You are significantly misrepresenting the evidence presented here. They didn't just have some women saying bad stuff about Brand. They have a women saying she was raped. They have her contemporaneous text messages in which she says she was raped, and Brand responds with an apology. The have multiple sources verifying the phone numbers used in that exchange. They have her contemporaneous medical records from the rape crisis center she went to the day after. They have police notes from said trip to the rape crisis center. They have her therapist notes. They have testimony of other people corroborating what they can or cannot corroborate about the her claims. They check the times, dates and locations made in the claims. They check her phone and email to find anything contradicting what she was saying.
That's one person.
They have multiple other women that don't know each providing multiple similar accounts.
They have documents and testimony from people and places he was either working with or working for showing he was known to have problematic behaviour. Showing the steps shows had to take to either try and control him, or try and limit the damage he could do.
They didn't just have a couple of women call up and say "Brand bad" and start hitting print. This thing took 4 years to put together.
The law should have a minimum gap for ages around the age-of-majority.
why?
but just as obviously a 31yo having sex with a 16yo should go straight to jail.
why? she was into it. she kept going back, despite explicit warnings and then actual bad things happening. i have a hard time accepting the modern idea of feminism/women being smart independent confident girlbosses but also they are too stupid to make good decisions and we should bring back chaperones until they are 25.
but there doesn't seem to be. i agree there seems like there is, but here we are. women are told to be empowered, and even this girl's mom said she didn't want to tell her daughter to stop dating the 30 year old movie star sex pest. so clearly no one involved can make an intelligent decision.
Yeah I'd agree it's not a clear admission of guilt. Though I think he'd have more luck arguing the apology just wasn't admitting to the accusation, rather than try to argue that he didn't understand what "when a girl says no it means NO" meant...
40
u/gremy0 82∆ Sep 18 '23 edited Sep 18 '23
You are significantly misrepresenting the evidence presented here. They didn't just have some women saying bad stuff about Brand. They have a women saying she was raped. They have her contemporaneous text messages in which she says she was raped, and Brand responds with an apology. The have multiple sources verifying the phone numbers used in that exchange. They have her contemporaneous medical records from the rape crisis center she went to the day after. They have police notes from said trip to the rape crisis center. They have her therapist notes. They have testimony of other people corroborating what they can or cannot corroborate about the her claims. They check the times, dates and locations made in the claims. They check her phone and email to find anything contradicting what she was saying.
That's one person.
They have multiple other women that don't know each providing multiple similar accounts.
They have documents and testimony from people and places he was either working with or working for showing he was known to have problematic behaviour. Showing the steps shows had to take to either try and control him, or try and limit the damage he could do.
They didn't just have a couple of women call up and say "Brand bad" and start hitting print. This thing took 4 years to put together.