Brand conviction renews scrutiny of 2000s lad culture and broadcasters

A woman who gave evidence at Russell Brand’s trial said she did not report what happened to her because she feared she would not be believed in “those laddish culture times”, the BBC reports. “It was my word against his,” she told the court.

On 5 November, a jury at Southwark Crown Court convicted Brand of one rape and three sexual assaults against four women between 2004 and 2009. He denied the charges and was acquitted of two other counts of rape and one of attempted indecent assault. He was taken into custody and is due to be sentenced on 9 November.

The Crown Prosecution Service said the four women did not report the offences to police at the time. It said they came forward independently after a television documentary about Brand was broadcast in September 2023.

Brand built his career during the 2000s with stand-up routines that included explicit accounts of his sexual exploits. His defence barrister told the jury that a promiscuous life was lawful. The question in the criminal case was whether the women had consented.

Writer Sarah Ditum told the BBC that audiences can mistake irony and self-awareness for honesty and trustworthiness. Comedian Jo Caulfield, a contemporary of Brand’s on the stand-up circuit, said people around stars could be reluctant to challenge bad behaviour because the performers made money.

At the trial, Brand’s former personal assistant Helen Berger testified that his bad behaviour towards women had been normalised by people around him, the Associated Press reported.

Channel 4’s own investigation offers one documented example of a concern not being properly handled. Its 2024 review found that an allegation about Brand’s conduct towards a Channel 4 staff member during a 2009 production involving the broadcaster had not been passed up the management chain or investigated as its procedures required. The anonymised summary did not specify the nature of the conduct.

The same review found no evidence that Channel 4 staff knew of the specific allegations in the 2023 documentary concerning other productions. Two people recalled serious concerns circulating in 2018, but said they knew of no specific allegations or sources; other staff interviewed did not corroborate their recollections. The review did not establish that Channel 4 knew of the offences for which Brand was later convicted.