Russell Brand’s lawyer brands disgraced comic’s rape a ‘short, momentary failure’ of a man who ‘went too far’

The sentence was delivered after Brand was found guilty of one count of rape and three counts of sexual assault committed between 2004 and 2009.

Mr Justice Bennathan heard from Mr Winter KC, as well as four victim impact statements and the prosecution’s case of aggravating factors against Brand.

Before sentencing, Brand’s victims delivered powerful statements to the court describing how his crimes had left them “haunted” and “humiliated and overwhelmed.”

And yet when addressing the rape of a 21-year-old woman at Brand’s home in 2009, Mr Winter urged the judge to treat the offence as arising from what had been consensual intercourse.

He told the court: “This should be regarded as a man who went too far and overrode consent that had been given.”

The barrister characterised the attack as “really quite a short, momentary total failure to respect her consent in two areas,” insisting there had been “no planning, there was no premeditation.”

Mr Justice Bennathan intervened to note that nobody had suggested the rape was premeditated.

Brand had also forced his victim to shower and brush her teeth before assaulting her.

In written submissions, Mr Winter argued this was “not entirely surprising” conduct from “an ex-alcoholic” who might not wish to smell alcohol on “an intimate partner’s breath in circumstances where sexual activity was very much expected and intended to follow.”

Mr Winter also attempted to downplay the sexual assault of a woman whose breasts Brand groped at a Soho bar in 2004.

He told the court: “She was not particularly vulnerable at all. 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.”

The defence barrister argued the attack should be considered a “very, very short incident” falling at the lowest level of culpability under sentencing guidelines.

Mr Winter further contended that Brand’s offending was linked to his rising celebrity status.

He told the court that the crimes occurred as Brand “started to become very famous and then extraordinarily famous,” inviting the judge to decide that “his behaviour for these offences are connected and the consequence of that level of fame.” He noted that the final offence took place shortly after Brand met Katy Perry.

While Mr Winter KC may have called it a “short momentary failure”, the impact on Brand’s rape victim was long-lasting.

She described the enduring damage his crimes had inflicted, telling the court: “Following what happened, I felt anxious, humiliated and overwhelmed. I struggled to eat and sleep, and I found it difficult to cope with my emotions.”

She explained that the impact forced her to take time off work and move back in with her parents because she no longer felt safe. She also developed difficulties sleeping.

“Even now, I feel that I am living with the trauma of what happened. It is something I carry with me every day, and it often feels never-ending,” she said in her impact statement.

Meanwhile, prosecutor Riel Karmy-Jones KC rejected Mr Winter’s remarks, describing the rape victim as “particularly vulnerable.”

She argued that forcing the woman to shower, brush her teeth, and then directing her to clean up afterwards with wipes constituted clear “degradation” and “humiliation.”

It’s not the first time Mr Winter’s conduct has drawn attention. Following Brand’s conviction on Thursday, the barrister confronted Sunday Times reporter Rosamund Urwin, who had been among the leading journalists whose investigation ultimately brought the case to court.

He told her he hoped she was “pleased with herself.” When Ms Urwin responded that she was “pleased justice has been done,” Mr Winter replied: “Well, it wasn’t. You f****d it. Congratulations.”

Mr Winter subsequently referred himself to his professional regulator over the incident.