# The case for the defence of Russell Brand’s barrister

- URL: https://talkfuse.com/story/the-case-for-the-defence-of-russell-brands-barrister/
- Published: 2026-11-13T06:30:00+00:00
- Updated: 2026-11-13T07:22:22+00:00
- Original publisher: City AM (publisher lean: Right)
- Original article: https://www.cityam.com/the-case-for-the-defence-of-russell-brands-barrister/
- Topics: Business

## Key points

- Brand’s barrister faced criticism after the conviction and sentencing.
- The article defends robust advocacy as part of a fair trial.
- Cross-examination remains subject to safeguards for complainants.

## Summary

Russell Brand’s barrister Ian Winter KC has faced criticism over his conduct and courtroom tactics, but legal commentator Luke Gittos argues that a defence lawyer should not be condemned simply for vigorously testing the prosecution’s case. Brand was convicted of rape and three sexual assaults, then sentenced to ten years and six months in prison.

Gittos says Winter was entitled to challenge whether extensive pre-trial publicity threatened a fair trial and to put allegations of dishonesty to witnesses where they formed part of Brand’s defence. He also stresses that this duty has limits: complainants must not be humiliated, and cross-examination must follow rules designed to prevent abusive questioning and rape myths. The argument is that the right to a robust defence applies even when a defendant is famous, unpopular or convicted.

---
Summarised by TalkFuse (https://talkfuse.com/). Quote the original publisher for the reporting and link this page for the summary and discussion.