Escapee - what are you on about ? Brand went Tonto during the lockdown days and decided to try his luck with conspiracy nonsense.
Nobody is saying he didn't switch away from the Left at that time, but the incontrovertible fact is that ALL of his convictions (and other alleged offences) happened during the time senior Labour figures , politicians and publications were bigging him up in nauseating fashion EVEN THOUGH he had been binned by the BBC over the disgraceful Andrew Sachs incident. The most prominent of those politicians is our current Prime Minister , You couldn't make it up.



There will always be some (on all sides of politics) who question evidence in cases like this, even if it seems clear he is guilty as heck. It happens in just about every court case, certainly high profile ones that get played out in public.

People can have opinions without "backing Brand as the victim". It doesn't mean they support him does it. Don't forget he wasn't found guilty on all charges, the jury has to be convinced beyond reasonable doubt and so there were obviously question marks in their minds around a couple of the charges brought against him.

As for "his crimes were widely known for at least six years", well that's just plain wrong as the Dispatches programme and newspaper articles only came out in September 2023.

had his head in a womans lap Nose facing inwards , And touched a womans Breast

Cant stand the man , but the Evidence is Flimsy at best

More to come see what they are

Looks like Brand thought he could get away with all sorts of deviance when he was being surrounded over and fawned over by the left then realised when he moved to "team woke right" as Escapee likes to call it he realised he had to stop that behaviour and turn over a new leaf.

I wonder what it is about lefties that made him feel he could get away with it when amongst them.

How many times has this count mentioned milliband?




Your desperation has become mildy amusing to watch.

You're not coping well are you.

Gurgling "milliband" on these threads everytime you take your thumb out of your mouth.

c)

And what she/they said was in direct contradiction to what they have been saying for 20 years.

The deep state strikes again, they got the dissident

Quite obviously (for example), the perception of an event occurring when an individual is immature and carefree is often completely different to when they look back on things they did when they are middle aged and mature. Many people would be shamed and ashamed of what they were willing to do decades ago. They might even want to/find it easier to cope by putting the blame for their poor choices at the time on other people.

That is a generalisation. Nobody knows for sure unless they were there all those years ago. We are however in possession of logic, and logic tells you that young people can be infatuated by 'stars' and getting some attention from them, get treated/used by them, and regret that activity in later life. Is it criminal, more than likely not, but this case seems to revolve around this individual being a horrible person and treating some of the women throwing themselves at him badly ie taking advantage. But, applying logic again, I'd say it's most likely to have been consenting activity at the time (and regret, sometimes deep) afterwards. It's probably why he was a trophy boy of the political left at the time. A woman scorned can be vindictive, given the opportunity. This character might be a genuine waypist, but I think it's less likely, personally.

Pretty obvious, modern day legacy media will never resist the opportunity to give older white dudes a good kicking. ie VIRTUE SIGNALLING. Especially one like Brand who is now lambasted for the behaviour he used to be celebrated for in the mainstream, and by politicians. To be honest I know very little about Markle (aside from the very basics), and care even less. But people will definitely see it as another opportunity to flex up their VIRTUE SIGNALLING.

not defending he may have been a wrong un but  back in the day the press /media championed him as "swordsman of the year " he was young and possibly reckless did those birds not have an inkling that if they went to a hotel room with said  swordsman that tea and scones and seeing his etchings so to speak might not be top of the list in nightime activitys.

Someone you sha$$ed 15 years ago claims you did her up the chuffer as well, which she now claims she didn't consent to, and then you're a convicted waypist. What a wonderful world it's turning into.

I can see why the jury took a dim view of the back door degeneracy. The average person thinks it's degenerate even when it's consentual.

There could be more charges for Brand. Mark Rowley appealed for more victims to come forward and said he wouldn't be surprised if many, many more come forward. Makes sense I suppose, but I wonder why there was no appeal for victims of grooming gangs.

Rapists should be worried.

Grape gangs aren't even a corollary as children can't consent to sexx with adults, even if they think that they wanted to. It's therefore a much lower bar for a conviction, the CPS only needed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that sexx happened/was organised.