guilty

RUSSELL Brand has been found guilty of sex attacks on a string of victims as part of a depraved campaign to sleep with 5,000 women.

The 51-year-old became a “ruthless, calculated and manipulative” predator as he sought to satisfy his “voracious” sexual appetite.

Brand preyed on women between 1999 and 2009 and used his growing fame – from presenting Big Brother’s Big Mouth and Hollywood movies – to target the victims in a range of locations.

The three counts he was found guilty of today include a sexual assault at a Soho bar, where Brand was accused of touching a woman’s breasts while they were talking about Big Brother in 2004.

Brand has also been found guilty of sexual assault at a radio station in a “violent, sloppy and frenzied” attack in 2005.

He raped a woman at his Hampstead townhouse in 2009, telling her to “clean up after herself” afterwards, it was found.

The jury also found him guilty of sexually assaulting a Channel 4 worker in 2009, who was forced to give him a massage.

He was found not guilty on three other counts – attempted indecent assault and two counts of rape.

The trial at Southwark Crown Court was told the offences took place when Brand’s “public profile was taking off”.

Instantly recognisable by his trademark skinny jeans, back-combed hair and heavy eye make up, Brand became known for falling out of nightclubs with female admirers draped from his arm.

Some of his victims were lulled into a false sense of security by Brand and believed the comedian was gay as part of his “strategy” to dupe women.

Once they were behind closed doors, the fiend’s mask would drop and he’d become a “monster” hell-bent on fulfilling his rapacious quest to bed 5,000 women.

Prosecutor Riel Karmy-Jones KC said the star was “childlike in his expectation that his every desire should be met” and only cared about his “birth right to orgasm”.

She told jurors all the women were “wholly unconnected” but each “described a pattern that resonates with who Brand was in the period 1999 to 2009”.

Ms Karmy-Jones added: “Six women who have nothing to gain, who have not sought the limelight, who have not looked out for some form of publicity, who have not taken part in a documentary, not made claims for compensation.

“There is no benefit to them, apart from perhaps some closure by coming before you and telling you their accounts of what happened to them so long ago.”

One woman who Brand raped at his home told how the comedian made her feel like a “piece of meat”.

She told she had met the celeb after seeing his show at the Hammersmith Apollo in London with a friend in 2009.

He told her his age range was from “16 to death” before she was invited to a backstage bar where they kissed and had a threesome, it was said.

The woman said she went to his home the next day where Brand told her: “Your hair smells funny”.

He then made her take a shower and wash her hair while he watched through a glass shower cubicle.

Once in the bedroom, the woman said they had consensual sex after he told her: “This is the best decision you’ve ever made, well done”.

She told the court Brand raped her and looked “absolutely f***ing horrified” – making her think he would apologise.

But the woman added: “But actually what he said was ‘you need to clear up the mess that you’ve made’.”

Another woman was in her 20s working at a radio station in the mid-2000s when Brand sexually assaulted her.

She told the court Brand was a “perfect stranger” to her at the time and said his assault was “violent”, “sloppy” and “frenzied”.

The woman also said she had locked eyes” with one of his entourage and was “pleading with her” to stop what was happening.

One victim said Brand “lunged” at her and grabbed her breasts when they were talking about Big Brother in a Soho bar in July 2004.

At the time, he had a “big, weird grin” on his face and “quite strongly” pulled her into the toilet where he orally raped her, she told cops.

When she protested, Brand told her: “Oh come on don’t be a spoil sport, you want to.”

The sixth woman worked for Channel 4 when she met Brand while he was filming a project.

She said she was informed Brand was “unhappy” and the situation would not improve unless she gave him a massage.

The woman said he walked up to a chair she was sitting on and placed his head directly into her groin area.

During his evidence, Brand wore a crucifix and wrung his hands together as he claimed his “promiscuous” past had been twisted into the allegations made against him.

He had admitted having an “obsession” with sex when he was younger but claimed consent is “non-negotiable” and “more important than sex itself”.

Brand added: “I do recognise I have been a very determined and focused man and with regard to the latter, with women, of course, which is the subject of my trial.

“I’ve been persuasive, seductive, begging and flirting, and dedicated a lot of my life to what seems now beyond-reckless philandering and idiocy.”

He admitted it had been “wrong” of him to use his fame for sex but denied he had ever forced himself on a woman.

Brand also tried to paint himself as someone who had reformed but whose life had been “consumed” by the allegations.

He moaned about how he had lost friends and said he was unable to persuade anyone to give evidence on his behalf.

But Brand had one supporter in the public gallery – his wife Laura Gallacher – sister of sports presenter Kirsty – who took to the stand herself after weeks of walking into the court hand-in-hand with Brand each day.

The mum gushed over the star – calling him an “amazingly attentive husband” and a “kind and a wonderful father”.

She told jurors “I love him very much” and claimed they always have sex “at my pace”.

Discussing when they began dating in 2007, Laura added: “I was not experienced, I had only had one partner before Russell.

“I felt entirely cared for and looked after by Russell.”

She told jurors Brand “respected my view” if she said she did not want to do something.

Laura said she was 19 when she met Brand, who was 31 at the time, at Edinburgh Festival.

The mum, who shares three children with the comic, revealed they broke up in summer 2007 when she became “very aware” of Brand’s promiscuity.

She added: “When I met him I was aware that he liked women, and I was aware towards the latter half of that year that he was engaging with other women.

“I wasn’t interested in having a relationship with him if he was sleeping with other people.

“I was invested, we both had told each other we loved each other but it was clear it was difficult for him to be monogamous.”

She said they got back together again as a couple in 2015 and married in 2017.

Brand, who displayed little emotion during the trial, was seen in the dock beaming as his wife spoke on his behalf.

He even laughed when she told the court: “We do have many friends and there are colleagues, and we are grateful for those people.”

In recent years, Brand had re-invented himself into a born-again Christian influencer – an image he bolstered in court by clutching a bible each day.

But his new life in the US came crumbling down when the allegations came to light in a Channel 4 Dispatches and he was thrust back into the public eye.

Brand is now facing a lengthy prison term when he is sentenced.

A Michigan man and former studio engineer is facing the music for his theft of rapper Eminem’s unreleased works.

Joseph Strange, a 48-year-old Michigan resident, pleaded guilty to criminal copyright infringement and will be sentenced to prison in January, the Department of Justice announced Thursday. He faces up to five years in prison. Federal prosecutors accused Strange in March 2025 of stealing and selling unreleased work by Eminem (legal name Marshall Mathers III).

An attorney for Strange did not immediately respond Friday to The Times’ request for comment, but told Variety in a statement that his client is a “good” man and his “children have suffered greatly in all of this.” The attorney said the case is “far more complicated and nuanced matter” beyond the theft.

“Nevertheless, my client has taken accountability for what he has done, has tremendous remorse for what has happened to his family,” the attorney reportedly added, “and has great faith, as do I, in the judges of our district to see this case for what it is.”

A spokesperson for 15-time Grammy winner, maker of hits “The Monster” and “Lose Yourself,” did not comment.

Strange was charged in 2025 with copyright infringement and interstate transportation of stolen goods, federal prosecutors announced. Investigators said at the time that more than 25 songs had been played or distributed online without permission from Eminem or the group that owns his music, Capitol Labels Group. Investigators discovered the music on password-protected hard drives stored in a safe at Eminem’s studio in Ferndale, Mich., an FBI affidavit said. At the time, an attorney for Strange denied the “untested allegations.”

The charges against Strange arose after studio employees alerted the FBI of the theft in January 2025, alleging the unfinished releases were shared to a number of online platforms. Files from a hard drive in a safe were transferred to an external hard drive in October 2019 and January 2020, around the time when Strange was working at the studio.

A Canadian resident informed investigators that he purchased 25 unreleased Eminem songs from Strange for about $50,000 in Bitcoin and that he raised the funds through the support of a group of Eminem fans. He also claimed Strange also put some of Eminem’s handwritten lyrics up for sale.

The affidavit says a federal search of Strange’s home in January 2025 led to the discovery of numerous lyric sheets and notes handwritten by Eminem, a VHS tape of an unreleased video and hard drives with about 12,000 audio files.

“Joseph Strange abused a position of trust to unlawfully copy and sell unreleased music belonging to Eminem, profiting from works that were not yet authorized for public distribution,” said A. Tysen Duva, assistant attorney general for the Department of Justice Criminal Division. “His conduct undermined both legal and artistic rights.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Mérida, October 16, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores have rejected a new indictment amid an ongoing prosecution by the US government.

I reject this document in its entirety,” Maduro told New York Judge Alvin Hellerstein in a hearing on Thursday. Similarly, Cilia Flores maintained her “absolute innocence” when asked to respond to the new charges, declaring: “I am completely innocent. I am not guilty.”

The judge entered formal not-guilty pleas on behalf of both defendants for all counts.

Maduro and Flores have been detained in Brooklyn’s Metropolitan Detention Center since being kidnapped by US special forces on January 3. 

In the Manhattan federal court, US Attorney Jamie McDonald presented the superseding indictment that introduces a “conspiracy to commit torture” charge alongside the previous charges of “narco-terrorism” and drug trafficking conspiracy, as well as weapons possession.

The accusation claims Maduro personally oversaw purported torture of prisoners and held authority over whether detainees were released or prosecuted.

“Maduro, Flores, and other high-ranking members of their inner circle used a violent system of torture and repression to maintain their power,” McDonald stated to reporters outside the courthouse.

According to the legal filing, the prosecution alleges that Maduro and Flores oversaw a violent state “apparatus of repression” spanning from the former’s election in 2013.

The document claims methods like electric shocks, asphyxiation, and simulated drowning, among others, were allegedly deployed against political dissidents, state officials suspected of disloyalty, and US citizens detained inside Venezuela.

Defense attorneys have repeatedly questioned the legitimacy of the entire prosecution, framing it as an unprecedented overreach of U.S. extraterritorial jurisdiction. Maduro and Flores have consistently maintained that they are political prisoners and that their capture constituted a flagrant violation of Venezuelan sovereignty.

Legal counsel has filed pre-trial motions requesting the dismissal of the charges on grounds that Maduro and Flores, as a sitting president and legislator, respectively, possess sovereign immunity from foreign criminal prosecution.

Hellerstein recently rejected a request from Flores’ defense team that she be moved to house arrest due to severe health concerns, arguing that the first lady poses a “substantial flight risk.”

The updated indictment forced the judge to adjust the calendar of proceedings. The hearing on sovereign immunity arguments has been moved to January. The trial was pushed back two weeks and is now slated to commence on June 14, 2027, with a final pretrial conference scheduled for June 8. 

In Venezuela, National Assembly Deputy Iris Varela blasted the new charges, arguing that Maduro and Flores remain victims of a forced kidnapping orchestrated by Washington.

“I wish to publicly express, once again, my absolute and total rejection of the despicable act that the U.S. government is brazenly carrying out against our president and our congresswoman,” Varela wrote on her X account.

She further described the latest charges as “a miserable ploy [and] a grotesque maneuver” and went on to label US President Donald Trump as a “pedophile pig.”

In contrast to Varela, the Venezuelan government has made no official statement regarding the latest developments in the legal case against Maduro and Flores.

Edited by Ricardo Vaz in Caracas.

A man who fell from the upper tier of a stand during a football match and injured fans below has been found not guilty of assault.

Maidstone United supporter John Ryan fell on to Joanne Peters and her partner Aaron Rose at Ipswich Town’s Portman Road ground during an FA Cup clash in January 2024.

Ryan, 62, of Railway Street, Chatham, Kent, denied one count of assault by beating and one count of actual bodily harm and told Ipswich Crown Court he had been unable to stop himself during goal celebrations.

Ryan could be seen crying in the dock as the jury returned verdicts of not guilty to both charges and said afterwards “it’s been very stressful”.

Peters had been in tears when she told the court she initially thought the supporters’ box behind her had collapsed and she thought she “could have died”.

Ryan had been one of thousands of Maidstone United supporters who saw their non-league side win 2-1 over Ipswich, who were heading to promotion from the Championship that season.

He told the court the game had been “the biggest match in the club’s history” and he had been celebrating a “special” goal.

The jury was told he had been in Cobbold Stand upper tier when he fell, slid down the sloping roof that covers the boxes, and landed on the Ipswich supporters below.

Ryan told the jury he had been unsure if he had been pushed or his foot had slipped when he fell.