Russell Brand rape trial: defence lawyer tells jury comedian is no psychopath
Brand's defence lawyer told the jury there is "no evidence" he is a psychopath who rapes people. Closing arguments concluded a three-week trial on charges of rape and sexual assault.
Defence closes Russell Brand rape trial: 'He believed they were all consenting'
Russell Brand's defence lawyer told the jury there is "no evidence" that the comedian is "some kind of psychopath who rapes people and thinks it's normal," according to variety.com, which reported on the closing arguments delivered at the end of a three-week trial.
Ian Winter KC, defending Brand, argued that his client's conduct during and after the alleged incidents was inconsistent with that of a rapist. "The fact he behaved normally during and after all of those 'rapes' tells you what you need to know," Winter told the jury. "He believed they were all consenting. You would have to be a psychopath to be raping someone and asking them if they were enjoying it at the same time."
Winter pointed to specific details he said undermined the prosecution's case: Brand had left his email addresses and photographs with one of the complainants, and had attempted to kiss her goodbye when he left. "Rapists do not leave their address," he told the court. "Rapists do not leave their photographs."
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 are said to have taken place between 1999 and 2009.
Channel 4 documentary 'poisoned the well of justice'
A significant portion of Winter's closing statement was directed at the 2023 Channel 4 documentary, produced jointly with The Sunday Times of London, which alleged Brand was a serial abuser. Five women appeared in the programme accusing him of rape, sexual assault and emotional abuse. Brand issued a strong denial before the broadcast aired.
One of the complainants in the current case — who alleges Brand anally raped her following consensual sex in 2009 — told the court she had watched the documentary before coming forward. Winter questioned what her evidence would have looked like had she not seen it.
"There is nothing random at all about these people coming forward," he said. "They have all come forward because they have been brought at the invitation of that program." He argued the complainants were "thoroughly contaminated" by the documentary and that its existence had "fundamentally corrupted" the fairness of the proceedings.
Winter described the programme as "one-sided" and "produced in a dramatic manner," and was critical of it presenting itself as a documentary. He noted that Brand had not spoken to any of the journalists involved in the 90-minute film, and had only been offered a standard right-of-reply contact — which Winter characterised as a move to "protect their defamation risk" rather than a genuine attempt at balance. The allegations in the documentary, he added, had never been tested in court, and the journalists had "poisoned the well of justice" by prompting the women to come forward.
Memoir used as evidence draws defence scorn
Winter also took aim at the prosecution's use of Brand's 2007 memoir My Booky Wook as evidence. Brand had been cross-examined over passages in the book in which he claimed to have pretended to be gay in order to gain women's trust.
"In 2007 he wrote a funny book, My Booky Wook, it contains some jokes," Winter told the jury. He argued it was unreasonable to "take what he wrote eight years after the event and somehow use it as evidence of what he was doing in 1999." The defence lawyer called the move an act of "desperation" by the prosecution.
'Put out of your mind any distaste'
Winter urged jurors to set aside any moral judgement of Brand's famously promiscuous lifestyle when reaching their verdict. "Put out of your mind any distaste you may feel for the way he lived his life," he said. "That way of living is not criminal."
He called on the jury to apply "pure, cold logic" to the evidence, dismissing as irrelevant any personal distaste for Brand's behaviour. "Disgusting, distasteful, immoral, who cares? It's irrelevant to your consideration," Winter said, adding that "even being manipulative in the pursuit of consensual sex is completely lawful."
He closed by stating plainly: "Brand is innocent."
Prosecution's position
The prosecution, in its own closing statement earlier in the week, rejected the defence's narrative, describing it as "a lot of half-truths" that had been "spun into lies."
The jury is now expected to begin deliberations. Brand, who took the stand during the trial, said the allegations had consumed his life entirely since they first emerged.
Source: Google News MT