What I thought when I saw the Brand allegations is that they are just that: allegations.
...
Unless and until he has been convicted in a court of competent jurisdiction, they are not worth discussing.
The presumption of innocence, however, is well and truly passé in the current woke/PC zeitgeist.
...
The saturation media coverage will make it impossible to empanel an impartial jury. Sub judice contempt of court seems to be roundly ignored in such cases.
This media interest will, of course, shrink to vanishing point if Brand is tried and found not guilty.
...
Whether found guilty or not, Brand will suffer enormous, possibly ruinous, financial loss as a result.
He has already been subjected to extra-judicial punishment by the corporate sector, who seem determined to prevent him from earning a living.
...
From what I have seen over the past 10 years or so, no man charged with rape or sexual assault can expect a fair trial anywhere in the Anglosphere.
What they can expect is exculpatory evidence to be illegally witheld from the defence (witness Liam Allan, George Pell, Bruce Lehrmann and others).
...
And if his accusers, who presumably "have to be believed"* are found to be lying? Well, this has happened before, and to the best of my knowledge and belief, no female false accuser has ever been charged with perjury or making false statements to police. AFAIK, they have had their anonymity protected too.
...
* That is the only explanation I can find for unsubstantiated allegations, often of alleged behaviour going back decades, and denied by the accused, somehow constituting a prima facie case.
What I thought when I saw the Brand allegations is that they are just that: allegations.
...
Unless and until he has been convicted in a court of competent jurisdiction, they are not worth discussing.
The presumption of innocence, however, is well and truly passé in the current woke/PC zeitgeist.
...
The saturation media coverage will make it impossible to empanel an impartial jury. Sub judice contempt of court seems to be roundly ignored in such cases.
This media interest will, of course, shrink to vanishing point if Brand is tried and found not guilty.
...
Whether found guilty or not, Brand will suffer enormous, possibly ruinous, financial loss as a result.
He has already been subjected to extra-judicial punishment by the corporate sector, who seem determined to prevent him from earning a living.
...
From what I have seen over the past 10 years or so, no man charged with rape or sexual assault can expect a fair trial anywhere in the Anglosphere.
What they can expect is exculpatory evidence to be illegally witheld from the defence (witness Liam Allan, George Pell, Bruce Lehrmann and others).
...
And if his accusers, who presumably "have to be believed"* are found to be lying? Well, this has happened before, and to the best of my knowledge and belief, no female false accuser has ever been charged with perjury or making false statements to police. AFAIK, they have had their anonymity protected too.
...
* That is the only explanation I can find for unsubstantiated allegations, often of alleged behaviour going back decades, and denied by the accused, somehow constituting a prima facie case.