J.K. Rowling has taken aim at women publicly defending Russell Brand since his conviction, and cited one of Britain's most notorious killers to make her point. 'I don't want to shame any particular woman here,' she wrote on X on 6 November, 'but publicly announcing that the #RussellBrand conviction must be wrong because you went home with him and he didn't rape you makes about as much sense as saying "well, I left 25 Cromwell Street alive, so Fred West's innocent."'
Brand was convicted at Southwark Crown Court on 5 November, of one count of rape and three of sexual assault against four women, for offences committed between 2004 and 2009. He was acquitted of two further rape charges and one of attempted indecent assault. The women are entitled to lifelong anonymity. He denied the allegations, pleaded not guilty, and was remanded in custody after the verdict, with the judge telling him a custodial sentence of some length would follow. He is due to be sentenced on 9 November.
I don't want to shame any particular woman here, but publicly announcing that the #RussellBrand conviction must be wrong because you went home with him and he didn't rape you makes about as much sense as saying 'well, I left 25 Cromwell Street alive, so Fred West's innocent.'
— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) November 5, 2026
The Woman She Did Not Name
Three women have publicly defended him. His wife, Laura Gallacher, told the court he was kind and a wonderful father, and US commentator Megyn Kelly said on air that she did not believe the charges. Rowling's complaint was narrower, and only one of them had made an argument along those lines.
She named nobody, but the comedian Samantha Pressdee had already stepped forward. Pressdee wrote in 2023 that she refused to sleep with Brand at his London flat in 2006, but that he did not pressure her when she said no and showed no anger afterward, leaving her comfortable enough to stay the night.
She responded directly to Rowling. 'Just because I am a woman doesn't mean I should believe all women,' she wrote, adding that she would sooner believe women who went to the police than ones who went to the press decades later, and questioning whether Brand got a fair trial. When the allegations surfaced in 2023, Daniel Sloss said women had been warning one another about Brand for years, and London Hughes said there was not a comedian in the country unaware of his behaviour.
Pressdee's other objection had nothing to do with the case. Rowling, she said, could have spoken up when Pressdee herself was 'cancelled for speaking against gender ideology', and she asked whether the sisterhood only supports women who sign up to the whole ideology.
Where the Argument Went
Much of the discussion then moved beyond Brand. Beneath one widely shared post about Rowling's comments, one reply had nothing to do with Brand. 'This applies to trans women too, J.K.,' it read. 'They can exist and live their own experience without diminishing yours. Just saying.' Readers split over whether that was fair game or a deflection, and the thread ran on from there.
Some readers who stayed on the original point backed her. 'A real woman on women's side,' one wrote. 'She is right about everything. Straight up,' said another. One reader seemed baffled that women were defending him.
Rowling's actual claim was narrow, and it was about evidence rather than character: that one woman's safe evening proves nothing about another woman's night. By Monday, much of the discussion had moved on.
