Complaints made about Russell Brand’s behaviour while he worked on numerous Channel 4 programmes “were not escalated or adequately addressed at the time”, an investigation has found.
The comedian, 49, was accused of rape, assault and emotional abuse following a joint investigation by Channel 4’s Dispatches programme, The Times and The Sunday Times last year.
Brand has strongly denied all accusations about his conduct, which allegedly took place at the height of his fame between 2006 and 2013.
Banijay UK, which bought Endemol, the company commissioned by Channel 4 to produce Big Brother spin-off shows EFourum, Big Brother’s Big Mouth, Kings of Comedy and Big Brother’s Celebrity Hijack, which Brand worked on between 2004 to 2006 and in 2008, launched the probe in September.
It said: “The investigating team undertook extensive interviews with current and former Endemol/Banijay employees and reviewed all relevant emails, correspondence, and documentation available over the course of 385 hours of the investigation.”
A summary of the investigation, carried out by law firm Lewis Silkin, has concluded that no formal complaints were ever raised regarding Brand’s behaviour on the programmes he worked on for Endemol between 2004 and 2006, and in 2008.
However, it did add: “There is evidence of informal complaints regarding Russel Brand’s behaviour (in relation to asking runners to get audience phone numbers and female staff feeling uncomfortable around him) to more senior members of staff, but these were not escalated or adequately addressed at the time.”
The investigating team also found Brand was engaged to work on shows “at a time when he was known by Endemol and Channel 4 to be a recovering drug addict with a reputation for being ‘edgy'”.
“No safeguards were put in place to protect Brand, those who worked with him, or those who otherwise came into contact with him (such as the audience),” it added.
Patrick Holland, chief executive of Banijay UK, said that although Endemol did have support and escalation procedures in place during the period in question, they were clearly not understood – nor adhered to – to the degree we would expect today.
Mr Holland apologised to individuals affected by the situation and those who felt unable to speak out or that their voice was “not properly heard” when they did.
He added that the company now has more robust UK and group-wide processes.
He said: “In the years since these alleged incidents, there has been extensive change at the organisation. Duty of care and safeguarding protocols before, during and after our productions have been prioritised across the business and on all productions.”
Additional reporting by PA.