Comments by "gerhard7" (@gerhard7323) on "Russell Brand | 'When I was arrested the accusers were called 'victims' straight away' Jim Davidson" video.

An accuser is NOT automatically a victim. What's happening to Brand is disgraceful.
150
@murmillo666 Behaving like a disgraceful tw@t for years is not a criminal offence and if it were our jails would be filled to bursting... Furthermore while he was 'behaving like a disgraceful tw@t' he could apparently do no wrong in the eyes of the liberal establishment for nearly two decades. It was only when he became a family man and largely reformed character that said liberal establishment turned on him and that begs the question why exactly?
6
@murmillo666 Until such time as he is charged in court they are allegations and nothing more. Equally, until or unless that happens, they remain his accusers NOT victims. Were I in the same position I would expect to be afforded the same courtesy and right along with due process.
4
@johngreenhorn8853 Are you deliberately missing the point here? They're not just defending Russell Brand the man, most are concerned for and are defending a fundamental principle ie innocent until proven guilty. A fundamental principle which you, I or anyone else SHOULD be entitled to if we were accused of something. A fundamental principle which you either don't think is worth defending or perhaps believe Brand isn't entitled to because you don't like him and think he's an @$$hole.
3
@gertstronkhorst2343 What I think is not relevant. Being accused of something isn't the same thing as being tried and convicted by a court of something. Did you think Salmond, Gambuccini, Assange and Cliff Richard were guilty? What I'm struck by is the timing of this and how a liberal establishment which included the BBC, The Guardian and C4 once saw him as a darling and defended him when his behaviour was likely at its worst is now gunning for him. Gunning for him now he's a family man intent on ruffling aforementioned liberal establishment's feathers. His past behaviour wasn't something I'd defend, but unless it was criminal, provably so, then we shouldn't be talking about his victims, sexual assaults, coercive behaviour, rapes, underage sex etc
2
@gertstronkhorst2343 What I think IS not relevant it's what a court, a judge and a jury thinks should it get to that. He's behaved appallingly in the past I'd agree, but was his behaviour criminal and are these women prepared to take an oath, stand up in court and be cross-examined by a counsel on these matters? Like I said above, people like Salmond, Assange, Gambuccini, Jim Davidson and Cliff Richard have themselves all been accused of sexual assaults in the past and 'not liking' someone isn't grounds for them to spend years behind bars or to lose their livelihoods.
2
Look what happened to Cliff Richard, Assange, Salmond and Gambuccini. The people baying for Brand's blood are a mindless, hate filled mob and one can only hope a least a few of them are on the receiving end of something similar if they're ever accused of doing something.
1