visits a rape crisis center on the same day)
How can you defend this?
How about posting the actual text exchange and not “something like” the text exchange.
That is his "interpretation" of the text exchange.
Simply put Russel Brand is one of the clearest examples of a grifter you can think of. He’s not right wing or left wing but he’ll do whatever he can do scam people and make money. But what we likely know is that he is a really scummy rapist. When these abusers are in trouble they’ll grasp any straws. R Kelly claimed racism, Brand talks about the mainstream media. They know that there are plenty of idiots around that’ll believe any nonsense.
My paraphrasing of the texts is pretty fair, I would say.
In the article it says the Rape Treatment Center she went to has "records" so hopefully they did a rape kit and has DNA in those records.
So why would you paraphrase and not use the actual text?
I presumed all you people getting invested in this story had actually done at least a small amount of research in it.
Nothing I'm saying is particularly groundbreaking, it was all in the investigation.
It's weird your type seems to jump on the bandwagon without even knowing what bandwagon you're really jumping on. I would advise not doing that, you end up looking silly.
The text exchange makes him look like a monster.
Here it is ...
I don't think the fact that they had sex was in question. It was the nature of the sex that's the issue.
Again. Not complicated. The texts seem to be pretty clear cut to me.
Yeah, but you want corroborating evidence ... if a rape kit was performed her body is photographed from head to to preserving evidence of bruising or injuries.
I can’t find anywhere in the text exchange where she mentions getting raped. Seems odd to me. I believe if somebody shot me, that I would say, “you fkng shot me!”
i “interpret” this as she had sex with him without a condom. pretty sure she went to see him to have sex. I’d still say no is no, but she didn’t seem overly concerned that she was forcibly raped either. he’s definitely a sexual deviant
This is what she alleges:
She told The Times: “I’m stuck underneath the painting and he’s pushing up against me.
"He’s a lot taller than me. And he has that glazed look in his eye again. And I can’t move. And I told him, ‘Get off, get off.’”
Nadia claimed Brand held her against the wall and raped her without a condom.
So she didn't use the word 'rape' so therefore it couldn't have happened?
Have a day off this weird crusade, for your own benefit. Her texts mention how scared of him she was, which he seems to acknowledge. None of it points to a consensual sexual encounter, condom or not. I don't really understand why you wouldn't believe the woman's side of this story here given what we do have to go on.
Whether she seems 'concerned' or not is not really something for a letsrun virgin to decide. She was 'concerned' enough to go to a rape crisis center, and 'concerned' enough to keep returning for 5 months.
I’ll decide what I do today, but glad you are thinking of me. There are levels to this game. I’m just saying she is accusing him of rape without ever using the word. seems odd. if someone steals, they steal. if someone murders, they murder. if someone starts a fire, they start a fire.
but, if someone rapes, what is the term victims use?
So you're saying she visited a rape crisis center immediately after the encounter despite the fact that she didn't, in fact, think she'd been raped?
I have no idea what she is thinking but I happen to know somebody who was forcibly raped and they fought for their lives. she did not do this. never even mentioned it. does no mean, the sex is fantastic but we can’t go there?
we need to see if she was bruised up, and did the police visit him and snap pics of scratches, etc…or did she just have regrets? that text is open for interpretation, which is why you interpreted it. had she said, you raped me, there is no interpretation
Your mental gymnastics is incredibly tiring.
Why the desperate need to find a circumstance in which he's innocent?
If your hero did nothing wrong, why was he so apologetic? You think someone visits a rape crisis center because of 'regrets'?