Publishing stories like this in England and Wales is fraught with risk – for media groups and accusers
It came as little surprise that the darker corners of the internet were ablaze with conspiracy theories this week, after Russell Brand used his YouTube channel to call the allegations of sexual assault and rape against him a “coordinated attack” and a “serious and concerted agenda” to control his voice.
But even among more mainstream voices, questions were raised about the timing. Toby Young, a former editor at the Spectator, asked if there was a “more innocent” reason why the Times, the Sunday Times and Channel 4 Dispatches had “waited this long to produce their findings”, while the British business magnate Alan Sugar tweeted that it was “strange” that multiple people had come forward at the same time.
Others wondered why it had taken so long for the story to be published despite rumours swirling about Brand’s behaviour for years. In the Dispatches documentary Russell Brand: In Plain Sight, the comedian Daniel Sloss said he had heard “allegations and rumours” about Brand, while Deadline reported that Brand was dropped from Comedy Central’s Roast Battle in 2018 after another comedian, Katherine Ryan, repeatedly accused him of being a “sexual predator”.
The reason, according to multiple experts, is simple: publishing stories like this in England and Wales is extremely difficult, and fraught with risk.
“People often think that we have a law that protects free speech here....
Congress leaders Harshwardhan Sapkal and Nana Patole, Nationalist Congress Party (SP) legislator Rohit Pawar, and Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray) leader Priyanka Chaturvedi said PM Modi's sp...