Prince William and Duchess Kate were in Borneo, and are now in the Solomon Islands. We don’t have the photos… yet. I’m sure we’ll get some of them tomorrow or in the next few days. It doesn’t really matter at this point because Will and Kate’s Epic Asian Tour (which will end on Tuesday or Wednesday, I believe) has been completely overshadowed by Duchess Boob-gate, or The Boob and Crumpet Scandal Of 2012. As we heard on Friday, William and the Palace are really going to go after the paparazzo who snapped the photos and the publications using the photos. The list is growing too – The Irish Daily Star has now published the photos, and the Italian magazine Chi is planning an even larger pictorial. The editor of Chi claims that “not even a call from the Queen” would stop him from publishing some of the 200 PHOTOS they have of Will and Kate frolicking in France.
As for the continuing legal maneuvers, it seems that the royal family’s lawyers will seek an injunction against Chi magazine AND Closer magazine, the original French mag that published the photos (Closer’s editor claims to have lots more). Closer and Chi are owned by the same company, which is owned by Silvio Berlusconi. The royal family will also be seeking damages, which is a bit rich in my opinion. But not as rich as this – William is said to be telling aides that he wants the photographer put in jail. For real.
Prince William has vowed to see the people responsible for taking topless pictures of his wife Kate Middleton put behind bars. The heir to the throne has even told his confidantes that he is willing to give evidence in court to help seek justice for the future Queen.
Britain’s Sunday Mirror reports that William will not just pursue Closer magazine in the French civil courts but will also pursue criminal action.
“I want them jailed,” William told pals, even as the Italian magazine Chi prepares publication of a 26-page special on Sunday showing more intimate pictures of Kate.
The royal couple is currently in the middle of a nine-day Far East tour to commemorate the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee.
“They will take any action they can within the law to seek redress,” William’s spokesman said. “They’ve been clear that they will not allow this to intrude on their enjoyment of the tour, or more importantly their work on behalf of the Queen.
“The couple always felt very strongly about privacy and harassment. It’s part of a very long-standing and heartfelt position by the Duke and Prince Harry, given their past, to do everything they can to protect themselves.”
You know what? ENOUGH. Enough to William and enough to Kate. The commenter reaction to this story has been mixed, and I have been paying attention, trying to gauge my own reaction and aiming to give William and Kate the benefit of the doubt. But really… I think William and Kate and the royal family have been overreacting to this whole thing from the start. First they overreacted in their initial statements, comparing Kate’s boob photos to the death of Princess Diana. I’m sorry, but it’s not the same on any level. Next, they’re going to court and seeking all of these legal actions and they want damages? For boob photos that we’ve now established were taken on yet another of Will and Kate’s endless holidays? For photos that might have been taken on a public road, out in the open, while Will and Kate cavorted openly? And now William – in what I can only imagine is a royal hissy fit of epic proportions – is telling people he wants the paparazzo in jail? All of this is a good example of how to sour the public’s goodwill – by overreacting and demanding special treatment at all times.
And of course this is all becoming a larger discussion about who gets special treatment and the place of modern royalty in the world and whether any of us really have a free press. The editor of the Irish Daily Star, Mike O’Kane, said upon publishing the photos: “The Duchess would be no different to any other celeb pics we would get in, for example Rihanna or Lady Gaga. She’s not the future queen of Ireland so really the only place this is causing fury seems to be in the UK, and they are very very tasteful pictures.” Do you see that? Equating a duchess to random celebrities? That’s very distasteful to the British people, apparently. And once again, I feel like a gauche, First-Amendment-adoring American for wondering just how and why there is all of this (literal) breast-beating.
Photos courtesy of WENN.
Give me a break. You are both idiots. Your mother, father, whole family are/were not innocent angels. This family loves to use press for their dirty games and then pretends that their hands are clean.
Yes, they use the press. Then then what happens? The Irish Daily Star is being closed down with a loss of 70-80 jobs because they chose to publish the photos and the group that owns the paper has thus ended the partnership. The Irish economy is in a terrible state, with record levels of unemployment and those who lost their jobs will have a hard time finding a new one in order to put food on the table. 70-8o talented and skilled people will now be on the dole que because one editor’s questionable decision and the group’s owner’s entirely disproportionate reaction. Tits indeed.
No, it is not due to “one editor’s questionable decision”. It is due to the unearned POWER of the monarchy. Willy can throw a hissy fit that devastates people’s lives. Get a clue.
The paper is a gutter tabloid, although I sympathise with people who may lose their jobs, particularly when the publisher boss who’s threatening to shut down the paper is a Mr. Desmond, who:
“scored a breakthrough in 1983 by persuading Bob Guccione to award him the licence to publish Penthouse magazine in Britain. Desmond persuaded Menzies and WH Smith to sell his expanding range of magazines. Overnight, he became one of Britain’s biggest porn publishers and the provider of hugely profitable sex chatlines”. Give me a break.
I think its great the Irish publish the photos. Its like a double ‘F You’ to the monarchy. Agree with Mike, they are celebrities. Worse. They are leeching off the british taxpayers. Gaga &co. at least pay their own bills.
Willie’s just using the press intrusion/Diana card because him and the missus were caught sneaking out of Britain for another vacation. So now nobody’s paying attention to the fact they were supposed to be busy preparing for the Asia trip and couldn’t do any further Olympic ambassador duties.
Over the next while the public will drop the bare boob thing and start asking other questions. Like who called the press because it sure looks like Kate Middleton is posing for the cameras.
This is not about boobs people. It’s about PRIVACY. If she were on a public beach it would be different. She was in a private setting. I’m sure William and Kate could care less what people think of their vacation schedule. All people deserve to have their private time remain so.
IMHO I think he has every right to be upset. They are topless photos of his wife. Lets pretend for one moment they are normal people minding their own business on vacation. What husband suddenly wants to see his wife’s boobs on the web. I would fully expect my husband to go OTT. I also think that suing for damages is just a way to hurt the publications, not gain any money.
Muzzle the world, Prince Willie-Sue for your wife’s stupidity. The tax-payers can pay for the cover-up, they always do.
oh please, jail?
look, they should have known better
i’m sorry but going topless is classless
“i’m sorry but going topless is classless”
Going topless in public may be classless to some, and not to others. It’s all down to how narrow minded you are.
However, going topless in private with just your husband there, is not classless, no matter how narrow minded you are.
The only narrow mind is one that cannot accept another’s opinion as just as valid as theirs.
I, too, think it’s classless to go semi-naked IN FRONT of security/servants/peons/underlings. And decadent.
if she were topless in private, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
She was topless outside on a balcony within camera-shot of a public road.
Although it is much more common to go topless on European beaches, the fact of the matter is – this is not Tammy Tourist on a sandy beach, this is the future queen of England that decided to go topless. And, as a future queen she should have been paranoid about possible pics – if she was not concerned about long-lens-toting paparazzi then she should have wondered about anyone of the, surely dozens, of staff inside the chateau snapping a pic.
I don’t care if she or anybody else goes topless, it’s just boobs. In addition to art, internet and other media I also can see a pair of those just by looking down on me, so nothing special there.
But what I care about is the hypocricy of those who cry for jail after they deside to show them off. If you are a person of interest but don’t want pictures of your exposed breast to be taken, don’t let them bounce freely in the wind! If you deside to go nude, well shut the f*uck up! Easy.
Personally, I don’t mind the Duchess going topless. She’s attractive and has nothing we haven’t seen before.
But knowing the brouhaha that follows everywhere she goes, she should know better. She needs to understand that she’s under public scrutiny 24/7. She has lost her privacy, for better or worse.
If she wants to sunbathe topless she should just build a wall of sheets or something around the area where she’s going to be. Problem solved.
Sometimes these royals seem so dense.
Sorry, this must be a cultural thing. Going topless in many places Europe is very common, and certainly not considered classless. From what I’ve seen so far, they were alone on a balcony sunbathing, so I’m not surprised Kate took her top off. I do, however, agree that they both should have been more careful since they KNOW they’re being hunted by the paps. Totally not appreciating that comparison with Princess Diana, but it does show they’re aware they’re being watched all the time, no?
I think the royal hissy fit may have more to do with the fact there are supposedly photos of them actually having sex while they were out there in the open. I suppose they think that if they kick up enough of a fuss, the tabs will be scared off from publishing the worst of the photos.
Personally, right up until the royal over-reaction, I had felt that this fiasco had actually made them more personable, more human. Not quite victims, but it did show that behind that wall of decorum, they’re not so unlike typical young couples who know how to have fun, enjoy being with each other and, obviously, like having sex. But with young future-king Will now using the full weight and power of the royal family to carry out his personal definition of justice, that illusion has totally been shattered.
I agree. They’re not taking any personal responsibility. If you don’t want topless/nude photos to be taken, then you shouldn’t be topless/nude anywhere near a public area. And because Kate Middleton is the future queen, she shouldn’t known someone would take her photo if she was in a compromising state to share with the world. Heck, I’m a nobody and I wouldn’t go topless in public because I know I’d be terribly upset if someone were to snap a photo whether it was for their own uh… personal use… or to distribute.
typical Americans getting into a frenzy because a woman bared her breasts… I know Americans think breasts are evil but it is very normal in Europe for women to bear breasts on the beach in public. That’s how it is over there. Really. I don’t even know how many bare chests I’ve seen on the countless beaches in France and Spain. Kate was in private and I can understand why William feels the press has violated his wife. He is very protective of her–some of you may think he is overreacting but to him, this is just the beginning of the paparazzi pushing their limits. He does not want to lose his wife like he lost his mother.
Coming from his perspective, if the paparazzi are willing to hunt them down on some remote estate, they will be just as willing and be reckless and cause some sort of accident. William is afraid the paparazzi will only get more aggressive–which is what ultimately led to Diana’s death. Think about it.
Again with the Americans. We have nothing to do with this. We are not posting these things left and right. We don’t have access to Closer and Chi. We’ve never even heard of them.
I think you Europeans should get off your high horses. You are the ones who took, sold and published the photos. You are the ones William wants to send to jail not us. You are the ones with lunatic royal families, not us.
If you would keep dragging us into this we would appreciate it because it’s not our thing. I doubt Willie could have a hissy fit and stop the First Amendment here. He should thank his lucky stars we don’t have them. The pap could sue William for defamation and emotional suffering with that jail threat.
I’m allergic to Willy and his privilege. It’s a great day to be an American!
Seems to be the Brits getting into a frenzy over it… Many Americans are saying, “What’s the big deal?” Certainly noting that shutting down publications, lawsuits, and threats of jailing seem a bit disproportionate.
completely agree Zen, so tired of hearing these “typical American” comments..
Sorry, it’s not the Americans getting into a frenzy over this. We have First Amendment rights here and no ties to royalty, so the uproar isn’t coming from us. The only thing that raised my hackles this morning was reading your typically stick-up-the-butt British comment.
“Going topless is classless”? Oh give me a break!!! Do you have any cultural sensibility? That depends on the culture.
I lived in three European countries, where going topless is just not a big deal. Many women do it. It is a common thing on the beach. I did it many times, because I could feel completely comfortable about it (and it is very pleasant).
The same way, when I travel the conservative Muslim countries, I cover my head as a way to show cultural respect and to mix with the locals and avoid excess of attention, even considering that I don’t agree with women covering their heads and that I am an atheist.
Well I must be totally classless as I go topless all the time at the beach and in my own pool. I actually pity people that don’t get to enjoy that simple pleasure in life. How can anyone be ashamed of breasts? The feed our babies For heaven sake.
It’s a good thing we live in a constitutional monarchy because right there….William is demonstrating that he’d rather live in a dictatorship where his word is LAW. Jail????!!!!! For some boobs!!!! Because our judicial system isn’t overworked with proper criminals.
He is simply demonstrating what an entitled with no judgement boob HE is.
No LAK, I disagree with you on this point. PW lost his mother to this rat pack and I think his anger stems from this.
she lost her life bc of a drunk driver
she was a wacko anyway
Ladies and gentleman, may we please request when observing the trolls can you please keep your arms and legs outside of the cage at all times.
I agree this stems from the fact his mother was constantly harassed by the press, she had many different problems including an eating disorder, and some of it may have stemmed from the press intusion (and the unhappy farce of a marriage she was in.) This is why he’s leaping all over it, it must be quite a fear that the same thing that hurt his mother might hurt another person he loves. It was an invasion of privacy- they used a long lens camera to get the photos, and the two were in a private house, which as far as I’m aware was seculed. Just because there’s a road nearby doesn’t mean it’s a hotbed of activity. Even if it does why should the paparazzo be taking photos of other people in privae houses. And going topless isn’t such a big deal in Europe, especially when you’re on your own, with your husband at a private house.
@Dragon and all the people falling for the diana card…..Please go back and read up on Diana, and her use of paps, press to further her agenda. And especially that final summer. How she teased and invited the paps to her summer of fun withe the immortal words,’ i am going to show you something big! or words to that effect.
And for all the invasion of privacy people, yes there is a case for that, just as there was a case for Harry. However, you can’t legislate against lack of common sense because with a simple precautions, which would have allowed them to continue their various holidays, none of us would be privy to anyone’s nudity.
And while we are talking about privacy, the only member of the royal family with nudity posted on the internet within the last 6weeks that i am prepared to defend is Prince Philip.
BTW – The palace had full knowledge that these pictures were available a few days ahead of publishing. they were offerred around the British papers which refused to touch them. The Palace allowed these pictures to be published and now William wants to jail the paps?? He should be looking to his team who were given the chance to buy/suppress the pictures and refused saying they would wait for the published editions before deciding if the pictures were real.
This isn’t like the Harry situation where the photos were published and then the palace found out about them.
@Amelia
haha! nice one
@chloe You’re not alone. I’m not Team Diana either and Henri whatsit was drunk.
Diana was, indeed. And she didn’t deserve her destiny.However the fact is she decided – at a certain point -to use the media for her own agenda / business / purposes. She used to call paparazzi as a modern celeb. And the Royal family apparently did learn a lot from her. Now they are all celebs, pros and cons- Not to mention all the relatives who are not Royals and are benefiting from undeserved media attention(Pippa).
Anyway, we have never seen or heard anything inappropriate from Queen’s part.
It means that similar unfortunate events can be avoided, it’s just a matter of behaving in a responsible and appropriate way. BTW, I agree there is nothing wrong going topless, provided that:
– you accept that there can be someone watching, commenting and criticizing, and
– you don’t give a c…, i.e. you don’t go aroung crying, sueing, sending letters to ask not to publish the shots.
I fully agree with the article and your comment LAK. Goodwill is running thin for these 2 and William seems to wish it was a dictatorship so he could lock the paps up in the tallest, darkest tower.
William is living in a state of arrested development and has no maturity to deal with this in a proper discreet way.
I agree with the “arrested development”. Instead of getting a therapist, like all his ilk, he takes his rage out on those “beneath” him. That’s how megalomaniacs are born.
LAK: Do you think this reaction is because of what has not been published yet?
yes most likely there is more stuff….and that’s what will wants to prevent leaking out…
Absolutely, and the good news seems to be that this may bring the two of them closer together since they are ‘in it’ together.
If someone took your topless pic or mine, when we were on private property and didn’t know/consent, they could go to jail for two years. That’s English law. It’s a crime, and a sexual one at that. So it’s not really asking for special treatment to want the law applied to them, too, is it?
What I don’t know is whether it’s also a crime in France, because the fact is, our legal system is irrelevant to what happens on their soil. But it wouldn’t surprise me. Voyeurism is illegal in a lot of places.
I agree, Kate. They’re not asking for special treatment. And as pampered and privileged as William no doubt is, it’s not like he’s talking about locking the paps in the Tower while the royal executioner sharpens his ax. He’s talking about pursuing it as a legal issue.
I agree, Kate. They were on private property, and the road that they were “in clear view of” was ****a half mile away****.
In my opinion, if the pics couldn’t be gotten with your average smart phone camera, if you in fact require a camera lens the size of a bazooka ;> to get the shots, then it moves into the realm of voyeurism/spying/invasion of privacy.
There isn’t even any gossip value to the pics. They are a young married couple in love. With each other, even. And they are behaving very normally in the way many married couples do, on private property. Where’s the gossip?
Prince William wants a dictatorship? Based on what proof?
A husband is angry that someone snapped pictures of his wife topless. They have every right to be angry, and pursue any legal action they so choose.
Look up the meaning of the word “dictator”. To compare the Prince’s anger over this scandal, to the behavior of Hitler, Stalin, or other dictators is absurd.
@Andy – I have lived in a dictatorship, so I know what I am talking about. Hitler and Stalin have nothing on the current Dictatorships. You are the ignorant onebecause you don’t know what you are talking about.when you can be jailed and tortured just for your thoughts, let alone your actions, then come back to me and discuss dictatorships. I live in a democracy now, and I am grateful for every single free day. William can be angry that his privacy was breached but to advocate jail is the sort of thing dictators do and in a bygone era would have lead to torture and Worse and is going on right now in countries around the world. I don’t have to look to history.
cosign.
I love people who attack those w/ opposing views by calling them ignorant.
It is a giant leap to call Prince William a dictator-in-the-making period. A “source” close to the Prince claims he wants them jailed. If they broke trespassing and privacy laws in France, then they deserve to be punished. The laws protect everyone including royalty. William is not wanting someone to be punished for speaking against him or the royal family, but for taking nude pictures of his wife.
I think it is a lesson that if they want to sunbath nude then they better find a more private place. They are not the first to have this happen to them and won’t be the last. I agree that they are making it a bigger story. Sue the people you feel you need to sue then STFU and let your legal team do their job. Problem is anyone that wanted to see the pictures can for free. So talking about having the fools arrested just makes those that were not interested.. interested
I saw a few of the pics. And the thing that I noticed was the affection between them. Something we don’t usually see. Not interested in seeing Kate’s boobs. I have my own..lol
I’m with you on the affection front, they seemed a lot less rigid they usually are in public. The occasional hand holding session wouldn’t kill, would it?
“More private”? They were on private property in a secluded area…
More private? How much more private can they get? It was a *secluded* 600 acre property! Kate did nothing wrong.
Eh i remember way back when there were nude photos of Brad Pitt and Goopy taken in their private home….they sued they won and you can still find the pictures with a google search. But imagine if there really is a sex photo I mean really how embarassing.
They were successful because the photographer was clearly trespassing. They had to climb a large fence. They were breaking the law before they even started taking the photos.
But what’s the difference between climbing a high fence and trespassing verses using a supped up, extended long lens from 300+ feet?? You can’t deny that there was a serious breech in privacy and or trespassing, but PC actions seem too much…unless there’s more to the photos.
No one jumped any fences, the papz were on the road nearby. Why can’t William face the truth that it was a stupid move by Kate to take her top and bottom down while out in public.
And why is the future Queen taking her g-dmn top and bottoms off outside anyway? I can see her but cr-ck.
Someone else posted this link. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2202895/Kate-Middleton-topless-photos-Closer-Royals-confirm-legal-action-French-magazine.html
As you can see, the house was not nearby.
Honestly, I try to imagine myself in this situation and I would be very, very upset. I think what bothers me about the whole “they’re just boobs” thing is the assumption that everyone has (or should have) the same laissez-faire attitude towards nudity. The Closer editor’s comments were really annoying an obnoxious in that regard. WHY should everyone have the same boundaries and the same sense of (or lack of) decency? Some people don’t give care if pictures of their private parts or in intimate poses are posted all over the internet, and some people DO. And for those that do, it’s probably a really traumatizing experience.
I don’t think William and Kate are out of bounds for pursuing legal action. The media can choose not to make a big deal out of it, but it’s not like these two are acting entitled for being angry about this.
I would be upset as well. And you know what? That’s why I would not sunbathe topless. It’s that easy. If we start talking about nudity, decency, and boundaries, we’ll have to ignore the reality of today’s press.
People may not like the tabloids publishing absolutely everything these days but to demand that they respect someone’s privacy is … well, it’s a nice thought but it’s not going to happen. So if you’re a public figure and you want your cake and eat it too (meaning go topless but have nobody look), you’ll have to risk stuff like this happening.
And of course they’re acting entitled. They want and need the press there when they do these tours and have their wedding and generally try to make the British monarchy look good. But they also want to decide where the line is. In what world are they living? The press is not their personal PR tool.
They should have taken this thing in stride and brushed it off. But no, they rather act like taking photos of someone lying around topless should be punished with jail.
If the paparazzo was trespassing, fine. But if he didn’t do anything illegal, get the hell over it. It’s not pleasant but it happened. Deal with it.
Well of course they should have known better, but we really don’t know the details of the situation. Like what the property was like, etc. They could have had a good reason to assume it was fine. So they and their security messed up BIG time. So what? It really doesn’t justify this. I mean it’s not like she was prancing around on a public beach for god’s sake, it was a private property and she assumed it was private. That assumption may have been stupid but its not disingenuous and fame-whory.
Perhaps instead of ignoring the ‘reality of today’s press’, or even worse accepting it, someone needs to say enough is enough?
Like the poster below argued, they took photos of her bare breasts and published them without her consent. That shouldn’t happen to anybody, movie star, princess or you and me.
Why shouldn’t they be held accountable? Why is talk of jailing them so obscene? Why is the law so lax? Just because it’s no big deal to some from a distance, doesn’t mean they’d be too pleased if it happened to them.
I didn’t say she is acting famewhore-y, I don’t think she is. At all. What I was saying was that while this is unfortunate and people may want the press to have some standards and even morals, they don’t. Everyone and their grandmother knows this and I would think nobody knows it better than the British Royals. So unless something illegal occurred (it may have, who knows), give it a rest. Because throwing tantrums is not going to help you or make the public more sympathetic. The public is fickle when it comes to the monarchy and Kate especially.
Some people feel bad for her, some don’t. And no jailing of paparazzi will convince those who don’t feel bad for her that they should. So what is the point here? Do they think suing anyone will prevent things like this from happening in the future? It won’t. All they can do is move on and maybe not get naked outside from now on. That might be a bummer for her tan but I think she can deal with tan lines.
Nothing “justifies” this but again, we’re talking about the tabloids. Nothing justifies having tabloids in the first place then. I’m just saying there’s a difference between tasteless behavior and criminal acts. If it was criminal, go after the guy. Otherwise ….. well, sorry, sh*t happens. Especially if you sometimes need the press and then want them to respect your privacy whenever you feel like it. Doesn’t work like that.
1. The circumstances surrounding the private photos taken at the chateau were different in nature to those taken of Prince Harry at Las Vegas.
2. In a private setting where privacy is expected and taken for granted, behaviour in private should not be subject to public considerations.
3. This is especially so when the chateau is deep in the countryside and the quality (bad) of the photos show the obvious intent of photographer to peep and spy in on the private activities of the Cambridges using high-powered telephoto lenses.
4. Regardless of who the subject is, the actions of the photographer himself/herself is criminal in nature. Specifically, non-consensual voyeurism became a criminal offense in the UK in 2004.
5. Not sure about common law in France but should this law, or its equivalent, exist, editors of Closer magazine will also be subject to criminal trial for abetting criminal activities. Of course this depends on how the proceedings are brought against them by the royal family,
5. Considering the victim of the offence, should the photographer be given a heavier sentence? I cant say for sure. What I feel, however, is that the paparazzi, such as the photographers and his/her associates, are devoid of morals and live off celebrities by feeding on their public and private lives.
6. Whatever Prince William’s motivations are for possibly commencing criminal proceedings on the offending party(ies) are out of the question. Similarly, whatever Princess Catherine did to deserve this/(or not) is out of the question. This extends to members of the royal family, because
7. The most important question here is whether this act of non-consensual voyeurism is morally or legally right.
8. God bless the UK and God bless the Queen.
@ Adam
1) Yes. And?
2) + 3) That’s really a matter of opinion.
4) This didn’t happen in the UK so I’m not sure why the legal situation of the UK matters here.
5) There were two fives so this is in response to the heavier sentence. Um, no. Why in the world should she be treated differently than any other woman? Because she’s a princess? That really does not send a good message to every other woman out there. And yes, paparazzi are part of a whole machine that is based on questionable morals but … you’re reading a gossip blog. If you’ve ever bought a gossip rag or perused the blogs, you’re part of that.
7) That’s the ONLY question and we should probably leave the moral question out of it because again, this is a gossip blog. Anyone who’s incensed by this “appalling” and “outrageous” behavior needs to take a look around.
8 ) I’m not from the UK so I’ll leave that to you. 🙂
@ adam
Regarding #5 – ARE YOU KIDDING? What century is this? Honestly, I had to check my calendar.
The sentence should not ever be dependent on the social standing of the victim. Waity or Miss Brown down the street – same crime, same sentence.
Recent events have proved me right. I guess there’s no need for further explanations.
Apply this to both Harry and Kate:
If you don’t want nude pictures of yourself taken, don’t go nude in public!
But Harry did not threw a fit . Harry may act foolish at times but to be able to stand up and laugh at himself make him more mature than the Cambridges
You can’t compare Harry and Kate’s situations at all. They are extremely different circumstances.
In my mind, there is no difference between what this pap did and a peeping Tom taking pictures from outside their window.
Agreed!!
agreed.
a poster yesterday said something like – take away the title and the tiara and she is a woman whose body was photographed without her consent and then it was published.
It’s her body. Regardless of who she is, where she was, NO ONE has the right to take pictures of anyone’s bare breasts and publish them.
absolutely. there is nothing anyone can say that would convince me that this wasn’t wrong and a total invasion of privacy.
Finally Intelligence!!!
This was a disgusting invasion of privacy, and to attempt to equate what this paparazzo did to “exercising his constitutional first amendment rights” is just plain stupid.
Soooo do not agree they are public figures & should expect this why not take a yacht far into the ocean where there are no paparazzi & then sunbathe nude??? They were just stupid about where they did this.
The photographers are French. The magazines are French, Italian, and Irish. They do not have First Amendment rights. Any debate on that is purely academic. They have there own national laws.
This says it would be hard for her to prosecute the photographer without know his name and where the photos were taken and proof he was trespassing (which it doesn’t look like they were) but French law does allow for privacy violations to be handled both criminally and civilly.
http://www.digitalspy.com/media/interviews/a406093/kate-middleton-topless-pictures-legal-qa.html
Where the photos were taken from:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2202895/Kate-Middleton-topless-photos-Closer-Royals-confirm-legal-action-French-magazine.html
Logical thinking here, I totally agree.
Right!
Peeping tom’s ok? I posted yesterday about my BF who caught a pervy peeping tom masturbating right outside her aprt window, looking right at her. And no, he was actually on the driveway of the other apartment.
So…if he took photos/published is that OK?
My sis n’ i were sunbathing (swimsuits) at a secluded Greek beach…I caught some perv wanking in the bushes behind us. Now, if I knew he had a camera or not, and he published them…
is that OK? (woops, public Greek beach so yes, but…what if it was our private beach…?)
so if PICS of YOU going potty at the local McDonalds gets published, is that OK???
This. To me it is the same thing as a peeping tom taking pictures of a normal from a public street? Through your open window? Well it was visible from the road it’s all public. In your backyard with your kids? Visible from the road so it’s all good. It’s not a double standard-it’s the same one that I think any of us would expect. To be safe in our home or the home of a relative.
I do think the jail thing is just William reacting like a normal husband. I know my husband and he’d say the same thing. Plus it’s illegal for photographers to take pictures of celebrities/normals in a private residence without their consent-so I’m sure there is some kind of legal precedent out there.
Agreed.
I’m just amazed by how many people are trying to blame the victim in this case by saying she should have known better. Why shouldn’t the pap have known better?
I just can’t believe people are actually supporting a peeping tom. It’s sick if you think about it.
Waity is a victim of her own ego and indifference to social and public royal norms and to reality. It’s very simple. Keep your top on. And don’t go half-naked in front of the help either. I don’t think she cares, either, in keeping with the first sentence.
Waity thinks no rules apply to her unless Willy says so.
@Hmmm…. are you *serious*???
If you or I were to take photos of a neighbor sunbathing topless/naked in his/her yard (let alone use a camera, with a high powered lens the size of your arm!) we’d be arrested for invasion of privacy as well as being placed on the registered sex offenders list!
Personally, I think your absurd hatred of Kate is coloring your statement.
Let’s put it this way: if it were YOU in those pics, being photographed in YOUR HOME, WITHOUT YOUR PERMISSION, you’d be phoning the cops screaming bloody murder.
MoxyLady, totally agree. I’m a modest person. I don’t even feel comfortable wearing skin tight, revealing clothing so there’s no way in hell I’d be OK with someone posting nude or topless pics of my, whether I was a celeb or not. I really feel for Kate. If this guy didn’t have the title “Paparazzi” and she wasn’t a celeb, this would be illegal. How many stories are there of peepers getting jailed for taking pics up women’s skirts? Lots. This is no different.
Publish any pics of celebs you want, but don’t publish something like this without their consent. I really hope they can stop them from being published. Shame on those pervert paps.
Agree! This was a clear invasion of Kate’s privacy. There are perverts running around taking pictures up women’s skirts on public transport and on the street. Are these women in public? Yes. But does that mean they deserve to be violated like this? No. Saying Kate has no expectation of privacy because there was a road near by is like saying women who wear skirts in public get what they deserve.
Except that in your example Kaity would be the one who would lift up her skirt and wouldn´t wear panties, because the paparazzi was not magicaly stiking his lenses under her top – she was the one who decided to go topless.
Does she deserve to be treated with respect? Yes. Should she expect people to not notice? No.
And why do we boob-shaming anyway? Boobs are awesome!
Agreed!
NINA- exactly. This is NOT an issue of First Amendment Rights for the paps. First Amendment rights are freedom of speech to express yourself through passive/silent speech and expression. What the paps did in taking and publishing pictures of a naked woman sunbathing has nothing to do with the photographers freedom to express himself. It would be the same scenario if someone was sunbathing in their backyard and they happened to be visible to a photographer. Would it be ok for the photographer to sell the pics to Hugh Hefnor to then publish in Playboy magazine as an expression of his “first amendment rights”??? Absolutely not.
The first amendment argument is nonsensical and ignorant.
There’s a difference between “freedom of the press” and taking pictures of someone in the privacy of their own home or friends home and then publishing them. If someone did that to me and posted it on facebook I would be giving all hell. No matter the public position you should NOT be able to invade a person’s privacy in that way and use the age old excuse of “they should know better”. Please. Use a real argument and not a personal opinion to back up your statement at least.
The reasonable expectation of privacy- in my mind- is the same.
I think they’re going completely over the top now. Remember Tampongate? They didn’t try and jail anyone there, and personally I think a phone call is infinitely more intimate than photos taken from a distance.
Sit down, William and Waity. You may be rightly pissed off and sure, go ahead and sue, but it doesn’t mean you have the right to demand someone be thrown in jail.
Oh pleeeazzz….he’s only drawing attention to the “scandal” by suing
Right? And it feels like a defensive move. It’s like they’re ashamed of the behavior. So, either they should apologize to their subjects for their shameful behavior – or they should just shrug their shoulders, say “we did nothing wrong and the paps are too sleazy to acknowledge” and MOVE ON.
This was an extreme invasion of privacy and totally disgusts me. The paps are sleazy and will do anything to get a shot but the magazines also have no integrity as well. I dont think the lawsuit is a defensive action I think it’s totally justified.
I completely agree with all the legal proceedings the royals are taking. This was a complete and total breach of privacy. So what if royal couple should be ‘working more’ according to some people? That’s not a logical argument for the pictures, because paparazzi didn’t take/publish these pics to expose the ‘lavish’ lifestyle of the royals, they took these pics b/c Kate was naked and there’s good $$ in that. Moreover, like other posters, I don’t think the royals are asking for special treatment at all. I’d sue the crap out of someone if they did that to me or my family, and I’m a peasant :).
Couldn’t agree with you more. All the major television outlet are calling it an extreme invasion of privacy. That must have been some telephoto lens. It was interesting to learn above that a celebrity couple has already won a case similar to this. If they want to sue let them. They’ll want to protect their children from this type of invasion also. That said nobody thinks any less of her for it.
I think maybe William is so sensitive about this because he saw what the paparazzi’s pursuit of his mother led to – her death, which was also in France. So I can almost understand why he’s adamant on making life very unpleasant for the paps if they try to do the same thing to his wife.
Totally agree Cindy – I don’t give a crap if they’re the royal family or not, that’s not the point here. The point is that the paps are wayyyyyy too intrusive with any kind of celebrity. They’re paid ridiculous sums of money and will go to any lengths to invade people’s private lives with no thought of the humiliation they cause. Anyone would be upset by having naked photos taken without their knowledge or permission spread all over the world, not just famous people.
let’s not be naive…diana engaged in a very dangerous game with the paps. unfortunately, it ended in tragedy.
also, if i knew i was on the pap’s radar, and then made the decision to go out on my balcony topless, i certainly would not be surprised if my pic was published. i would not then have the nerve to sue and claim the photographer should be jailed!
ridiculous.
william needs to put his efforts into real issues, not pics of his wife’s boobs.
agree & I have to believe he has a deep hatred for the paps for how his moms life ended. this may seem a small non story to many but to him it’s personal
William’s anger is understandable. Diana was his mother. He loves his mother. This whole thing has brought reminders of that home to him and his reaction is not logical. How could it be? She was his mother and Kate is his wife. I’m not going to give him any shade for it.
Agreed that Willy is entitled to his feelings and to his reaction. He is not entitled to invoke Diana’s name at every turn when situations are not comparable. Nor is he entitled to take out his own unresolved feelings, his rage, on everyone around him which is what he does. He possesses immense POWER- that is scary.
He’s hiding behind the skirts of his dead mother instead of owning an iota of his own crap. Like his LIE to the Paralympic committee and hence, all the competing athletes.
Hmmmm: He deserves to be ridden over the coals for lying about working, I definitely agree about that.
I stand by what I said, though. He lost his mother when he was 15, and lived through all her dramas. So, no, I am not surprised that this has really got him going. And you can’t argue with raw emotion. There’s no logic to it.
@bluhare,
I’m not disagreeing with you about Willy’s psychological issues. But they don’t excuse his behaviour, especially since he wields enormous power. There’s nothing worse than a rageaholic and a bully not matter what their social status or childhood issues.
Wills for sure has issues, but I’m pretty sure that if this had happened to me, my boyfriend would be having the exact same reaction (and his mom is totally alive and well).
From a PR standpoint, I don’t know that suing or pushing for jail time is the “right” move, but I certainly understand why they want to go that route and I think that from a reasonable expectations standpoint they are well within their rights. I do think these two are generally a pair of spoiled, immature, and lazy brats, but this is still a pretty shitty thing to have happen and I do hope they’re successful.
If the RF just ignored this, it would go away. Those pictures are not very titillating. No one, even commoners, can have an expectation of total privacy any more because cameras are everywhere at all times. So, either there was nothing wrong with what the duchess did (and there really wasn’t) and they should just take the attitude that the low brow papparazzi aren’t worth their time – OR if they feel there was something wrong with her behavior given that duchesses are held to a different standard, then they need to deal directly with her and stop carpet bombing the media with their response to boobgate.
So there is nothing to blame the paparazzo for, right?
He’s just a force of nature, not a person with motivation and ability to take responsibility, right? If there is anyone to blame it is, of course, HER.
You are right, there is no need to make an attempt to stop this kind of a behavior. We, as a society, must accept it as a norm and just move on.
Ugh.
@ Jae – I suspect you didn’t read my post. I, myself, was not putting blame on anyone – but instead attempting to logically deconstruct the RF’s approach, which is making this a bigger news story than it would otherwise be. If they don’t feel the duchess did anything wrong, they should express their support for her and be done with it. Going after the papparazzi in the media only makes their photos more valuable.
@bettyrose
I did read your post.
You’ve offered two options – either
1) pretending there is no issue with the paparazzo’s actions, because they should be ‘above it’ – and would you give the same advice to a woman, say, being verbally harassed on the street or in her workplace by the sexually-charged comments? To be ‘above it’?
or 2) if they think that there is something wrong with her, to deal with the issue without getting into a fight with the media.
Both of those options leave the paparazzo out, let him get out of this and send a message that doing stuff like this is totally okay and the only thing to consider when you decide whether to invade someone’s privacy like that is how much money can you get out of it. That this is acceptable. That the most harm that can come to the person doing it is a simple lack of attention.
The ‘don’t dignify them with your attention’ approach doesn’t work. It doesn’t work when it comes to bullying, it doesn’t work when it comes to harassment, it doesn’t work here.
It is shifting the responsibility to the victim and it is basically saying ‘let them do whatever they want, let them have their fun, hopefully the will soon get bored with you’.
Uh, yes, Jae, when a woman is harassed on the street, her best course of action is to not entertain the idiots. That’s what they’re looking for. A response. This is not in any way the same issue as workplace harassment. I speak from years of experience living macho cultures in which I was harassed daily. Only minimally employed uneducated men were involved in this behavior, so I did consider it unworthy of response. There’s no law against it, and so long as it doesn’t get threatening, there was no point in acknowledging it.
How about a woman, whose underskirt picture is snapped by a cameraphone?
Would you tell her to be above it too? Not to get the police involved and just wear pants next time she’ll be out in the street?
Plus, the thing is, that, apparently THERE IS a law against such a behavior in France. Should the Royals give up their legal right to be protected from such an invasion of privacy because they are famous?
Thing is though, he can’t ask them to face criminal charges unless what they did is a crime. If it is a crime, then it isn’t asking for special treatment, because anyone could ask that charges be brought in a similar situation.
I have no idea whether this story is true, and if he is asking for this, but if so then what the pap did must be criminal. And it’s a crime in England as well, taking shots of someone on private land in a “private situation” without their knowledge and consent. It’s a sexual crime, actually. You can be jailed for a couple of years if you do it.
I do see what you’re getting at – the fuss is making it more media worthy. But I get the feeling he’s trying to play it so nobody in future will do similar. Jail plus a fine will mean the photos aren’t worth it. He’s probably trying to play the long game here, and in a situation where he expects his family to be famous till they die, I can understand that.
@bettyrose I understand ignoring someone on the street who is harassing you but would your methodology change if you knew that they were also making money from harassing you?
After having more time to think about it, I guess what bugs me is not that I wouldn’t 1,000 percent support a private citizen for pursuing legal action in this case, but that the RF should *know better* than to handle it in such a way that it becomes a media circus. Surely they are well practiced in more discreet handlings of these matters. Thus, this feels insincere to me.
The fact that they were in a private home is what makes it so egregious, I think. The expectation of privacy is much higher, and I think they are reacting appropriately. No matter who you are it is a gross invasion.
I don’t blame William for reacting so strongly – his opinions on this type of thing are so shaped by his mother’s death. I admire him for his stance, to protect his wife.
the royals SUCK when it comes to public relations.
william fighting a fight that he can never win is just going to leave a bad taste in the public’s mouth.
i had high hopes for william a number of years ago. unfortunately, the image he is creating for himself is one of a resentful, temperamental, over privileged, man-child.
The Irish Daily Star might be closing over this. Which completely sucks because over 100 people (including friends of mine) are now going to be out of a job, because the co-owner of the company that runs the paper is English and is being all self-righteous about it.
Yeah its crap the pictures were taken….but they’re out there now. It’s a complete overreaction. Nobody in Ireland even cares about her boobs. The story here now is that some d-bag is closing the paper and losing those people their jobs. If they want to fire the editor…fine…but everyone just needs to CALM DOWN.
Sorry to hear that. Sounds like a bunch of bluster tbqh. Unless it’s specifically written in the contract, Northern & Shell would have a hard time censoring what is & what isn’t featured in the paper. Even pulling out of the venture will probably cost N&S more than just stating their opposition to the photos & letting it go.
I have no problem with what William plans to do. It is against the law in that country and from what I have read, the distance from the road to the house was so great it was reasonable for them to believe they had privacy.
If you want to ridicule them because they aren’t experts on photographic equipment that makes it possible for those kind of shots from that distance, then go ahead, but they paid for their lack of knowledge by having their privacy invaded.
Unless of course, the pap didn’t take it from the road but had a closer position he or she will never admit to because it would be a criminal charge.
The Irish editor who compared the photos to that of pop culture entertainers is an idiot. It is not the same by any stretch of the imagination.
The Slimy Woman from the French magazine issues an obviously veiled blackmail threat to William and Kate by revealing she has even more intimate photos of them. She would never publish them, she says. Oh no, she would never do that. Right.
She wouldn’t do it via her own magazine, but what do you want to bet they could show up somewhere else in the world and she says they were stolen.
My personal opinion is that I think William decided he had to take a stand, especially after hearing what Slimy Woman at the French magazine had to say. He recognized blackmail when he heard it and he wasn’t going to let it go by.
No matter the outcome, I think he is doing the right thing and I hope he wins.
William’s threat had the opposite effect because the Italian paper is planning a 20 page, 50 picture special edition. This is why they should have heeded the woman’s threat and left things alone.
The photographer, a woman, has admitted she stood off the road, under the trees and snapped away. And Radar is hinting Kate got butt naked.
Of course they or someone on their staff should know the exact range that pictures can be shot from. Like someone at the Daily Mail pointed out, if photographs can be taken from a distance, people can also be taken out from that distance. More care needs to be exhibited by the royals and their security.
Also, both of them need to realize who they are and what is expected of them. The price they pay for their endless special treatments, luxuries and vacations is that photos of them will always be sought after. If they don’t like this, William needs to abdicate. I didn’t see Harry throwing a royal fit over his shots.
Zimmer, I agree about the security issue, security seems to have failed Harry and William and Kate.
However, your argument that they should expect to have their photos taken in exchange for their privileged life only is valid to a certain point. I am sure they expect to be pursued by photographers for the rest of their lives and pursued relentlessly. William and Harry are both veterans of this kind of pursuit. But, just because it is possible to get those kind of photos doesn’t mean it is OK to do so and it doesn’t meant it is OK to then make money off the embarrassment of someone else who hasn’t done anything to deserve it. You could say since they live pampered lives and live off the dime of GB, then so sad, too bad, who cares. Well, William cares and he could say the same thing about the vultures who take and publish these kind of pictures to line their pockets. Yes, people want to see them, but the vultures wouldn’t care what people want to see unless there was money in it. So, William and Kate may live off the people of GB, but other people live off of them and therefore millions more get to gawk and invade their privacy.
Harry had only himself to worry about and I think that made a big difference in the reactions between him and William.
I also think William most likely wouldn’t be talking about suing anybody and just let this whole thing die down as soon as possible if it were not for the Slimy Woman from the French magazine insinuating blackmail. That put a whole different aspect to the situation.
Saying he could abdicate if he didn’t like it is a good suggestion, except I don’t think William is that fragile. Just because he doesn’t like it doesn’t mean he feels he has no right to fight it. He obviously feels a line has been crossed and he will do what he can to see it doesn’t happen again.
@JAne – go look at the life of JFK jr.
He was pursued relentlessly and daily all his life in much the same way as Diana. They are the only two people in the world who knew what that was like. He understood that he was a target, and he accepted and lived his life with the paps with grace. Never giving them opportunities like this. Diana wanted him to talk to William about how to live your life with pap/media interest but sadly died before they ever met.
William has always been protected by press bans on reporting on his life, and it has made him careless. or thoughtless especially now he has brought another person to the party in the form of Kate.
The palace were given a chance to supress these photos before they were printed and refused to do so saying they wanted to see the printed editions. That speaks to gross negligence on the part of his team/Palace and all this is trying to put the genie back in the bottle. Or maybe he was relying on the usual protocols that have protected his privacy in the past. Unfortunately for him, he/Palace miscalculated, photos were bought by the French/Italians who have no such qualms and voila!
It does suck that people may lose their jobs, but that is because the paper chose to print those pictures. They knew there would be recupercusions of some sort but still decided to do it.
It amazes me that so many people are blaming Kate and William. They were in a private residence. Pictures were taken without their permission or knowledge. If they don’t take a stand and try change things, this will continue. Look at the press who chase stars, driving wildly all to get a photo that they can sell for a ridiculous money and we can all giggle or gasp at. People get hurt in the process. I am tired of people saying hey, that’s how gossip works or it all their own fault. How did we end up so unfeeling, mean, and critical as a people?
I’m not blaming Will and Kate….I love them!
I am blaming the idiot guy from the parent company who thinks closing down the paper is going to get him a knighthood or something.
My mates who work in the sports section haven’t done anything. Neither have 99% of the other journos there.
It’s so unfair that all those people have to lose their jobs because of some misguided attempt to climb into the Queens ass.
That totally sucks, but don’t blame William. Blame the paper’s ownership.
@LAK – Obviously you do not live in the USA. John Kennedy Jr. did not live gracefully with the media. There are countless pictures here in the U.S. that attest to the fact that he hated the whole paparazzi situation, but apparently those photographs have not been published in Great Britain. I do not for a moment ever blame him (John Kennedy) for being enraged by the whole media circus around him but, that said, he was not one who dealt with it particularly well and should not be a person to be held up as an example for William and Kate to follow. And then after he began publishing his magazine, I believe it was called “George,” John Kennedy courted the media quite actively. His magazine was on it’s last breath when he died and the magazine folded soon after. And no, I am not some sort of stalker type; the only reason I remember all this is because it occured when when my children were young and they would do their homework at the table while I cooked dinner and watched CNN which was full of all this stuff at the time.
@Another K – I do remember the CNN coverage. The Enquirer and other such publications was sustained by pictures of JFK jr. It was covered in Great Britain as much as it was covered in USA. He was pursued as much as Diana. Initially she had it better than him because she had the protection on the royal family. Afer that went away, the paps were able to get at her just like him. Do you remember when they published his exam results? Did he sue or ask those publishers to be jailed? He had more than enough intrusion to pursue numerous publications but he never did. William,unlike JFK jr, has the protection of the royal family and for most of his life a press ban on reporting on his activities. JFK jr gave an interview once about it in which he said he hated all the attention but he understood that people were interested because of his parents and that he would always be a target. By living with grace I mean that he didn’t throw a tantrum everytime a picture or rude headline was put out about him. You could clearly see that he was angry and annoyed in pictures/news items sometimes BUT he really tried to live under the radar despite the attention which is why new information about him is always surprising given ho much of a glare he lived under. He always tried to minimise pap situations, not just for himself but also his companions. And Diana wanted to meet him to discuss how he managed it because as I said in my post, he was the only other person in the world who knew what it was like to live in that spotlight without protection and managed it gracefully.
BTW – I am ashamed to say that I did contribute to his harrassment because I loved to hear about him, and bought as many publications or watched the news reports unashamedly.
I agree with a commentor above – what the pap did was no different then a peeping Tom taking a picture through their window. It’s not like they were on a public beach. It’s a married couple in private. Also, the magazine claimed that had even more intimate photos and that the royals are lucky she isn’t having those published, which almost sounds like a threat. I think William is more concerned that other photos that show much more than the royal boobs will be released if he doesn’t take action now.
Yup. I read that as a threat too. Back off or we’ll embarrass you even more
Boobs for all lol. I don’t think they will win this. Dude took pictures from miles away on a public road. She needs to keep her clothes on outside then.
And I see William has joined the hairclub for men. Getting plugs put in.
I’m torn on this one. On the one hand, I don’t think ANYONE on this blog would want their privacy invaded like this. It was an intimate moment with her huband. On the other hand, they are one of the most famous couples in the world. No matter how much privacy they think they have, they need to be CAREFUL about what they do if they don’t want something like this to happen.
Call me crazy, but a small part of me thinks this might have been done on purpose. We all know how scheming and conniving Kate can be. And from everything I’ve read about the location of where these photos were taken, it was near an OPEN ROAD where they were visible from the street. They should have known (given their history as they so blatantly stated) better, right???
In yesterday’s post about them, a commenter linked a picture that supposedly showed the “open road” and its position relative to the house. If that pic is accurate, then the paparazzo and the newspapers who published those pictures should definitely be sued. We aren’t talking about a regular house’s distance from the street. The house looked more like a dot. It looked like it was at least half a mile from that “open road.”
I saw that too on Nightline. I can’t imagine how the photographer got that picture. Never in a million years would they have expected a picture like that could be taken.
If it was a secluded spot, then I agree that the pap who took the photo should be punished. I do still think though that they should have been way more careful (and in no way am I saying it was like she was asking to be raped, as some commenters are saying below). No woman should have her body violated this way BUT they are constantly stalked by the paparazzi as it is – when you want the job as future queen as much as she has shown, as terrible as it is, you have to be more careful about these kinds of things.
I agree with you. Someone on their staff could easily do something like this for the right offer. The two of them should never do something outside of a closed building that they wouldn’t do in front of the Queen or their parents. I don’t understand why so many royals seem to caught in these positions.
This is how I see it:
1. PTSD – William, death of mother
2. Media PR stunt for Kate hardsell
3. $
Combo of all three if William really, honestly wants paps in jail.
Use common sense: the royals know 24/7 they have no privacy indoors (ie- they have their private rooms sweeped for bugs on a regular basis), (plus they know the have footmen or other staff willing to sell out) or out.
A few thoughts
1) I see the pap behavior with Kate is starting to follow the PATTERN it did with Diana. So the analogy is not necessarily an overreaction
2) the argument “she shouldn’t have taken her top off” is too similar to the rape excuse “she shouldn’t have worn a short skirt” for my liking. Both are violations of privacy and consent, both are taking ownership from the violator and putting it in the violated.
3) private property, remote location = reasonable expectation of privacy. Being a public figure doesn’t mean they give up all expectation of privacy.
Taking the pictures as done is really no diffeerent than if the person physically broke in to do so. Because the result is a sellable property, I’d classify it much more closely to break and enter (which is a jailable offense) than simple trespassing. I think Will has a point under that logic.
I’m a huge constitutional supporter, but even the first amendment doesn’t include committing break and enter to obtain the material to publish.
I totally agree with the points you make, and I also see the similarity between “She’s the duchess…she should have KNOWN BETTER” and the “her skirt was too short, she should have known better” rape justification. Also agree with the earlier poster who said that the photographer is essentially a peeping tom. I also don’t understand people who keep saying, “She was out in public, she should have kept her top on.” Do people not read the articles on this issue???? She was on a secluded, private estate. She expected privacy. It’s not as if she was prancing around topless on a hotel balcony or skinny dipping on a public beach. Total violation of privacy.
I think this reveals the hopelessly sheltered and embarrassingly privileged life prince bald spot the 3rd has led. He actually believes someone can be imprisoned for taking bland photos of his bland wife’s bland nipples: “Send them to the tower! Off with their heads!… What, we can’t do that anymore? If we can’t arbitrarily order people to be maimed and killed for displeasing us what possible use do we serve?”
When princess waity learned this could not be legally done, she was forced to console herself by ordering their fleet of servants to walk into walls all day until they collapsed. oh how she laughed.
I think there are some not so bland photos out there. Hence the over the top reaction.
I don’t know about France, but in England taking photos of someone “in a private situation” without their knowledge and/or consent is a crime. It’s banned under the Sexual Offences Act. You can go to prison for two years for it. You can actually be prosecuted just for looking at photos taken that way, too, if you knew or should have known the context was not consensual.
Voyeurism – being a peeping Tom – is a crime here. It isn’t asking for special treatment to seek prosecution for something that is specifically against the law, you know?
Plus I agree with prior contributor, I wouldn’t ever want Kate’s life. Horrible.
Tho, I still want to issue official application to Queen’s Privy Council if there’s a sex tape, to change title to Camebridge/Cumbridge 😉
I’m getting into photography and you’d be *surprised* how powerful some of these lenses are. Overall, I think they are overreacting. They weren’t doing anything wrong. They were in a private location. They let their guard down. I get it. Kate and Wills were not being inappropriate. We’re a progressive society. Boobs. Whatever, man. They were fine. This post-post-boob-and-crumpet hubub, however…This is NOT fine. This hubub they’re creating (people losing jobs, whatever) is ridiculous and they should chill.
“We’re a progressive society. Boobs. Whatever, man.”
I agree–boobs, whatever. But that doesn’t mean I’d want mine out there for everyone to see, without giving my consent. The problem I have with this line of thinking is that just because this is okay to one person (or perhaps to the “progressive” French media), doesn’t mean it is okay to everyone else. People have different standards of propriety…and just as there’s nothing wrong with someone feeling free to sit topless on a nude beach, there’s nothing wrong with someone NOT being okay with pictures of her boobs being plastered in the tabloids.
I don’t know how it is in France but what one professor in a law of media communications class said, in ridiculously plain speech,was that in the US you wouldn’t have to worry about a pap taking inappropriate pictures of you and posting it in a magazine for the simple reason that you are considered a “private citizen.” In other words, you have not done anything “newsworthy” that would make you interesting to the public.
Which is why you need to sign media release forms whenever you get filmed or photographed on the city streets during professional shoots. You can sue if your image is used in a manner not approved by you. You have not done anything newsworthy, so your image and any rights to use that image is protected by law.
However, once you DO do something newsworthy that thrusts you into the public eye, you are officially considered within the public domain and anything and everything you do is in the “public interest” and newsworthy. At that point, since society as a whole now lives in the digital age, the only reasonable expectation of privacy is that which finds you away from the eyes of others.
In other words: If daylight and anyone else can see you, you’re fair game.
And since Kate was in full view or SERVANTS and other HOUSEHOLD STAFF, she is basically fair game there too – because there is the possibility of hidden cameras and staff taking unapproved photos as well. Now, those images wouldn’t be able to be used for commercial financial gain (posters, keychains, etc), but since tabloids are considered News Organizations (Yellow Journalism to be exact), they can use the editorial images as they see fit.
@ ataylor – in the US maybe, but the law is different in France
The guy’s in the jungles of Borneo and he somehow tells pals that he wants the photagraphers jailed. I don’t doubt that he is angry, but I do doubt pretty much every detail in this story.
All that being said, any laws that we have about privacy are because people have taken action in the past. Good luck to the royal family in their legal pursuit – they may not win this one, but I hope that their actions, combined with those of others, helps further define privacy, intusion etc.
Absolutely agree on both points.
I don´t understand the boobs histeria, yes she has boobs as all (or almoust all) woman on the earth. but if thay was making stuff like brad and gwyneth outside the bedroom -it is embarrassing.
http://tofangsazan-the.blogspot.se/2009/08/see-more-funny-videos-and-funny.html
I bet Fergie, Eugenie, and Beatrice are having a good laugh right now.
The new royal protocol should be that the royal with the most recent photos of their privates in the tabs has to bow and curtsey to the others.
The queen needs to tell them to shut up and keep their gd clothes on. The paps are scum and that’s not going to change so deal with it. Then she should exile them to a year of living with lepers so they can get a taste of what real problems are.
I nominate you for Queen.
I actually *do* understand why she and he are so upset. Who wants photos of their boobs shown everywhere?
With that in mind, she should never sunbathe topless. Period. No exceptions.
It reminds me of when I used to drop off my kids at school without bothering to put on a bra. Unfortunately, I never expected to end up with a flat tire that left me bouncing around the parking lot looking for a ride. Lesson learned.
It seems like the people who are willing to excuse the paparazzo behavior and blame Kate are the same kind of people who make excuses for rapists. This woman’s privacy was violated and her body is now being put out on display for the (mostly) male gaze without her consent or knowledge. That is an INCREDIBLY violating act and anyone who attempts to make light of it is a bit sick.
You sound just like Kristen Stewart who equated the paparazzi with being raped. It was a dumb analogy then & it’s a dumb analogy now.
No one is making excuses for the paparazzo. What they we are saying is as a public figure Kate is going to have to employ some common sense in these situations and not drop her bra/bikini top where there is a possibility someone out to make a buck off her is going to be. Same as Harry. While there was an expectation of privacy, there was also an expectation that as a young celebrity, he wouldn’t drop trough around a bunch of strangers with cellphones.
I think bringing up rape is an effective way of stopping a conversation dead in its tracks because no one wants to see himself allied with such cruel violence. It’s easier to move on to another topic than it is to explain why you’re not a rape sympathizer or a sexist who loves to see victims punished even more or hesitate to be branded as a lady who doth protest too much. This isn’t like a rape because it wasn’t a rape, it was a tacky invasion and those involved will have to adapt accordingly. All that violates is not rape and all recognition of the difference doesn’t put a person in league with the oppressor.
I want to marry Jo Mama Besser. I love you, girl.
jo mama! Incredibly well said! *applause*
@JoMama,
Yes, yes and YES! The ubiquitous rape argument is like an offshoot of Godwin’s Law.
Wow. Thanks!
+1 and x1000
I haven’t heard Kate speak ill about the photos. I do hear William throwing a hissy fit over it.
And the violent, terrifying, and very physical act of rape is far from a woman that knows the cameras are always there taking her top off infront of not just her husband, but possibly staff.
She wasn’t physically violated and I doubt she’ll have ptsd over this.
She’s already flashed everything except her breasts and she never seemed to blush about it.
I’m a little all over the board on this comment, but it strikes up a lot of emotion.
i think you should go have a conversation with a woman who has actually been raped and tell her that you think her experience is similar to kate’s.
her reaction should be enough for you to never make this ludicrous comparison again.
Yes, THIS!
I love you Jackie O. And Jo ‘Mama’ Besser too up there.
Y’all need to stop with the rape analogies now.
Exactly. I was too mad at that asinine analogy to even respond. Thank you Jackie O & Jo Mama.
This is quite possibly the most disgusting reply I’ve read in awhile.
Making a comparison between this silly incident involving two immature grown-ups versus a rape incident.
Why dont you try telling a rape victim that her situation was exactly like Kate’s?? see if you get slapped.
And shame on the people like Shannon who support this ludicrous comment.
Kaiser- I agree with you completely. Public opinion will turn against these two. I believe it was a set up by someone upset that they bailed on the closing ceremonies and wanted to show the world exactly what they were up to!
karma is a bitch is the message sent to Will and Kate!
I think this was an invasion of privacy, and it appears that William may be more upset than Kate for reasons that do go back to his mother’s death and how he views the circumstances of her death.
It’s possible the RF is making such a big deal by suing in order to ensure no publication of much more intimate pictures rumored to have been taken….?
Sorry but I am with the Royals on this one. William grew up believing that this is the same kind of paparazzi behavior that was responsible for his mother’s death. There are deep feelings associated with this and I for one understand his angry desire to protect his wife from a different fate. I am all for freedom of speech and expression but that is not what this is about. It’s a nasty invasion of privacy for which the pap should be punished.
I for one hope they utilize all their legal remedies, including crimimal options.
For me the violation of privacy is the key issue. I don’t care if they were on holiday #100. That still does not give people, paps or otherwise, the right to violate the sanctity of a private perimeter with a high powered photo lens. There has to be a line drawn to what is acceptable and appropriate behaviour that is applied to all.
Again, I challenge everyone, including you Kaiser, to think of this by putting yourself in Kate and Will’s position. Is okay for someone to stand on the edge of your property and peer past clear barricades (the barricade in this case was the shear distance from the street) to watch you in what is clearly a private repose with your spouse/family/etc?
It’s not okay. Yet, people are trying to say this is an overreaction. I fundamentally disagree because it was a clear violation of their privacy. The RF is responding like any normal person would in this situation.
Those pics were taken in France? Doesn’t that shoot holes in Halle Berry’s reason to alienate Nahla from her father..oops I mean move to a safer environment. just wondering
Sorry, she should have known better than to take off her top where she could be seen, even at a distance, from a public road.
And if she is prepared to turn a blind eye to it, which apparently she is, why does he care? She’s the future queen and either she loves the attention or really couldn’t care less who sees her tatas.
And if William came out and said,” Ehh, they’re just my wife’s boobs. Anyone could take a picture of them, no big deal,” there would be a huge uproar about him not defending and protecting his wife properly.
Agreed. Any gentleman would do the same for his wife or girlfriend.
But he tacitly did that, didn’t he? It’s okay with him that she prance semi-naked in front of the staff.
It’s an unpleasant fact of life for persons of public interest that cameras are everywhere. So the worst thing is that you can’t sunbathe topless anymore. There are way, way, way worse things to contend with in one’s life than the prospect of never being able to expose one’s nips to the sun. Shut up & keep those royal nips covered, and you won’t have nip scandals anymore. Ta-da!
Part of me suspects that Duchess Dude or the Palace engineered this, anyway; something doesn’t smell right about the couple’s displays of affection as evidenced in the photographs – which of course I perused, to see what all the royal yelling was about. (Hint: People become curious when other people start making a fuss.) In public, William’s body language screams that he wishes Duchess Dude would go away & leave him alone. I don’t buy that in public he feels uncomfortable with all the attention from other people, but that in private he is warm & affectionate. He just strikes me as very cold and unfeeling; there’s definitely something off with him, in my book. The logic would go as follows: Duchess Dude & Balding Bill have been losing public support. Pap photos of them looking warm & fuzzy together surface, and suddenly it looks as though the couple has been violated! Oh noes! Public support surges. The integrity of Duchess Dude’s nips is sacrificed, but we’ve already seen her pubes, so what does it matter?
Yes, I’m likely unpopular in this conjecture, but I am oh-so-tired of Balding Bill riding the wave of popularity engendered by his charismatic mother. He’s 30 and he sips from the chalice of kings. Besides, weirder things than engineering a nip scandal (if this is, indeed, what happened) have transpired in the British royal family.
-Coming from the perspective of one who doesn’t believe breasts should be censored, anyway.
Crybaby. William needs to get a REAL life and concern himself with things that matter. He’s a spoiled, officious, egomaniacal wastrel. He is a lowlife and deserves no better. Sow what you reap, you waste of space.
How about that LIE that you couldn’t make it to the Paralympics when you were actually getting naked in France? Let’s focus on that, because that is what really matters!
And comparing your plight to that of your poor dead mother??? How low can you sink.
Feh. I wish the Dolittles would just go away. I want to see the downfall of the monarchy which is as corrupt as any mafia family. And to attempt to wield their power in this manner? I hope the tabs publish all the skeevy pix.
Amen!! He’s over reacting big-time. As someone said in an earlier comment, the pap’s behaviour is tasteless, but not criminal. Comparing this act to what happened to Diana makes no sense. No one caused physical harm to Kate or put her life at risk. Holy cr*p, get a grip baldy.
The expression is “reap what you sow,” FWIW. And I totally agree with you.
@charlie,
Yeah, I know that. I think people got the drift even from my mindless error.
WOW, this is really what monarchs have done for generations. Dictatorship and Ruling all others who do not obey their orders!!
William’s rule is this “To all media and journalists: Please take beautiful pictures of us at any time without any restriction, as long as these pictures show us classy, with moral, working hard for poor people and have no doubt that we are worthy of being king and queen (despite the fact that the future queen loves showing boobs to the mother nature). However, don’t you dare taking any incriminating photos of us, otherwise you go to jail. (now about those sexy photos that exist, I am just trying to impregnate our lovely future queen — we are just trying different locations and are hoping mother nature will be nice to our efforts).
Who cares if William testifies in court — his word is worthless anyway. He lied to the public about having to return to “work” at the air force and then ditched the Paralympics to go on yet another undeserved vacation. So if we know he’s a liar when it’s convenient for him, to protect his image from his own laziness, what good is his word or testimony?
To me, he’s proven his word is worthless. Lazy, useless, spoiled, self-entitled rich boy. The faux outrage is overkill. Maybe he should be sued by the Paralympics, for he violated their goodwill just as much.
It was so blatant, wasn’t it? An outright LIE to an organisation to which the Dolittles were supposedly committed. He LIED and now gets away with it. That’s the real story. Let’s talk about his lying.
This is the bigger story. William’s entitlement, laziness, and being a liar.
It’s disgraceful how he operates and even worse that he’s 2nd to the throne.
I’m interested to see how his time with the RAF will end also and if he can handle being a full time royal.
And also i keep forgetting to add that the palace was informed of the pictures a few days ahead of publication but decided to do nothing about it saying they wanted to see what the PUBLISHED edition looked like.
These photos were offered to the British Press first, which means the Palace would have known about them and suppressed them.
They chose NOT to, and allowed the pictures to be printed and downloaded on the internet for all of us to google and NOW they are crying Wolf!!!!
Talk about crying over spilt milk.
LAK, hwo come they didn’t do the same to Harry and let the Sun print the LV pics? Is there a double standard going on between the sexes? The RF hardly bat an eyelash when Harry’s scandal was going on, yet when it was Kate’s turn to have one they tumbled all over themselves to protect her.
@GoodCapon – it’s not so much sexes as heir vs spare. Kate, by virtue of being married to the heir, is protected which is why the british press didn’t touch the pictures. I speculate that the palace thought that might be honoured abroad as well as there have been occasions where that has happened. Harry as the spare doesn’t get that protection, so british press can get away with it. If this had been Harry’s WAG, they would have printed them.
Just look at the statements put out by the palace on behalf of the heir for this and the honeymoon pics. For Harry, barely aroused themselves to do more than confirm that it was him. And they allowed the legal process to become a discussion on censorship rather than pursuing a publication for breaching his privacy rights and calling for jail time.I can put money on it that the palace wouldn’t be going to these lengths if this was Harry and his WAG.
Very nicely stated, Mrs. Krabapple!
+1!
I am glad I am an American whose tax dollars do not go to support these dumbasses who want to censor their press and don’t have the smarts to keep their clothes on in public or keep out cameras in compromising situations. Between Waity, Wills and Harry there seems to be about two brain cells between their three heads. I’ll bet the Queen is embarrased about them and rightly she should be. I googled the pics of Waity’s bewbs and they are nothing special at all, just like Harry’s little junk he covered with his hands and remember when Wills little junk was exposed and was also nothing special. Maybe that is what they are really offended by, that they are nothing special to look at and people know it now. The throne should have gone to one of Fergie’s daughters who seem like decent people. Wills, Waity and Harry all seem like entitled brats.
Subscribe. Boobs didn’t look good. The holiday when they should been working doesn’t look good.
Is Will upset now….oh well….
Is this going to happen again? For sure.
Is this an invasion of privacy. Hell yes it is. It is fair? No.
But you know what. That’s the price one pays to be part of royal family.
My thoughts: someone is pissed at royal family and stuff leaks out. way too much stuff in a month….
I don’t know what the laws are in the UK, but there are plenty of states in the US where taking of nude photos without consent is punishable by jail.
Perhaps he wants the photog charged with trespassing as well?
Since he’s looking in on a half naked woman, and if they were photographed having sex or whatever, wouldn’t this be voyeurism? Which is a crime
Good for him.
There’s a disturbing trend in this tabloid frenzied world where famous people are reduced to less than animals.
Someone invades their privacy? Oh well, they wanted to be famous so they should know they can’t ever have private moments again. Their body was exposed? Oh well they signed up for this life so frankly they should just shuttup and put it all on display for the public. They’re angry or hurt? Oh well, it’s not even like their tits are that great anyway.
Seriously? This where were heading? It’s everyone else’s fault but the guy with the camera looking to make money?
And f the editor of the magazine too with her bs explanation. She doesn’t give a damn about romance and affection, if she did tabloids would be full of regular couples holding hands in the park.
She wanted to embarrass and give a middle finger to the royal family. She wanted the fame and the money and now thanks to her actions people’s jobs are on the line. Honestly I hope William pushes it as far as he can. There’s a limit Kaiser. Are we gonna start telling celebs to ‘get over it’ when there’s cameras who can pick them out undressing from miles away?
This, exactly.
Excellent! In total agreement.
Well said!
That’s not something new.
Zac Efron’s bare butt was photographed:
http://ohnotheydidnt.livejournal.com/68066801.html
Scroll down the page to see where the photographer was located and how far he was when taking the photos, as well as how advanced his photo lens must have been to take said photos from that distance.
There was a big body of water separating his location to Zac’s hotel. Farther than the paparazzo’s location when taking Kate’s photos in France. Yet he was able to take Zac’s photos and make it look like it was taken from 10-feet away only. The photos are good quality, no?
Where’s the outrage for Zac’s privacy being breached? He’s not the first celebrity whose privacy was breached this way. He even put up towels to make sure he was “protected”.
Britney Spears’s baby showers had paparazzi hanging from trees and climbing over fences just to photograph her and her friends. Nobody got sued and nobody was thrown in jail. Nobody was angry on her behalf, either. Not many people sympathized with her when she was having mental issues and the paparazzi wouldn’t leave her alone. The comments I saw were harsh towards Britney, not the paparazzi who couldn’t let her be.
Again, we should be outraged for everyone in this case. Not just Kate. But history will show that many people don’t care for celebrities’ privacy. But royals are special…I guess.
Some, not all of us, do care and are outraged. I think there’s a line when it comes to this gossip angle. Some of us enjoy a juicy story but don’t want any actual dirt or suffering. I’ve found most of the stories on this site that garner the most comments are the ones I avoid.
There’s this fine line where to fill a public desire (and line their own pockets) paparazzi need to get closer, more intimate, more humiliating pics and stories and it really comes down to treating people, celebs or not, like meat.
Whoa, Sachi, I think you might need an outside hobby or some other activity that has nothing to do with celebrity gossip blogs.
@Another K:
erm, and your point is?
Lots of people here apparently suffer from the dreaded Kardashian-Hilton-Lohan fatigue. These dumbasses have created that belief that celebrity of any kind totally equals all access to everything, always, and as soon as you become famous, the public is automatically entitled to your everything, always, because that is exactly what you want from the public anyway.
If a random peeping tom had taken the topless pictures of a random housewife with her in her closed backyard and him and his camera a mile away, and then those pictures were posted all over the internet, would anybody have accused the woman and her family of wanting ‘a dictatorship’ if they had taken legal action? Would anybody have said ‘well, your Facebook is full of pictures of you doing stuff, so you obviously don’t care about privacy’?
But these are the royals, so this is ‘a hissy fit’, right.
Thank you Jae. Thumbs up and +1 to this response!!!
Why is it that the argument FOR William and Kate is a comparison against Paris and Lindsay? Most people weighed against those two would come out on top.
There are simple measures that could have been taken to ensure that no photographs were available. It is what is done by most celebrities. Like PUTTING A SCREEN ALONG THE TERRACE or sunbathing inside a walled garden. leaving the terrace open like that wasn”t just a pap invitation, but also a security breach.
No one is arguing that their privacy wasn’t breached. What we are all up in arms about is the OVERREACTION to the situation. Especially when The Palace knew about these photos several days ahead of publication and chose to wait until AFTER publication to decide it was a breach of privacy. Also, one lone picture of them on that terrace made it’s way into the main stream media from a different source but with Kate’s top on. Not a word from the palace. That picture was grainier than these pictures. Why was THAT not a breach of privacy? When is it a breach? When we see her boobs rather than when we see her crotch, bottom or her strolling along in a bikini?? Is that the distinction??
Preach it!
I thought there was an earlier photo. So yeah…where was the outrage the from the Palace & PW? They were perfectly fine with this invasion of privacy when they thought that was all the pap saw.
William really needs to chill & get some therapy. If he wants a life out of the public eye with Kate, then remove himself from the line of succession.
The argument is not the comparison.
The argument is that people now have that idea of what being a celebrity means, and this idea is shaped on one side from the money-grubbing anxious to defy and defile anything and everything paparazzi and on the other side by the celebutards that have literally nothing to offer to the world except for the voyeuristic pleasure of looking at their dirty underwear or, even more often, a lack of it.
As a result ‘being famous’ now equals with ‘being ready to show it all’ or even ‘wanting to show it all’. And this perception, originating from the Kardashian-types is then magically superimposed on everyone, no matter why they are famous.
‘She should have expected that’ – why?
Because this is the norm? And why so, huh? Why are we so damn ready to accept THAT as the norm? To accept THAT as the way we treat famous people?
Nice idea with the screens. Would you advise the same to my hypothetical housewife? Would you tell the women, who get the pictures of their underskirts taken by the perverts’ cameraphones to just wear pants and not bother to call the police, ’cause that, honey, is what you should have expected when you wore a skirt out of the house?
Why the one with the top on isn’t treated as a ‘breach of privacy’? I think it is because of the kind of a reaction many people here demonstrate, not being ready to accept even the topless one as a breach of privacy. It seems that the paparazzo have committed a criminal offense, and yet there are lots of people saying that she should have prevented it and that seeking protection and retribution PROVIDED BY THE LAW is ‘a hissy fit’, and wanting to install dictatorship. And all that with her topless. Her being in a bikini? trying to stop that would probably bring out accusations of wanting to be, I dunno, gods or something. They give that right up because we make them to.
On a side note: I am truly charmed by the approach I see many people expressing here: apparently whether a paparazzo has committed a crime is determined not by the court of law, but by whether the woman he took picture of is famous. That’s like… reverse-LA. Which, to think of it, totally explains it: all these feelings people have over Lohan or Bynes channeled into this situation.
@Jae – Given the fact of peeping toms, i would advise anyone who was going to sunbathe in the nude on a terrace to put up screens. be they celebrities or ordinary housewives. The super high profile divorces of Fergie and Stephanie of Monaco may have been prevented if screens had been employed….In Fergie’s case, the paps dug a trench around the chateau which wasn’t visible at all, and lived in the trench for 3 days until they got the money shot. That was 1992.
The notion of celebutant standard being imposed on other celebrities is simply not true. The genie was let out of the bottle in the 60s if not earlier. Jackie O was papped naked, full bush front and centre on a beach on her husband’s private island in the 70s. Brad & GOOP naked in 1997. Frankly the amount of naked flesh we are seeing these days is less compared to the bad old days. That may be due to legalities or simply smarter celebrities not sitting around on an unguarded terrace with no clothes on.
JFK jr was papped every single day of his life, and was pursued as relentlessly as Diana. He took precautions so he was never caught with his pants down figuratively speaking because he was aware that he was a target, as were his dates.
The salacious nature of photographs and the lengths at which paps will go to get them is a fact borne of market demand. the subjects change but the methods remain.
And i can’t believe it has taken THIS for you or people on this board to realise just how far paps go about their business. There have been so many incidences…frankly as someone mentioned earlier, there was a point in the 80s and 90s before celeb mags like HEAT or US weekly were borne when all you got were grainy pap pics of celebrities rather than tasteful ‘at home’ interviews. The paps were a factor in Diana’s death and that didn’t halt the market for these types of pictures or how they are acquired.
Go see pictures of Elizabeth Taylor being chased by the paps in the 60s or grainy footage of her being ‘caught’ on a boat with Richard Burton thus confirming their relationship to the world.
Since this sort of thing is now the norm, with camera/video phones on top, famous people have to act with care. These two are the no 1 pap target in the world. It is/was very naive of them to assume something like this wouldn’t happen.
Or perhaps they were relying on the usual bully tactics that have cowered press into not publishing such pictures in the past and therefore not tarnishing the golden Prince.
@LAK A very thoughtful and insightful comment.
@LAK
Well, don’t know ’bout others, but I was born in the eighties in the USSR and only got internet access in the early noughties, so i was both too young and too removed from the stuff you’re talking about.
Thing is, I don’t disagree with anything you say.
Yes, this is what the paps do.
Question is, why are people so eager to label the attempts at legal recourse as ‘overreaction’? Why do we take this kind of invasive behavior as a given?
Why shouldn’t a man, who spied for a woman from afar with his super-strong lens and stalked the private location she was staying in till he got a money shot of her being topless and then, no doubt, earned a shitton of money by selling the pictures go to jail? Why shouldn’t he be legally persecuted?
What is it in his behavior that we, as a society feel needs protection from legal action?
Why do we value his ability to make money this way and the possibility to see a set of breasts higher then her being able to be topless in a private location? Would we evaluate the situation the same were she not a famous person? No, because most of us (I hope) are not interested enough in some random pair of tits to overcome the feeling of the skeeviness of the whole situation. But this particular pair of tits, apparently, belongs to us so much, that the law has to take a step back, or we start screaming about ‘royal entitlement’.
Or it might be just that we don’t like her, ’cause I remember people here questioning the ethics of Suri Cruise being photographed in much more public dance class.
That stupid hobos have to take care of themselves! If they are sunbathing naked on a balcony with view it’s their own fault. Now he’s crying because it’s easier to make other people responsible for it.
Read somewhere that the British Government (and the palace) didn’t want Fergie as ambassador for a children’s charity and they would pull the plug on their donations to the said charity if Fergie stayed on. Fergie had to withdraw. if she didn’t, the children would suffer. the organization was also forced to say they didn’t ask Fergie to be the spokesperson. Can you imagine what they will do to the common man if they don’t comply to the palace’s wishes? Clearly these two will do as they please, and all British subjects and those who want to “in” will be fed pig fodder to keep them gilded.
25 years ago it was a bi-weekly event to have a royal photographed in the buff from the waist up. I’m not suggesting anything, I just remember it.
It’s interesting reading all of the comments.
No matter where you stand on the issue of privacy, or photo content, everyone seems to be in agreement with this simple fact..
William is the one with the issue here. Kate seems indifferent. And she’s seemed indifferent every time someone has photographed her privates, or bottom.
How do you know she’s indifferent?
She SEEMS to be indifferent. She never speaks up and complains.
She never takes precautions to prevent it from happening again… like sewing magnets into thehem of a skirt.. sound familiar? The queen and Diana did it.
And she seems to often find a camera to smile into…
Her actions speak volumes. She seems indifferent. William doesn’t.
Magnets? Why would she have magnets sewn into her hems? I don’t understand that at all. How would that help? — Unless she’s got the corresponding positive or negative attractors taped to her thighs, which I highly doubt. I think you meant the small hem weights which the royals don’t untilize any longer because they proved uncomfortable and also pull on the hemline which then has to be repaired. I read this in Majesty magazine or one of those other silly magazines I spend too much money on.
I wonder why… 😉
Considering that she’s currently touring some very conservative, Muslim countries where woman are required to be covered the publication of these photos is probably really horrifying to her.
I don’t think she’s indifferent.
I couldn’t reply to the poster asking about “magnets” so I am replying here. They are not magnets that QE or Diana use(d), but dress weights to keep skirts from flying up in the wind.
The problem with William blowing this story to huge proportions, with the suing and now statements like this, is that now when they get back to Britain, Kate will be hounded like crazy for pictures to do follow-ups for her reactions. They might even try and make her cry like they did to Diana (they did this by following her and saying things like, “You’re a c*nt Diana”)
If William and the palace had just supported Kate, and not acted like it was a big deal, the story might have gotten boring and gone away already. That’s how gossip works.
Absolutely.
Interesting you use the word “blowing”. Perhaps the rest of the pictures are what the royals are really worried about.
Regardless, the formula is the same:
React to a scandal= Make it bigger
Ignore a scandal= Make it less significant
No matter what the content of the photos, William is making it way way worse by throwing a hissy fit over it. Kate seems unfazed, but is still probably appreciating William making her a big story, and the increased celebrity that will follow.
The girl is dead-set and nearly fetishizes on being the 2nd Diana, I fear.
I used to really like her but after seeing the photos not anymore ,she really is not a princess and i hope she will never be one.
Because she has boobs?!!!
Prince Harry handled his naked butt scandal so much better than Prince William and Duchess Kate are handling theirs. Even though Harry was upset and embarrassed to some extent he didn’t issue an apology nor freak out about it like his brother is doing now by suing and making other threats.
All Prince William is doing is making more of this than need be. I think this will make the Cambridge’s less likable than they already are for some since they seem to feel that they’re untouchable or should be exempt from these kinds of things happening solely because he and Kate are the second couple in line to the throne. It’s their own fault imo. Besides, they should have been attending the Paralympics events instead of going on another vacation.
And to the media and others, please stop using the Diana card, okay? I’m so sick and tired of Duchess Kate being compared to Princess Diana. There is zero comparison. Princess Diana and Kate have nothing in common IMO. Princess Diana wasn’t dubbed lazy, waity, or work shy, she didn’t slack off on the patronages she supported either. Diana was genuine in her concern for others, raising awareness to certain issues, and using her celebrity to make a change in the world. Kate has no substance what so ever and even her style is questionable.
Now there’s something nobody can argue against! Diana had style.
Yes she wore some truly terrible outfits by today’s standards, but that was the 80’s. Shoulder pads, crazy prints, colors, and loose fitting clothes. But there are some absolutely gorgeous shots both candid and staged where her style is flawless. Her smile was often genuine and she did indeed work hard.
She was no saint, but was still better in many ways to a woman who has never worked hard aside from landing a husband and title.
+1
Anaya- could not agree with you more. Harry took it on the chin, looked sheepish, hugged some kids and moved on, um, to Afganistan. Willy is going way overboard with his reaction. These paps, even though I agree that the Cambridges’ privacy was violated, will not go to jail, just because Bald Willy wants it.
Harry is no rocket scientist, but he definitely handled his scandal better.
Absolutely. I personally never liked Diana and can make a good argument why BUT She had many good qualities that no one can ever take from her and she left an outstanding legacy.
I HATE that William/Kate keep using her as the excuse for their behaviour when the only comparison that can be made is her DNA and nothing else.
I have so much more respect for Harry for not dragging his dead mother into his shenanigans or using her as the excuse to hide behind for his shortcomings.
The way these two and the press go on, you would think Diana had just the one son.
@Kaiser, How about “Button-Gate”? 😉
He lied that he couldn’t make the Paralympics closing because of ‘work’.
When he actually skipped it to go on yet another holiday.
Disgusting.
If you don’t want pics taken of your boobs, then simple, DON’T TAKE THEM OUT!
God!
Thank you.
Just a thought: there are privacy laws but obviously they are broken time and time again by people all over the world. Big Willly needs to realize that he cannot control all of the paparazzi in the world. It just might be easier to keep his wife clothed in public. After all, he’s a royal, right, so he would know all about the paps.
As it is, he has made such a big deal that everyone is searching the internet for the pics, which are terribly disappointing and one-dimensional. Just keep a stiff upper lip Will and put an extra tight knot on your wife’s bikini.
Of course both Will and Kate will need a vacay in the Carribean to deal with all their non sense. British taxpayers…pay up!
NO, Susannah, thank YOU!!! I laughed out loud at the Big Willy reference; it’s good to see someone has a fairly reasonable handle on this as well as a sense of humour. You’d think think that precious Kate was physically attacked they way they are going on.
If she was stricken with a serious illness (not wishing that on her by any means) or had been attacked, then the current reaction and sympathy are warranted. Let’s get some perspective folks.
I’m on their side. Honestly, I don’t think this should be acceptable regardless of who is photographed–but if they don’t put their foot down, it’s gonna be even more open season than it already is.
Also, saying that the child of a woman who died in a paparazzi harassment related accident is ‘overreacting’ is incredibly insensitive.
This isn’t about whether or not her breasts are a big deal. It’s about whether or not there is any reasonable expectation of privacy, or if a woman should have control over who gets to see her body.
In my mind, she should.
Wrong. She died because of a drunk driver. Let’s place blame where it really belongs. Otherwise, there would be much more pap-related accidents/deaths in existence.
People seems to forget that the pictures were taken in France, where the privacy laws are very strong : it is ILLEGAL to take and publish a picture of someone without his / her constant. Its as simple as that….
So Kate didnt “have to know better” and the pap wasnt “using his first amendement right”…
She was in a private property and it’s was her right to be topless. THIS is not illegal….
The pap had no right to take thoses pictures!
She was in France, and the French laws apply.
If they sue, they will win, trust me. The question is more about the sentencing. A judge can even forbid the mag to sell this issue (very rare, it only happened once, when a magazine published the pictures of the dead body of a french former president…).
I don’t think they’re overreacting to this at all. The pap stuff with Diana started out the same way – then look where it ended up.
The paparazzi are beyond obnoxious. Maybe W&K were naive to think they ever have privacy, but I bet from where they were sitting, they didn’t think anyone could see them.
Next time, she’ll do the “I’m taking my top off” JIG behind a screen they’ll have to have installed everywhere they go.
Or just keep her top on.
No the pap stuff with Diana started because she GAVE UP her security and wouldn’t take it back when the harrassment escalated.
Prior to that, the paps only rarely got pictures of her and usually the royal family used there clout to supress them.
Once she got rid of her security staff, plus started calling the paps herself on various documented occasions including that last summer of fun, it became open season on her.
@Hmmm – William hasn’t mentioned his mother once, it’s the commenters on this and other blogs who have, and everyone should be sorry for the loss of his mother in the prime of her life as a result of a horrific accident caused by paparrazi hounding her.
The fact remains that the paps are invading every area of the private lives of celebrities and royals. Why? Who gave them that permission? What they are doing is above and beyond the law, and yet they are hardly ever brought to justice.
Everyone, royal or celebrity, is entitled to a private life where everything they do in the assumed safety of their own homes, vacations, whatever, isn’t constantly broadcast across the world for the profit of these scurrilous publications.
Please consider to what end this violation of someone’s family life has done. You may have a grudge against celebrities or royals, but that doesn’t condone violating their privacy and humiliating them on a public stage.
This is the chicken’s way of showing hate or revenge. And it only serves to make the photogs and publishers of vulgar trash publications rich, at the expense of someone’s right to private time.
We all believe in our own right to privacy, but if yours was violated I guarantee you would be equally furious and want to have access to legal recourse.
True. The paps overstep bounds all the time. However, the DoCs pretty much know that paps will try to get their photos 100% of the time. Fair or unfair, the couple should be pro-active and take measures to prevent such mishaps. Obviously British protection is sub par so they should (a) vacation somewhere more secluded (like Wales or Scotland) or (b) stay fully clothed when outside of closed doors.
The jewels, vacations, palaces, clothes come with a price.
Diana was absolutely mentioned in the statement to the media about this kerfuffle. He is not above using Diana when it suits him.
The Palace has mentioned diana saying and i quote,’…..afraid the duchess will become a target like Diana…’
The Palace PR use the diana strategy for William’s media profile all the time which is why She is so closely associated with him rather than Harry.
He finds seemingly low key ways to invoke her, which as his son he has every right, but only to his advantage.
If he didn’t want his wife associated or tied to Diana in the public’s mind, he would have killed that conversation already.
The proof is in the pudding because the public always default that way now.
Before his wedding, Diana was fading in the public consciousness but at the engagement, with that ring and saying he wanted Kate and Diana to be tied together as the reason for giving her that ring of doom, the conversation was re-awakened.
OK, I see your point. But part of me still believes, maybe naively, that William has a painful issue about his mother’s death. He wants to defend his wife from the hounding from relentless paparazzi wolves. He knows he and his wife are targets. Agreed they shouldn’t have gone unclothed, they should have known better. But the paps are an evil, unnecessary intrusion into personal lives, and to have to give up simple pleasures like sunbathing topless because a pap might be hiding in the trees a mile way is not acceptable. I can’t imagine the paranoia I’d suffer being in that kind of spotlight.
What I’m trying to say is that the paps should be banned. They feed off the hurt and embarassment of people who don’t deserve that kind of humiliation. Why should they be paid as much or more than a nurse or doctor or someone doing good for society rather than being paid bags of money for ‘tits and bums’ photos to sell without someone’s permission?
Yes @LAK, certainly agree re your quote “ring of doom.”
Even with all the criticism or praise of Kate, the woman IMO deserved her own ring.
Now, don’t get me wrong. I understood William’s feeling re- loss of mother, however Kate needed her own ring ie- her own life, her own identity.
I also, unfortunately saw the move as a cheap, recycle bit/angle on the part of Buckingham Palace books.
Okay, I’ve never commented twice on a post except when it comes to replies but MOTHEREFF!
Everyone is entitled to their opinion and a lot of people seem to be completely outraged by this. Okay, that’s fine. I’m not but hell, opinions differ.
What I find ridiculous is the fact that so many apply different standards to Waity than to “normal” celebrities apparently. And not only that, it’s also a bit disingenuous to do this on a gossip blog. For the love of gawd, gossip as a whole lives on this and suddenly everyone is concerned about this incredible “breach of privacy”. I get it, I really do. But we’re still reading a gossip blog. This is what happens if people love gossip. So let’s all calm down and stop acting like we’re pure little angels who want to stand up for a young woman’s right to privacy while bashing that paparazzo. He has a job because of US. Not because of lax laws or sleazy tabloids. It’s us.
True, BUT I draw the line at nude pictures that were NOT “approved” by the person in question, period. gossip is one thing, but nude pictures are another. If for example Lindsay Lohan wants to strut her stuff in public on a french beach, that’s fair game, she’s a public figure out in PUBLIC, but when the royals are in PRIVATE that’s were the line is crossed, get it?
http://ohnotheydidnt.livejournal.com/68066801.html
where do you draw the line here?
The money shot is further down. And you get to see how far the pap was in order to get it.
or is it OK to only show celebrities nude but royals crosses a line??
What about the nudes of Brad Pitt & GOOP taken inside their own cottage. Why is that not criminal or invasion of privacy but Kate is??
i don’t want to post that link but google to see. In both these cases, these people are not sitting out by an unguarded terrace showing their naughty bits. They are in the privacy of their own homes. But no one is screaming about breaching their privacy.
The thing is you don’t get to draw the line. Neither do I. All we have are laws, which are applied to everyone equally (or should be).
Even with laws, there are lots of pap photos published all the time of people photographed on private property. Celebrity weddings are often papped. Private, personal events are papped. Nude photos of celebrities on private property, unaware that they are being photographed, are more numerous than you might imagine.
If this exact thing had happened to, say, Salma Hayek, the shrieking about violation and privacy would not be thundering.
The outrage over this is disproportionate to what has occurred.
…. yes, I get what you’re saying of course. It’s an arbitrary line you draw though.
Your line is nude pictures of Duchess Waity, someone else’s line may be a celebrity’s kids at the playground. So what’s the point here exactly? Is it the privacy thing? I do think that photographer went too far but again, celebs get photographed on their hotel balconies and at hotel pools all the time. Just because they’re not naked doesn’t mean it’s not an invasion of privacy.
BUT that’s apparently okay because either they’re not naked or because they’re not Waity? And this I do not get. It’s ALL part of gossip and celebrity culture and I find it so hypocritical of people to yell about privacy when for any old celeb these standards are not applied. Nobody would freak if this was JLo or the Jolie.
Bottom line, and I cannot stress this enough, the paparazzi are no more to blame than we are. And by that I mean everyone who enjoys gossip. There is no “clean gossip” just because your (or anyone else’s) arbitrary line is not crossed. Because for the people whose lives are under the microscope, there is no line.
@littlemissnaughty: exactly this! thank you.
ok…let me think..I agree that EVERYONE is free to do whatever he/she wants, if I want to show my boobs. ok…if I want to go on vacation to a tropical island and be naked all the time..it’s fine!
BUT, this lady knew from the beginning of this marriage where she was heading to…she knew that she was going to become the future queen one day and she knew that her life would change forever and she went through it..they also know that the paps are dying for an exclusive photo and they will go to extremes in order to get what they want…
to come to a conclusion, if I were her, I would never play with the slightest possiblity of a pap being hidden to the woods and I would be really careful what I was doing outside my house…SHE CHOSE THIS LIFE, SHE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT BEING CAREFUL WITH THESE THINGS IS REQUIRED…otherwise, she should remain a commoner…just like Chelsey, whom I respect more…she has the real balls in the game
I hope he takes them to the cleaners. Those vultures are directly responsible for his mother’s death. They’re like vampires feeding off blood.
Co sign. Also, I read somewhere else that the pap did trespass to take these pix, which paps do all the time here as well. Not cool.
Keep in mind the William comments are hearsay reported by a media outlet. Like any husband he is and should be frustrated about the whole thing. There has been a longstanding agreement amongst the monarchy and at least the British press not to photograph the royals in private times. This agreement was forged following the death of Diana, which many believe was caused or at least impacted by the presence of paparazzi. It’s not just that she was undressed, it’s trying to prevent a pattern of behavior by the press that could eventually escalate one day to tragic consequences.
They were on vacation and have a right to expect some privacy. Those pictures were taken from a half mile away. She was not in full view of the public she was at a private villa. I hope they sue the crap outta those photographers and the magazines. They may be public people, but they definately have a right to a private life. William has every right to be pissed.
You can see the pictures at Showbizspy, and they should have never taken nude pictures of the Future Queen of England.
Dude, seriously don’t help people find those pics, that’s horrible.
Thank you, Mr. Mike O’Kane, editor of the Irish Daily Star for putting it out there that famous people are treated the same irrespective of whether they are celebrity actors or royals. For once someone is not making the excuse of “invading the privacy of these young royals.” Instead of complaining, the young royals should keep themselves covered outside of their four walls. Period.
MSM reports that Chi, the publication that threatens a 26 page feature on these pics, was also one of the few papers to publish pap photos of Diana as she was dying in the car crash.
This cements my opinion of the matter. This is not a “freedom of the press/the public has a right to know” issue, this is voyeurism bordering on morbid obsessiveness. There is no issue of integrity, just an aggressive cash grab.
I love gossip as much as the next person, but I don’t need these photos, so I won’t go to sites that use pap pics, in hopes that supply and demand rule.
You are so totally off base on this one. They should be pissed. They were on private property, and although the photos “may” have been taken from a public road, they would have HAD to have been taken with a very high tech camera zoom.
If they could not be seen by the naked eye, and special technology was used to invade their privacy they are totally within their rights to demand justice.
Just because they are in the public eye doesn’t mean they should have to endure such an invasion of privacy.
I don’t blame the guy for being super sensitive to paparazzo after what happened to his mother. I think his stand might be a good thing – it could change the laws regarding paparazzi in England perhaps. I say Go Wills!~
He’s going to lose and look like a bigger ass than ever. Can you imagine the questions he’ll have to answer in any trial?
In England, they are already protected from the press. William won’t change any laws outside of the UK. Naive to think people care that much about these two to totally rewrite laws.
There may be many reasons to ridicule William, but it’s a bit unfair to do so for his reaction to this however OTT it may seem to outsiders. Whatever view you have of Diana and the paps, he had it from a child’s perspective which is hard to outgrow.
I don’t buy the argument they were fair game because they were within camera shot. A high-powered zoom lens is generally used by these guys as a weapon. I don’t see the distinction between invasive paps and peeping toms.
The Irish editor making the claim he would have published similar shots of random celebs ie Rihanna or Lady Gaga is an idiot. It would be an invasion of their privacy too and I doubt there would be so much backlash if they sued.
The fact that W&C were on vacation “again” is irrelevant. So the perception that they have a cruisy lifestyle means what? In this case absolutely nothing.
Actually the fact that they were on vacation AGAIN is very relevant because they lied about it. Palace said they couldn’t work the paralympics FOR WHICH THEY HAD BEEN MADE GAMES AMBASSADORS because William had work stuff with the RAF whereas KAte had Asia tour prep to do.
These pictures, irrespective of contents, are undeniable proof that they lied.
You’re missing the point. It means absolutely EVERYTHING because they were supposed to be working (attending the Paralympics closing ceremony) when these pictures were taken. Work should always come first before leisure, especially for the royals. The Cambridges thought it was the other way around and look where it got them. Karma sucks big time!
Hmmm, to me it’s sounds like neither of you can separate the arguments. It’s not about karma or ‘lying’ about whereabouts. This is about whether it’s okay for someone to take a powerful camera lens and play peeping tom then sell the photos.
By your logic if someone pulls a sickie from work and gets hit by a bus (karma aside) they deserved it?
@Feebee: nope. sounds like you are the one who can’t separate the arguments.
how is pulling a sickie at work – assuming this sick leave was due to a genuine illness – comparable to being the AMBASSADOR to the paralympics but telling everyone you can’t turn up cause you apparently have REALLY IMPORTANT “work” to do.. but instead go on some vacation nearby to have fun and suntan topless comparable?
one is a genuine,valid reason, while the other is an outright lie. to MASSES of people.
so yeah, them going on holiday instead of doing their ambassadorial duties, ie: not working – is completely relevant. on another point: they hardly do any “work” but constantly need so much vacation. such back-breaking, exhausting “work” they do, huh? sheez. I hope they do sue and lose big-time.
I just love the outrage by so many people here claiming this is a breach of privacy…
…and yet here they are commenting on a website that relies on celebrity gossip, lifestyles, and photos provided by the very paparazzi who feed our society’s constant need to watch famous people and comment on their lives. How else did you find Celebitchy if you weren’t looking for celebrity news/gossip in the first place?
Our society as a whole has become voyeuristic.
You can’t come in here and cry about William and Kate being victims and also wish the paparazzi and magazine to be punished, but then go on another topic to talk about celebrities and their activities.
Or what about the crotch shots or upskirt photos of female celebrities? Nobody raises a big stink about those when you can make a case of sexual assault every time the paparazzi lie down on the sidewalk trying to get a shot of a female celeb’s privates. Are Paris Hilton and Miley Cyrus not women? Are they less “special” than Kate so upskirt shots are okay?
Somehow, William and Kate must be defended and protected by virtue of their rank. And let’s not forget to bring up Diana over and over again!
If you really don’t like what the paparazzi do, you shouldn’t even be on this website. The very fact that you are, we all are, suggest that we are playing a part on why the paparazzi’s behaviour are so low and disgusting nowadays. They’re just feeding our greed and hunger to know every detail about celebrities and royals.
Do I think it’s wrong that they took photos of Kate topless? Absolutely. Nobody should go through that, nor should anyone even be that interested in other people’s private parts to the point that we have paparazzi zooming in on celebs’ skirts or crouching down waiting for the woman to get out of the car to get some photos of their crotch.
But the reality is that there’s a demand for this. We have a culture that encourages this type of interest. People will say this is invasion of privacy but they themselves can’t help but look at the photos to “see” what the fuss is all about.
See the irony? If you want the paparazzo to be thrown in jail, then you should want the same thing for every photographer all over the world. You should want the whole paparazzi trend to stop and all the other avenues of celebrity-watching to stop, too. That means no more Celebitchy, D-listed, Oh No They Didn’t!, Lainey Gossip, Just Jared, and whatever other website you love to visit to get your fix of celebrities.
This is not just an invasion of privacy, it’s a whole ugly culture that has been developing for decades. We should be upset for everyone who gets treated this way, not just Kate. But the outrage seems to come out for Kate only and only because she’s a Princess. Not many people would sympathize with Britney Spears if it was her on Kate’s place. Nobody would say, “Put yourself in her position. Take away the title and rank, and she’s just any other woman!!!!” Nope. The outrage just comes out for someone who married Diana’s son.
If Beatrice or Eugenie were in Kate’s place, would people care as much? Or would we get snide and nasty comments about the girls’ looks, their weight, their mother, their personality, etc?
—-
Magazine and paparazzo should be made to pay the fine. But jail?
NO. That would be too much.
If anything, the more William shows a reaction to this issue, the more the media will focus on him and his wife. If he can’t move on from this and put a brave face in public, neither will the media.
Let his lawyers handle this. He should make use of his stiff upper lip. Grin and bear it like Robert Pattinson has done.
Excellent post!
I agree that we’re complicit in the paparazzo culture. It’s unarguable. But I do think there’s a line crossed when people take photos of others on private property, just living their lives, because while all these people – royals included – need our interest to sustain their lifestyles and careers, they should also be able to relax on their own time. I haven’t looked for or at these, because it just feels creepy. I felt the same way about Natalie Portman’s wedding photos. They’re people, not zoo animals.
Fact is, if he can get police involved and charges brought, it has to be a crime to do this in France. You can’t make the law on jailable offences up as you go along. And it would be a crime in England if anyone did that to a normal member of the public, too. I think that fact – that it looks like it’s a crime in both countries – should give a pretty good idea of how wrong it is. And you can’t blame the victim of a crime for wanting the protection of that law.
If I heard a friend had had a creepy guy who lived a mile away from her isolated house stalk her via zoom lens camera, catch shots of her sunbathing in the nude, and the first she knew of it was the pics ended up on the net, I’d be urging her to call the police. Wouldn’t you?
+ 100,000,000, Sachi.
The double standards in people’s reaction to this incident makes me more angry than some pap “invading Waity’s privacy.” Most crying over this issue forget the most recent crucification of KStew. I’m not even a fan of hers, but I’ll never forget the reactions she was subjected to. It’s a shame that some people on Celebitchy continue to address her as Trampire only because she was found cavorting with a married man, which apparently does not happen in hollywood or outside of hollywood. The reason she needs to be raked over coals is because she was responsible for breaking Sanders family. And Sparkles should dump her classless ass. How much more shittier these arguments can get? Were her actions wrong? Yes. Did she deserve being called a slut, trampire etc? No.
It’s time we get off our high horses and treat all famous people in the same manner. If we are crying foul over the invasion of Waity’s privacy, we should do the same with other famous people too. I don’t see a difference between Kim Kardashian, Kristen Stewart or Kate Middleton. All of these people make use of the press to create and sell an image to the public. They also cry when the same press publishes another image of theirs.
The paparazzi or press culture is not a one-way street. It’s a nexus between the celebrity, media and the market (which is made up of consumers like us). As long as we want to comment on these issues, we will continue to form the market and create a demand. So there’s no point in blaming the media alone and denying agency to celebrities and consumers.
The pecking order we have created among celebrities is why our reactions differ dramatically from one issue to another. Kim Kardashian is a reality tv actor, so she deserves all the garbage thrown at her. It does not matter that people continue to see her or the real house wives program on television. Kristen Stewart is an entitled brat earning millions for zero talent. However, Kate Middleton is different from these two just because she has a title to her name. No big deal that she has less talent than Kim Kardashian or Kristen Stewart.
If anything, the monarchy should be declared obsolete instead of wasting millions on an outdated institution. If not, learn from the Queen. The woman knows that she had to sign off her freedom for the job she inherited. William comes across as an idiot for his over-the-top reactions and comparing this incident to Diana’s death, while carefully forgetting that Diana was as much an accomplice in the media game that was responsible for her death. There are many celebrities who do not engage the media outside of their work. This incident is not half as embarrassing as Harry’s or Charles tampon-gate.
Nothing is more infuriating than having a celebrity pecking order and treating all of them differently.
Mira: Your whole comment is just false equivalency.
Kim Kardashian is an amateur p*rn star who is literally only famous because of a s*x tape. She doesn’t deserve respect because she doesn’t seem to respect herself. She doesn’t deserve to be maligned at every opportunity but she definitely does when she does something monumentally stupid in public i.e. her fake marriage and her fake baby voice.
Kristen Stewart cheated with a married man in the open. Lots of people cheat. Most people do it where no one can see them. Rupert is scum too and it bothers me tremendously that women hate on other women so easily when it comes to cheating scandals. But frankly, when you do something so bad in such a public space, you kind of deserve to be raked over the coals. People reacted poorly because she was doing something WRONG-Kate was just sunbathing with her husband in what she thought was seclusion.
Kate Middleton, as far as I can tell, hasn’t really done much of anything untoward. She doesn’t do much of anything at all but she’s not cheating on anyone publicly, she’s not releasing sex tapes or flashing her vag for the paps or wandering around town braless.
What does “talent” have to do with anything? She’s a Duchess, not a performer. It means nothing that she has “less talent” than Kim or Kristen.
That said, I do not think Kim nor Kristen would deserve to have the same thing happen to them. If either of them were caught topless on private property and were pissed about it, I’d back them up too because it’s just privacy invasion, pure and simple.
And William didn’t make the statement to the press about his mother, the Palace did.
GrandPoobah –
The point I was making was to not cry foul over this sandal. I don’t see it as any different from other celebrity sandals, intended or not. For me the royals are famous people like Kim and KStew are. I don’t see why some of them need to be butchered in the media and public while others need to be excused. The only difference I see is that Kate has a title to her name, which according to me is an obsolete institution. The very least she should know about being famous is to understand that she will always be a target of the paps/gossip irrespective of where she is – indoors or outdoors. It’s pointless to cry hoarse once the deed has been done. The one thing any celebrity/famous people need to be responsible about is to exercise their freedom in the privacy of their four walls. They anyway lead an entitled life, which I have no problems with. If you want the laws changed, then be it so for all of them. Not for a handful who have family names to back them up with power. Yes Kim is a porn star who became famous because if her sex-tape; Kristen is a dimwit for making out in the public; and Harry/Kate are idiots for not understanding that they will be a pap target no matter where they are. But beyond all of this, all of them are celebrities and they will get treated similarly in tabloids. I just believe in equal harsh treatment of celebrities. Of all the things, let’s not have a celebrity pecking order.
And hey, it’s not like these people don’t make use of the media when it’s convenient for them. The media has hidden more than its share of royal secrets from getting out in the public. They have that arrangement with the UK media. They can’t except to have such arrangement with media houses in other countries too. Like I said before, learn form the Queen.
I’m not siding with the pap who took her pictures. I’m against the different reactions different celeb scandals receive. If I’m here commenting on a gossip site, I’ll personally detach myself from them. I don’t have to “put myself in their shoes” to empathize with them. If I do, I’ll empathize with all or none. You see my point? I’m against the invasion of privacy of any celeb/famous person but the reality is different. Therefore I don’t want some of them to be treated with different set of laws. It’s all of them or no big deal about any of the controversies.
Mira: It isn’t “pointless to cry hoarse after the deed is done”.
I think that if your privacy has been violated in such a skeevy manner, you should definitely stand up and say that it isn’t right what was done. If there aren’t laws on the books about this kind of thing, then there should be, for everyone. People should be able to be nude on private property without the fear that someone somewhere could be hiding in the bushes waiting to take pictures, public figure or not. NO ONE should have nude photos taken of them without their consent and then published for the world to see. That’s creepy and perverted and should be illegal.
“They can’t except [sic] to have such arrangement with media houses in other countries too.” No, but isn’t it reasonable to expect that other media houses wouldn’t publish illegally taken nude photos without your knowledge?
“It’s all of them or no big deal about any of the controversies.” So in other words, you don’t understand nuance. All or nothing. All celebrity scandals are the same. It’s either a huge deal for everything or no big deal for everything, nothing in between.
You can’t see the difference between someone willingly releasing footage of their nude body and someone else’s nude body being photographed without their knowledge.
You can’t see the difference between a person brazenly cavorting with a married man and a woman thinking she’s alone with her husband being photographed from half a mile away.
“I’m against the different reactions different celeb scandals receive”,
That’s illogical. You can’t group all celebrity scandals together because they are all different. And people react differently to various scandals because it is logical to do so.
Celebrity scandals vary in seriousness. Do you think people should have the same reaction to Chris Brown beating Rihanna as they do to Dina Lohan being drunk/high/whatever on Dr. Phil?
Or maybe Amanda Bynes continuing to have hit and runs-same reaction to that as Phil Spector murdering someone?
Are you against people having a different reaction to Halle Berry trying to keep Gabriel Aubry away from their child than Miley Cyrus leaving tweets which vaguely allude to her relationship being in trouble?
I would think that one would look at that list of celebrity controversies/scandals and have different reactions to them all. One should have different emotional responses based on their personal experiences and perceived social norms.
Not empathizing with another human being when something really terrible happens to them is…odd, to say the very least. Celebrities are people with human emotions, believe it or not.
Kate Middleton must be humiliated right now and I find it truly bizarre that there are people in this world who point their finger at her and say, “She should have known better” instead of “How is that legal?”
You’re missing the point here, a line has been crossed into CRIMINAL territory. I like gossip too, but I don’t need to see nude pics of Kate, if I want porn I’ll go to a porn site. This was an invasion of privacy plain and simple. We don’t need “upskirts” or other “unauthroized” nude pics of celebs to come to this site, at least I don’t.
Lots of pap shots of celebrities venture into criminal territory. LOTS. But people only get their knickers in a twist when it’s a royal – for some god forsaken reason – that is the point.
@Suze
So what, the answer is not to ‘get the knickers in a twist’ at all?
Or maybe get them in a twist here and then in every other case too?
If the royals are fighting back that hard, its because there are more than just topless pics, there is a lot worse. If you wanna be naked or have sex, do it indoors not outdoors, even if you are in a private property area.
This isn’t just about boobs. This whole thing has upped the anty about a million times. Can you imagine the glee of the photographer snapping those photos? I’m surprised he didn’t stroke out. Now every photographer in the world wants a BIGGER payday than this guy. And they will stop at nothing to get it. What’s next? Catching them in the act? Snapping Willie’s Willie? They will be hunted like Diana and worse.
I don’t blame them one bit for trying to shut this down right now. Who has to die next? When Kate’s as dead as Diana will it be enough to enact some laws about privacy? People are saying the monarchy has no rights to shut this down.
Do the tabloids get carte blanche to ruin lives, embarrass people, and climb trees for the money shot no matter WHAT the consequences?
We already have Willie’s willie. Google. you’ll find it easily!!
As for being hunted by paps, look up how the paps treated JFK jr.He was hounded as much as Diana. He handled it all with grace, didn’t hide and didn’t threaten people with jail time.
Diana’s situation ended in an unfortunate way, but JFK jr survived.
Now that’s a bit dramatic. We wouldn’t even be talking about this if these gals had the brains to put a seat belt on and keep their clothes on outdoors and within view of a public road. Is it too much to ask public figures to be a little circumspect themselves? If they don’t like it, they could always step down.
One more thing. For all the talk that they don’t have much of a relationship, these photos rather prove they are in fact very relaxed and happy together.
If it wasn’t for paparazzi we wouldn’t have known Fergie (not the cool BEP one) liked having her toes sucked by someone who wasn’t her husband.
Wills should take a leaf out of Harry’s book. A storm in a Royal Doulton teacup. It’s all a bit “off with their heads” really. As others have already said.
Ole Sausage Curls should have kept the royal ta ta’s under wraps. How common!
well, how would you be reacting if it was michelle obama, for example? or even sarah palin.
I think you would probably also find it distasteful, unless they were purposefully famewhoring, as they say….
although the royals are not politicians, technically, they actually are diplomats and cultural ambassadors….they do represent the country.
i’m american, and i find this distasteful and i don’t think it should be legal to essential be a voyeur, take photos and then sell them. invastion of privacy for sure.. imagine if it were michelle obama or one of their daughters? awful, right?
Michelle Obama wouldn’t put herself in a position that would embarrass the President, the United States or her position as Mom-in-Chief. She understands that becoming a public figure means holding herself to a higher standard than regular folks. Hell, I’ll even say Sarah Palin wouldn’t do something so blatantly stupid. She may talk stupid, but the woman knows she has a brand to protect. She knows who her followers are.
+1. Used to only dislike her, I find her useless and vapid, but now I dislike him as well, he seems like a crybaby. The monarchy is outdated anyways, why should we even care about these people?
If it were Michelle Obama or Sarah Palin I would think it was a horrible violation of their privacy.
I would also think that they were very foolish taking their bikini tops off outdoors and not realizing that they could be photographed.
Exactly the same thing that I think about this situation.
I completely disagree with this post. It is sick to me that women aren’t coming to the defense of another woman who had her privacy invaded and who has nude pictures of herself all over the world.
It makes me sick that some of you can’t put yourselves in her shoes. You can’t think about how degrading and horrific it would be to have nude pictures of yourself taken and distributed without your knowledge or consent. A woman (or man, for that matter) should get to choose who sees her naked form and when.
I hate this “who cares, they are just boobs” attitude. I don’t want everyone to see my breasts. I would feel extremely violated if this happened to me.
It is disgusting that some of you are even siding with the photographer (and that is what you are doing) by saying she should have known better. She was in a PRIVATE RESIDENCE in a secluded area. The photographer took the pictures from a HALF MILE away with a high-powered zoom lens.
That is voyeurism plain and simple. That photographer is a peeping tom pervert, period.
I cannot believe how many of you are basically saying that she deserved it because she vacations a lot and has a lot of clothes and jewelry and doesn’t really do anything. SO WHAT?? On what planet does that make it ok for perverts to take nude photos of her and distribute them around the world?
How humiliated would you be if some guy from high school stood across the street and took pictures of you in your window and distributed them all around your school? Or some random pervert took a nude picture and distributed it around your workplace? I wouldn’t wish this on any person, on any other woman, in this world.
William is acting just like any husband should. His wife’s privacy was invaded. I’d be pretty pissed if this happened to me and a boyfriend/husband wasn’t pissed about it. I think this will help curb this behavior, at least for a little while. Photographers CAN’T get away with this. It’s invasive and sick and perverted.
I can’t even with some of you. i really can’t. I feel like I’m taking crazy pills and the world has turned upside down. What happened to respecting other people’s privacy? What happened to common decency?
Since when do public figures not deserve privacy in their own homes?
EDIT: And you cannot compare her to Britney Spears or Miley Cyrus or Paris Hilton or Kim Kardashian for a number of reasons but number one on that list? She does not present herself as a famewhorey skank.
She has NEVER distributed a sex tape of herself. She has NEVER released nude photos of herself. She has never gotten out of a car, legs wide open, without underwear on. She doesn’t go out in public without a bra; her breasts barely concealed by a muscle tee. These “celebrities” did not have their privacy invaded in those instances. They put their parts out there for everyone to see. They CHOSE to show their bodies. Kate did not choose this for herself. That is where the violation lies. And that is where the outrage (from normal people) comes from. I think jail time is absolutely appropriate in this case.
Common decency dictates that the same rules apply to *EVERYONE*.
I don’t believe you can have one set of rules for those you personally deem “famewhorey skanks” (for going out without a bra, really?) and another for people you seem to think deserve better treatment.
You either have to be all in on prosecuting paps who take photos like this – no matter who the subject is – or you have to say this is the way the world is and the subjects of these photos need to sack up.
I think all photographers who take pictures like these should be fined and jailed. I think it is an invasion of privacy no matter who it is. It is NOT normal for people to hide in bushes and take nude photographs of other people from a half mile away. That should be a crime if it isn’t already. No one should have this happen to them and then have someone say, “This is the way the world is, sack up”.
However, these pictures are not the same as the nude/semi-nude photos taken of famewhore skank celebrities because Kate was unaware they were being taken. She didn’t choose to be exposed.
Famewhore skanks are those who willingly expose their genitalia/breasts/rear ends in public settings for no other reason than for attention and those who release their own personal sex tapes. They are complicit in the exposure and that is the key.
Going out without a bra is inappropriate when your breast could fall out of the side of your top at any moment and if any time you lean over, pretty much the whole side of your breast can be seen.
‘A different set of rules’ is created by the famewhorey set who don’t take legal action against the paps because they enjoy the attention. It’s their choice.
Are you saying that just because some people don’t value their privacy other don’t need their protected?
Calm down before you have a stroke.
She did in fact got out and in of a car with the legs wide open and a grin on her face.
I do get your point though and I agree…
But hey step away from a gossip site because you and me sister create the demand for the photos…
And now I am waiting to get my head pulled off….
I don’t create demand for the photos-I haven’t looked at them. Going to a gossip site doesn’t create demand for illegally taken nude photographs of celebrities. I like to read about new movies, the clothes at premieres, set photos and such. Sometimes I read the silly gossip about certain celebrities. So no…not creating the demand for nude photos because I don’t look at them.
And I do not recall any photos of Kate Middleton getting out of a car grinning with her legs spread open and I’m not interested in seeing any.
You’ll have to wait a long time to get your head pulled off…
you don’t recall seeing her photos getting in or out of the car while her underwear is on full display….but you do go on gossip sites like this one where THAT is what is posted….also you say you come here for gossip….
you don’t make any sense
yes you do create demand. if you are posting on a gossip site….
get off you high horse…like it or not all of us create the demand….
christinne: In order to create demand for something, I have to consume it, correct?
Since I haven’t seen the pictures, nor will I click on links taking me to the pictures, I’m not consuming them.
Therefore I’m not creating demand for that kind of thing. If I did go on ahead and look at them, I would be a hypocrite of the highest order and would be creating demand for pictures like that. Understand?
I come here for gossip-not nude pictures of celebrities.
Never seen her coming to the defence of other women, anyway. And yes, it’s difficult for me to put myself in her shoes. What I understood is that while we are working hard every single day to keep our jobs, raise our children performing our duties and enjoying holidays only once or twice per year, she did buy a ticket to what she thought to be the best possible life. Unfortunately this didn’t came for free, the price she had to pay are all the obligations that she did accept to fulfil. If the Firm (not myself or the public opinion) deems that topless pics are inappropriate then she has to avoid going outdoor topless, where she can be seen by servants and security and where papz can reach her. This childish behaviour of going aroud screaming “privacy” is ridiculous and unacceptable. Period.
nora: This kind of attitude is sad. So she has a privileged life, so what? That doesn’t mean her privacy should be invaded. It doesn’t mean she deserves that kind of treatment.
“This childish behaviour of going aroud screaming “privacy” is ridiculous and unacceptable.”
Why?
Why doesn’t she have a reasonable right to privacy on private property in a secluded area?
What a bizarre thing to say. It’s not childish to be upset that someone took nude photographs of you without your knowledge and then published them for the world to see.
Being seen by servants and security is not the same as being seen by paparazzi and you know it. Seems a common thread with the victim blamers is not being able to understand nuance.
Sorry, but royals are public property, they are “public slaves”! There is no privacy for the Windsors!
The “modern” monarchy is a kind of slavery! No privacy … but money, titles, jewels, palaces etc.
Modern royals don´t rule their countries, their only job is to entertain the people! The monarchy needs the media!
Sorry, William, but your life is not an endless holiday! It´s time for you and Kate to wake up. Your life and death, your body, your wife and her body (= belly), your kids etc. belong to the british people. There will always be paparazzi.
Escape or accept it!
I really do not envy you.
THIS.
sadly true….
I heard somewhere recently that there was a court ruling in the 70s (I think) that established celebrities were not entitled to the same right of privacy as “the rest of us” on the grounds that as soon as you hire PR etc, your intent is to be in the public domain. Seems reasonable to apply similar rationale here. The royal couple haven’t hermited away as they could have – they’ve used the press to their advantage the whole way through their engagement and marriage. They’re willingly in the public domain, in large part because they sought to be.
It’s not reasonable to apply that logic here. They were attempting to hermit away by staying in a remote, seemingly secluded private residence.
The photographer was hiding under some trees a half mile away and got the photos with a high-powered lens.
Even if that court ruling is true, it wouldn’t apply here because I’m pretty sure it’s illegal to take naked pictures without someone’s knowledge pretty much everywhere. No one has a right to see nude pictures of public figures. That’s an invasion of privacy, period.
And unless that court ruling was in France it doesn’t apply here because Kate is from Britain and the home is in France.
Just my opinion and no one will buy it, but I think this was all orchestrated to take the heat of Harry’s nude photos. It all happened too soon after Harry’s escapades in LV and I think Wills and his family would do anything to protect the brother. In fact, this could half explain the lie he pulled to get out of the paralympics and go off on vacation at this time, and so Harry was present to show better image of himself post LV…
So this could also be a way to set an example that anyone who messes with the Royals will be sued…now it is poor Royals, how they were so violated, instead of what Harry went through which was royally funny! They want to turn the tables and become the victors, not the victims.
Kate is as famous as Michelle Obama. She is one of the most sought after royal public figures on this earth. Now not being devil’s advocate but she certainly has been aware that even if at the end of an amazonian forest and other jungle she’d be found, hence having a certain standard, sunbathing or else..
And Wills is meaning well by suing but unfortunately it’s just opening the pandora box, I have the feeling it’ll be even worse paparazzi wise, they’ll track them down non stop just to prove that they can’t control it all.
Just saying…
If I was topless and in a place I believe to be private (I don’t know all the details but I’m assuming they didn’t know they could be seen by public/others) and someone took my photos and published them I’d press charges as well. I don’t get how that makes them entitled. Someone violated them and their privacy. That being said I wish boobs weren’t such a big deal, who really cares? It’s not dick or crotch shots.
What makes breasts different than a penis or labia?
And Kate probably cares because they were her breasts that have been exposed to the world.
If you’re OUTDOORS, there’s a chance you’ll be seen, period. That’s why the police are allowed to use helicopters and binoculars or other enhancement devices to record criminal activity taking place OUTDOORS, no matter how secluded you think your backyard is.
This was poor judgment on William and Kate’s part. This is the 21st century for crying out loud. The techonology exits to see far away. Even satellites nowdays can see Kate’s boobs, no matter how small they are, whenever she’s OUTDOORS. Did they really think photographers wouldn’t take their picture, given a chance? Well, they gave the photographers a chance, and the photographers took it. Sheesh. Does William think he controls all of OUTDOOR France?
Just remember to keep your clothes on when OUTDOORS (it isn’t that difficult to do), and you’ll be fine.
+1
A little common sense goes a long way!
Well said!
but those pesky tan lines!
I don’t agree. The argument is that Kate should know that technology exists that would let someone photograph her topless outdoors, so she should never, ever go topless outdoors, right? Rather than try to be a part of punishing and discouraging this invasion through the law — and some of the big celebrity cases have set incredibly important privacy law precedents — Kate should just assume that anyone could violate her at any time, so it is her fault if she does anything that makes her vulnerable to be violated.
Shockingly, technology also exists that lets people photograph people in the nude INDOORS without their knowledge. Sure it’s an illegal invasion into private property, but so is this, as far as we know.
It could happen any day. It has happened. Knowing this, should public figures like Kate also refrain from the bathroom and bedroom, because they know someone could be watching? If Kate gets caught on the john, is that her fault because she should have known that someone could have a camera in there — because someone can, maybe EASIER than the lucky pap a half mile away.
I keep seeing that since this impossible technology exists, it is their sole responsibility to police themselves. I do not want to live in that world.
Parts of this case make me recall what happened to Erin Andrews a few years ago. People in each case have victim blamed and insisted that the person “should have known better” and “expected people to be photographing them”. Although in Andrew’s case she was in a hotel room where these should not even be a question of her privacy. The man who filmed her through peepholes in the nude also filmed several other non-famous women and posted the footage online.
The type of behavior the photographer engaged in was sick and could influence creeps everywhere to use similar techniques.
Erin Andrews is a completely different case and not just because of how the photos were taken. As you point out, they got Erin while she was changing in doors in the privacy of her hotel room with the curtains drawn and the door closed. They got her with a peep hole. Total invasion of privacy.
There would be some similarity if Erin Andrews had spent the whole afternoon topless on her balcony and someone had snapped a photo of her I’d feel no sympathy for her.
I’m a guy but my wife (and plenty of female friends of mine) sunbathe topless. When you decide to do so you are doing so based on a belief that there is no shame in the act. Those female friends of mine who are not comfortable with it keep their tops on. They don’t take them off then order you to keep your eyes pinned to the ground.
Now here’s the kicker:
Erin Andrews is a private citizen. Sure she’s on tv but she’s till a private citizen. She doesn’t presume to be a ruler or lay claim to a title. No one bows to her and no one ever will. If she suddenly decided to run for public office, or married the Crown Prince of England, then she’s putting herself out there in a way that is far more significant and potentially impactful on people’s (read: her subjects) lives. In that case she has a choice, either be topless and proud (own that shit!) or keep your top on when your outdoors.
To me, singers and entertains actually have far more right to complain about paparazzi then these do nothing but cloak themselves in their status royals.
Pretty simple stuff really.
No anyone regardless of how famous they are, has a right to privacy. No one should be taking pictures or filming another person when that person is on private property. Especially when the person would not be able to be seen by others, without the assistance of either manipulating a peephole or using a camera.
It is arguments like your that people use when they are blaming the victim and actively supporting rape culture.
Whilst I don’t think she “deserves it”, I don’t have a whole lot of sympathy for her. If you’re stupid enough to prance around outdoors without your clothes on when you’re a media darling on the most wanted honeymoon of the year, what do you think might happen?
Royalty doesn’t equal intelligence, obviously. Also, people need to f’ing chillax because no one is going to care about this in a month. And now that it’s on the internet, anyone can see the images so she really shouldn’t bother trying to censor it. If she acted like she didn’t really give a shit, an amazing thing would happen … no one else would either.
I am so over this thing. It was a pair of boobs!
They are overreacting.
Henry was caught naked, all the world has seen his (glorious!)naked ass in his private room. He didn’t say a word, except for a small joke during a charity evening, and that was the end of it. No one cares anymore.
That’s how you control a “scandal”, with their overreaction they are increasing this thing.
And correct me if I’m wrong, William will not only be king, but also the chief of Anglican Church, so Kate can’t assume attitudes that can embarass a future church man. Privacy or not.
Kate presented boob outside in range of a camera… but the photographer didn’t do anything illegal by snapping a photo, right?
Isn’t the entire legal offense being committed by the publishing of said boobage without permission?
Even in the US if you’re in a public place and someone happens to get a recognizable shot of you, they can’t publish it without a release from you saying it’s ok.
Is it different where they were? How do the press and speech rights read there vs. here?
Release forms are only necessary for private citizens – which Kate is not. People of th public domain do not need to sign release forms – otherwise all those pap shots would have to be sign off by all the celebs and what not. ataylor explains it pretty well upthread, you can go give it a read.
I for one am sick and tired of the British “royals”.
I mean honestly, if you value your privacy so much don’t sell your wedding (read: Business venture) to every television and radio station on the planet; and if you don’t want to be photographed with your top off don’t frolic topless on your balcony. Granted that’s a point of some debate and some people (not to me though) view this as an invasion of Privacy. You want to be royalty? Then every move you make is going to be scrutinized by your subjects and there is no down time. That’s part of the deal.
But all that’s not even the problem. What really irks me is their holier than thou attitude and sense of entitlement. What do these people actually do anyway? Near as I can tell they are the British Kardashians. You know, except that the Kardashians kind of sort of have jobs.
I think they’re being reasonable, the photos weren’t taken in public, she was sun bathing in the private estate of a friend, who cares how many holidays they have. They’re entitled to do what they like on private property without the fear of a pap with a very long lens peering over the fence from up a tree miles away
@ Rose:Prince Harry was partyin in his Las Vegas suite, the photos were published,we’ve all seen his glorious ass, but no one sued no one.
He made a joke about that, and now no one cares anymore. Just saying.
Doesn’t one, when they go through such a tragedy as losing his mom to the games of paparazzi as William did, relive that with emotions at the age of the memory? To William who wanted to avoid all of that with Kate, history seems to be repeating itself in France and with the media. Emotionally, I can see him reliving as the boy he was—and I don’t blame him one bit, when and where do these paps/media cross the line? Breaking into their house?
You’ve hit on the key point that others seems to be missing. William is reliving the loss of his mother as he watches his wife being hounded the same way, but hopefully not the same results.
If it’s not a big deal for Europeanns to go topless, why should they be upset about the photos at all?
The more I see her the more I am convinced that she looks like the puppet Madam.
When it comes to this particular family, I’d be very reluctant to say they are ‘overreacting’ regarding the paparazzi, on almost anything. They still have memory of what happened. He was a child and that was obviously very traumatizing and impacting, and if he feels terrified/enraged at the prospect of the paparazzi going too far regarding his new wife, I can hardly blame him. They really need to lay off a bit, the frantic, obsessive focus surrounding her lately keeps building and building, and it’s feeling all too familiar. We dont need to know every single outfit she wears, ever, or what she said at any given moment, or how she wore her hair throughout the many hours of every single day. It’s getting to be too much, and perhaps this is just the breaking point for William. I just absolutely can not blame him, they ought to have known better, and this ‘innocent story about lovebirds’ is sooo manipulative.Not buying it at all.
I really like crumpets for breakfast, preferrably slathered in butter and served with a medium boiled egg and a glass of orange juice.
That said, I’ve not seen the titpics, but judging from the time it took to scroll down to comment they’re popular?
What was done was invasive and had it been a regular citizen there’d been no comments suggesting overreacting. Being Royal doesn’t equal fair game.
Her breasts are all over the internet – I would say that is incredibly embarassing to anyone that isn’t leaking pics themselves.
I will forever call him by his new name – Willie-Sue… He uses Diana’s name for a Trump Card – to get sympathy, favors, and other privileges. At other times, he’s out cavorting about using his royal trump card for lavish vacations paid by the country being visited and lavish vacations dubbed under the guise of “work”. Work that has ONLY the sole purpose of promoting the Royal Family… Imagine wining and dining the country’s elite rich and aristocratic and spending only a smidge of time with the grassroots people and after all that getting the front page of the paper. Imagine looking on from a hospital bed or imagine losing a son in war, a son who died saving your countrymen while the very same countrymen are fawning a clotheshorse and her leechy husband (who they never see on top of that) on the homefront. what a slap in the face… down with that already…