Russell Brand bailed after appearing in court accused of rape and sexual assault
Russell Brand has been granted conditional bail at Westminster Magistrates' Court after appearing at a 12 minute hearing to face charges of rape and sexual assault.
Standing behind reinforced glass in the dock, he spoke to confirm his name and address in Hambleden, Buckinghamshire, before appearing to forget his postcode. Holding his sunglasses behind his back, Brand, 49, confirmed the details after he was prompted by chief magistrate Paul Goldspring. Mr Goldspring said he must also provide, as part of his bail provisions, his address in the US where he also resides.
The clerk read out the charges in full but Brand was not asked to enter any pleas and his case was sent to the Old Bailey where he is due to appear on May 30. Brand walked slowly out of the court staring straight ahead.
He was charged by post last month with one count each of rape, indecent assault and oral rape, as well as two counts of sexual assault, relating to four separate women, in alleged assaults said to date back 26 years.
The TV personality is accused of indecently assaulting one woman in 2001 by allegedly 'grabbing her arm and dragging her towards a male toilet'. Brand is accused of raping another woman in 1999 and allegedly groped the breasts of a third woman and forced her to perform oral sex in 2004.
A fourth alleged victim says the now 49-year-old sexually assaulted her by touching her "when she did not consent" in 2005. The incidents are said to have occurred in Bournemouth, Dorset, and the Westminster area of central London.
Reacting to the charges in a video posted online, Brand said last month: "I was a fool before I lived in the light of the Lord. I was a drug addict and a sex addict and an imbecile, but what I never was, was a rapist. I have never engaged in non-consensual acts."
He added: "I've never engaged in non-consensual activity. I pray that you can see that by looking in my eyes."
Detectives launched an investigation after he was accused by several women in September 2023. The Crown Prosecution Services authorised charging Brand, who lives in the US, in April.
Det Supt Andy Furphy, from the Met police, said at the time: "The women who have made reports continue to receive support from trained officers. The Met's investigation remains open and detectives ask anyone who has been affected by this case, or anyone who has any information, to come forward.
"A team of investigators is available via email at CIT@met.police.uk. Support is also available by contacting the 24/7 Rape and Sexual Abuse Support Line." Jaswant Narwal, of the CPS, said: "We have today authorised the Metropolitan Police to charge Russell Brand with a number of sexual offences."
Brand, from Grays, Essex, was aged between 26 and 30 when the alleged offences occurred. During the early period covered by the charges he was a presenter for MTV, but was sacked after coming to work dressed as Osama bin Laden the day after the September 11 terror attacks in 2001 .
In 2004, he began hosting Big Brother's Big Mouth, the E4 companion show to the Channel 4 reality series Big Brother.
Channel 4 production company Banijay UK and the BBC are also investigating Brand's conduct. He presented a BBC Radio 2 show between 2006 and 2008.
The father-of-three was married to US pop singer Katy Perry from 2010 to 2012 and has since remarried.
After the 2023 allegations, which followed a joint investigation by The Sunday Times and Channel 4 Dispatches, he vehemently denied any wrongdoing, insisting all his relationships have been consensual. He moved to Florida from Henley-on-Thames in Oxfordshire last autumn, claiming he was being persecuted in the UK.
He wrote in February: "I don't live in the United Kingdom anymore, because I personally have experienced how the media, government and judiciary - if you become an inconvenience - will find ways to attack and shut you down."
In his video last month, he said: "I'm speaking particularly to those of you watching in the UK. How do you feel about your legal system?" He also made a reference to the Southport murders of last July, for which triple killer Axel Rudakubana was jailed for a minimum of 52 years.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South Wales Guardian
an hour ago
- South Wales Guardian
Metropolitan Police's policy over live facial recognition ‘unlawful'
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has said the UK's biggest police force's rules and safeguards over using the tool 'fall short' and could have a 'chilling effect' on individuals' rights when used at protests. The concerns come as the Met is set to deploy LFR, which captures people's faces in real-time CCTV cameras, at this year's Notting Hill Carnival over the August bank holiday weekend. Metropolitan Police commissioner Sir Mark Rowley has already sought to reassure campaign groups that the technology will be used without bias. The EHRC has been given permission to intervene in an upcoming judicial review over LFR, brought by privacy campaigner Big Brother Watch director Silkie Carlo and anti-knife crime community worker Shaun Thompson. They are seeking the legal challenge claiming Mr Thompson was 'grossly mistreated' after LFR wrongly identified him as a criminal last year. EHRC chief executive John Kirkpatrick said the technology, when used responsibly, can help combat serious crime and keep people safe, but the biometric data being processed is 'deeply personal'. 'The law is clear: everyone has the right to privacy, to freedom of expression and to freedom of assembly. These rights are vital for any democratic society,' he said. 'As such, there must be clear rules which guarantee that live facial recognition technology is used only where necessary, proportionate and constrained by appropriate safeguards. 'We believe that the Metropolitan Police's current policy falls short of this standard. The Met, and other forces using this technology, need to ensure they deploy it in ways which are consistent with the law and with human rights.' The watchdog said it believes the Met's policy is 'unlawful' because it is 'incompatible' with Articles 8, right to privacy, 10, freedom of expression, and 11, freedom of assembly and association of the European Convention on Human Rights. Big Brother Watch interim director Rebecca Vincent said the involvement of EHRC in the judicial review was hugely welcome in the 'landmark legal challenge'. 'The rapid proliferation of invasive live facial recognition technology without any legislation governing its use is one of the most pressing human rights concerns in the UK today,' she said. 'Live facial recognition surveillance turns our faces into barcodes and makes us a nation of suspects who, as we've seen in Shaun's case, can be falsely accused, grossly mistreated and forced to prove our innocence to authorities.' 'Given this crucial ongoing legal action, the Home Office and police's investment in this dangerous and discriminatory technology is wholly inappropriate and must stop.' It comes as Home Secretary Yvette Cooper defended plans to expand LFR across the country to catch 'high-harm' offenders last week. Last month, the Metropolitan Police announced plans to expand its use of the technology across the capital. Police bosses said LFR will now be used up to 10 times per week across five days, up from the current four times per week across two days. The Metropolitan Police has been contacted for comment.
Leader Live
an hour ago
- Leader Live
Metropolitan Police's policy over live facial recognition ‘unlawful'
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has said the UK's biggest police force's rules and safeguards over using the tool 'fall short' and could have a 'chilling effect' on individuals' rights when used at protests. The concerns come as the Met is set to deploy LFR, which captures people's faces in real-time CCTV cameras, at this year's Notting Hill Carnival over the August bank holiday weekend. Metropolitan Police commissioner Sir Mark Rowley has already sought to reassure campaign groups that the technology will be used without bias. The EHRC has been given permission to intervene in an upcoming judicial review over LFR, brought by privacy campaigner Big Brother Watch director Silkie Carlo and anti-knife crime community worker Shaun Thompson. They are seeking the legal challenge claiming Mr Thompson was 'grossly mistreated' after LFR wrongly identified him as a criminal last year. EHRC chief executive John Kirkpatrick said the technology, when used responsibly, can help combat serious crime and keep people safe, but the biometric data being processed is 'deeply personal'. 'The law is clear: everyone has the right to privacy, to freedom of expression and to freedom of assembly. These rights are vital for any democratic society,' he said. 'As such, there must be clear rules which guarantee that live facial recognition technology is used only where necessary, proportionate and constrained by appropriate safeguards. 'We believe that the Metropolitan Police's current policy falls short of this standard. The Met, and other forces using this technology, need to ensure they deploy it in ways which are consistent with the law and with human rights.' The watchdog said it believes the Met's policy is 'unlawful' because it is 'incompatible' with Articles 8, right to privacy, 10, freedom of expression, and 11, freedom of assembly and association of the European Convention on Human Rights. Big Brother Watch interim director Rebecca Vincent said the involvement of EHRC in the judicial review was hugely welcome in the 'landmark legal challenge'. 'The rapid proliferation of invasive live facial recognition technology without any legislation governing its use is one of the most pressing human rights concerns in the UK today,' she said. 'Live facial recognition surveillance turns our faces into barcodes and makes us a nation of suspects who, as we've seen in Shaun's case, can be falsely accused, grossly mistreated and forced to prove our innocence to authorities.' 'Given this crucial ongoing legal action, the Home Office and police's investment in this dangerous and discriminatory technology is wholly inappropriate and must stop.' It comes as Home Secretary Yvette Cooper defended plans to expand LFR across the country to catch 'high-harm' offenders last week. Last month, the Metropolitan Police announced plans to expand its use of the technology across the capital. Police bosses said LFR will now be used up to 10 times per week across five days, up from the current four times per week across two days. The Metropolitan Police has been contacted for comment.
Western Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Western Telegraph
Metropolitan Police's policy over live facial recognition ‘unlawful'
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has said the UK's biggest police force's rules and safeguards over using the tool 'fall short' and could have a 'chilling effect' on individuals' rights when used at protests. The concerns come as the Met is set to deploy LFR, which captures people's faces in real-time CCTV cameras, at this year's Notting Hill Carnival over the August bank holiday weekend. Metropolitan Police commissioner Sir Mark Rowley has already sought to reassure campaign groups that the technology will be used without bias. The EHRC has been given permission to intervene in an upcoming judicial review over LFR, brought by privacy campaigner Big Brother Watch director Silkie Carlo and anti-knife crime community worker Shaun Thompson. They are seeking the legal challenge claiming Mr Thompson was 'grossly mistreated' after LFR wrongly identified him as a criminal last year. EHRC chief executive John Kirkpatrick said the technology, when used responsibly, can help combat serious crime and keep people safe, but the biometric data being processed is 'deeply personal'. 'The law is clear: everyone has the right to privacy, to freedom of expression and to freedom of assembly. These rights are vital for any democratic society,' he said. 'As such, there must be clear rules which guarantee that live facial recognition technology is used only where necessary, proportionate and constrained by appropriate safeguards. 'We believe that the Metropolitan Police's current policy falls short of this standard. The Met, and other forces using this technology, need to ensure they deploy it in ways which are consistent with the law and with human rights.' The watchdog said it believes the Met's policy is 'unlawful' because it is 'incompatible' with Articles 8, right to privacy, 10, freedom of expression, and 11, freedom of assembly and association of the European Convention on Human Rights. Big Brother Watch interim director Rebecca Vincent said the involvement of EHRC in the judicial review was hugely welcome in the 'landmark legal challenge'. 'The rapid proliferation of invasive live facial recognition technology without any legislation governing its use is one of the most pressing human rights concerns in the UK today,' she said. 'Live facial recognition surveillance turns our faces into barcodes and makes us a nation of suspects who, as we've seen in Shaun's case, can be falsely accused, grossly mistreated and forced to prove our innocence to authorities.' 'Given this crucial ongoing legal action, the Home Office and police's investment in this dangerous and discriminatory technology is wholly inappropriate and must stop.' It comes as Home Secretary Yvette Cooper defended plans to expand LFR across the country to catch 'high-harm' offenders last week. Last month, the Metropolitan Police announced plans to expand its use of the technology across the capital. Police bosses said LFR will now be used up to 10 times per week across five days, up from the current four times per week across two days. The Metropolitan Police has been contacted for comment.
