Russell Brand‘s second accuser in his trial has argued “intent was there” to assault her when the presenter allegedly tried to drag her into a toilet at the MTV offices in London 25 years ago.
The accuser, who we are calling C2, said Brand went from “affable, jovial and friendly” to “suddenly turning into a wild-eyed maniac, trying to pull me into the toilet.”
She was working for MTV in London at the time and had been showing Brand where the toilet was, she said. Once she showed him, C2 alleged Brand “was trying to pull me into the bathroom.”
“I said, ‘What are you doing? Are you mad? Let me go’, and then he started to plead almost, saying, ‘Go on, go on, come in,'” added C2. “He had hold of my arm hard in a grip and I’m pulling back out towards the corridor.”
After about 20 seconds, C2, who described herself as “physically stronger than the average woman,” said she was able to “wrench herself away.” She added that she subsequently told two colleagues but didn’t tell her employers as she was “scared” and thought it would be “my word against his.”
Brand faces seven charges, encompassing three counts of rape, three charges of sexual assault, and one of indecent assault. The charges pertain to allegations made by six women, spanning a decade from 1999 to 2009. Brand has pleaded not guilty to all charges and has consistently denied wrongdoing.
Under cross-examination from Brand’s lawyer, Ian Winter, C2 was questioned over whether at the time she could have actually felt that Brand wanted consensual sex, and it was only after she watched the 2023 documentary Russell Brand: In Plain Sight that she changed her view.
C2 denied this. “Why would you drag someone into a toilet if you didn’t want to assault them?,” she added. “You don’t drag someone by the arm. You don’t grip someone and try and pull them. That’s not consensual. The intent was there. It could have been very different.”
As they were walking towards the toilet before the incident, C2 said “nothing was suggested about romance, not a word.” She added that even though he was one of the flagship MTV presenters at the time, she did not see Brand again while working at the network.
She did not come forward before seeing the documentary because “in 2001, it would have been my word against his,” C2 said, adding: “I had a job to consider, [and] came away relatively unscathed. He didn’t manage to rape me, and I managed to get myself out the situation. I just wanted a quiet life. I didn’t need this.”
“Sex was a huge preoccupation for him”
Yesterday, a police interview was played to the court from complainant C1, who alleged Brand raped her in his hotel room during the 1999 Labour Party conference in Bournemouth after he posed for semi-nude photos from her. He was appearing in a play at the time on the fringes of the conference.
Today, a number of witnesses gave evidence supporting C1. John Rogers, who wrote a play Brand appeared in at the Labour conference, said the presenter had told him he had had an “encounter” with a woman that week. Brand’s “reaction was a bit odd” and “he was a bit flustered” when telling the story, according to Rogers.
A flatmate of Brand’s during the Bournemouth conference, Andrew Dobson, alleged Brand wanted to leave hurriedly the morning after the alleged assault took place. “He came in and there was suddenly an urgency,” added Dobson. “It felt tense and confusing. I didn’t understand why.”
Dobson said “sex was a huge preoccupation” for the Forgetting Sarah Marshall star. Before finding fame, he described Brand as “vibrant, egotistical, lively, demanding, persuasive and erratic.”
Two acquaintances of C1’s also told the court via witness statement that she had told them about her alleged rape after watching the Brand documentary in 2023.
One said C1 had told her she had been raped previously by her husband “and felt as if she were reliving this and completely froze” during the alleged assault. C1 told her she was worried about backlash from her community if she reported Brand at the time, this acquaintance said.
The other said she was told by C1 over WhatsApp after C1 had reported Brand to the police. The police had told her she should only share the information with “trusted persons,” this witness said, via a pre-written statement.
The trial continues.