Jodistrict

Of course Brand will appeal. But success is unlikely. The judge gave detailed instructions to the jury. The jury acquitted on some of the charges and it is evident that they carefully considered every charge individually. Also the judge’s sentence was very meticulous and carefully considered. He even reduced the rape charge by one year. It wasn’t an excessive sentence. And as for the the incompetent Barrister argument, see below. Brand still is apparently unrepentant and has zero empathy for his victims and it has come back to bite him in the ass. Karma comes around. The Incompetence Argument is Blocked by Brand’s Instructions The sentencing judge, Mr Justice Bennathan, explicitly addressed the trial's aggressive, victim-blaming defense strategy during sentencing. In a direct statement to Brand, the judge noted: "That was all done because of you, on your instructions." Under UK law, if a defendant gives their barrister specific instructions—such as telling them to aggressively attack the victims' credibility or push a particular narrative—the defendant cannot later claim the barrister was incompetent for following those instructions. Brand directly authorized the "attack-dog" cross-examination strategy that ultimately backfired with the jury.

That’s the first step. I think the reason for public confession (which is nothing more than telling the truth) is to help the victims heal. Because having something like that happen to you and it is not believed or is dismissed by society has its own corrosive affect on the soul. But, if he every has an authentic transformation, then he will want to do that. Not because it is being forced. It will just naturally come from the heart.

On thing I am certain of is that authentic spirituality isn’t bla bla bla. That’s why confession is so damn hard to do. The ego just screams “you are crazy, this will kill me”. Which is the whole point.

That is because his ego is using Christianity as just another grift which just feeds the false personality and makes it bigger. Only confession can break that loop and make it real.

He is placing his faith in the world. But what security does the world give him or us? His lawyers allowed him to testify in court dressed like a pimp. His lawyers aren’t going to protect him. For them it is just a business. The security of the world is all fake. If he confessed, he could start healing and he would have the protection of Christ consciousness.

Because he hasn't "confessed his sins". Or in other language he hasn't told the truth. He can't be on a spiritual path and simultaneously continue to gaslight his victims. If he fully confessess than everything changes.

So far he is just faking it. Another grift. But there is a small possibility that it becomes real.

Saint Francis of Assisi was a playboy and started to transform after a year in prison (an underground dungeon). He spent the next two years navigating a metanoia (a transformative change of heart). So, it is possible but rare. Will there be a Saint Russell of Youtube?

If Russell Brand was a real Christian he would confess his sins, which just means telling the truth. If he told the truth and stopped gaslighting his victims, then he and his victims could start to heal. It will be interesting to see if prison is enough to shock him into truth or does he continue with the same false personality spewing nonsense.

Here is a picture of baptism by Russell Brand. He is bare-chested in a swim suit and she is wearing a flimsy low cut dress. A perfect setup for what he calls “shagging”. Here is a more typical baptism. One of the important objectives is to remove him from society so he doesn’t continue to do harm. It is doubtful he has changed his predatory behavior.

By the way, most of the objections here are not objections to this specific case but objections to the legitimacy of the legal system itself. These are typical questions first year law students ask. So they are legitimate questions but outside the scope of a particular case.

Group think isn't always bad.

The authority backing the laws is the people. That's how it works in a democracy.

The appelate court has the authority to adjust the sentence if it doesn't follow the guidelines or is unreasonable.

The judge (who also saw all the evidence and testimony) will decide based on sentencing guidelines. In addition to this, a judge ruled that the evidence was sufficient BEFORE the trial even began. And in addition, the defense lawyers are sure to appeal and an appelate court will examine the evidence and rule whether the conviction is upheld or overturned. Russell Brand has been treated fairly and justly.