A Judge's Sentencing Remarks Become the Rape-Myth Rebuttal the UK Legal System Rarely Delivers

Mr Justice Bennathan's sentencing of Russell Brand to 10.5 years didn't just punish a predator — it explicitly dismantled the defence's rape-myth strategy and named the enablers who let it continue.

Mr Justice Bennathan sentenced Russell Brand to ten and a half years in prison for raping one woman and sexually assaulting three others. The sentence itself matters less than what Bennathan said delivering it. His remarks were a point-by-point demolition of the rape myths Brand's defence had deployed throughout trial — the idea that what women wear, drink, or fail to do in the moment of assault determines whether a crime occurred.

The Criminal Bar Association, through chair Andrew Thomas KC and vice-chair Kama Melly KC, called the remarks "piercing clarity" and said they demonstrated that a properly directed jury will not be swayed by a defendant's appeal to rape myths. This is not boilerplate. Defence barrister Ian Winter KC had run a cross-examination strategy built on those myths — demanding to know why victims hadn't fought, screamed, or reported immediately. Bennathan's remarks were a direct judicial rebuke to that strategy. Rape Crisis England & Wales chief executive Ciara Bergman described the remarks as "hugely important," specifically because they recognised what victims endured during the trial itself. The cross-examination had perpetuated the misconception that credible allegations require immediate physical resistance or instant reporting. Bergman noted that there are a range of responses to imminent sexual assault, and all are valid — a principle the defence strategy had worked to undermine. Bennathan went further than addressing the defendant. He named the "enablers" — people present at a radio station and a TV studio who witnessed Brand sexually assault women in front of them and did nothing. Of the radio station incident, he said Brand's companions likely thought it was "outrageous laddish behaviour" that only he could get away with. "It was outrageous and possibly laddish, but also a criminal sexual offence, and as it turns out you haven't got away with it." The enabler framing matters structurally. Bergman called it "crucial," noting the case is "about more than just one man" — it is about everyone who laughed along, didn't speak up, or looked away. They didn't commit Brand's crimes, but they contributed to the culture that allowed him to harm women with impunity for years. Deniz Uğur of the End Violence Against Women Coalition echoed this, calling it "critically important" to examine the institutions and individuals that enabled Brand's behaviour. Labour deputy leader Lucy Powell praised the remarks as "incredibly powerful," contrasting them with what she called the "depressing" nature of Winter's cross-examination. Uğur went further, arguing that rape myths should be prohibited from courtroom use entirely. Meanwhile, police have received further criminal allegations against Brand beyond those addressed in this trial. The institutional question is whether Bennathan's clarity remains an exceptional judicial moment or becomes standard practice. Rape myth strategies persist in courtrooms because they work on juries — this case demonstrated both the problem and its potential remedy. The judge's remarks now function as a public record of what a courtroom should sound like when it takes sexual violence seriously.