Russell Brand's lawyer questions why victims did not 'scream more' when they were attacked as his father-in-law Bernard Gallacher accompanies him to court

Russell Brand's barrister has asked his accusers why they did not 'kick and scream' more when they were allegedly raped by the actor.Ian Winter, KC, today claimed Brand is not a 'psychopath that rapes people and thinks that is normal'.He asked jurors to consider whether it was credible that the 'highly promiscuous' 51-year-old only attacked three women over ten years when he had 'an immense amount of sex'.In his defence closing speech, Mr Winter told jurors: 'The question for you is can you possibly be sure in this case that out of the many, many women who voluntarily had sex with Mr Brand between 1999 and 2009, he raped just three of them?'He added: 'The prosecution do not have a case thesis as to why he raped these ones and none of the other ones?'Mr Winter questioned why alleged victims did not come forward during the MeToo movement in 2017, suggesting the six women only reported the attacks after the public view of Brand was 'poisoned' by Channel 4's Dispatches programme, which broadcast claims of sexual misconduct in 2023.Brand has been accused of three counts of rape, three sexual assaults and one count of attempted indecent assault, which he denies.Yesterday the comedian was accompanied to court by his wife Laura and father-in-law Bernard Gallacher, the Ryder Cup-winning golfer, in a show of support.The family sat quietly as Mr Winter told jurors they should disregard Brand's accusers because they didn't scream, kick, slap him or accuse him of rape. The comedian was accompanied to court by his wife Laura and father-in-law Bernard Gallacher, the Ryder Cup-winning golfer, in a show of support Russell Brand, accompanied by his wife Laura Brand, leaves Southwark Crown Court during the fourth week of his trial on charges of three counts of rape, three counts of sexual assault and one count of attempted indecent assault 'Not one person made a complaint of rape to him. There does not seem to be a credible reason why not,' he told jurors.'Not one of them resisted or screamed or even tried to leave.'Mr Winter dismissed the account of one woman who claims she was dragged into the toilets of a bar in 2004, asking why a woman 'raped in the mouth' 'did not slap him in the face' after Brand leapt on a toilet seat and grabbed her head.The barrister also questioned why a 21-year-old fan allegedly raped in 2009 by the then 33-year-old star 'didn't just roll over and kick out'.Mr Winter said there was a 'problem' with the account of the first alleged rape victim who invited Brand to her room for a cup of tea after meeting him at a theatre show in 1999, mistakenly thinking he was gay and did not pose a threat.'There is a real problem with her having invited him back to her bedroom. She invited a stranger back to her bedroom. She fancied him. He is highly fanciable,' he said.Mr Winter suggested the 28-year-old was not a 'naive and wilting flower' and Brand, then 24, was merely unsuccessful in pleasing her, adding: 'No person who has been raped can say their rapist was not trying to please them much.'The lawyer went on to advise jurors that it was 'inexplicable' that a fourth woman allegedly groped at a radio station in 2005 kept silent, adding: 'How is it remotely possible that in all the years of this incredible fame, his marriage to Katy Perry, that you never mentioned he jumped on you like a maniac behind the bins?' The family sat quietly as Mr Winter told jurors they should disregard Brand's accusers because they didn't scream, kick, slap him or accuse him of rapeDuring their evidence alleged victims have described how 'normal' Brand seemed after the alleged attacks, but Mr Winter said: 'It's impossible for you to be raped and for you to think it is normal.'He told jurors: 'There is no evidence that he is a psychopath that rapes people and thinks that is normal. He obviously genuinely believed that they were consenting because that's the only thing that would explain why his behaviour was normal.'He suggested his client may have been a 'crazy idiot' and treated women 'unkindly', leaving them with a phone number or email address shortly after sex.But he said Brand was only looking for 'approbation and adoration'.'Rapists do not leave their email address,' Mr Winter said.'A rapist does not seek to exchange a phone number with a victim.'More than 30 times Mr Winter claimed the Dispatches programme had 'poisoned the well' of justice in Brand's case, suggesting that the victims had consented to Brand's advances, but the programme had 'corrupted' their views.He said jurors should acquit Brand adding: 'Living a highly promiscuous life is entirely lawful, however morally distasteful you may find it.'The trial continues.