A woman accusing Russell Brand of raping her at his London home in 2009 told police she later confronted him in a text exchange, saying he had treated her 'like an animal'. Jurors at Southwark Crown Court heard her account in video-recorded police interviews before she gave evidence and faced cross-examination on 21 October 2026.
Brand, 51, has pleaded not guilty to seven charges involving six women: three counts of rape, three of sexual assault and one of indecent assault. The charges concern alleged incidents between 1999 and 2009. He denies engaging in non-consensual sexual activity.
Woman Describes Encounter at Hampstead Home
The complainant was 21 at the time of the alleged incident. She said she met Brand after a performance at the Hammersmith Apollo in 2009 and engaged in consensual sexual activity with him backstage. She said he took her telephone number and invited her to his Hampstead home several days later.
She told police she went to the house expecting to have sex. After arriving, she said Brand asked her to shower and brush her teeth. She described the encounter as initially consensual but alleged that Brand then initiated anal sex without her agreement and continued despite repeated requests to stop.
The woman said she was in pain and bled for several days after the alleged assault. She also alleged that Brand told her to clean up the mess left on the bed. The defence disputes her account of a non-consensual act.
Jurors first watched her recorded account to police. She then answered questions in court, including challenges from Brand's legal team about what she had agreed to and how she described the encounter afterwards.
Messages Recalled Months Later
The woman said she saw Brand again while working at the Edinburgh Festival about six months after the alleged incident. She recalled receiving an unexpected text from him and asking why he was contacting her.
In the account played to jurors, she recalled Brand replying: 'Because you're dirty, and I wanna push you further.' She said she answered: 'I think you pushed me far enough - you treated me like an animal.' His response, she recalled, was immediate: 'I'm sorry.'
The complainant said the message left her feeling degraded and reminded her of the alleged encounter. She described feeling 'like a piece of meat'. She said she no longer had the telephone she used at the time of the exchange.
The wording of the exchange was recounted in her police interview, rather than read from an original telephone record presented in the reporting.
Defence Questions Consent and Later Messages
Brand's barrister, Ian Winter KC, questioned the woman about her admiration for the comedian when they met and her decision to go to his home. She acknowledged that she had been a devoted fan and had expected consensual sex.
Winter put it to her that her feelings for Brand had clouded her judgement. He also asked why her later text said Brand had treated her like an animal but did not explicitly accuse him of rape. Those were questions advanced by the defence, not findings made by the court.
The defence argues that the sexual activity was consensual; the complainant denies consenting to the act at the centre of the allegation. She said: 'I did not consent to what happened to me, I have said that repeatedly in the questioning.'
She maintained that agreeing to one sexual act did not mean she had agreed to another. During questioning, she rejected the suggestion that she had agreed to anal sex before the encounter.
The woman said she told close friends and family about what had happened. She said her parents took her to a clinic for treatment, but she did not make a police report at the time.
Trial Continues
The jury has now heard accounts from all six complainants. The prosecution alleges that Brand committed sexual offences against them over a 10-year period; the defence contests the allegations and maintains that the encounters at issue were consensual.
Brand has formally denied each charge and has separately said he has never engaged in non-consensual sexual activity. The trial at Southwark Crown Court is continuing, with no verdict reached.
