I was listening to Radio5 Live and they replayed, for all those people who were at work all day, the interview with 'Alice' the woman who had a sexual relationship with Russell Brand when she was sixteen and he was in his early thirties.

I thought the interview was... problematic. 'Alice' was critiquing he teenage selv and regretting her actions. She said her mother warned her and was violently opposed to her relationship with the older Brand. But she ingnored this advice and being grounded and sneaked off to be with him. The mature woman now insists that she was not able to take proper decisions about who she had relationships with and was being groomed by Brand. Ah, the benefits of hindsight.

The Women's Hour presenter, actually, if I remember correctly, used the term 'technically legal' about Brand having sex with 'Alice', that seems a rather loaded term... 'technically legal'. It was more than 'technically legal' surely? It was legal, not a crime and absolutely legal sex. As the law stands a sixteen year old can have sex with anyone they choose, perfectly legally. Who decides what the 'proper' or 'appropriate' age for sex is? The presenters of Woman's Hour?

'Alice' then ridiculed Brand's view that he isn't part of the mainstream anymore. Of course he is, said 'Alice'. He's part of the mainstream and has a Youtube channel! He's talking about a plot against him, a conspiracy theory, that's nonsense.
without missing beat or a breath, 'Alice' then presents her own 'conspiracy theory' about Brand. That he's worked for years to build-up his Youtube profile as a defence, and followers, in order to protect himself for the day when he knew the truth of his behavior would come to light!

'Alice' who is clearly a modern, middle-class, feminist, talked about 'men like him' use their power to manipulate women and the public. 'Alice' clearly had an agenda, a 'feminist' agenda aimed not just at Brand, but lots of other men, who have power and behave like him.

Then they 5Live had an interview with the leading journalists from despatches who had a team investigating Brand, for years.

They too had a 'feminist' agenda relating to power in society. They obviously consider themselves to be a 'vanguard'. They talked about how society 'had moved on' and now one could address the behavior of men like Brand. This is before he's been charged with anything, let alone convicted of any crime! As far as we know, he's an innocent man, still.

She didn't think the women they interviewed should have gone to the police with their allegations. That was up to them, their decision entirely. Which I thought was a bit odd personally. After all we are talking about serious crimes here.

I could go on, and on. They clearly 'had it in' for Brand and his 6 million Youtube followers. They even mentioned his conspiracy theories about Covid and Ukraine.

Finally they mentiond the latest development, were a woman has complained to the Met about attempted rape in Soho London, apparently in the street, back in 2003. Good luck proving that in court.