The latest news

On Thursday 5 November 2026, at Southwark Crown Court, Russell Brand, 51, was found guilty by a jury of 1 count of rape and 3 counts of sexual assault, involving 4 women, for offences between 2004 and 2009. He was acquitted of 2 other counts of rape and 1 count of attempted indecent assault.

On Monday 9 November 2026, Judge Joel Bennathan sentenced him to 10 years and 6 months in total – 9 years for the rape, plus the assault sentences consecutively. He must serve two-thirds, 7 years, before release on licence. He is on the sex offenders register for life. The judge described him as a “sexual predator” with “staggering arrogance” and “arrogant disregard for a woman’s right to say no.” The Metropolitan Police have said investigations continue into 2 further rape allegations.

Many people have commented on what has happened, supportive and non-supportive, and I have read and weighed many of those comments. While I would rather NOT have to write this blog, but after having digested these comments, found mostly on social media, I feel I should, and I do so in the light of three further factors that are pertinent to my decision to do so.

I have blogged about Brand in the past, and I did so positively

Two years ago, I posted a blog titled: “Russell Brand Revisited” (see here), where I gave a very positive opinion about the man. I found him to be a breath of fresh air, with great insights into what is going on in the world as well as being very articulate and well adept at engaging with his guests and audience. Whilst he is very much a minority (opinion wise), he is part of the minority that I support, such as the Covid hoax, the nefarious part played by Big Pharma and assorted stitch-ups of the establishment, as well as figuring out what is happening in the world, all of which I found helpful.

His journey has included mental health and addiction challenges and coming to faith in Christ. I liked it when he interviewed Alex Jones, Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens, three high profile people, and in all those interviews he ended it with a word of prayer, which I found particularly inspirational.

All that remains true, but I want to emphasise that in my own work I often come across people who are struggling with all sorts of issues like mental health, addiction and faith, and the insights that Russell Brand brought I have found to be particularly helpful.

The Andrew Neil YouTube video

Another set of comments that I was particularly interested in were those of Andrew Neil, and the fact that it really was a hit piece. The title of his video is “The shameful truth about those who turn a blind eye” (see here), which I suggest readers may want to check out for themselves, and I think it is important that they do so.

I think Andrew Neil was as much governed by his experience interviewing Jimmy Savile, where he asked probing questions but he got a hostile reaction from the audience that was siding with Savile, who was skilled at manipulating those watching. We now know later on that Savile was a wrong ‘un, and Neil could feel vindicated that he was right. But he feels many people have been taken in by Savile just as they are being taken in by Brand.

But the very fact that some of the, in my opinion, good guys in the world like Elon Musk, Tommy Robinson, Katie Hopkins have all come out supportive of Brand, and he rubbished them, putting them down in a very derogatory way, is all part of what made him annoying as far as I am concerned.

My friend Stephen Clayden

A number of people, including some I know, have given their views on Russell Brand and his conviction on social media, including two ladies who I have a lot of respect for writing in support of Brand. But the one that sticks out for me is my friend Stephen Clayden, who has quite a good following on social media, and he was honest in saying he does not know many of the ins and outs of the Brand case or concerning Brand’s own Christian journey. He also made it clear later on, in one of the comments, that he is not supportive of the justice system, which he sees as being broken in this country, given the way certain people who do bad things get away with it and with hardly any come back, yet others face the full force of the law.

I think Stephen sees all that, but then he also says that if you have done a bad thing, even if it is in the long distant past, you need to face the consequences later. And he cites as a good example King David, who committed adultery with Bathsheba and murdered Uriah to cover up his sin, and then he had to suffer all sorts of bad things, particularly insurrection against him by his sons in later years. That is but one consequence and every sin has a consequence.

A question about two-tier justice

There is another point that a number of people have made in comments, on YouTube and elsewhere, and I have to say I have some sympathy with it. It is the question of two-tier justice. There is a feeling that some people are pursued relentlessly, in this case years later, while other people who have done very serious things seem to get away with a slap on the wrist. I hasten to add that I do not know many of the details of those other cases and I have not looked at the evidence in them, any more than I have looked at all the evidence in the Brand case. So I am not going to assert that this person got that and that person got this. But I understand why people are asking the question and that justice is blind. If we are going to have a justice system that people trust, then it has to be seen to be consistent.

Regarding the possibly rigged judicial system, I would like to cite the villainous Francis Urquhart from the TV series “House of Cards”, which I followed back in the day. Whenever somebody came up with some controversial opinion that quite possibly, and probably likely, he agreed with, he would actually add his catchphrase: “You may think that. I couldn’t possibly comment.”

Concluding thoughts

I think it is also important to reiterate that I do not know all the ins and outs of the case. It does seem incredible to me though that many years later Brand has been brought to task and that it was mostly based on the testimony of a number of women (their word against his). But since I was not in the courtroom and as I have not looked at the detailed evidence, I have to be careful commenting on the verdict. It seems clear that due process did take place, even though the verdict and sentence was not one that I feel comfortable with. If he had done wrong, he needs to be convicted.

I end by just saying that my thoughts and prayers are with Russell Brand (and that God will use him as His instrument for His glory and give him peace, whilst in prison), but also with the victims as well, who have been very hurt. And just to reiterate, my own journey and how I see the world makes me want identify with Brand. There are many hurt people and flawed people on all sides, and what this case especially brings out is this breadth of concern.

While Brand and any one of us can stray and do harm, we will find forgiveness in the divine court of justice if we repent and trust in Jesus, which is the one outcome that matters most. But if we are dealing with the law down here on earth, even if it was long ago when an offence had been committed, we must be prepared to face the consequences. If Brand was indeed guilty as charged, he must face the consequences of his crimes and to leave divine retribution or forgiveness or vindication with the Almighty.