🇳🇱
So I just heard about this through @bonifartius ... maybe im missing some details but let me see if i got this straight.
1) Russel Brand was accursed of some sort of sexually inappropriate activity, not sure what it is yet, but sounds serious. While serious as of yet no evidence has been made public, no trial, and his guilt is unknown.
2) Based on only accusation and rumer the UK parliment decided he should be treated as if he is guilty before a trial
3) the UK parliment has reached out to several platforms asking to deplatform him as punished for something we havent determined if he did yet
4) Platforms like YouTube saw no problem with this and agreed.
Is this seriously where we are at....
+bonifartius 𒂼𒄄
@bonifartius@qoto.org
@bonifartius I see him talking a lot about pro-left wing politics. Kinda ironic him being the victim of the very toxic environment he has supported.
@freemo well, he did interview tucker carlson. not sure if i'd put him into the leftist corner. seems to be more british-libertarian-new-age-health-guy to me, but i haven't really listened to much of his stuff.
anyway, the point is that it's absolutely crazy how things are handled lately, cf. the whole episode with the rammstein guy.
I have never heard him say or have an opinion that would be on the right (by any measure) and quite a few on the left.
Interviewing tucker carlson doesnt tell me anything about if he is right or left.... disagreeing/agreeing with him might.
And yea it is nuts.. like i wouldnt be too surprised if people boycotted him.. but to have the UK parliment itself actively pull something like this based on rumor alone... Im astonished.
@freemo
> i wouldnt be too surprised if people boycotted him.. but to have the UK parliment itself actively pull something like this based on rumor alone... Im astonished.
well, the parliament is made of people :P
@bonifartius Pretty sure that is a false statement....
@bonifartius I think you meant to send me a picture of something underneath the parliament? Thisis just a picture of an ordinary parliament session.
@freemo @bonifartius That should be 'accused' not 'accursed' otherwise it looks like a Freudian slip.
@freemo @bonifartius That’s almost correct:
The accusations happened a couple of years ago, the investigation only now got to a point when the evidence has been made public. I suggest taking a look at the publicly available evidence before saying anyone acted hastily, it might change your mind.
Perhaps relevantly Brand switched to championing much more right-wing cases after the accusations have been formally made, so a couple years ago. It might be a coincidence though, since he mostly came in there from the direction of COVID-related conspiracies.
And, in relation to another of your posts in this thread, you might want to be aware that the Depp situation is far from clear cut – he lost the cases in the UK and won the case in the US.
Good info, thanks.
Which cases did he loose exactly? That seems weird that he would loose a csae for rape and not go to prison.
Neither of the cases was about rape (I don’t think anyone even alleges any rape around this, just general abuse), they were both defamation/libel cases. As is often the case, Wikipedia has a decent summary: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnny_Depp#Legal_issues .
Thats fair, I dont remember hearing about rape in the hearing when i watched parts of it.
@freemo @timorl @bonifartius Apparently, the U.K. defamation case was against a newspaper, whereas the U.S. one was against her directly and involved far more evidence.
I've only heard of the case in passing though. I'm not familiar with it, so I might be mistaken.
Ahh yes I think i remember that.. if so I'd say that makes it a pretty cut and dry case of his innocence and her guilt
Considering the first court found a significant portion of the allegations to be true, it doesn’t seem like lack of evidence was a problem there, so this kinda doesn’t add up. But I haven’t followed that whole situation that closely. 
What do you mean, a lack of evidence from Johnnys side would have exactly that effect, he would be found guilty, especially if the other side did not have a problem there.
The UK libel law is stricter than the US one (free speech is less of a fundamental principle there), and requires the defendant to prove that the things they claimed actually happened. If you have enough evidence to show that something happened it doesn’t really make sense for more evidence to show that it hasn’t happened after all – proving a negative is harder in general, but proving it after the positive has been proven seems at least very weird.
I suspect that either the specific claims that were litigated in both cases were sufficiently different, or the fact that US-based litigation is more money-dependent impacted the result. In either case Depp has done some abuse. There is also the possibility that the UK courts simply decided badly of course (no reason to have that much faith in either country’s judicial system), so I don’t feel comfortable directly claiming that he definitely did something wrong. I could probably look into it deep enough to have a proper opinion, but it doesn’t seem worth the time.
It does bother me quite a bit that there was a propaganda campaign associated with the second trial, which makes me trust claims about this being cut and dry even less. (Source for the campaign: https://www.vice.com/en/article/3ab3yk/daily-wire-amber-heard-johnny-depp .)
@timorl @bonifartius @freemo It could be the U.K. one hastily came to a conclusion with insufficient context / information.
I'm going to avoid speculating broadly here though. Not enough information.
I'm probably still missing a lot... So far all I hear are the accounts of the witnesses. While they will be heard and considered in court (As they should be)... I cant find, as of yet, any evidence beyond that.
One woman said she visited a rape center after the incident... that sounds like it could be a piece of evidence... has that been confirmed or do we just have her word on it.
Any other evidence i have overlooked in my quest search?
@freemo There are also some verified SMSes in which he admits to at least one of the instances. @bonifartius
That alone would be quite damning.
That said even if i review it and decide I think he is likely guilty, it doesnt justify the UK parliment to punish him as if he is guilty before a court of law has found him guilty... Its a scary overstep to say the list and wrong.
> you might want to be aware that the Depp situation is far from clear cut – he lost the cases in the UK and won the case in the US.
I followed the Deep case and it is completely clear that he is the victim. The UK judgment stated that 2 + 2 = 5.
@freemo sums up what i know about it pretty well.
i actually only remembered him about a week ago for is role as annoying musician in "forgetting sarah marshall". looked up what he does now and gave his podcast a listen.
fast-forward a few days he is cancelled.