The defence in Russell Brand's rape and sexual assault trial has suggested there is “no evidence he is some sort of psychopath who rapes people and thinks it’s normal”.
Ian Winter KC, leading barrister heading the defence's closing arguments, told the jury that Brand had "acted normal" following the alleged attacks on women. Winter suggested the fact the comedian behaved normally showed Brand believed the women had consented.
Defence argues normal behaviour shows belief in consent
He said: “They have all given evidence that Mr Brand’s behaviour was normal either during and or after the incidents.” He added: “That, we suggest, is something that simply cannot have occurred if he is guilty... He couldn’t have been behaving normally if he knew they were not [consenting].
“He obviously genuinely believed that they were consenting because that’s the only thing that would explain why his behaviour was normal.”
Winter added that there is “no evidence he is some sort of psychopath who rapes people and thinks it’s normal”.
Trial details and complaints examined
Brand is standing trial at Southwark Crown Court accused of three counts of rape, three counts of sexual assault and one of indecent assault. He denies all allegations. The comedian was accompanied by wife Laura Gallacher and her father, Ryder Cup winning golfer Bernard Gallacher.
Winter told the jury it was "quite surprising" not one of three alleged rape victims made that complaint to Brand. He said it is one thing not to report the incident to police but to not make it known to the alleged assailant is something else.
He added none of the complainants "resisted or screamed or even tried to leave". Of the fifth complainant, who alleges she was anally raped by Brand in 2009, Winter says: "She didn't roll over, or kick out, or try to stop him in any way from penetrating her anus."
The defence noted the complainant's words to her then-boyfriend a few days later: "I own that I had made that decision [to go to Brand's home]."
Closing arguments continue
Winter told jurors: "What matters is [Brand] had an immense amount of sex and none of it was unlawful." He added: "Disgusting, distasteful, immoral, who cares? It's irrelevant to your consideration."
He told the court Brand was "seeking approval" and "seeking adoration". He told jurors: “He respects it when a women says no so that makes him someone who is not a rapist.”
The barrister said: “He was seeking the approval in the sex, it’s the approval, it’s the ‘yes I will have sex with you’ and that’s what he said in his evidence.” He referred back to when Brand testified that consent was more important than the sex itself.
He said Brand "left his actual email address - rapists do not leave their address. He left photos she 'd taken of him, rapists do not leave their photographs; and he kissed her goodbye, or tried to, when he left."
The defence will proceed to give its closing speeches into Monday afternoon. The trial continues.
