THE FACTS: An Unbiased Summary Of ALL The Allegations Against Russell Brand, And His Response

Comedian and political commentator Russell Brand has been accused of sexual impropriety by multiple women. Yet while fierce debate – illogically influenced by politics from both sides of the spectrum – continues to be waged online, we take a quick logical delve into the facts. 

Who is Russell Brand?

Russell Brand is a successful author, presenter, actor, and podcaster. After appearing on MTV and on shows like Big Brother’s Efourum, Brand briefly married singer Katy Perry. He has now remarried and has children. In recent years, Brand has rebranded himself into a political commentator, conspiracy theorist, and ‘wellbeing’ promoter. He has frequently been criticised for promoting demonstrably false claims relating to medical science, political issues, and, most recently, the war in Ukraine.

What are the allegations?

Four women have alleged sexual assaults between 2006 and 2013, while he was a presenter for BBC Radio 2 and Channel 4 and then an actor in various Hollywood films.

WOMAN ONE

Alice – not her real name – alleges she had a sexual relationship with Brand when she was 16.

Brand, who was 30 at the time, allegedly sent cars to Alice’s school to collect her and bring her back to his London home.

Alice claims that he became increasingly controlling during the relationship and encouraged her to lie to family and friends to cover up their meetings.

She also alleged that he removed a condom during sex without her knowledge.

“Russell engaged in the behaviours of a groomer, looking back, but I didn’t even know what that was then, or what that looked like,” she said.

While in bed with Brand, Alice alleges that Brand forced his penis into her mouth and that she was unable to breathe.

“I was pushing him away and he wasn’t backing off at all,” she said.

“I ended up having to punch him really hard in the stomach to get him off. I was crying and he said, ‘Oh, I only wanted to see your mascara run anyway’.”

After this she claims that he held her mouth open, drooled into it, and then forced her mouth shut until she was “gagging and crying”.

WOMAN TWO

Nadia (not her real name) said Brand raped her at his LA home in 2012.

The pair, she claims, previously had consensual sex.

On one occasion, Nadia claims that she was asked by Brand to join him and a “friend” for a threesome in his bedroom. When she refused, Nadia said that Brand pushed her against a wall and raped her without using a condom.

After escaping his house, she said Brand sent her a text at 3.29am, which said: “I’m sorry. That was crazy and selfish. I hope you can forgive me, I know that you’re a lovely person. X.”

She said she ignored a call from him but texted him the following morning to say he had “scared the s***” out of her, adding: “When a girl say(s) NO it means no.”

Brand replied he was “very sorry” and “embarrassed” by his behaviour, The Times reported.

Nadia provided the team of journalists with her medical records from a rape treatment centre she went to after the rape, as well as therapy records.

WOMAN THREE

Phoebe – not her real name – had a brief consensual relationship with Brand after they met at an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting in 2013, she said.

He later hired her for a project they worked on together.

During this time, Phoebe said she became “trapped” in a bedroom in Brand’s home and he started chasing her around the room.

Brand, whom she claims was naked, “grabbed me and got me on the bed” and tried to forcibly remove her clothes.

“I was screaming, and I was like, ‘What are you doing, stop, please, you’re my friend, I love you, please don’t do this, I don’t want to do this,’” she said. “I think he had his hands down my trousers but I was fighting so hard and I was screaming so hard, hoping that I could get through somehow.”

Phoebe claims she then ran out of his house and into a group of people who had arrived for a business meeting.

One of the people in the group apologised to Phoebe years later, she has claimed.

She said: “He pulled me aside and he said to me, ‘I have never forgiven myself for not running in that house to save you. I heard you screaming. And I didn’t know what to do. And we were all so scared of him and I didn’t do anything. And I am sorry’.”

Phoebe continued working with Brand.

WOMAN FOUR

Brand’s former girlfriend Jordan Martin did not provide an account to the journalists working on the investigation due to “personal family circumstances” but confirmed to the team that she stood by allegations she made in a self-published book.

The former model had a six-month relationship with Brand in 2007.

In her book, she detailed an alleged sexual assault at The Lowry Hotel in Manchester between Dina and Randall Grand – pseudonyms she used for herself and Brand.

Ms Martin said the comedian became angry when he found out she had spoken to an ex-boyfriend. She claims that he then grabbed her phone and assaulted her in the bathroom, sliding his hand into her underwear.

She said she was “not ready for this intrusion” and did not find it “sensual or pleasant”.

Other allegations

In the Dispatches episode, Brand was criticised for joking with Jimmy Saville – who at the time had not been arrested for any crime – that he could provide him with one of his assistants to give him an inappropriate massage.

Meanwhile, a production runner on Big Brother’s Efourum said Brand flashed her on set and insinuated she “might like to suck his d***”. However, it was also revealed that the runner later had consensual sex with Mr. Brand.

Brand is also accused of asking an aide to procure women from the studio audience to have sex with, some of whom allegedly later said that they felt ‘used’.

Is there any actual evidence?

Media outlets such as Sky are irresponsibly reporting the above accusations as though they are proven facts, often failing to use terms such as ‘allegedly’ to ensure readers clearly understand that the allegations are not proven.

‘Alice’s’ alleged relationship has only been corroborated by a so-far unknown family member. It was not stated by Dispatches whether or not the relative also corroborated her claims of assault.

Nadia has allegedly provided therapy statements to reporters. It has not been revealed if these records show her naming Brand.

Nadia has, however, provided a screenshot of a text message sent by Brand and verified by journalists. The message, below, is particularly damning.

Phoebe has not yet provided any physical evidence nor witnesses to at least partly corroborate her story.

What has Brand said?

“Now, this isn’t the usual type of video we make on this channel where we critique, attack and undermine the news in all its corruption because in this story, I am the news. I’ve received two extremely disturbing letters or a letter and an email. One from a mainstream media TV company, one from a newspaper listing a litany of extremely egregious and aggressive attacks, as well as some pretty stupid stuff like community festival should be stopped, that I shouldn’t be able to attack mainstream media narratives on this channel.

Is this a ‘politically-motivated smear’, as Brand and many of his fans are suggesting?

While some of the women have said that Brand’s ‘return to popularity’ via his social media accounts was a factor that motivated them to come forward, there is zero evidence to support claims that this in any way involves politics. As usual, petty, tribalist factions from both sides – those who agree with Brand’s politics and those who don’t – are engaging in illogical, emotion-driven biased rants on social media. Even before any of the evidence was released, many began blindly defending him and wholly rejecting the claims (without truly knowing what those claims even were), while others, mostly on the left-wing or from the controversial ‘metoo movement’, instantly screamed out for Brand’s blood. Both sides are immoral and dimwitted.

Are The Times, Sunday Times, and Channel 4 ‘colluding’ to ‘cancel’ Russell Brand?

Understandably now on the defensive, Brand appears to be manipulating his fanbase by appealing to their conspiracy theory leanings and lack of trust in the ‘mainstream media’. Brand has made a fortune from parroting anti-establishment narratives riddled with paranoia and unsubstantiated claims relating to an alleged smear campaign led by ‘the establishment’ or the media, which he and others claim are essentially part of the same ‘club’, Brand has been able to galvanise support from his followers, most of whom are already susceptible to confirmation bias and to believe such a narrative.

A similar tactic was deployed by GB News presenter Dan Wootton, who blamed allegations against him on a ‘plot orchestrated by the left-wing to attack GB News’, manipulating staunchly pro-GB News viewers and his anti-Meghan Markle fans. In fact, the allegations were made, and reported to police, long before the existence of GB News. To date, however, controversial outlet ‘The Byline Times’ has failed to provide any evidence to support their more serious claims about Wootton.

The Sunday Times has no motive to smear Brand with allegations they know to be fabricated or which they have fabricated themselves. Channel 4 has no motive to knowingly report false accusations against a former employee, particularly when some of the allegations highlight potential failings in safeguarding on their own shows.

Summary

None of the women accusing Brand were under the age of consent when they allege that the crimes took place.

It is important to note that it is understood that none of the accusers have ever made complaints about Brand’s conduct to the police.

It is not known if any of the accusers were paid for appearing, albeit anonymously, on the Channel 4 Dispatches episode or in the articles by the Times and The Sunday Times.

Only one of the victims has provided evidence to partly support her claim. This comes in the form of the damning text message that has been verified by journalists as being sent by Brand himself.

Is Brand guilty or innocent?

While some of the evidence is indeed damning, Brand remains innocent unless proven guilty.

What happens next?

Considering the fact that some people do indeed make false allegations, there is a strong case for banning the media from reporting on unproven allegations, particularly relating to alleged sexual impropriety. No matter what happens, it is likely that Brand’s career will remain heavily tarnished. Considering that he now does not appear on the television but makes most of his money from his own personal online endeavours, it is likely that he will suffer minimal financial impact.

The accusers now have the option to officially report their allegations to the police – to not do so, while still speaking to the press, can be perceived as suspicious. Some may also now attempt to sue Brand for compensation – however none of the accusers have yet expressed their desire to do so.