BREAKING: ‘Predator’ Russell Brand Convicted of Rape

Can you give me your name, please? >> Russell Brand. >> Thank you. >> In the past, my engagement with. interested members of the public was. friendly, consensual, and warm. >> We got breaking news from the UK this. morning. Comedian, actor Russell Brand. has been convicted of [music] rape and. sexual assault, and the judge told him. he should expect to go to prison for his. actions. [music] We have just learned. that Bran could face more sexual assault. or rape charges as well, possibly. involving a [music] 16-year-old alleged.

victim. Welcome to Sidebar, presented by. Law and Crime. I'm Jesse Weber. There was a time in the early 2000s when. it seemed that every comedy coming out. of Hollywood had Russell Brand in it. Right? Forgetting Sarah Marshall, Get. Him to the Greek. He even voiced a. character in the Despicable Me movies. And before that, he was a constant. presence in the UK as a TV presenter, a. stand-up comedian, host of a Big Brother. spin-off series. And of course, he was. known for his romantic relationships.

with celebrities like Kate Moss and Katy. Perry. But now, he is likely headed to. prison for years after a London jury. unanimously found him guilty of one. count of rape and three counts of sexual. assault. And there is information coming. out that Brand could face even more. charges that this would be in connection. with alleged assaults involving a. teenage girl. We're going to get to more. of that in a moment. But how do we get. here, right? Well, according to. reporting from the Guardian during the.

MeToo movement, there were these rumors. that had always been around just under. the surface about Russell Brand that. started to become more prominent and. many entertainment outlets distanced. themselves from Russell Brand. And then. you go to 2023, Channel 4 in the UK, they put out this investigation, this. documentary, if you will, which included. allegations from multiple women who. claimed that Brand had either sexually. assaulted or outright raped them at some. point over the last two decades. And.

within days of this airing, the. Metropolitan Police were investigating, and we are now seeing clips from two of. his police interviews, one in 2023 and. the other in 2025. Um, thank you for. your time today. As I've repeatedly. stated publicly and written about. extensively, I led a very promiscuous. life in the past, which I've spent years. openly denouncing. I've never engaged in. non-consensual sexual activity. On the 16th of September 2023, a.

defamatory and fictitious documentary. was broadcast in conjunction with the. publication of two national newspapers. containing false anonymized allegations. which led to unprecedented media. reporting. Subsequently, both the media. and the police publicly invited. additional allegations to be made which. has resulted in further encounters being. invented or reimagined. At present, I do not recall the names of. complainants or meeting them. However,

it's entirely possible that I may have. encountered them and that we may have. engaged in consensual sexual activity or. physical contact that has been since. reimagined. In the past, my engagement. with interested members of the public. was friendly, consensual, and warm. There was often physical contact at live. shows, press events, junk kits, and book. signings. Because I did my best to be. accessible, non-discriminatory, and. loving. I spent a lot of time at these. events. I've shared kisses with hundreds. of members of the public during press.

events and photos of many such kisses in. front of people in front of hundreds of. people are available online. Everything. I did in public once I was famous could. be photographed or recorded and end up. in the tabloids. I was aware of this. I routinely made provocative jokes or. comments with members of the public. during live performances and and. broadcasts. I did on occasion find.

reasons for leaving or asking partners. in casual sexual encounters to leave. shortly after the experience had. concluded. I had sexual encounters in. countless locations and scenarios, often. with people that I've just met. The way. of life that I've described, the. magnitude of the promiscuity deceptively. rendered in recent media attacks. accompanied by advertisements for. complainants have caused consensual. encounters to be unfavorably reframed. decades later. As I stated at the.

outset, I've never engaged in any. non-consentual sexual activity. I'm just. going to caution you again. You do not. have to say anything that may hold me. defensive. Do not mention when. questioned something which later on in. court. Anything you do say, you may be. given evidence. Would you like me to. explain it? >> No. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Right. Okay. So, we have spoken about. three incidents. We've asked you lots of. questions. Uh give you the opportunity. to speak to us. Um I want to ask you. now, is there anything else you would. like to add with regards to the. interview? Any more detail or anything.

you would like to provide us. now? >> I have nothing to say at this time. Thank you. >> So, the now 51-year-old Russell Brand. claimed that he was being targeted by. defamatory statements. This was a. product of the media. admitted, yeah, that he may have been promiscuous, but. everything that he was involved in was. consensual. Authorities didn't agree, and he was charged with five sexual. offenses out in the UK in April of 2025. and two more in December of 2025. He. entered not guilty, please, to all the.

counts, but he ended up being convicted. on most of those counts. His trial got. underway this October at Southwork Crown. Court, lasted weeks. Prosecutors. portrayed Brand as a manipulative sexual. predator. Victims got up in the dock, testified about what Bran reportedly did. to them. Some of the allegations going. all the way back to 1999, and he also. testified in his own defense, and I'm. going to talk about that, too. And his. current wife, Laura, even gave character.

evidence in support of her husband. But. those heartbreaking and oftentimes. graphic accounts were enough to persuade. the jury that Brand had committed. crimes, which is not an easy task, by. the way. You're talking about old. allegations. And according to reports. from The Mirror and the BBC, Brand was. found guilty of groping an MTV worker. during a party in 2004. He was also. convicted of kissing and groping a. Capitol radio worker in 2005, plus. sexually assaulting a Channel 4 worker.

in 2009 when she had been forced to give. him a massage. The rape conviction. involved a 21-year-old fan who. apparently met Brand after a stand-up. show in 2009. He was cleared, by the. way, of two counts of rape and one count. of attempted indecent assault. Now, according to reports in the courtroom, Bran had closed his eyes as the guilty. verdicts were read. didn't have much. more of a reaction. Now, despite Brand. having been out on bail up until this. point, he was immediately remanded to.

jail until his sentencing on Monday. And. this is when he should expect, according. to the judge, to receive a quote. significant custodial term. Now, I will. note this. It was reported that as he. left the dock to head to the prison. transport van, the BBC reports, he. mouthed, "I'm good. I'm good." to his. defense team. Detective Superintendent. Andy Fury of Metropolitan Police put out. a statement about Bran's conviction and. it said, quote, "Today's verdict is. first and foremost a testament to the.

extraordinary courage, resilience, and. determination of the women who came. forward and reported what happened to. them. Despite intense media and public. scrutiny, they relived deeply personal. and traumatic experiences and place. their trust in us. Without their. bravery, this outcome would not have. been possible." Bran used his influence, status, and fame to exploit and sexually. offend against women. As his profile. grew, so too did his sense of. entitlement. I hope this conviction. sends a clear message that no one is. above the law, no matter how famous or.

powerful they may be. And the detective. superintendent also gave some details. about how investigators were even able. to put this case together, saying, quote, "The nonreent nature of the. reports presented challenges. There was. no CCTV or forensic evidence available, while digital inquiries were limited by. the passage of time. Instead, detectives. worked to piece together the. circumstances surrounding each. allegation, carefully identifying. evidence that could support and verify. the accounts provided by the women.

Meaning, they didn't just solely rely on. the accounts of the women. They needed. more evidence. Quote, "Detectives traced. and spoke to more than 100 witnesses, took more than 400 witness statements, and reviewed over 1,400 documents. They. also established detailed timelines and. obtained historical floor plans and. photographs of locations linked to the. reports, including a former address of. brand and a former workplace. This form. part of an extensive investigation. involving hundreds of lines of inquiry.

And we also now know that Russell Brand. is being investigated over more sexual. assault or rape allegations because the. BBC reports that the Metropolitan Police. have said, quote, "The suspect has. previously been interviewed under. caution in connection with the. allegations." And they've also. reportedly referred their investigation. over to the Crown Prosecution Service to. see if they want to move forward with. the case. One of the claims seemingly. comes from a woman who alleges that she.

dated Brand when she was a school girl. and he was in his 30s. So, The Mirror. reports that the alleged victim, using. the pseudonym Alice, claims that she met. the star in 2006 when she was out. shopping in central London. And she says. that this relationship lasted three. months, that he was allegedly. controlling and abusive, even she says. referring to her as quote the child. And. that's on top of what's happening here. in the United States because Brand is. facing lawsuits from women who claim he.

sexually assaulted them in California. during his time in Hollywood. So, look, we're going to have to wait and see what. comes of these latest investigations and. the civil complaints, but I have to talk. about the massive bombshell verdict. right now. Okay, I want to bring on. right now criminal defense attorney, former prosecutor Sappa Robinson Ferrer. Uh Sappa, good to see you. It's been a. minute since we've talked uh and we. haven't had a chance to talk about the. Russell Brand case. I mean, this is this. is quite the verdict from a number of. different angles that I want to talk.

about. Um what is your reaction to this. verdict? Because these kinds of cases, particularly when you're talking about. allegations from years ago, even they. say the authorities say there it's. called nonreent allegations, they can be. difficult to prove. and yet sustaining. these allegation, sustaining these. convictions uh is quite notable. What. What is your reaction to it? >> It's actually pretty surprising and it. specifically to your point because of. the length of time between the.

allegations and when this case was. actually brought to trial and then we. now have the conviction. When there's. instances where they're so far in time. or time in between, you often have. witnesses or victims who aren't. cooperative anymore or their. recollection of things may have. deteriorated because so much time has. passed. Also, the strength in the. investigation at this point in time. isn't as strong as it would have been or. would be if the case or the allegations. were nearer in time. Also, as cases.

progress and things go along, you have. instances where evidence can sometimes. go missing, other witnesses, maybe law. enforcement professionals may pass away. And so, all of those things factor in. and traditionally speaking, the longer a. case will go, it's far better for the. defense. But that's untrue in this case. And we see that by the conviction. >> Do you think it's significant that this. was a jury that found him guilty of. certain crimes and not guilty of others? It's it's not significant in the sense. that it's uncommon. A lot of times you.

will see juries go on a split verdict. depending on the facts that need to be. proven for the specific offenses. So you. may have a jury that comes back with. respect to one victim or one witness as. guilty for conduct that allegedly. occurred on a specific date, specific. time in the manner in which the conduct. was allegedly performed. that can oftent. times bring about a guilty verdict if in. the event that the witness and the. evidence points to that. But then you. also may have other instances in that.

very same particular case where the jury. doesn't feel that there is enough. evidence to sustain a conviction on the. on the elements for the other charges. And so you will see that from time to. time. We have seen that for example in. the Diddy verdict he was found guilty of. certain offenses and not guilty of. others. So, it's not entirely uncommon. and it's not actually surprising here. >> You know, one and one of the other. complications or one of the potential. complications was one of the uh victims. in this case um you know, she originally.

told the journalist that um you know, I'm not sure my story has much to it. I. feel like I was an idiot. I was young. and stupid. That she's probably as much. to blame. There was questions about why. she didn't initially go to police. And. yet, at the end of the day, he was. convicted. And so I think that's. significant because our understanding of. sexual assault has changed, right? I. think it used to be 20, 30 years ago. Um, you know, if you didn't do those. things, you're making the claim up. And.

look, that can hurt someone's. credibility nonetheless, right? A jury. could look at that and say, "I don't. believe this complaint and I don't. believe this account." But at the end of. the day, it's not the end all beall. Jur. juries and judges look at this and say. that may not be the whole story. There. could be reasons why somebody stays in. touch with the person who abused them. Or you can have a situation where. there's consensual conduct and then. non-consensual conduct. Or if you don't. immediately tell family and friends and.

law enforcement doesn't make the. allegations not true. Right. >> Correct. And you know as time goes along. the world has changed. people's. understanding of sexual abuse and sexual. misconduct has changed. We've seen. movements throughout the country over. the past couple a decade or so where you. find victims being more vocal about. their experiences with regard to sexual. abuse and sexual misconduct. And. obviously this is over the United. Kingdom, but the facts still remain that. people are far more understanding now of.

what that may look like. Why a victim. may continue to have a relationship with. their abuser. why people may change. their stories and why they feel like. they may not be believed initially, especially when you're dealing with. somebody who has high status in society, who is a celebrity, and who has access. that you as a victim may not. And a lot. of times we think that because people. participated in drug and alcohol use. that somehow that negates the alleged. conduct of the defendant and that.

somehow dismisses the sexual abuse or. sexual assault or rape allegations. >> How does his highprofile status affect a. case like this? Because one way could. say, you know, oh my gosh, multiple. people coming forward, they're going. after a well-known name. You know that. this is this is common. um you know he. denied the allegations. He told. authorities that this is a product of. defamatory statements that it was made. up from the media. But at the other. hand, do prosecutors say this is.

somebody in in a unique position who had. the power, the resources, the. opportunities to do things like this to. sexually assault and rape women. >> to use their notoriety and to use their. stardom to influence sexual acts with. alleged victims. And so the prosecution. will make that argument. And we've seen. that in other cases, of course, uh very. notable case here, the United States of. America versus Shawn Diddy Combmes, and. that was a part of the prosecution's. argument in that case. Not only that, but on the defense side in other areas,

you have cases where, you know, people. believe that or jurors may believe. specifically that because this is a. celebrity, there's that stardom. component where it's like, wow, this. this Russell Brand, he's, you know, a. well-known actor. He's an amazing actor. Juries really become in awe when you. have a celebrity defendant. And we've. seen that in other cases. Sure. >> Cardi Cardi B, very charming woman, very. hilarious. And so you have juries that. really enjoy sitting on some of these. celebrity trials and really will sort of.

weigh in favor of celebrities to some. extent. And not saying that that. shouldn't be the case if the facts fit. the if the facts fit that. But you do. have juries who have that sort of oh wow. this is this person and you know I don't. want to convict and so it's actually. surprising here that someone might. >> that that's the that's the purpose of. wadier that's the purpose of jury. selection. What do you know about the. defendant? Have you seen the movies? Are. you a fan? What do you think it was in. this case? And obviously you know this. is a UK courtroom. You weren't there.

You're not part of the investigation of. the prosecution. But what do you think. it was that led to the convictions? If. you are dealing with allegations that. are old and you may not have the same. type of uh forensic or testimonial. evidence that you would have if they. were recent, um is it is it what leads. jurors to convict? Is it the testimony. of the victims? Is it just so det I mean. what makes them particularly credible? Whereas Russell Brand because I want to. talk about him taking the stand too. They didn't believe him. They didn't.

believe him. What do you think led them. to convict him? Well, I think there's. power in numbers and in this particular. case, there were a number of allegations. from a number of victims who alleged. that he sexually abused them. And so, I. think that when you see power in. numbers, juries will start to believe. what these victims are saying, especially when they're testifying to. specific patterns of behavior. and in. different instances. So you may have a. victim who had an allegation stunned. from one date and a second victim with.

allegation stunning for years later, but. the pattern of behavior is still the. same. Not only that, but when you are in. a courtroom sitting and watching some of. these individuals testify, you really. get a sense of their energy there. And. that certainly impacts you as a viewer, as a juror, as anybody in the courtroom. to see how this has physically impacted. the person. Are they crying? Are they. upset? What is what is the timeline that. they're providing? What is the nature of. the things that they're saying that. truly hit home for jurors to say, "No, I.

I truly believe this woman or I believe. this person. I think this happened." And. it's also consistent with the evidence. that was obtained in this case. And it's. also consistent with other witnesses and. what they're saying they've alleged and. what they've experienced with this. individual. He took the stand and. clearly, you know, in certain ways maybe. it helped him in not being found guilty. across the board, but it was a very. interesting line of testimony from what. I read about it. Um, that he talked.

about how he was like a sex ad, right? He had this obsession over uh sex. He he. felt this sense of regret over using. fame um and that notoriety and his. success to get sex. Um, but he denied. the allegations. He said everything was. consensual. There were times he said he. didn't remember certain things. Um and. obviously, you know, jurors can look at. that and say how convenient you don't. remember. But it him taking the stand um. was notable, too. What did you take away. from it.

>> with regard to him testifying on the. stand? You know, that's always a. double-edged sword when it comes to. defendants testifying because they're. going to open themselves up to. cross-examination by the government and. also you have to think about how the. jury is going to perceive the story that. you're telling. I don't think that he. did himself any favors by openly. admitting that he was a sex addict. because in my mind, if I'm hearing that. you're a sex addict, that tells me that. you will do anything that you can in. your power to obtain sex. And so that in. my personal opinion doesn't really go.

well to his defense in this particular. case. And when you're testifying that. there are certain points that you don't. remember what happened and they are just. so conveniently placed that it's like it. gives you a pause to say, "Do you not. remember? Do you not want to address. this portion?" But we have a victim over. here for the prosecution who actually. does remember and this is their. recollection and they're providing us. with that missing piece that you refuse. to provide us with. And so a lot of. times people don't realize again the. defendant doesn't have to testify. And.

oftentimes, you know, that's the best. case scenario is not to testify. It's. the government's burden to prove guilt. beyond a reasonable doubt because you. open yourself up to so much exposure. And I don't think that he did it himself. any favors here in addressing his sex. addiction and drug and alcohol abuse. during his testimony. and I don't back a. >> and maybe it's not fair to characterize. him as an a sex addict like a like a. formal determination but he did say to. the court he did say to the jury I do.

recognize I have been a very determined. and focused man and with regard to the. latter with women of course which is the. subject of my trial I've been persuasive. seductive begging and flirting and. dedicated a lot of my life to what seems. now beyond reckless philandering and. idiocy he did say that he has an. obsession or had an obsession obsession. with sex. So, I wonder if he was trying. to be, you know, open and he was like, I'm being honest about things. This is. who I am. I regret um and a way to. humanize himself, but it didn't take. away from the ultimate allegations and.

the severity of it. >> You know, there's always an appreciation. when somebody is being transparent about. their experiences and with addictions. and things like that. And I think in. this case, he was being vulnerable and. transparent with his obsession with sex. and other things that he may have. participated in at that time. But one. word I think did him in in hearing that. testimony is I was persuasive. And you. really got to be careful with the word I. was persuasive. Because how were you. persuasive? Are you continuously.

persuading somebody to engage in sexual. activity with you when they've already. said no? What manner are you persuasive. in? Oh, well, you know, let's have a few. drinks to see, you know, maybe you'll. change your mind. And people really have. to understand the moment a person says. no, the answer is no. And so, I think. using that word persuasive specifically. didn't do him any service in his. testimony. >> What do you think he's looking at? I. know you don't specialize in criminal. law in the UK, but based on reporting uh.

that I've seen, including from NBC, the. maximum sentence for rape is life. imprisonment and 10 years for one count. of sexual assault. You you heard the. court say, I mean, basically a lengthy. prison term, custodial term. What's he. looking at? You think. >> he's looking at spending the rest of his. life in prison, that's for sure. Do I. think a judge would ultimately sentence. him to that in this particular case? Probably not. And so, we'll have to take. a look at the sentencing guidelines.

there and what his actual minimums would. be if there's any ability for him to. participate in any sexual abuse. rehabilitation, any mental health. evaluations, and any treatments that may. be necessary. Those are things that he's. going to want to get ahead of and. participate in before his sentence is. pronounced. And if there's any way that. he can use those mechanisms or some sort. of probation to serve his sentence that. he's now been convicted of, I expect. that his attorneys are going to advocate. for that or at least the minimum. And if.

he's looking at at least 10 years on one. count, that he would likely be looking. at at least 10 years with respect to any. particular count that he would have been. convicted of. >> And what do you think about there's. allegations there's investigation into. other allegations. Um, you know, uh, I I. mentioned this alle, you know, this. alleged school girl. There's lawsuits, um, in America. What What does his life. look like? What happens to those now? >> Well, if he's convicted, then that's. certainly going to that's certainly.

going to take the front seat to anything. else that he may have in litigation. going on for further anywhere that that. might be. And so depending on when he's. going to be sentenced, he will still. have to litigate those cases, but he'll. either have to do so on behalf of his. attorneys and have them advocate for. him. It's going to be interesting to see. because the civil cases are not going to. take any sort of precedent over the. criminal case that he now has in his. conviction. and to get him brought back. to the US or to get him brought back to.

any jurisdiction when he's going to. possibly be incarcerated in the United. Kingdom and and serve a lengthy prison. sentence. I don't think that there's. going to be any sort of redress for. anything that may already be pending. I. think it's going to be pretty difficult. for them to get anything out of that. >> Suffer Robinson Ferrer, thanks so much. for coming on uh this kind of breaking. news. Wanted to talk about it as quickly. as possible. Thank you so much. Thanks. for having me, Jesse. >> That's all we have for you right now. here on Sidebar. Everybody, thank you so.

much for joining us. I'm Jesse Weber. I'll speak to you next time.