Russell Brand’s lawyer told the jury there was “no evidence” that the comedian was “some kind of psychopath who rapes people and thinks it’s normal” in his closing argument.
“The fact that he behaved normally during and after all these ‘rapes’ tells you what you need to know. He thought they were all consenting,” said Ian Winter KC, defending Brand, according to Sky News. “You would have to be a psychopath to rape someone and at the same time ask them if they like it.”
Winter pointed out that Brand left his email addresses and photographs and attempted to say goodbye to one of the plaintiffs when he left. “Rapists don’t leave their addresses,” he said. “Rapists don’t leave their photos.”
Brand has pleaded not guilty to three counts of rape, three counts of sexual assault and one count of attempted indecent assault. The alleged incidents occurred between 1999 and 2009.
After a three-week trial, both parties presented their indictments this week, with the prosecution calling the actor’s defense “a lot of half-truths” that were “transformed into lies.”
As part of his closing statement, the lawyer also referred to the 2023 Channel 4 documentary that found Brand was a serial abuser as part of a joint investigation with the Sunday Times of London. The documentary featured five women who accused Brand of “rape, sexual assault and emotional abuse.” He strongly denied this before the broadcast.
One of the plaintiffs in the current court case, who claims Brand anally raped her after consensual sex in 2009, said in her testimony that she watched the documentary.
“One wonders what her testimony would have been if she had not seen the program,” asked the lawyer. “There is nothing random about these people coming forward… They all came forward because they were invited by this program. »
“They are all, we say, completely tainted by the program. Their very existence as plaintiffs is fundamentally corrupted by this program and this advertising and (that) makes it fundamentally unjust.”
In his closing statement, Brand’s defense lawyer called the Channel 4 documentary “biased” and “dramatically produced” and was said to have been scathing of him for claiming it was a documentary. Winter said Brand had not spoken to any of the journalists involved in the 90-minute show and was only offered a “right of reply” – where a journalist typically contacts the subject of an article to detail the allegations against them and offer them a chance to respond – in order to “protect their risk of defamation”.
He added that the allegations in the documentary had never been tested in court and that journalists had “poisoned the well of justice” by inciting the complainants to come forward.
Winter also accused the prosecution of “desperation” after using Brand’s 2007 memoir “My Booky Wook” as “evidence.” Brand was cross-examined over passages in the book in which he claimed to pretend to be gay to gain the trust of women.
“In 2007, he wrote a funny book, ‘My Booky Wook,’ which contains a few jokes,” the lawyer said. He then said the jury was being asked to “take what he wrote eight years after the event and use it in some way as evidence of what he was doing in 1999.”
Winter also urged the jury to disregard Brand’s “very promiscuous” lifestyle when deciding the verdict, saying “put out of your mind any disgust you may feel for the way he lived his life… This way of living is not criminal.”
Instead, he said: “Do what journalists have utterly failed to do, completely forget any condemnation and apply pure, cold logic to the question: ‘Are we sure, based on the evidence we’ve seen, (Brand) did what is alleged?’ »
“Disgusting, distasteful, immoral, whatever? It has nothing to do with your consideration.”
He added: “Even being manipulative in pursuing consensual sex is completely legal. »
“Brand is innocent,” the lawyer told the court.
Gn entert
