Fade and Die
Medal Winner
If he is guilty it must be dealt with by the law, I’m not comfortable with the Lynch Mob mentality of some on here…
Russell Brand
- Thread starter PhilTheFragger
- Start date
- Status
PhilTheFragger
Provider of Entertainment for the Golfing Gods 🙄
Mod edit - quoted post deleted.
Now come on Karen, I never said that and you know it.
I’ve said my piece and I’m out.
Now come on Karen, I never said that and you know it.
I’ve said my piece and I’m out.
Last edited by a moderator:
stefanovic
Medal Winner
First heard him on the radio and he seemed a bit creepy.
Once again the BBC were only interested in their ratings.
Wiki page says he was abused as a child and his Dad took him to prostitutes.
What happens early in life has a tendency to come back to haunt you.
He may of course just been trying to keep up with the times.
Once again the BBC were only interested in their ratings.
Wiki page says he was abused as a child and his Dad took him to prostitutes.
What happens early in life has a tendency to come back to haunt you.
He may of course just been trying to keep up with the times.
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
The BBC shot JFK.
3offTheTee
Tour Rookie
I have always thought him objectionable since his prank on Andrew Sachs with Ross.
Watching his “show” I could not see any humour whatsoever and I have seen Chubby Brown once many years’ ago.
The main point is that many on here I expect will not have been in the position of being raped and some may be speaking from personal experience. I have sympathy with them and realise it can affect different people in different ways.
I only hope the truth will come out and justice will prevail
Watching his “show” I could not see any humour whatsoever and I have seen Chubby Brown once many years’ ago.
The main point is that many on here I expect will not have been in the position of being raped and some may be speaking from personal experience. I have sympathy with them and realise it can affect different people in different ways.
I only hope the truth will come out and justice will prevail
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
With friends like these…
Fade and Die
Medal Winner
With friends like these…
The other way of looking at it is that they have all been victims of “Trial by Media”?
Both Chellie’s post and yours are typical of the Social Media Lynch mob mentality. Someone will soon suggest that the authorities are doing nothing so “someone has to do something”
Again classic Lynch Mob psychology.
A close friend of mine was raped. She went to the police. He was never prosecuted.
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
Eh? I think you misinterpret what I’ve posted. I don’t condone anything Brand may have done but most certainly don‘t agree with the social media lynch mob, nor with the generally twisted, often vile, thoughts of the trio Tate, Wooten and Fox.The other way of looking at it is that they have all been victims of “Trial by Media”?
Both Chellie’s post and yours are typical of the Social Media Lynch mob mentality. Someone will soon suggest that the authorities are doing nothing so “someone has to do something”
Again classic Lynch Mob psychology.
Last edited:
As ever, I remain enormously uncomfortable with celebrities and others in the public eye being subject to trial by media, before any formal and qualified investigation has even begun.
There are a number of points I would make. First and foremost, television and the press are all about ratings and selling column inches. The more sensational the better, and the truth is very often distorted to make the programme or article more newsworthy and, hence, more saleable. I have first hand knowledge of at least one TV documentary (Dispatches) and numerous press articles which have been so far divorced from reality it’s unbelievable. But when the outlets are approached and the significant gaps in their “investigation” pointed out to them, they have no interest in redressing the balance. The damage is done, reputations ruined, but ratings boosted and papers sold. Which is all they are interested in.
Which brings me on to investigation. Investigative journalists are journalists first and foremost, investigative skills being, in many cases, somewhat limited. They do not possess the investigative mindset of a skilled and qualified investigator - they are editor driven, and regardless they do not have, and never will have, access to all of the material required in order to complete an exhaustive, conclusive and balanced investigation. The purpose of their so called investigation is not to prove the guilt of an individual or organisation, and as a consequence I have always had the tendency to regard their findings with a huge dollop of caution.
And finally, the victims, or alleged victims, themselves. It is not uncommon for victims of alleged offences to be more than happy to share their experiences via social media, or through TV or the press, whilst having absolutely no intention of cooperating with a formal police investigation. The result is that, whilst an alleged offender may be subject to full on trial by media, no complaint is ever made to the police, or is unsubstantiated, and as such no criminal prosecution follows. I have any number of examples but they are not going to be repeated here.
I don’t know Russell Brand. I have no interest in ever knowing him. And I haven’t watched the Dispatches programme. I will not comment on the allegations being made, for the reasons set out. But one thing I will say for sure, and it is a repeat of my opening paragraph, is that the developing trend of picking over the bones of allegations confined to the press and media way in advance of any formal and qualified investigation is a very dangerous game to play. No good can come of it - in the event a criminal trial ensues there remains the ever lingering concern that the defence will argue their client is being denied the opportunity of a fair trial. If there is no criminal trial reputations are trashed.
There is a right way to do things. This isn’t it.
There are a number of points I would make. First and foremost, television and the press are all about ratings and selling column inches. The more sensational the better, and the truth is very often distorted to make the programme or article more newsworthy and, hence, more saleable. I have first hand knowledge of at least one TV documentary (Dispatches) and numerous press articles which have been so far divorced from reality it’s unbelievable. But when the outlets are approached and the significant gaps in their “investigation” pointed out to them, they have no interest in redressing the balance. The damage is done, reputations ruined, but ratings boosted and papers sold. Which is all they are interested in.
Which brings me on to investigation. Investigative journalists are journalists first and foremost, investigative skills being, in many cases, somewhat limited. They do not possess the investigative mindset of a skilled and qualified investigator - they are editor driven, and regardless they do not have, and never will have, access to all of the material required in order to complete an exhaustive, conclusive and balanced investigation. The purpose of their so called investigation is not to prove the guilt of an individual or organisation, and as a consequence I have always had the tendency to regard their findings with a huge dollop of caution.
And finally, the victims, or alleged victims, themselves. It is not uncommon for victims of alleged offences to be more than happy to share their experiences via social media, or through TV or the press, whilst having absolutely no intention of cooperating with a formal police investigation. The result is that, whilst an alleged offender may be subject to full on trial by media, no complaint is ever made to the police, or is unsubstantiated, and as such no criminal prosecution follows. I have any number of examples but they are not going to be repeated here.
I don’t know Russell Brand. I have no interest in ever knowing him. And I haven’t watched the Dispatches programme. I will not comment on the allegations being made, for the reasons set out. But one thing I will say for sure, and it is a repeat of my opening paragraph, is that the developing trend of picking over the bones of allegations confined to the press and media way in advance of any formal and qualified investigation is a very dangerous game to play. No good can come of it - in the event a criminal trial ensues there remains the ever lingering concern that the defence will argue their client is being denied the opportunity of a fair trial. If there is no criminal trial reputations are trashed.
There is a right way to do things. This isn’t it.
KenL
Tour Rookie
I'm very surprised this is being discussed on here.
A discussion regarding whether the continuation of this thread is appropriate is taking place between the moderators and admin. Until such time as that discussion has concluded I am going to lock the thread to prevent further posts.
- Status
Similar threads
