Russell Brand told a London court on Wednesday, October 28, that sexual misconduct allegations against him had devastated his personal and professional life, as he began giving evidence in his defence at Southwark Crown Court.
The 51-year-old British comedian and actor faces three counts of rape, three counts of sexual assault and one charge of attempted indecent assault involving six women between 1999 and 2009.
He denies all seven charges.
Brand told the jury that a 2023 documentary and accompanying newspaper investigation had caused friends and colleagues to distance themselves from him.
The documentary contained allegations from women, while the court previously heard that all six complainants involved in the trial approached detectives after its broadcast and related reporting.
Asked by defence barrister Ian Winter KC about the impact of losing friends and professional relationships, Brand described the experience as devastating.
He acknowledged that he had been unable to persuade friends or acquaintances who might support his defence to appear in court.
Brand also claimed that publicity surrounding the allegations prevented him from staying with his son at London's Great Ormond Street hospital while the child underwent open-heart surgery.
He said hospital staff had cited publicly available material when explaining the restriction to him and his wife, Laura.
During questioning, Brand repeatedly denied committing the alleged offences, answering each charge directly before the jury.
He also emphasised the importance of consent in sexual relationships.
Winter questioned Brand about an allegation involving a woman he met at the Labour Party conference in Bournemouth in 1999.
Brand acknowledged meeting the complainant but denied raping her.
The defence also examined allegations involving another woman at a London party in 2004.
Brand recalled meeting the woman and entering a toilet with her but denied grabbing her breasts, forcing her into the toilet or committing the alleged sexual offence.
He described the behaviour alleged against him as both criminal and vulgar, rejecting suggestions that he had acted in that manner.
The proceedings, now in their third week, continue at Southwark Crown Court.