Dramz

For those who don't know the Russell Brand case... Imagine being sentenced to 10.5 YEARS in prison for alleged offenses dating back as far as 22 YEARS AGO, in a case where the police say there was zero CCTV footage, zero forensic evidence, and digital enquiries were limited because SOOOOO much time had passed, and prosecutors themselves acknowledge that the passage of time limited the available evidence, and yet STILL a jury convicts you in a case built primarily on testimony, and then you get to sentencing and the judge acknowledges the work you have done helping people overcome addiction, including paying for their treatment, acknowledges that your children will lose the presence of their father, and also accepts that there is no sound evidential basis to conclude you pose a future risk, and still sentences you to 10.5 YEARS in prison, again following convictions reached without CCTV or forensic evidence, and now you’re left asking how the testimony and supporting material established the disputed acts beyond reasonable doubt despite those gaps, and how the court justified a sentence that will take years out of your children’s childhoods for offenses from nearly two decades earlier, which is roughly where Russell Brand is tonight.