Though the headline suggests that the “promiscuous life” statement and the charge reduction were related, the article says otherwise:

After a delay in court, the judge told the jury there was “insufficient evidence” to support the original charge and that they should find Brand not guilty of this particular allegation.

And it’s a good thing: promiscuity has nothing to do with consent. You can be the world’s sluttiest slut and get consent every time. In fact, that’s the only way to be the world’s sluttist slut and not be a rapist.

At London’s Southwark Crown Court, the actor, presenter and comedian (St. Trinian’s, Forgetting Sarah Marshall) was initially accused of three counts of rape, three charges of sexual assault and one allegation of indecent assault, with six women alleging offenses dating from 1999 to 2009. He denies all of the charges, which The Hollywood Reporter has looked at in depth, as they were presented by prosecutor Riel Karmy-Jones in the trial’s first week.

But on Tuesday afternoon, Justice Bennathan reduced the indecent assault charge to attempted indecent assault. After a delay in court, the judge told the jury there was “insufficient evidence” to support the original charge and that they should find Brand not guilty of this particular allegation. The charge relates to a claim from one complainant who said, while she was working at MTV with Brand in 2001, he grabbed her by the arm and attempted to drag her into a nearby toilet.

Very interesting that the headline focused on this single charge being reduced when the other 3 counts of rape and 3 charges of sexual assault remain.

Hollywood Reporter continuing to protect predators.