Met chief says he wouldn't be surprised if more allegations made about Brand after rape conviction

Russell Brand was found guilty at Southwark Crown Court of one rape charge and three sexual assault charges. The conviction means the jury accepted the prosecution’s case on those four counts to the criminal standard required in court. Brand was refused bail and remained in custody before sentencing.

The jury did not convict him on every allegation. He was acquitted of two other rape charges and one allegation of attempted indecent assault. The trial involved six women and covered events said to have occurred between 1999 and 2009, when Brand was becoming a major public figure.

Brand is due to return to court for sentencing, and the article says he is expected to receive a substantial prison sentence. The Metropolitan Police also says two other rape investigations remain open. Those investigations concern separate allegations and have not been resolved by the conviction described here.

An ongoing police investigation means officers are still examining allegations, gathering evidence, and deciding whether the available material supports further action. It does not mean that a person has been charged, tried, or found guilty in those matters. The process remains unresolved.

The article says two rape investigations involving Brand are continuing. It also says he has already been interviewed under caution in relation to them. That is a formal police interview connected to a suspected offence, but it is not a conviction or a finding that the allegations are true.

The Metropolitan Police has not announced a final outcome for either investigation. Police could continue investigating, bring charges, or take no further action, depending on the evidence and legal decisions. The article says more people may come forward, but it does not state whether the two investigations will result in prosecutions.

Six women were involved as complainants in the criminal trial. The allegations covered the decade from 1999 to 2009, a period when Brand became one of Britain’s best-known entertainers. The jury convicted him on four counts but acquitted him on three others.

After the trial, the article reported that two other women had made further rape allegations. The Metropolitan Police confirmed that its investigation remains ongoing, and Brand has been questioned under caution. Legal documents suggest one woman was 16 at the time and appeared in a Channel 4 documentary, although the article does not identify her.

The two women connected with the ongoing investigations were not among the six trial complainants. Their allegations therefore remain separate from the verdict. Police may gather further evidence and decide what action is appropriate, but the article does not say whether charges will follow.

Brand has already faced an immediate consequence: he was refused bail after his conviction and was due to remain in custody until sentencing. The article says he is expected to receive a substantial prison sentence. The sentence will be decided by Southwark Crown Court after considering the offences and relevant sentencing rules.

The two ongoing rape investigations are separate from the convictions. Police have questioned Brand under caution, but investigations do not automatically lead to charges. Prosecutors would need to decide whether the evidence supports bringing a case. Brand would then have the opportunity to contest any charges in court.

If further charges were brought and led to convictions, Brand could receive additional sentences or other criminal penalties. The exact result would depend on the charges, evidence, verdicts, and sentencing decisions. The article does not predict whether either investigation will lead to prosecution.

A rape conviction depends on whether the prosecution proves the legal elements of the offence, not on whether the complainant reacted in one particular way. Someone may freeze, feel unable to escape, fear consequences, or respond passively during a terrifying event. A lack of screaming or physical resistance does not automatically show consent.

The article reports that Brand’s defence told jurors that complainants had not “resisted, screamed or even tried to leave”. Sir Mark Rowley said that this was very close to victim blaming. He supported a proposed legal duty requiring judges to direct juries about rape myths and misconceptions in every rape trial.

The jury considers the whole case, including testimony and other evidence, before reaching a verdict. The article says it is wrong to suggest that a victim’s failure to behave in one expected way undermines her case. It does not describe the full legal directions given in Brand’s trial.

Power in a sexual situation can come from fame, status, workplace authority, money, or control over professional opportunities. A less powerful person may fear losing work, damaging a career, being disbelieved, or facing retaliation. Those pressures can affect whether someone feels able to refuse, leave, or report conduct.

The article says Brand’s case may look different because it involves celebrity. Sir Mark Rowley added that most sexual offending is about people abusing power. A famous entertainer may have access, influence, and public credibility, while someone seeking work or opportunities may have less ability to challenge him.

Power does not by itself prove that a sexual offence occurred. Investigators and courts must examine the specific facts and evidence in each case. The Met chief said victims will be believed and that police will work to bring powerful offenders to justice, while the article also records Brand’s denials of the further allegations.

A criminal trial tests particular charges in court. Prosecutors present evidence, the defence responds, and a jury reaches a verdict. In Brand’s trial, that process ended with convictions on four counts and acquittals on three others. Those findings apply to the charges tried, not automatically to every allegation about him.

A police investigation happens before any possible prosecution. Officers gather evidence, interview people, and assess whether a case should proceed. Brand has been interviewed under caution in two ongoing rape investigations, but those matters have not reached a verdict. An investigation can continue without charges being brought.

Public allegations are statements made outside a completed criminal trial. They can prompt police inquiries or public debate, but they do not by themselves establish criminal responsibility. The article reports further allegations and says Brand denied them. Only a court can decide guilt in a criminal prosecution, while police and prosecutors decide whether a case should move forward.