Russell Brand Petition Draws Backlash as Wife Visits Prison

The Change.org campaign, titled “Free Russell Brand,” was promoted on Thursday, November 12, with the hashtag “#FreeRussellBrand.” By November 13, it had more than 15,551 verified signatures, according to its public page. The Evening Standard reported that the post drew objections from users, including one who wrote, “We don’t free rapists.” It remains unclear who published the post while Brand is incarcerated.

Despite its title, the petition asks for access to legal advice, independent consideration of any grounds for appeal, transparency in the judicial process and accountability for substantiated procedural concerns. Its organizers describe themselves as an independent group and say the campaign is not authorized by Brand or his legal representatives. They acknowledge the seriousness of the convictions and the rights of the women involved, and say they oppose harassment or interference with witnesses and court proceedings.

According to the Mirror, Gallacher’s reported visit was her first since the sentencing. The 39-year-old shares three children with Brand and was also present at Southwark Crown Court when he was sentenced. The Blast reported that she will not be allowed private conjugal visits in the UK; visits at Wandsworth take place under supervision and require security checks. There is no evidence that Gallacher organized or endorsed the petition because her photograph appears on it.

Brand was sentenced on November 9 after a jury found him guilty of raping one woman and sexually assaulting three others in offenses committed between 2004 and 2009. He was acquitted of two other rape charges and one count of attempted indecent assault. Mr Justice Bennathan called Brand a “sexual predator” and said his status had protected him until journalists published allegations in 2023. Brand has maintained that his sexual encounters were consensual. His legal team may seek to challenge the convictions; the petition is not a formal appeal. At sentencing, women described lasting effects of the offenses, and the judge criticized Brand’s “casual arrogant disregard” for women’s right to refuse.