Russell Brand pleads not guilty to charges of rape and sexual assault in London court
Actor and comedian Russell Brand pleaded not guilty in a London court Friday to rape and sexual assault charges involving four women dating back more than 25 years.
Brand, who turns 50 next week, denied two counts of rape, two counts of sexual assault and one count of indecent assault. He said 'not guilty' after each charge was read in Southwark Crown Court.
His trial was scheduled for June 3, 2026 and is expected to last four to five weeks.
3 Russell Brand arrives at Southwark Crown Court on May 30, 2025, in London, England.
Getty Images
Prosecutors said the offenses took place between 1999 and 2005 — one in the English seaside town of Bournemouth and the other three in London.
Brand did not speak to reporters as he arrived at court wearing dark sunglasses, a suit jacket, a black collared shirt open below his chest and black jeans.
Brand is accused of raping a woman at a hotel room in Bournemouth when she attended a 1999 Labour Party conference and met him at an event where he was performing.
The woman alleged that Brand stripped while she was in the bathroom and when she returned to the room he pushed her on the bed, removed her underwear and raped her.
A second woman said Brand grabbed her forearm and attempted to drag her into a men's toilet at a television station in London in 2001.
3 Brand (C) arrives to Southwark Crown Court in south London on May 30, 2025.
AFP via Getty Images
3 Courtroom drawing of Russell Brand appearing in the dock at Westminster Magistrates' Court, London, on May 2, 2025.
ZUMAPRESS.com
The third accuser was a television employee who met Brand at a birthday party in a bar in 2004, where he allegedly grabbed her breasts before pulling her into a toilet and forcing her to perform oral sex.
The final accuser worked at a radio station and met Brand while he was working on a spin-off of the 'Big Brother' reality television program between 2004 and 2005.
She said Brand grabbed her by the face with both hands, pushed her against a wall and kissed her before groping her breasts and buttocks.
The Associated Press doesn't name victims of alleged sexual violence, and British law protects their identity from the media for life.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
31 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Tiger Woods and Vanessa Trump Ready for 'Next Step' in their Relationship
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. These days, the golf world's attention jumps from the US Women's Open to the Memorial Tournament. Everyone is also keeping an eye on the final qualifiers for the US Open, which will be played next Monday. After that, everything will be set for the third major of the men's season in two weeks. However, the attention of golf fans goes far beyond scores, strokes, and champions. According to reports, new developments in the life of the couple of the hour are also in the news this weekend. Tiger Woods and Vanessa Trump are reportedly dating. Sources say the relationship began in late 2024. Tiger Woods and Vanessa Trump are reportedly dating. Sources say the relationship began in late 2024. mpi34/MediaPunch/IPxleft) / Copyright Brian Rothmuller/Icon Sportswire 2025 (right According to Mail Online, Tiger Woods and Vanessa Trump are ready to take the next step in their relationship. The British media outlet reported statements from people close to the couple who claim that things are moving full steam ahead: "She's very comfortable in his home now. She has all the security codes and can come and go as she pleases. She has total access to his life," the unnamed source told Mail Online. "She's got some clothes there, her toiletries, some cosmetics. She'll throw in a load of laundry while she's there, or help herself to something in the fridge. You'd think she owns the place!" the source added. The source offered a personal assessment pointing to a very favorable future for the relationship between Tiger and Vanessa: "She's really good for him to have around. And they're always together now. If things keep going the way they're going, they'll be living together by the end of the year. Tiger moves fast in that department." The relationship between Tiger Woods and Vanessa Trump was first reported in mid-March. At that time, reports emerged that the two had been dating since Thanksgiving 2024. Woods later confirmed the relationship through a post on social media that quickly went viral. According to reports, the children of both Woods and Trump, including junior golfers Charlie Woods and Kai Trump, are OK with the relationship. Love is in the air and life is better with you by my side! We look forward to our journey through life together. At this time we would appreciate privacy for all those close to our hearts. — Tiger Woods (@TigerWoods) March 23, 2025 Another person who views the relationship favorably is Donald Trump, Vanessa's former father-in-law and the current president of the United States. "I have a very special relationship with Tiger," Trump said on the matter, according to The Mirror. "He's a fantastic guy. I said Tiger, 'that's good. I'm very happy for both.'" Tiger Woods is out of competitive golf due to a ruptured Achilles tendon he suffered in early March. He will not be able to compete again until at least the 2026 season. More Golf: The Memorial: Max Homa implodes as US Open berth slipping away
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Starmer's enslavement to woke ideology is a gift to the new axis of evil
When wokeness in Britain went from being a loony Left preoccupation to a way of life, hot on the heels of America's wokeward tack in 2020, only fools, villains and villainous fools insisted that nothing much was happening – apart from a bit of long overdue fairness. Of course, they said, the old Right-wing cis white straight men and women were squealing about the embrace by the virtuous of 'social justice' and 'equity,' but that didn't mean there was a real culture war afoot. It was obvious to me from the start of the woke era, however, that this was not 'just' a culture war but a real one, in a truly modern sense, with real consequences that would be felt far beyond a few workplaces or university seminar rooms. The vaulting from the seminar room into the world of the ideology linking 'white privilege' to empire to colonialism to the immovable fact of white British guilt has led to poisonous politics on the Left, a troubling reaction on the populist Right, and a ruling class who make decisions with our money, our personal safety and the security of the country based on it. If people have been injured or died already thanks to wokeness – for instance in the failure to confidently and properly police Islamist terror suspects or BAME (Black, Asian and minority ethnic knife crime), or in the body-destroying treatments handed out by LGBTQ+ allies to kids who said they were trans in the gender movement that followed Black Lives Matter – then much more is set to come. One of the most flagrant case studies in how the woke mindset can be physically dangerous is Starmer's Chagos islands agreement. The 'deal' is to hand the British territory to Mauritius, and lease back the land on the island of Diego Garcia, on which sits a strategically vital, Anglo-American military base. The lease costs £30 billion, and will be paid over 99 years. The Government's strange argument for the deal was that it would prevent the security risks that could come from instability due to international lawfare on this last 'colonial' outpost of Britain's. Starmer, somehow, did not think that it was more of a security concern that Chinese influence in Mauritius is malign and growing: China has now announced that Mauritius will be joining its power-grabbing Belt and Road initiative. Indeed, Starmer's comments about the handover in a press conference were very odd. He said with confidence that only Britain's enemies were against it. 'In favour are all of our allies: the US, Nato, Five Eyes, India. Against it: Russia, China, Iran.' Yet days after it went through, China was celebrating. Beijing's ambassador to Mauritius, Huang Shifang, told guests at the Chinese embassy in Mauritius's capital of Port Louis that China sent 'massive congratulations' to Mauritius on the deal, and that China 'fully supports' Mauritius's attempt to 'safeguard national sovereignty'. It's hard to think of a more cynical, almost joyously so, use of this terminology. China, after all, is a country obsessed with taking by force the democratic, independent Taiwan (Mauritius, China has made clear, supports its doctrine that Taiwan is already part of China); repressing free speech in Hong Kong, where it operates a subtle reign of terror, and subjecting its Uyghur Muslim population in Xinjiang to sadistic treatment in internment camps. And now it gets to set about enjoying all manner of devious proximity to our all-important Eastern base. So yes, Britain's Chagos deal makes delicious sense to China, but makes no sense for us. Unless, of course, you are Starmer and his inner circle, and you're enslaved to the twin ideologies of post-colonialism and 'international law' – which lands you in the awkward and unfortunate position, as we have seen, of ending up in agreement with China on core values like self-determination. It's a mess. All this Chinese gloating disguised as proper appreciation for nations' rights to freedom from colonial shackles serves as a useful reminder of just how suspicious such language has become. Yes, it is mass-peddled by august 'international' bodies, NGOs, courts and the UN. But these have all been corrupted by those with sinister anti-Western agendas. Indeed, the intranational bodies charged with pursuing a kinder world order with 'human rights' pursued through law always seem to favour those who care least about those obligations. It was telling when Lord Hermer, Starmer's attorney general, compared those in favour of withdrawal from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) to the Nazi philosopher and jurist Carl Schmitt, when what membership of the ECHR really means, in practice, is having to treat terrorists and foreign mass murderers with the utmost consideration. The greatest, longest-running example of the hijacking of a world organisation is the UN, which has been faking outrage at violations of 'international law' to endanger and ostracise Israel for decades. As Natasha Hausdorff, the international lawyer known for pointing out the legal flaws in the numerous evil smears levelled at Israel, notes : 'Armies of NGOs [have fed] the United Nations system and international bodies like the ICC and ICJ' so that 'pseudo-legal language permeates public discourse about Israel. This has now broken into public consciousness, but it has been building in the NGO world and UN world for a long time.' The once honourable ICJ – the International Court of Justice – was seized by South Africa to bring a case against Benjamin Netanyahu as a war criminal even as Israel sacrificed soldiers fighting Hamas in Gaza, resulting in an arrest warrant for the Israeli PM which Britain refuses to reject. As the famous American lawyer and Harvard professor Alan Dershowitz says of the ICJ: 'It's not international, it's not a court and it doesn't do justice.' The bloc that still determines the balance of power and the fate of countries – just – is the Western one. And we are now in great peril, due to being gullible and ill-informed, anti-Semitic, terror-appeasing and morally confused. Our cultures swallowed whole by Leftist cultural theories that were meant to never leave academia – those of post-structuralism and post-colonialism – and under their influence we turn our faces towards the lies pouring from the Eastern axis of 'resistance' – with lethal consequences. The international human rights community in all its respectable clout gives this evil nonsense the stamp of approval. Older people just about remember when international law meant something. Some saw first-hand the real genocide of the mid-20th century, others spectacular bloodshed under monsters and in the course of war. Some of us just remember hearing about those times and events, from parents and grandparents. To us, the souring of organisations like the ECHR, ICC, ICJ, UN – the whole concept of 'international law' itself – is bitter and clear. The rising generation, though, those who have taken up en masse the garbage of third-rate academic theories about coloniser and oppressor, who misuse terms including racism, apartheid, genocide, settler-colonialism, fascism and even capitalism, seem to genuinely think these corrupted organisations are the end of the moral and geopolitical rainbow. That reference to their motions and cases and objections and votes must end all arguments; that the old animating force behind international courts for human rights and justice was just a relic of a racist age, and now we know better. In some ways we do. But those who still chase after 'international' legitimacy are barking up the wrong tree – either accidentally or, like China, on purpose. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Sinner drops only three games in ruthless win
Jannik Sinner is looking to win his first French Open title [Getty Images] French Open 2025 Dates: 25 May-8 June Venue: Roland Garros Coverage: Live radio commentaries across 5 Live Sport and BBC Sounds, plus live text commentaries on the BBC Sport website and app Jannik Sinner dropped only three games in a ruthless performance as he crushed Jiri Lehecka to reach the French Open fourth round. The Italian top seed blew the Czech world number 34 away inside one hour and 35 minutes with a 6-0 6-1 6-2 victory. Advertisement Sinner won 11 games in a row to start the match, dropped only nine points on serve and hit 31 winners to nine unforced errors in a classy performance. The win extended Sinner's winning streak against players ranked outside the top 20 to 64 successive matches. "After today I don't think there's much I can improve but every opponent is different," three-time major champion Sinner said. "This morning I said to my team I'm feeling well and physically ready. We had to go hard in the beginning because the beginning is very important for confidence." Sinner, bidding for a first French Open title, will play 17th seed Andrey Rublev for a place in the quarter-finals. Advertisement Russia's Rublev advanced when France's Arthur Fils withdrew before their match with injury. Sinner has won the past two Grand Slams, triumphing on the US Open and Australian Open hard courts, and his merciless dismantling of Lehecka underlined his status as the man to beat. The Italian controlled the action from the baseline and showed great athleticism as he moved around the court. Sinner started on the front foot, making just one unforced error in a 23-minute first set. Lehecka finally got on the board for 3-1 in the second set - and was greeted by huge cheers from the crowd on Court Suzanne Lenglen. Advertisement Lehecka, who remained in good spirits despite the scoreline, responded by smiling and raising both arms in the air in celebration. It was a rare moment of joy for Lehecka, who only won two more games as Sinner continued his sprint towards the finish line, stamping his authority on the performance with an emphatic serve and volley on match point. Elsewhere, third seed Alexander Zverev saw off unseeded Italian Flavio Cobolli in straight sets to reach the fourth round. Last year's finalist Zverev won 6-2 7-6 (7-4) 6-1 as he continues his bid for a maiden Grand Slam title. Zverev will face unseeded Dutchman Tallon Griekspoor next after he beat American Ethan Quinn 4-6 6-1 6-7 (2-7) 6-1 6-4. Advertisement
