Russell Brand's barrister, Ian Winter KC, has urged the judge at Southwark Crown Court to view the former entertainer's rape conviction as an isolated incident where a man "went too far," rather than a pattern of behaviour.
Brand was found guilty on Thursday afternoon (November 5) of one count of rape and three counts of sexual assault, while being acquitted of two counts of rape and one charge of attempted indecent assault. He is due to be sentenced on Monday and has been warned he faces a "significant custodial term."
Defence Arguments on Showering and Alcohol
During sentencing submissions, Mr Winter urged the judge to find that Brand did not humiliate or degrade the rape victim by forcing her to shower and brush her teeth before sex. He argued the requests were made for a good reason, as Brand is a recovering alcoholic.
"Whilst plainly unattractive behaviour on the part of Mr Brand, it is not entirely surprising that an ex-alcoholic might prefer not to smell alcohol on an intimate partner's breath in circumstances where sexual activity was very much expected and intended to follow," Mr Winter said.
He also urged the judge to view Brand's quick departure after the incident, to attend a stand-up show, as "inconsiderate" rather than an aggravating factor intended to degrade the victim.
Fame and Vulnerability Claims
The defence barrister argued that the four events should be seen as isolated rather than a pattern of behaviour. The judge intervened, suggesting: "To say 'He got away with it for 17 years' is not necessarily a huge piece of mitigation, is it?"
Mr Winter added: "This should be regarded as a man who went too far and overrode consent that had been given." He stated there was "no planning, there was no pre-meditation," though Mr Justice Bennathan interjected that there had been no suggestion of pre-meditation to the rape.
The barrister told the court that Brand's crimes were connected and the consequence of the level of fame he was acquiring, noting the final offence "happened very shortly after he met Katy Perry."
Mr Winter also argued that a woman whose breasts were groped by Brand at a Soho bar in 2004 was "not particularly vulnerable at all." He said: "Being tipsy is not something that gave rise to vulnerability and there's no evidence the defendant knew she was tipsy so to be vulnerable." He described the incident as a "very, very short incident" falling at the bottom of culpability under sentencing guidelines.
