Media Storm - Russell Brand: Innocent until proven guilty?

Episode Date: September 21, 2023

Content warning: This episode discusses rape, sexual assault, and gender-based violence. If you need support, you can call Rape Crisis for free on 0808 500 2222 This week - though an 'open secret' in the media industry - it was revealed by the Times, the Sunday Times, and Channel 4 Dispatches that Russell Brand has been accused of rape, sexual assault, and emotional abuse.  Four women have alleged sexual assaults between 2006 and 2013, others have made a range of accusations about Brand’s controlling, abusive and predatory behaviour. More women have come forward since the article and documentary aired. Brand denied the allegations and said his relationships have all been consensual, and said there is a mainstream media conspiracy theory to take him down. In this bonus episode, we address Brand's announcement of a 'mainstream media conspiracy', plus other reactionary statements including 'Why didn't she say anything before?', 'What about false accusations?', and - often the biggest statement when rich and famous men are accused of sexual assault - 'Innocent until proven guilty!'. To address the crucial context of systemic failures that’s often missing from the conversation on rape convictions, we then revisit our Series 1 investigation: "Rape Justice: What happens to the 98%?" The charge rate of rape is less than 2%. The investigation features rape survivors not just from the UK, but from the US and Europe too: however varied their experiences or assault, silence and injustice are themes that shape them all. They attest to the multitude of reasons why victims may not go to the police; and why even when they DO go to the police, they may come to regret it. Sources: CPS Q3 and Q4 reports for 2022-2023 Speakers: Alison Turkos @alisonturkos Pieke Roelofs @pieke_r www.photoandgrime.com Verity Nevitt @veritynevitt www.thegeminiproject.org Dame Vera Baird, Victim’s Commissioner @VictimsComm Sarah Crew, National Police Chiefs Council @aspsarah_crew Siobhan Blake, Crown Prosecution Service @CPSUK @crownprosecutors Your hosts are @helenawadia and @mathildamall. Music by Samfire @soundofsamfire. We've launched a Patreon. If you want to support us for a small monthly fee, head to patreon.com/MediaStormPodcast Media Storm was launched by the house of The Guilty Feminist and is part of the Acast Creator Network. Become a member at https://plus.acast.com/s/media-storm. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This episode contains discussions about rape, sexual assault and gender-based violence. If you need support, you can call rape crisis free on 0808-500-22222-2. It's been a heavy few days since these Russellbrand allegations were revealed. An open secret in the media industry for a long time, but it was revealed by the times, the Sunday time, and Channel 4 dispatches this weekend that Russell Brand has been accused of rape, sexual assault and emotional abuse. Four women have alleged sexual assaults

between 2006 and 2013. Others have made a range of accusations about Brand's controlling, abusive and predatory behaviour. More women have actually come forward since the article and the documentary aired. Russell Brandt has denied the allegations and said his relationships have always been consensual and said there is a mainstream.

media conspiracy theory to take him down. We do want to quickly address this point because the journalism was rigorous. A coalition of journalists worked on this investigation for three years, compiling evidence from hundreds of sources, gaining access to private emails and texts, viewing medical and therapist notes, and especially with a name like Russell Brand, who's known to have an army of lawyers around him. The risk of suing means the facts that actually make it to print will only be the most rigorously checked and legally proved.

Yeah, absolutely. Also, over the last few years, Russell Brand, you know, has moved away from his own mainstream media roles and sort of rebranded with this YouTube audience and made himself the face of this mainstream media suspicion. And I've heard cynically, you know, from comedians who know that he has known this has been coming for a long time, that this move on his part has been a deliberate strategy to protect himself from anything in the mainstream media might say, and to surround himself with an army of fans who won't believe anything the mainstream media has said because he's been saying that they've been conspiring against

him for years. Yeah, and I think it's important to say that Russell Brand has in a way often aligned himself with being anti-establishment, but the move can be seen to be much more sinister because it was an alignment specifically with much more right-wing and radical ideas of anti-establishment than previously he was anti-establishment. He was anti-establishment. He was anti-establishment. in quite a left wing way. But really, this bonus episode is to address some of the reactions that have come from this piece of journalism, including, why didn't they say anything before? You know, it's a worry because men do get falsely accused. And the main one, which is so often the reaction when rich and famous men get accused of sexual assault, well, innocent until proven

guilty. So please, if a friend or a family member has said any of these phrases and it's safe to do so, please do send them this episode. We want to create a dialogue so we can help support victims of sexual assault, especially when the allegations are against people in the public eye. Now, you may remember way back in series one of Media Storm, we did an episode called Rape Justice what happens to the 98%. It's called this because, between 2021 and 2022, of over 70,000 rapes reported to police, fewer than 2,000, even made it to trial. This is a charge rate of less than 2%. In a moment, we're going to play the investigation from that episode for you

because it really addresses that first comment, Helena mentioned. Why didn't they say anything before? Two years on from this investigation, none of the survivors you'll hear have seen any more justice than they had then, and it is precisely the fact that what they say is still just as relevant today that makes it vital listening. The investigation features rape survivors, is not just from the UK, but from the US and Europe as well. However, varied their experiences

of assault, silence and injustice are themes that shape them all. They attest to the multitude of reasons why victims may not go to the police, and why even if they do go to the police, they may come to regret it. In the investigation, you'll learn about a controversial clause of the police, crimes, sentencing and courts bill and a campaign to change that in order to protect victims' We can now update you that the bill passed into law with those controversial clauses still in place. In the investigation, we also speak to the National Police Chiefs Council lead for rape and adult sexual offences about work being done to improve rape investigations. Operation Bluestone, as this work was called, was just launching at the time. Two years on, it continues with high energy. However, rape charge rates have not improved.

they are still below 2%, despite charge rates for all crimes, increasing to 80%. That's 80% for all crime, 1.5% for rape, and after having actually dropped, 0.7% for domestic abuse. And to the main point, innocent until proven guilty. We've seen countless cases of men, especially rich and famous men, not being convicted after sexual assault allegations, made against them. What it is important to remember is that not being convicted of a crime like sexual assault is not the same as being found innocent of that crime. A criminal trial is about the prosecution trying to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of the crime. But the defence does not have to prove that the defendant is innocent. What that

means is we cannot say that every failed rape conviction means the victim was lying. It doesn't It doesn't. It just means they don't have enough direct evidence to prove it. And why is that? Of course, because of our societal programming not to believe women, but also because of the nature of sexual assault. It's hidden. It not always, but very often happens behind closed doors with no hard concrete evidence that is accepted by a court of law. So there are many men that have been accused but not been convicted and people will say, well, there we are. That proves they're innocent. No. it doesn't. It is such an important point to make because it's just not what you're taught and it's not the reaction that you hear in the public when there is any kind of trial for accusations of this

nature. And I think it's so true for a crime like sexual assault where conviction is really difficult. And in the investigation, you will also hear from the Crown Prosecution Service themselves about why conviction is so difficult for rape. And here's the other thing. Innocent until proven guilty is being applied by people who blindly defend alleged rapists with a false righteousness. Innocent until proven guilty refers to the state. The state has to presume your innocence. Members of the public, those of us who understand how prevalent sexual assault is, do not. Exactly. You know, a lot of people after seeing the Russell Brown allegations have said, well, where's the evidence? Where's the evidence? I'll tell you where the evidence is.

It's in that article. It's what those women said. That is evidence. It makes me want to scream. Yeah. And that's, in fact, when it comes to rape trials, the only evidence often that we can have. And that is the evidence with which juries are asked to make these convictions.

And on that final point, there has been talk about false allegations. The number of false allegations is not statistically significant. The figure sits somewhere between 0.5% and 4%. compare this to the fact that one in four adult women have experienced rape or sexual assault and in reality men are far more likely to be raped themselves than to be falsely accused of rape right so to conclude this introduction there there was a quote i read in glamour a couple of days ago by the writer chloe laws and i just thought it really said so much i'm going to read it now

It is therefore fair to assume the following. You will personally know a woman who has been raped, probably multiple women. You will personally know a man who has committed rape, maybe multiple men. It is unlikely that you know anyone who has been convicted of rape. It is very unlikely that you will know someone who has falsely accused someone of rape. But much of our society's default is to assume and believe the complete opposite. With the mountain of evidence against Russell Brand, another powerful man stands accused. But behind the horror show in our headlines is a crucial context of systemic failures that's often missing from the conversation.

So here's what lies behind that media storm. What do you mean this happened to me? If it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to check out. And if I have to listen to one more gray-faced man with a $2 haircut, explain to me what rape is. You can do anything. Whatever you want. Grab them by the pussy. We are the corporate.

Kelsey Smith. Kelly Stewart. Welcome to Media Storm, the news podcast that starts with the people who are normally asked last. I'm Matilda Mallinson. And I'm Helen Awadier. This week's investigation. Rape Justice. What happens to the 98%.

Before we continue, we wanted to tell you about a podcast. that we absolutely love listening to. It's outrage and optimism, a useful weekly guide for anyone wanting to make sense of the complexity of the climate conversation. Whether you're suffering from climate anxiety or are already fired up, full of hope and taking action,

or somewhere in between, the podcast will help you navigate feelings of outrage and optimism and leave you feeling informed and inspired. Hosted by Christiana Figuera, Tom Rivett Karnik and Paul Dickinson, the trio share their expertise in Scyon, and humour with the world's climate thought leaders, making the show the leading global independent climate podcast. We highly recommend you check it out, so search outrage and optimism

wherever you get your podcasts. Columbia University, New York City. Anne-Marie has just gotten in, her dream space for a career-changing post-grad. That career, by the way, is public-facing, so we're actually using a pseudonym. She should be thrilled, but pacing around with a small white stick in her hand, she's more distressed than she's ever been. Two stripes, no mistake. She's pregnant with her rapist's child.

I had to get an abortion. I asked the person who assaulted me to help me pay for it because I was, you know, like really low income at the time. He said that I got myself into this because I, opened my legs. I was dating someone in December of 2015. I was asleep and he was having sex with me as I was asleep. I was scared, but also it never occurred to me at the time that it was assault because we had been intimate, you know, before I fell asleep, it actually wasn't until graduate school program orientations, and one of them discussed sexual assault. I realized in that

moment I did not give consent, you know, each time that we were intimate. Like the vast majority of sexual assault survivors, Anne-Marie did not report the crime against her. This is the first and greatest hurdle on the road to rape justice, and the reasons are many. I felt really ashamed of what I had done, who I had let into my life as a woman of color. I just, I don't see many women of color getting justice, if I'm honest, in any regard, you know, whether it's homicide or rape or anything like that. In the US and UK, research shows sexual violence is disproportionately targeted against women of color, while they're statistically less likely to see justice than white women. The same is true for trans victims.

But for all survivors, there are many systems in place, preventing them from speaking out. For Alison Turcles from New York, sex education bears some of the blame. I didn't report when I was 16 because no adults in my life were having conversations with me about consent. No one in my life was having conversations with me about the fact that sex is and can be wonderful, but it must be pleasurable for both parties. Where were the adults in my life who were naming the word sexual assault, who were naming the word rape. I don't need to learn how to put a fucking condom on a banana.

That's not helpful. It's just unhelpful to me. But with Anne-Marie, she shared a fear of being blamed as well. You know, I would have been asked questions consistently of like, how much were you drinking? How late did you stay up? Why didn't you lock the door? Why didn't you tell someone immediately?

Those questions aren't helpful. But even asking why didn't you report it, Alison points out, flags a fundamental issue with where we look when diagnosing rape culture. I feel like we are perpetuating the perfect victim narrative. It puts all of the labor on me as a victim. I want to turn the table and to say what systems were and still are in place that made it so that I didn't report. Because in October 2017, and I'll pick up that story, but in October 2017, I did everything right.

I reported within 24 hours and look at where it fucking got me. because the answer is nowhere. The only person who gets to decide what justice and repair looks like is the person who has been harmed. The new headline tonight involving one of the most powerful figures in Hollywood. The Harvey Weinstein news drops, October 5th, 2017.

And so October 13th is a Friday. Just when the Me Too movement was taking off, on the streets of New York, Allison was about to be reminded of why. Now, the next three minutes contain descriptions of sexual violence. She's been on a girl's night out, and as you do,

was a taxi on an app called Lyft. It's a quick ride, her guard is down, and she falls asleep. When something wakes her up, they're crossing a bridge, and that's not right. So at the light, she tries the door. It doesn't open. Shear and utter panic set in. And that night, I was wearing a set of, like, seven to ten, like, silver bangle bracelets. And for anyone who wears bangle bracelets, you know that, like, if you breathe or move,

they are like a marching band I'm like trying with every single fucking ounce of strength to open this door like I think that I'm going to break this handle and the driver turns around at this red light and he pulls a gun on me and he just tells me to shut the fuck up they drive into a deserted park

what two other men are waiting so the driver instructs me to lay down in the backseat of the car and he and the two other men proceed to gang rate me. And the overhead light and the car is on. I have blue eyes. I have very sensitive eyes. I'm very sensitive to light. So my eyes are closed.

After the rape, Alison's assailant drives her home. And the next morning, she remembers nothing. When I left the apartment, I opened up the Lyft app and my ride from the night before was over $100. And there's a map of the entire ride. This is something worth highlighting trauma-related memory loss because it's often used to deny a survivor's legal credibility. For Alison, it took a reenactment of the journey with two male NYPD officers to fill in the gaps. But do you notice she seems to remember it now with minute detail, the number of bangles she wore, the overhead light. This is something I've noticed with other survivors I've spoken to. They recount the events with unnecessary detail, at least for the purposes of this interview.

To me, it feels like a need to paint an overly accurate picture so that no one can pick holes. It's as if they don't expect to be believed. October 16th of 2021 will be four years since I reported. No one is in custody. No charges have been brought forth. The driver is still driving. Most likely is still driving for a lift and Uber.

I understand that your rape kit provided multiple semen samples that presumably from the app you had the ID, the license. place number, on what grounds was this all deemed unusable evidence? Yeah, great question. So the driver's DNA is not in my kit, which could be for a plethora of reasons. Like the driver might have worn a condom according to law enforcement. Because his DNA is not in my kit, they cannot charge him with sexual assault. A question that I will live with for the rest of my life, you had his license plate number. You had the make and model of the car. Why not do a hair and fiber check? And my PD never did it. Why not collect video evidence from Liberty State Park to see if there was video evidence of the sexual assault? NYPD never did it. There are glaring factual errors on my police report.

The date that I reported on my police report is wrong. My address in my police report is wrong. I knew that they were not going to be helpful. I never knew how unhelpful they would be. I never knew how they were going to like truly ruin my case. The privileges that I hold that allow me to navigate the system are just like seeping out of me. I am a white woman. Can you imagine how black trans women are treated, how sex workers are treated? Do you think that your queer identity has had any impact on your experience? So like I used to have very, very short hair at one point in time I shaved it, but the FBI told me that I should grow up my hair because I would, a jury would be more likely to believe me because I would be read a straight. They would look at me and not ask

questions internally and being like, but she looks so gay. Why? Why would men want to rape her? I'm doing it. My hair is very long right now. On the 31st of January 2019, Alison filed a lawsuit against the NYPD. They responded to media storm. The NYPD takes sexual assault and rape cases extremely seriously

and urges anyone who has been a victim to file a police report. You did say that you'd had slightly intimidating messages from the FBI after publishing an opinion piece. Have you felt at any point, Someone is trying to silence you for holding authorities to account? All of the time. As a method of retaliation, I believe that the Eastern District of New York will not prosecute this case because, like, I published a letter, I have called them out, I have filed a complaint.

John Mazzali, spokesman for the United States Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of New York, said, the Office does not comment on ongoing investigations. However, we can confirm that all prosecutorial decisions are made based on the law and the evidence. the office does not retaliate against victims or witnesses. Alison isn't alone in feeling silenced. I want to see you happy and always bursting with light for the shape of the song that is bound to survive. Let me introduce you to Pika Roloff, a Dutch artist.

She claims her botched rape investigation was buried by the state and is taking legal action against them. What the government did and didn't do in those cases show such a severe neglect to the criminal point. Pika already had a rape case open. When she says one of the witnesses from that case began stalking her, she called the police to complain nine times, but it didn't protect her from what came.

When, she says, he took her hostage in her home and raped her. I've been looking into this case for more than a year. I've read legal correspondence, court documents and medical histories. I've tracked down and interviewed previous girlfriends of the first man accused, who support Pekker's claims against him. I can tell you there's no shortage of evidence. I've just never had my chance to make the case in court all until now. What I've done is fight to get a proper investigation in the case

and fight to get those cases prosecuted. This becomes really difficult if even the most basic things in these police investigations aren't done already. If witnesses aren't interrogated, if conversations between you and your abuser aren't interrogated. This is the reality of rape cases. Just because a crime happened doesn't mean it will be properly investigated, let alone prosecuted. Once again, Pika feels that the mental impact of her trauma led to her not being taken seriously.

I was hospitalized as a result of the abuse, so I became a psychiatric patient as a result of the abuse. But the thing is, they don't look at you like someone who was hospitalized as a result of the abuse. They look at you as a psychiatric patient alone. I just could see in their eyes they just started zoning out and not really taking me serious. I definitely don't think that the system has been put in place to prosecute as many crimes as possible. I think it's just put in place to give people the sense of there being a system that protects them. There's a theatre show going on. In Pika and Alison and many others, we have a situation where survivors are going to war not only with their attackers,

but entire justice systems. Back home, our next case takes me to southeast London to meet Verity Nevet. In 2017, she says her ex-boyfriend sexually assaulted her, before going on to rape her twin sister, Lucy. The sisters reported what happened to the police, but a few months later were told no further action would be taken, despite having texts in which the accused apologized for the alleged assault. So the real reason was it's not enough for a...

jury to be convinced beyond reasonable doubt. And by this point in, we'd lost a friend during a police investigation. They didn't believe us. They took his side. I was just like, I've just had a suicide attempt over this. Lucy was very hurt. Sometimes I think that hurt her more than the actual rape. What I really want to highlight with this story is the level of scrutiny that claimants

often have to withstand in an attempt to build their case, because surveys show this is another significant deterrent to reporting. I didn't understand why they needed to see our school records going back to like primary school, medical records, counselling notes from when I was like nine. It's not just paper documents that are collected, but entire digital histories, their social media accounts, messages, photographs. There were certain things on my phone, like being a university and taking drugs and talking about that, that I was a bit worried that the police would see and I'd be prosecuted. They kept bringing up messages that they'd read, which now I know is like very inappropriate, but they kept kind of laughing and being like, you girls are very

funny, like your conversations with your mum and your friends. Were these messages in any way related to the case? No. So they'd looked at everything. Can you, is there an option to withhold explicit photographs of yourself or your boyfriend? You know, are you allowed to withhold something? It doesn't feel like you'll give it an option. And they mentioned that they'd seen those photos, which was embarrassing. But yeah, my social media accounts shut down all the computers in Lewisham Police Station because there was so much of it. A lot of the time they have to send the phones off to a lab. Lucy didn't have her phone for like, gosh, nine months. She was walking around with my iPad. The man that the sisters accused did not have to submit to this.

He didn't even need to submit to an interview. They didn't interview him after I had reported. They only interviewed him when Lucy reported. And they said, well, we did ask him about what happened with you, but he gave no comment. They basically just knew he was going to give another no comment interview, so just didn't see the point in there. They were meant to interview my mum, and they didn't. They were meant to interview the first person my sister told, which is called the first disclosure, which was quite important to police investigations, and they never did that either. And while the sister's data was needed, because it could be used to pick apart their credibility in court, there's a different approach for the accused. A man's

character is used in their favour. We'd said all along, you know, this is someone we trusted and had been really close with and was part of our family. And they said that actually works in his favour. And I remember my partner just saying, what, so seemingly good men get one shot at being able to rape somebody. I definitely felt like we were the ones being investigated. It's a very interesting time to be looking at this issue in the UK.

The government's police crime sentencing in Courtsville, which caused controversy earlier this year with its restrictions on protesting. is back in Parliament. It also rephrases officers' powers to access people's private data in a way that critics say undermines data protection law, making victims' privacy even more vulnerable. Let's see if she's ever said anything to be honest.

Let's see if she's ever flirted with anybody. We're looking at her credibility. That's the culture of present. Leading the battle against this is Dame Vera Baird, the UK's Victims Commissioner. She sent the government a list of amendments to bring the bill in line with data. data protection laws, amendments the government chose to ignore.

I'll move on. I'd like to answer that if I can. But after much fighting, the government you turned, only, however, for digital data. Third party data, like school and counselling records, remains in Dame Vera's eyes all too vulnerable. There is only the Crown Prosecution Service to point to. They are very keen to keep their conviction rate up. They think that jurors are very prejudiced against rape complainants, that it's easy to throw dirt at them, about flirting, about drinking.

And so they want to look for all of those possibilities before they even consider taking it forward. They are, in my view, very worried about their reputation and much, much, much less worried about the privacy rights of a complainant. Prejudices shouldn't be a barrier. Prejudices should be challenged. What makes the government's decision even more confusing is the fact that police actually support these changes.

I've been a police officer for 27 years. The figures and the convictions are worse. That shows we have to do something different. This is Sarah Crewe, the National Police Lead for Rape in the UK. And she is hoping to lead that new departure. So there were some significant cases in around 2016-17, 17. where the police and the Crown Prosecution Service had failed at disclosing material. Dozens of rape and sexual assault cases have been dropped

because vital evidence was withheld from the jury. When there's a significant failing, there is a reaction. And so in the quest for making sure that all the relevant information had been gathered, disproportionate effort and disproportionate focus has gone into material held about the victim, about them, school records, health records, etc. It's sending the pendulum towards an investigation of the victim. And what I'm proposing and what I hope I'm leading in policing is a swing back of the pendulum, rebalancing our focus onto the perpetrator. Let's not forget the people who are responsible for this are the perpetrators. So what's her plan of action? Project

Bluestone, as it's called, is a five-pillar model. One, that's swinging of the pendulum to focus on the suspect rather than the victim. Two, an interventionist approach to catching criminals before they act. Three, ensuring victims feel respected throughout the process. And four, with the help of academics, continual learning and development that is five, informed by data and analytics. Trial in Somerset earlier this year, rolled out to London's met police in September, it will spread across England and Wales in 2022. So on that note, When do you think we can expect to see results from this change in terms of real prosecution figures?

I think almost immediately. With that promise, we can watch this space. Miss Crewe knows what's at stake. Rape is such, it's the worst crime you survive, and the criminal justice system should be able to deal with a crime of that seriousness. You know, my own view, and this is a personal view, it throws some doubt around the effectiveness of the criminal justice. system. And if the public haven't got faith or confidence in the criminal justice system,

you know, that says something about the way we live and our way of life. Now, as you've heard from our survivors, it isn't just up to police. The Crown Prosecution Service, or CPS, rejects about a quarter of cases referred by police and have a role in deterring referrals themselves. So that's where I'm heading now, inside the Ministry of Justice's building in Westminster, to ask the CPS why that is. I'm hearing I'm getting a better run than Channel 4. The woman leading the CPS for rape and serious sexual offences is Chauvonne Blake

and she insists the same pendulum swing that Ms. Crewe described to focus on suspects is happening in courtrooms as well. Why was this person sat in a nightclub on his own? If he's there for a night out, quite innocently, why isn't he joining in? You're trying to place the jury in the mind of the perpetrator. So you really have to try and focus right from the start of the investigation on what we call an offender-centric approach. Did that lead to a conviction?

We did get a conviction in that case, yes. And in other cases, where do you think the jury's typically lost? Very often the cases that we are investigating and then prosecuting will have quite limited immediate evidence in so much as a lot of them take place without witnesses for obvious reasons. And also, the law on consent is such that we don't simply have to demonstrate that an individual has not consented, but we also have to show that the defendant hasn't reasonably believed that that individual has consented.

That's something that sometimes juries, I suspect, wrestle with. Although it does sound sometimes insurmountable, it really isn't. And remember, the most important piece of evidence we've got is the victims. And victims are often really, really compelling. We will prosecute cases simply on the account given to us by the victim. Could you help us then understand why many cases, who have clearly very compelling firsthand testimonies to offer? And sometimes what they feel is sufficient other compelling evidence,

why it doesn't lead to trial in so many cases? What we have to do as prosecutors is assess all the evidence. And it's not about not believing victims. I think this is the point I'd really like to stress. We're not there to make those value judgments, but we have to be satisfied that we can put a case to a jury where they could convict. Please hold the faith with it.

because we can't do it without victims. I think when you see headlines which talk about the decriminalisation of rape and, dare I say it, some simplistic examples, which are based more on perception and actuality, I think that can be really frightening for victims and survivors. I walk into an office every day where we have a whole team of private. prosecutors who are prosecuting rape cases and serious sexual offence cases day in, day out. It's what they do.

It leaves me fearful that there are survivors who are in really dangerous situations because their confidence has diminished in criminal justice. My takeaway from all this is that pendulum swing to shift pressure from victims onto perpetrators. I think it's needed at every stage. From courtrooms to police investigations, but beyond that too, our survivors pointed to cultures of blaming or not believing victims. Are we still just living in a man's world? Where does responsibility lie?

That takes us back to the studio. Thanks for sticking around. Thank you for listening. If you want to hear the studio discussion that happened after this investigation, scroll back to find our episode with activists Gina Martin and Dr. Leila Hussain. Next week, we'll have more from our discussion with Quajjo-Twenaboa on the link between housing and immigration.

We'll also be releasing our live show recordings on three of the biggest media storms of the year, Hugh Edwards, the Titan submarine implosion, and the so-called kissing row, or assault case between Jenny Homozo and Louise Rubialis, featuring The Times as Manvina Rana and comedian Athena Kugbano. And then we'll bring you our investigative season finale. another man's freedom fighter, the fine political line between terrorism and resistance. Follow MediaStorm wherever you get your podcast so that you can get access to new episodes as soon as they drop. If you like what you hear, share this episode with someone and leave us a five-star rating and a review.

It really helps more people discover the podcast and our aim is to have as many people as possible hear these voices. You can also follow us on social media at Matilda Mal at Helena Wadia and follow the show via at MediaStorm pod. Get in touch and let us know what you'd like us to cover or who you'd like us to speak to. Media Storm is an award-winning podcast produced by Helen Awadier and Matilda Mallinson. It came from the House of the Guilty Feminist and is part of the ACOS creator network. The music is by Samfire. Follow her on social media at Sound of Samfire.