Prince William & Duchess Kate sue French magazine over ‘privacy’ breach

First things first: fashion! Fashion before boobs, always. These are photos of Duchess Kate and Prince William at a reception in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia yesterday. Kate is wearing a Temperley Fall 2012 dress – on the runway, this dress was black with gold lace. Kate loves lace, I think – she seems to enjoy lots and lots of lace overlays, lace sleeves, lace insets, lace, lace, lace. Most of the time, I tend to think it makes her look like a giant, walking doily… but I kind of like this dress. It’s pretty and feminine and a little bit girly, but it’s not cloyingly sweet like something Taylor Swift would wear.

Now, onto the scandal! We need a name for it… like… The Epic Boob & Crumpet Scandal of 2012. Or “Duchess Boob-gate,” which has a particularly nice ring to it. Anyway… when these photos were taken, William and Kate already knew about the boob photos in the French magazine, Closer. Prince William is said to be royally pissed (“pissed” in the American vernacular, meaning “to be very angry,” as opposed to “drunk off his ass” in British parlance) at the French mag, and Will wants to use this controversy as a way to limit the press’s access to he and Kate even further. And of course, the Right Honorable Royal Barristers have been summoned. And they wasted no time in actually suing Closer. The Palace confirmed on Friday that “legal proceedings for breach of privacy have been commenced today in France” and the lawsuit claims that the magazine breached Will and Kate’s “right to privacy” while vacationing at a private estate in France.

Meanwhile, the editor of Closer is defending her decision to publish the photos. Editor-in-chief Laurence Pieau said, “These photos are not in the least shocking. They show a young woman sunbathing topless, like the millions of women you see on beaches. It is a young couple that has just been married. They are in love. They are beautiful. She is the princess of the 21st century.” She says the outrage over the photos are “disproportionate”… which I kind of agree with her on that. But! Late Friday/early Saturday, Closer did pull the images off of their website, releasing another statement: “Following comments received after the publication of photos of Kate and William in Closer magazine France, we would like to make the following clarifications: This is the French edition of Closer and not the English edition. The photos we chose are by no means degrading. They show a young couple on vacation, beautiful, in love, living a normal life. The article reports that the couple recently vacationed in the south of France.”

Oh, and there are more photos too! Pieau teased: “I won’t hide the fact that there are more intimate pictures that exist that we haven’t published and will not publish. These are images full of joy, not degrading.” Well well well. That’s interesting, isn’t it? Now my interest is certainly piqued. If there are photos of William going to town on Kate’s duchess biscuits, I DEMAND to see the photos. I might get my wish – there are reports this morning that an Italian tabloid, Chi, has bought the photos as well, and plans to publish them. And FINALLY, people are beginning to raise questions about the security that surrounds the young royals – coming on the heels of the Prince Harry stuff, the fact that a paparazzo was even able to get this close to William and Kate speaks to (what I think is) the main issue: the royal protection officers are bad at their jobs. It’s amateur hour over there.

PS… Her hair!! It’s finally pulled back! And she even put some really pretty pearl stuff in the bun.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

207 Responses to “Prince William & Duchess Kate sue French magazine over ‘privacy’ breach”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Swethaa says:

    Why do the Middleton sisters look older than they actually are,esp Pippa?? they look like 40+….

    • Alexandra Bananarama says:

      It is unfortunate how much older they look.

      Even with palace denials it’s common knowledge they drink, smoke, and tan. Their mother doesn’t look bad for her age, but they could all just age very young and level off.

      Kate looks tired! Those under eye bags are resurfacing again.

    • Snowangel says:

      She always looks like she needs a good facial to me. Maybe its the make up, neither Kate or Pippa have any glow about them. They need Kate Hudson’s make up artist.

    • emmieapricot says:

      They definitely do look older than their age. Maybe it’s their thinness that ages them?

      And I like Kate’s dress. I wonder if they make a full-length version? I think that would be really stunning.

      • tmbg says:

        Kate’s always had a bit of plumpness in her face at any weight, so I don’t think it’s that. I never followed her prior to her marriage, but if she did a lot of partying which included drinking and smoking, that’ll age you fast along with tanning. I was good friends with a pair of sisters who loved their alcohol and sun and they look so much older than their ages now, especially the one who also took up smoking.

    • Aud says:

      I think they take after their mother. Their mother looks prematurely aged. She may be thin, but she has masculine qualities about her.

    • Iggles says:

      I know right! They look rather old to me. They do not seem to be aging well…

    • Fue McCormick says:

      In the first photo the light hitting her hair makes it look a little gray at the forehead and the ear. She looks about 40 in that photo. And the style of her hair in these photos is for an older woman, too. Does she go to her mother’s hairdresser? I do like this dress. It is the first dress of Duchess Duckface’s that I’ve ever liked, although I do not think the color is good on her. And Lord … she needs to stop tanning and get a facial.

    • Molly says:

      British women age faster. I don’t think they drink enough water and they probably drank too much alcohol in their teens and twenties and spent too much time sunbathing.

      • Callie says:

        That’s not a sweeping generalisation.

      • erika says:

        uhmmm….wait a minute….

        everyone’s been bellowing that Lindsay Lohan LOOKS 40!! OMG

        now were on the Kate Middleton looks 40?

        so…which is it? The Cracken or the Queen?

        btw, I AM 40 and I look younger than Kate!

        STOP IT with this 40-S***T!

      • Shitler says:

        @ Molly
        That is such shyt. Tell American women to lay off botox & see how young they look

      • bluhare says:

        Molly, you are so right. We British women look old before our time because of all the sunbathing we do in our sub tropical climate while drunk and staring at our bad teeth in the mirror.

        Would you be angry if I say that American women are all fat and obsessed with their looks to the point they’re vacant and uninteresting?

        Yeah, thought so.

    • Ally says:

      @Molly – British woman here, your comment is ignorant and rude.

      • Kiki says:

        Ally with all due respect I don’t think Molly’s comment was ignorant. Maybe rude. But it’s normal that British women age faster because they are very white. There’s nothing wrong with that. I read once that they also drink a lot compared to other European countries and that they are stressed out. I don’t mean to offend you so please I’d like to apologize for my comment. :D

    • Dea says:

      Right on! Pipa looks like a woman in her 40-s with 5 kids, seriously. Kate looks like she is 40. Don’t understand the fascination with both of them, especially Pipa. And they are not classy at all. They both like bathing topless. There are several pictures before Kate got married where both sisters could bath topless. So this is not something new. Pipa was topless in front of William while on a boat. Check google images photos. Kate was lucky that Will fell for her. If she was not with Will now, we could have seen topless pictures more many times by now and maybe more than that.
      If you read the story of how their mother made everything possible that Kate marries William you will be shocked. Their mom is like Kriss Jenner but smarter and a little bit classier.
      People are saying this is an invasion of privacy. I get that, but she knows who she is and what she represents. Saying that, she should have chosen to not go topless in an open area. By the way if you see photos carefully (i have seen many under google images), there is a feeling I get that she knew or could see the camera or people far away in front of her. She is looking right to the camera in one of the photos. Something she noticed from far and I am sure she chose to remain there. Lets not forget these two sisters love the attention and Kate is not queenship material — she just got lucky.

    • asiont says:

      +1. they both look old but Pippa is additionaly really unattractive.

  2. Christina says:

    I’m no expert, but I do wonder about this ‘blaming the security’ thing. Is it reasonable to expect them to stake out every tree top for miles around? Because that is what it would have took to prevent a guy with a long lens from shooting these pics. This is France, where Kate and Wills are just two more visiting celebs – I don’t think their staff could close roads and ban cameras for miles around just so the Duchess can tan her boobies on a terrace.

    • rtms says:

      I agree, if the estate is say a couple of acres, depending on where the paps were, they have every right to hang out on the edge and see what they can snap. It’s impossible to clear the area for mile around, especially in a situation like this. It sucks, and can lead to bad consequences but it’s the life they live.

      • RocketMerry says:

        So totally agree.
        It’s not a good thing and I would not condone spying nor taking unauthorized pictures of anyone, but considering that Kate knows that being a royal leaves her with very little privacy then she should really work on being a bit more descreet.

        That means, she can tan her royal tatas someplace else, where she’s sure she won’t be spyed on, and not on vacation on foreign grounds.

      • LeslieM says:

        Did this article say that there were other topless pictures taken that Will and Kate knew about before these came out? Does anyone know about that? I suppose if that was the case I might feel a little bit differently about this.. I didn’t know there was a potential way to sue for invasion of privacy over pictures like these. I think it would be AWSOME it they could win a case like that especially in light of what happened to William’s mother.

        I’ve loved all the pictures of the clothes she’s been wear on her trip. I would love to have her wardrobe. I think she has done an AMAZING
        Job of picking clothes that fit into the culture of the country she is visiting.

        I saw video of her giving a speech and shaking hands with the crowds when I was watching nightlife last night. I was glad to see no one on the program had anything negative about the pictures and only comment on the fact that it was a huge invasion of her privacy.

      • L says:

        @leslie what the article says is that when these pictures at the tea party were taken Friday evening-Will and Kate were already aware about the french publication (which had been released Friday morning(

      • Jess says:

        I think the security issue is that instead of a camera, this guy could have had a sniper rifle with a long scope.

      • Shannon says:

        Yes, the paps have a right to hang around the property, but using a high powered lens to peer into the property is an invasion of privacy. Especially if you have to use a high powered photo lens to achieve this.

        Rplace royal with normal everyday person and then change paparrazi to stalker/peeping tom. Then you can see why this is such an invasion of privacy.

    • Christina says:

      Jess,

      I see your point but even so, do Kate’s security really have the right to cordon off the countryside for miles around just so that nobody takes a pot shot (of any sort) while the Duchess tans her titties? I know that if I were living or travelling there, I’d be pretty peeved if I had to be inconvenienced in order to accommodate the tanning preferences of a visiting celebrity.

      If Kate’s security felt the balcony was too exposed – either to paps or to more sinister types – then they should simply have told them not to use it. For all we know they did just that, but were ignored. I just think it’s a bit too easy to blame the security folk, as also happened when Harry got drunk and got himself snapped in the nip.

      • Jess says:

        In Harry’s case, his security should have secured all phones and cameras before allowing anyone into his suite. That’s keeping it on the DL 101. In this case, I’m not sure if they are blaming security, so much as calling into question how secure Kate and William really are at any given time. Someone found them when they really and truly thought they were alone and in private. It just draws a lot of questions. It’s like if someone got shots of Barack and Michelle like this. Everyone would be wondering how that access even happened. For me it has nothing to do with tanning titties. The tanning titties just reiterates that Kate thought she was safe, when she wasn’t. It could have been a sniper rifle, and that’s a big concern for security.

      • Christina says:

        ‘In Harry’s case, his security should have secured all phones and cameras before allowing anyone into his suite.’

        For all we know they did, but Harry wouldn’t allow them. Or perhaps one or two phones – they’re pretty small – slipped through. In any case, it’s their job to protect Harry’s personal safety, not to stop a 27 year old man from acting like a moron.

        As for Kate, I don’t disagree with you, but again, what could the security people do? They do not have the right – or the resources – to block off the countryside for many miles around. As I’ve said, for all we know they may very well have advised Kate and Wills not to go on the terrace and were ignored. At the end of the day, they’re just employees.

  3. Ali says:

    Hey maybe this starts the process of Fergies daughters taking over the as heirs to the throne! Diane would roll in her grave at that!

    • taxi says:

      Surely you’re kidding. Do you really think the Beast & Eug can leapfrog over the people ahead of them in the order of succession? Read up on the rules.

      • brendapie says:

        The line of succession separates Beatrice from the throne quite a ways but until William and Catherine have children, anything is possible. In a couple of decades Beatrice’s place in the line of succession will rise and given the nature of both William and Harry’s military careers, it is certainly in the realm of possibility that there could one day be a Queen Beatrice.

        Do I believe it will happen? No. But I do accept the possibility. Until the heir and the spare are conceived anything is possible. What is guaranteed is that Beatrice will become a Counsellor of State later in her life.

      • LAK says:

        @Taxi – Your ignorance is outstanding.

        The Queen herself, was in exactly the same position as B&E before unexpectedly being catapulted into the top job so anything is possible. Ditto Queen Victoria and countless other monarchs.

        Name-calling 2 young ladies who have not put a foot wrong is not clever or witty.

    • GoodCapon says:

      As much as I don’t like their mum, I think she and Andrew did a good job raising Beatrice and Eugenie. They always kept their heads low and was happy to tag along in a royal engagement every now and then. They have no scandals that we know of (at least, not yet!). I think Beatrice is working now? Not sure about Eug.

      They only got bad press because of the hats they wore at the wedding and the mean-girling of ‘Cinderella’ which I think is absurd.

      • ZenB!tch says:

        +1. I can’t stand their mum and poor Bea favors her but I don’t see Bea or Euge doing anything wrong other than crimes against fashion which I think is par for the course among royals. Poor Kate seems to be trying to straddle the line between normal woman and royal woman fashion and I think that is why she looks so odd. I love the original rocker girl version of the dress and if I were Kate’s age and decidedly non-royal I would totally rock that thing. I looked my age if that when I was 30.

    • Amelia says:

      Yeah … that’s not how it works. If every heir who ever got caught up in a scandal got refused the right to the throne, then we’d probably have gone through double the number of Houses and Families by now.
      We’d run out of royalty.

  4. Marta says:

    I love this dress, I think she look matronly on the pictures but classy.

    • Palefire says:

      I love this dress too but it would be a BILLION times better sleeveless. Just re imagine it that way!!!! Even prettier. And prettier on a blonde !

  5. Alexandra Bananarama says:

    Does anyone else think William might be angry at Kate about the pictures as well as the press.

    It’s just a hunch, but with all their history and William’s temper, is it possible Kate is getting caught in the wake of his anger? It’s just a thought. Like he’s not physically abusive, but more in a petulant child throwing a fit kind of way.

    Those stories were everywhere while they were dating/seperated.

    And why does high ranking security suck so much now! First president Obama’s secret service scandal and now this….but if you’re outside topless and you don’t want others to sneak a peek, private chateau or not you should know better.

    And royal security unfortunately sucks as bad as POTUS secret service guards.

    • rtms says:

      Will was right there, he could have told her to put her top on. Clearly he had no problem with her going topless since he’s rubbing sun tan lotion on her back while being so. No he’s just pissed because this is just an embarrassment and they got caught. They can’t even enjoy a family’s place with out the press. He’s hated the press/paps for years since his mother died and this just reinforces it.

      • Alexandra Bananarama says:

        My thoughts on his anger would be towards getting caught, not that his wife topless. That’s just silly. It’s his wife!

        It’s reported he throws tantrums when things reflect poor on him in a very juvenile way.

        Ofcourse they deserve their privacy, but they’re public figures. It’s not going to happen and that is the price they pay for having a life where they can do as they like and bills are covered.

        That’s all i can give for a Saturday morning.

      • Molly says:

        Good lord, maybe they should laugh it off. She looks fantastic. Everybody has nipples, for Chrissakes. It’s not like she was going down on him.

      • LAK says:

        @Molly – one of the pics has her standing bent over with her bikini bottoms down with him rubbing lotion into her bottom…and his hand looks like it is in the middle!!!

        Editor says the ones they didn’t publish were salacious. If the bare bum to the world one is any indication….Yikes!!!

  6. Shy says:

    Well of course it’s breach of their privacy… But she should have know better. What was she thinking when she went topless outside? What was William thinking? They know that they are hunted by paparazzi because of their status. They know that no matter how they hide there is always possibility that pap will hide somewhere too.

    It’s one thing if those photos would be taken INSIDE house. That would be completely unacceptable. But she went topless outside. In plain sight of anyone. THEY are to blame in the first place. Just like with Harry.

    • Tory says:

      They just want to dictate where/where/how they get press. If they can’t control people, they get peeved. Why else would there be so much effort on behalf of the Palace to portray the Duchess as hard-working and serious when, in actuality, her ‘job’ seems to be picking out clothes and keepin’ it tight? I, for one, am SERIOUSLY not interested in showing any pity for these rich, self-centered, entitled figureheads — they certainly want all the perks without any of the cost, and no one else’s life works that way!

      • GoodCapon says:

        I think it’s William who’s become particularly spoiled with the royal treatment; that he always wants to have things done his way. From what I’ve read Kate was just happy to let things go and William was the one who wanted to pursue the lawsuit and go power-tripping.

        Frankly I’m just disgusted that the Palace (and William) pulled the Diana card in this. The Paris incident which resulted in several deaths and an unfortunate incident which resulted in several topless pics are not even on the same level.

      • Stig says:

        Well I decided to chime in.

        William as king will be head of the Chuch Of England. His wife should not strip in front of the staff even if they are not in the room cause surely they were not alone in that holiday home, not to mention doing it outside.

      • Madison says:

        Instead of suing, his wife should stop going topless, it might be a private villa but she was out in the open where the paparazzi could see her. Yes this is all about image and control they are royalty and think they are above everyone else, are use to people always bowing and saying yes then this happens, get over yourself William, stop suing and tell your wife to cover up next time she’s sunbathing out in the open. I get the impression Kate has been sunbathing topless since she was a teenager, too bad she married a prince and now the paparazzi are taking pictures of her topless it’s be expected since she’s the next queen.

    • Merritt says:

      They were not in plain sight of everyone unless everyone has a high powered camera lens. It is not as though they were out in a traditional yard where they could be seen by the naked eye from the street.

      The person who took the pictures is to blame. As are those who published them.

      • anonimouse8319 says:

        Those of us with traditional yards do not have the privilege that comes with non-traditional yards and the long lenses of the paps. That home is in sight of a public road, if William (in the least) did not consider that a long lens could capture her breasts, then these two are ill-equipped for life as a the power royal couple.

      • KaitX says:

        +1 Merritt I agree. They are entitled to expect privacy on an isolated estate

    • Anne de Vries says:

      More like ‘in plain sight of anyone with a top of the line telezoom lens’

      https://twitter.com/helenlewis/status/246917980573794305/photo/1

      • the original liv says:

        but how do we know that that picture/diagram is accurate? did the photographer say that that is where he took the pic? just curious.

      • Anne de Vries says:

        You can look at the angles in a photograph and then on a map draw lines to a point from where a photograph could have captured those lines. Looking at the landscape, you’d be drawing a line in that direction and keep going until you reached a point with enough elevation to be able to make those shots, and that a photographer could have reached. You end up on that dirt road.

        Then if you go to that point you can establish the point of origine reasonably accurately. Those trees on either side make it easier – it’s probably a fairly narrow window, even at this distance.

      • Fatkid says:

        Additionally, Daily mail has a statement from the photographer about the location.

      • Anne de Vries says:

        @ fatkid – do you have a link? I loathe the DM enough that I prefer not trawling the site.

    • Eleonor says:

      I agree with you: was it an invasion to their privacy? YES it was, but as someone stated before their security staff can’t shut down cities and streets etcetc to prevent paparazzi from taking photos of them.
      I get William is very sensitive about this, but if I go out on my balcon to sunbathe in topless I can’t complain if someone takes pictures of my boobs, even if I’m chez moi.

    • hannah says:

      Tyler Clementi should also have known better .

      See how stupid that sounds. Invasion of privacy is just that . No matter whose privacy it is .

    • carrie says:

      if you can’t be quiet in Luberon,you never will be quiet!
      the pics are taken with a huge telephoto lens:the paps was very very far (contrary to Harry,she didn’t know she was photographed)

    • amanda says:

      I completely agree! With their status I would be so beyond paranoid and feel like someone is always watching you are outside and the most sought after public figures for photos why even take the chance I really hope they don’t win this lawsuit. Yes it is an invasion of privacy but you are not some little known d lister you are the future queen and plus do you reeeaally need tan boobs that bad it annoyed me from the start

    • ZenB!tch says:

      This is nothing like Harry. Harry was an idiot – is an idiot. Harry got naked in front of strangers with cellphones. He’s lucky it’s not worse.

      Kate and William forgot who they are or are not familiar with those gigantic takes a crew to lift them lenses. If that was me and my husband on that balcony no one would care.

      I do wonder how this will impact Halle Berry’s case re: the French vs. US paps. It wasn’t the US *paps* that got Harry. LOL.

  7. Birdie says:

    The Duchess has green eyes, never noticed that.. anyway, I think they have every right to sue the heck out of Closer magazine. I still would abuse the search button on google to see these more “intimate” pics.

  8. someone says:

    I like the blue and white Temperley dress. I even went to their website to see if it was for sale. Did anyone else notice Kate has laid off the eyeliner a little bit in these photos? She didn’t line her lower lids as strongly as she normally does. Maybe she finally heard us.

  9. Ms. Candy says:

    When in a public place you have to be careful what you are doing especially in broad delight. She should be able to relax and enjoy herself while vacationing or spending quality time with her love ones.

    The pap’s just don’t care anymore and these tabloids posting the pics don’t care anymore either… They are getting worse by the minute with these celebs

    • RavenClaw says:

      This. Im honestly taken aback by the response that Kate somehow DESERVES this because she took her top off in her husbands presence in a secluded area. The graininess if the photos shows just how far away the pap was, which I really don’t think security could’ve found easily. As for Kaiser’s DEMAND to see sex photos – grow up. Kate may be lazy etc but that’s a breech of privacy that any normal person should be ashamed to ask for

      • Disbelieving says:

        I agree. Its a sad statement on all of us that these photos have so much demand. If there were no demand then there would be no need for a supply. Shame to be being gleeful about the possibility of viewing that which should be sacred and private between a husband and wife. The pictures were taken from a half mile away from a public highway. You could barely see the house from the vantage point. Technology has outstripped the ability to protect people. We need to have the maturity to not click on it. (Which is not going to happen. *sigh*)

      • Luxx says:

        just an FYI: I’m pretty sure Kaiser was saying it more in terms of “HOLY CRAP THIS WORLD-FAMOUS COUPLE WHO BARELY TOUCH OR LOOK AT ONE ANOTHER IN PUBLIC HAVE BEEN PHOTOGRAPHED GETTING IT ON??!THAT’S WORTH SEEING” as opposed to the somewhat personal, odd way you all are taking that statement.

        If anything I’d call it a natural, morbid curiosity :D

      • Ms. Candy says:

        Maybe I am bit baffled here but I didn’t say she deserve any of this to happen to her. I said she should be able to relax with her loves ones as in not needing to worry about some damn paps snapping her pic unexpectedly…

        otherwise it’s no big deal being topless, I have seen far worse photos of other celebs…

      • LAK says:

        BUt she wasn’t alone with her husband. There were security and staff nearby.

        In some ways it is like the Harry situation. Yes the lens was a mile away BUT just because the staff are used to seeing your boobs, is no reason to wonder outside when you are the no 1 pap target.

        PLUS This isn’t the first time royals have been caught out. William was very distressed when it happened to his mother, luckily the Spainish decided not to publish the photos so he knowing the lengths paps are willing to go to should have known better.

        No point saying he has a right to privacy. If i, an unknown with zero public interest in me, know that if i sun bathe topless there is a chance that some random will take a picture, what about them who are world famous. Why give peeping toms/paps the opportunity. Even if you think you are secluded. Fergie was in more secluded villa, the paps dug trenches to sleep in for several days before they got their money shot.

        Also, a simple screen on the terrace would have given them privacy.

        Just as it would have been idiotic of Harry to blame security for his lapse in judgement, so it is equally idiotic to blame the paps or security. Especially when there were staff all looking at her boobs too.

      • ZenB!tch says:

        I don’t think she deserves it. Harry totally deserved it but not Kate. There was an expectation of privacy for most people but unfortunately not for her. She doesn’t deserve it but I don’t think she should be surprised.

  10. Ann says:

    You Americans need to chill the fuck out. It’s just a pair of boobs. No harm done.

    • bluhare says:

      I don’t think it’s an American thing. It’s a people thing.

    • Disbelieving says:

      Which she did not choose to have aired for public consumption. Context is everything.

    • AG says:

      WE’RE perfectly fine with it, it’s the BRITISH PRINCE that’s suing ….

    • bettyrose says:

      LOL! Yeah, blame the Americans for this.

    • shewolf says:

      I like when Americans take offense to being called American. Its like they subconsciously know but because they are American they get uppity.

      • bettyrose says:

        I’m pretty sure no one was offended about being called an American (and, for the record, I don’t just subconsciously know that I’m American. I have an actual document that confirms it).

        I think we were puzzled at having that “CtFD” comment above directed at Americans rather than at the Royal Family. I haven’t seen one American get riled about this- and I know a lot of ‘em.

        On a side note, thanks to Kaiser for covering this on a Saturday!

      • ZenB!tch says:

        Being American, 99% of my friends are American. Everyone I know who has mentioned it being quite well behaved about this. This is not like Harry, there are no derogatory posts all over my Facebook feed, people I know feel sorry for her.

        I’m actually shocked they haven’t been published here – with those annoying puritanical little American bars across her nipples of course.

    • ZenB!tch says:

      We haven’t posted the photos. It’s those darned Southern European libertines that have. Obviously they think they have something salacious.

      We aren’t suing anyone to stop them. It’s that darned persnickety royal family that is doing that. Again, they think it’s salacious as well.

      Unlike HRM Americans are just amused. We have terrorists and nutty Christian fanatics to worry about, I don’t think we would even react much to Michelle Obama topless – although we would be much less amused.

  11. Polkasox says:

    I feel for the girl. Maybe she should know better, but she should be allowed to have some moments of intimacy/privacy with her husband. If she got caught changing in her bedroom because the curtains werent perfectly shut should she be chastized because she “should have known better”? The paps are despicable. This shouldn’t be legal.

    • Mrsjennyk says:

      Who exactly is “blaming the Americans”? Get over yourselves. It’s just a pair of boobs! I notice nobody has anything to say about PW rubbing lotion on her half naked ass!

    • Mrsjennyk says:

      Who exactly is “blaming the Americans”? Get over yourselves. It’s just a pair of boobs!

  12. Anne de Vries says:

    the fact that a paparazzo was even able to get this close to William and Kate

    Really? ‘this close’?

    Telezoom lenses can cover up to a kilometre these days. Think about that for a minute.

    Here’s a photo of (alledgedly) the photographer’s position and the chateau.

    https://twitter.com/helenlewis/status/246917980573794305/photo/1

    Even if that is not the exact position, covering that kind of distance is possible with zoom lenses these days.

    • Shannon says:

      I don’t believe this is the position the pap took the photo from for two reasons.

      One: He would have had to have been there for a quite a while to get that money shot. If he was standing on the road with a high powered camera someone would have saw him.

      This leads to the second reason I don’t believe this is the actual position. If he had been standing there with a zoom lens other paps would also have been there for the money shot.

      Paps are notoriously competitive, so whoever toook this photo wouldn’t have been in a visible position to alert others. He would have been hidden, so only he could get the money shot.

      My guess is he was in a tree or hiding in the bushes where he wasn’t visible.

      • Anne de Vries says:

        Who says he didn’t get an exclusive tip? I don’t think it was common knowledge where they were at the time they were there.

        As for your second point, wildlife photographers can be found in exactly such locations, carrying camera’s with massive lenses too. Unless you knew there were famous people around, I don’t think anybody would think twice about seeing somebody hanging around photographing things in the distance. Besides, looks like a quiet hill road to me.

      • Shannon says:

        I just find it hard to believe that some guy with a camera was standing on the road and no one saw him. Someone would have had to have seen him which is why I don’t believe he was just planted on the side of the road casually snapping photos.

  13. Meg says:

    Yes…it’s an invasion of her privacy.

    Yes…it’s part of the gig. You will be hunted 24/7, is it right? No. Is it going to stop? No.

    William can throw all the tantrum’s he wants, the paps will pay the fees and keep going.

    • emmieapricot says:

      I agree. It sucks that they have very little privacy, but unfortunately it comes with the job/title/gig… It’s not fair but what is!

    • Jackie O says:

      exactly. life isn’t fair, william. get over it.

      suing over pics of her tits?? gimme a break. dont walk around half naked outside, if you don’t want ur pic taken.

      he has an ‘us vs. them’ mentality…and he is never going to win.

    • Shannon says:

      Some of you people sound incredibily ignorant. I mean you sound just down right stupid.

      You are making it seem like it is okay that the pap got away with taking this photo because she should have known better. Since basic laws of privacy and decency elude you then I bet most of you would also think it’s okay if the pap peered in their window and took this shot.

      Simple fact is there is no difference between peering in the window and using a high powered lens to breach the privacy of couple located behind walls over a 1/2 mile away. Both obstacles are put there to provide privacy that when breached represents an invasion of privacy.

      Imagine you are not a royal and just some regular joe-schmoo. You’re out at a luxury resort which is private. You have the expecation of privacy because you paid for it! Then some peeping tom follows you home and realizing he can’t see you from that far away. He breaches your privacy with a high powered lens and takes photos of you. Then that stalker post the photos of you on the internet. Would you still be saying “I should have known better”?

      Give me an effing break. Some of you people need to read up basic privacy laws and remember that what you advocate for celebrities are in effect the same laws that will apply for and to you.

      • emmieapricot says:

        We’re just giving our opinion. If you don’t agree with our opinions, fine. You are more than free to state your own opinion. However, there is absolutely no need for name calling or swearing or your general negative attitude. This is a light-hearted celebrity blog – go somewhere else if you want to debate privacy laws.

      • LAK says:

        There is privacy and then there is stupid.

        If i was at a private resort,, even if booked out by me, there would still be staff present as there were at this chateau.

        I still wouldn’t take my top off. Not being sanctimonious. Just good old common sense.

        It’s the same as your parents telling you not to take candy from a stranger because that could lead to bad stuff going down so you didn’t.

        We don’t live in a utopian world where everyone is decent and considerate. I don’t undress infront of my windows and if i choose to walk around naked at home, i keep it indoors and close the curtains. Peeping Toms are a fact of life, so you adjust accordingly.

        You don’t wonder outside, with staff on hand who are all loooking at your boobs and expect that they are not going to take advantage either by taking pictures themselves or alerting the media when you are the no 1 pap target. Clearly these ” don’t have common sense.

      • Shannon says:

        Rather or not you think it was sensical for her to take her top off doesn’t dispute the privacy breach. If she wanted to show her chest off in the privacy of her home to her husband, the staff and anyone else inside that perimeter is her business. It still doesn’t give anyone the right to breach that privacy.

    • Shannon says:

      If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and walks like one well.

      Also…privacy laws is what this topic is all about. If you don’t want to be called out for something you say then perhaps you should go elsewhere.

    • ZenB!tch says:

      If there are sex pics he is lucky Closer has chosen not to publish photos of the royal stiffy. I feel for Kate, I think William should shut it. He is as responsible if not more so than she is. He should know a lot better than her what the paps of capable of. He’s been royal his entire life.

  14. KellyinSeattle says:

    I don’t think it’s such a big deal..like the dress/hair…She has to look a bit matronly as she is with the future kind of England (I don’t like Wills so don’t get me started)..I think suing would just draw more attn to the situation.

  15. Alti says:

    finally a new hairstyle!
    With that hairstyle she looks grown up. Yes, the dress looks girly, but it´s sweet.

    Her make-up looks better!
    But her skin is aging badly :-(

  16. teresa says:

    I just hope that their age will protect their as sanity unlike the 19 year old Diana. She was thrown onto the deep end while Charles and THAT bitch Camilla gloated while she drowned! Wills and Kate, keep your heads high and tell granny to back off! As for Camilla as Queen, can ‘t wait till the Britts tell Lizzy to get off. Worst mistake she’s made in the 50 years I’ve been watching

    • michkabibbles says:

      charles and camilla gloated? i don’t recall seeing any such public reaction, so you must have been invited to their private teas?

      • tmbg says:

        I don’t think she gloated. Those two went about things in the wrong way, but why was he forced into a marriage with Diana? Why couldn’t he have married Camilla from the get-go? I don’t have much royal knowlege so I have no clue if she was still married or not, but if she wasn’t, big deal if she was divorced.

        It would have spared Diana so much pain. She might have found a man her own age who truly loved her and I have no doubt she still would have involved herself in charities. Maybe she’d still be alive today if she didn’t get herself stuck in that royal web.

        But like I said, my knowledge is limited so maybe she actually wanted to be a part of that family for a time.

  17. Bradley says:

    I’m waiting for the sex pics which allegedly exist.

  18. anonimouse8319 says:

    Alright, I’ll do the dirty work. Kate, honey, you can never assume that you have privacy. Fergie was miles and miles from a main road and was papped. You are a member of the royal family. Your breasts are big money. I know Europeans fancy themselves so much more relaxed over sex and breast; apparently not when they’re royal breasts. I get so tired of those with privilege complaining. So what? You have to keep your top on, big deal.

    • Boo says:

      Precisely. See that big sapphire ring on your finger, sweetie? That means you traded your privacy for a title. Keep your top on.

      If she wants to sunbathe topless, she should rent a villa with an interior courtyard and get Wills to enforce a no-fly zone overhead. Otherwise, keep your toplessness indoors, where royal nudity belongs. For pete’s sake, if us commoners get it, why are the royals not getting it?

    • Fue McCormick says:

      If I were a celeb with a price on my head for photos and I wanted to tan my boobies I would strategically position chairs around an area and then drape towels over them and then lay in the center of them.

      • LAK says:

        Given the angle of the pictures, a simple screen along the terrace edge would have afforded them the privacy they needed to go topless.

  19. cocnut says:

    She’s been wearing less eyeliner on her lower lids on this trip (and sometimes heavier eyeliner on her upper lid)! Hasn’t anyone else noticed???? Looks good!

  20. GoodCapon says:

    The bigger crime here is not the topless pics but the fact that they skipped the Paralympics closing ceremony to take another holiday.

    As Olympic ambassadors they were supposed to do their job of showing up at the ceremony (really, how hard could it be?) but instead they had to forgo the ceremony because of ‘prior engagements’ and because they had to ‘prepare’ for their SE Asia tour. Fast forward a week later…

  21. Jaded says:

    It saddens me to think that the editor of Closer chose to publish these pictures when it was French paps who hounded Diana to her death. And that she chose to release them when William and Kate were on official business to further humiliate them. Finally, the fact that she’s a woman and yet would deliberately embarrass another woman in front of the world, defending her actions with some weasel words about “beautiful pictures of a loving couple”.

    Let’s call a spade a spade, she’s an evil, heartless and greedy c*nt who did it for the money and notoriety, and doesn’t actually give a “merde” about the beauty of the photos or the consequences. What a horrible POS she is.

    • Blue says:

      I agree, from reading that statement, I can picture a very smug smirk on her face as she typed it. Her reasoning such BS, it isn’t about love or beauty, it’s about her wanting money and attention for her magazine. Period. I mean there really was no good reason for them to publish those pictures. No one want or needed to see Kate’s breasts.

  22. Ella says:

    I don’t buy this “topless women are considered normal in France” argument. I’m pretty sure the women of France get to CHOOSE when they want to reveal their assets to the public.

  23. Aud says:

    I’d like to be sympathetic toward this couple, but they are so privileged and so goddamn aware of the way the media operates, that they should have known better.
    As for the magazine in question. What can be expected?
    In any case, she should realise that her status as William’s wife will basically place her in the same spotlight as Diana and a lawsuit is only going to make it worse.

  24. taxi says:

    This is a tempest in a teapot. Yes, Will, who has lived in the fishbowl for 30, should perhaps have anticipated this. He clearly didn’t object to his wife removing her top. They are married (to each other unlike some other topless royals). We don’t know how many acres surround the house where they stayed or where the pap was when he got the shots. No harm, no foul.

    Great hairdo for Kate.

    • The Original Mia says:

      The pool faces a road leading up to the residence. The DM has figured out where the pap was hiding to get the pictures. He stood on the road in the bushes and shot the photos. That’s why I have little to no sympathy. The house is clearly seen from the road. Why not place screens around the pool area so they could ensure their privacy? Why act as if they were on an island where the paps were prohibited from coming? Even when they were on an island, photos were shot of them on their honeymoon. Just so much stupidity on both their parts. I just can’t garner up much sympathy for them.

    • Hmmm says:

      Nor does Willy object that there are staff on the premises while his wife chooses to go semi-naked. Of course, servants/peons are not really human or feeling/thinking creatures.

      • Sassy says:

        I was thinking the same thing. Surely there were servants present in the house. Perhaps the toplessness is very commonplace when they are on vacations. They lead a glamourous life and are at sophisticated resorts, where topless sunbathing would be the norm and nobody would bat an eye. Deck of a yacht, secluded beach, they are young, who cares.

  25. Blue Moon says:

    “Scones & Crumpets-gate”?

  26. claire says:

    She was at a private residence and was not out in the public. I think it’s awful that these photos were taken and printed. It’s not cool to hide in trees a mile away and take topless photos of her. And it’s not cool for the paparazzi to make a choice for her that the entire world will see her naked body. It’s HER body. HER choice. It’s a total violation and I completely support the lawsuit.

  27. Shannon says:

    I agree 100% about the security. I actually think part of the reason for the lax security is Harry and Will don’t realize their deal with the paps is over. If anyone remembers, after their mother died the paps all voluntarily agreed to leave them be, which they did for the most part. Now though, all bets are off.

  28. EllenOlenska says:

    It s+cks for them. I’m waiting until they announce Kate’s pregnant and the magazine decides to sell the pictures as “future king’s conception pictures”.

    It is wrong, she had a reasonable expectation of privacy but Europe or not, dont take your top off, Duchess. Period. You just cant do it anymore. And yes, it is unfair. But it just is.It is unfortunately part and parcel of wearing the tiara.

  29. Dee Cee says:

    Where were the royal guards..? And.. those who tan naked while vacationing, working as a role model for their country; has lost their rights to privacy.. really stupid of her to expose herself to the woods and countryside with no walls even with walls.. and not expect something like this to happen, even their guards are closely watching them at all times..

    • Anne de Vries says:

      You do know just how far a telezoom lens can get you, right? Where were the royal guards? Not scouring the countryside up to a kilometre away to make sure there wasn’t anybody around. It’s not like these photos were made from 10 or even 100 metres away. More closer to 1000 metre.

  30. The Original Mia says:

    I have a question. I know we’re supposed to be outraged because Waity’s tits & bits were exposed. But…how exactly did the paps know where to find them when no one knew they were even in France until after their return? As far as everyone knew, Kate was receiving her final lessons for their Asia tour & William was working. Those were the excuses given for their absence from the closing ceremony of the Paralympics. While I think the security was lapse, I can’t exactly fault them. They probably were working from the stance that the trip was done in secret. Someone tipped the pap. The question is who did & for what purpose.

    William’s decision to sue does absolutely nothing. The magazine will pay a small fee. Waity will be able to donate it to a worthy cause and other publications will buy the photos and print them. All this does is prolong the scandal that really isn’t a scandal to begin with.

    Oh, I forgot, TMZ is saying these pictures blow Halle’s case out the water.

    • GoodCapon says:

      ‘But…how exactly did the paps know where to find them when no one knew they were even in France until after their return? ‘

      This is what I want to know too. Perhaps the paps are just very skillful at stalking or someone tipped them off (did Will & Kate piss someone off?). Either way, both cases are frightening to consider.

    • Jaded says:

      There were actually some press articles about their planned vacation in France. The paps are like cockroaches, they are everywhere, they have paid “insiders” who tip them off, they will stop at nothing to get a story or photo op so long story short, the royals aren’t safe from their intrusions anywhere.

      • The Original Mia says:

        Okay! So there were whispers they were going to be vacationing in France & Waity still proceeded to tan the girls and have her bum oiled in full view of anyone passing along that road. At some point, we have to stop coddling a grown woman and point out that a little bit of common sense goes a long way.

      • Anne de Vries says:

        You mean, in full view of anybody who passed along that road with a professional-grade telezoom lens. No way you can even see people, let alone their state of (un)dress, with the naked eye or even an ordinary zoom lens at that distance.

  31. Camilla says:

    Every day I am hoping the Princess Royal will inherit the throne. I wish she could. She actually does hard work. I am tired of how Catherine has been reduced to such trivial topics like what she wears every day. I am sure the Queen is not happy. She was not happy with the media intrusion into her family during the days of Princess Margaret and Peter Townsend. But she realized that the media would define the royal family much differently. She realized that it came with the 20th century and that with losing so many other royal houses after two world wars that the public would have different reactions to the institution. More importantly Elizabeth realized that publicity could go both ways and as a monarch it is her duty to try an ensure her family is portrayed in the most dignified manner. If she thought Margaret was a problem I can only imagine how she must feel about all the scandals and failed marriages of her children and now how she must feel that her two most prominent grandchildren are embroiled in scandal. First Harry and now Will, they need to get it together.

  32. lisa2 says:

    We live in strange times. And I will say when I go outside my home I assume that someone maybe watching. Celebs or public personalities have to know that the IDEAL of privacy is far different then the reality. You backyard is only private to the point that no one can see. The reality is you only have a “private moment if you a in a room with no windows or doors and even then someone could find a way to snap a picture

    Welcome to the new world everyone. And this could happen to anyone. And it does.

  33. Shannon says:

    She had a reasonable expectation of privacy and that should be enforced. Again, I hope the Royals sue them and find someway to blacklist Closer.

    Seriously, it’s not as though she took her top off at a public beach. It’s not as though she took her top off on a balcony where anyone walking by could see. Apparently there was at least an acre+ of land and trees surrounding the property. Not to mention, it’s private property. A normal human could not have seen them without a high-powered photo lens.

    I don’t care if she’s royal or not. Imagine if your are lounging in your totally secluded and private backyard…on your property. Then you find naked pictures (or pics of your kids) on the internet that were taking from hundreds of yards away. You would feel your privacy had been invaded and you would be right for feeling that way because it has been invaded!!!!

  34. Phil says:

    Enough about the security stuff celebitchy! Now days, you can take pictures from 100s of yards away from the inside of a hotel room blocks away. Seriously, these are paparazzis, they are professionals so of course they have great cameras. Anyway, I’d be ticked off too if there were published photos of my wife naked and I think it was right to sue. The magazine claims its a beautiful thing, but they didn’t claim that until there were threats of them getting sued. You know they published them to cause scandal. Don’t try all of this bullcrap about it being beautiful.

  35. Dimebox says:

    The pictures clearly showed that Will and Kate were completely relaxed and enjoying what they mistakenly thought to be private time. I am not a public figure, but if anyone, friend or foe, had taken such pictures of me and posted them on the Internet, I would be embarrassed and humiliated. Moreover, it would hurt to have the memory of an intimate moment not only ruined, but to realize that the chances of another time like that would be slim.

    As for William, he has shown his wish to protect his wife from the hounding Diana suffered from the papparazi. He lost his mother because of these jackals who pursue a photo with no regard to the consequences. I say that people who have to live the majority of their lives on a public stage deserve respect for their privacy. There is no picture I need to see enough to risk another death like Diana’s or the ruining of another person’s life by making them virtual prisoners. The palace must be reeling with Harry’s pics, Kate’s pics, and yesterday there was a very concentrated attack on the base in Afghanistan where Harry is based. Harry is a soldier, Kate is not, and didn’t deserve this. I think the French editor was an opportunistic bitch without integrity.

    • anonimouse8319 says:

      I don’t think Kate deserved to have her pictures published; she does, however, need to assume at all times that she is being watched, that paps are able to see her and have cameras that will take her picture.

      • Shannon says:

        C’mon….give me a break. Why does she need to assume at ALL times she is being watched?

        Yes, she is a public figure, but she is also entitled to some privacy. Should she expect cameras while she’s showering or taking a dump? Should she expect cameras when she has intimate relations with Will?

        My main issue with this photo and other photos taken at this distance is the person being photographed had the reasonable expecation of privacy. The paps invaded that privacy in a way that was unreasonable. Seriously, he/she was skulking in the bushes and crawling around on the ground probably more than a 1/2 mile away. He had to go out of his way to photograph her. As I said earlier, it would be different if she was within normal viewing distance, but she wasn’t.

      • ZenB!tch says:

        @Shannon “Why does she need to assume at ALL times she is being watched?”

        Because she IS.

      • Shannon says:

        That’s my point though. There has to be a line drawn. Everyone, royals, celebrities, and regular people, are entitled to rights of privacy. Just because someone feels someone else’s life is meant for public consumption doesn’t everything single thing they do is open to be viewed by the public.

    • Hmmm says:

      Diana died because of a drunken driver and her refusal to wear a seatbelt.

    • LAK says:

      to quote what Margaret apparently told Fergie when she was the subject of topless photos,’ We have enough private castles and houses for you to enjoy without exposing yourself.’ or words to that effect.

  36. Anguishedcorn says:

    So, I’m going to reverse my opinion that she should wear her hair pulled back more, because when I look at her with her hair out of the way, all I can see is that puggy little nose.

  37. mik says:

    I hope they win their lawsuit. Clearly, an invasion of privacy.

  38. anonimouse8319 says:

    A drunk driver killed Diana. A lax security team chose to take a route the paps could anticipate, easily.

  39. FreeSpiritedGirl says:

    Great! Great! Take that you Sneaky little fly on the wall!

  40. Lol says:

    I find myself kind of annoyed with people saying they’re public figures they should know better. They were on a private estate where they could expect privacy, not a public beach. Replace Kate&William with yourself and your spouse and the photographer with any other regular peeping Tom/stalker and then think about it again. Will the next step be a photographer hiding in the bushes with a telelense and taking pictures of them in their bedroom?
    Yes, they’re public figures, but even public figures can expect some privacy in private situations and places, such as the private estate of a relative.

  41. bettyrose says:

    I absolutely love that dress. It makes all that bother to be so slender worth it. Now, do I understand correctly that there might be some sort of sex act depicted in a few shots? I find it hard to believe they’d be that naive, but who knows, maybe in one moment of vacation-fueled passion they just didn’t care what happened. And for almost any one on this planet – including Brangelina – I’d say “more power two ‘em” – but these two are future heads of state, so the rules for them are just different.

  42. Jess says:

    I just saw the picture. What’s the big deal? She’s very flat chested. My neighbor has bigger boobs and he’s a man!

    • Jaded says:

      @ Jess, the “big deal” isn’t the size of her boobs, it’s that the pictures were taken without her knowledge, in a private location, while they were on a private vacation.

      The “big deal” is that they were taken by a French papparazzi for a gutter publication, and the French papparazzi basically chased William’s mother to her death.

      And the “big deal” is that the photos were deliberately released while the royal couple were on an official tour just to have them suffer even more world-wide hurt and humiliation.

      It’s not about the size of her boobs.

      • K says:

        I disagree. The “big deal” is they were on yet another vacation!

      • GoodCapon says:

        So true, K. The “big deal” here is that they skipped their royal duties to go on yet another vacation again. It sends a message that the Paralympics is not worth bothering over.

      • GoodCapon says:

        ^ Sadly this little but all-too important fact will be lost amidst all the mock outrage and hand-wringing.

  43. Marigold says:

    So, let me get this straight-SHE has to change her behavior to accommodate the sick fuck who took her picture? SHE has to accept that this is how the press works but the sick fuck who took the picture doesn’t have to change a damn thing about his behavior? Wow, take away the tiarra and the pretty sapphire, and she’s just a woman who had her photos taken nude against her will. If she were my friend and came to me, I would react with appropriate sympathy and anger. It surprises me how many people don’t have the same reaction.

    • Pandy says:

      So well put. I hope they sue their @sses off so the “red line” is respected in future.

    • ShugAveryPee says:

      YES she is a ROYAL every bit of her behavior must change the minute she said ” I will” … That is the way it is… Keep your clothes on…I for the life of me never understand why people come outside naked in public.. she isn’t the first woman this happened to… it happens to regular people too just search youtube…

  44. Feebee says:

    Lol just made a really good point. At what point does a paparazzi become a peeping Tom? Being a public figure is not a free for all.

    The Palace has every right to finally get angry enough to sue. Because where will it stop otherwise? Diana had everything thrown at her including hidden cameras at her gym. I cannot fault William for being royally pissed and genuinely concerned. I don’t think he can or is angry at Kate. I’ll bet it’s not the first time she’s sunbathed topless and he obviously didn’t tell her to put her top back on.

    Even amidst any humour and/or excitement or whatever this brings, there has to be a line and I think this is it.

    And I hope that everyone in Halle Berry’s case is taking note. She must be spewing.

  45. Susannah says:

    Emotions aside, if a woman (common or commoner turned royal) does not want to be photographed in the nude then DO NOT TAKE YOUR CLOTHING OFF IN PUBLIC! This is a truth that mothers have passed on to daughters for eons.
    Get naked in private!

    • Jaded says:

      Ummm…she wasn’t in public. She was at a highly private, walled-in estate owned by William’s cousin. On a private vacation. He only rents it out to family and friends. It’s invasion of privacy, and she did nothing wrong, she didn’t invite it by parading around topless at a public resort.

      The pap snuck inside the property illegally, and sat with a mega-telephoto lens in a tree for days in camo gear waiting for the money shot.

      This is an unforgiveably vile and cruel act done thoughtlessly to someone who lost his mother as a result of French papparazzi chasing her down, and during William and Kate’s official tour of Malaysia, just to garner the most attention.

      I’m totally on side with the royals and hope to God they can shut down this and other scurrilous publications that pander to this kind of harrassment.

      • M says:

        Actually they were by the pool which isnt hidden by any walls or coverage. You could clearly see the house and pool from the road, and while you would need a camera with a zoom lens to get the pictures, you would probably be able to see that they are people on terrace with your naked eye. The photog was standing on the road, not in a tree. If you could see them from the road, they were in public.
        Also, Lord Linley rents out the house to anyone who can afford it, not just family and friends. If I have $50,000, I could stay there if I wanted to.

      • LAK says:

        Estate isn’t walled in. The pool area is visible to the road including the little one that runs just under the balcony. Staff were present, so everyone was getting an eyeful.

        A simple screen along the terrace would have made them invisible to anyone on both roads.

    • A~ says:

      She wasn’t in public.

  46. Duckie says:

    It’s such a disgusting breach of privacy. The pictures were taken with a long lens camera and, according to bbc news for example, were taken far from the property. The property itself is PRIVATE, nobody had the right to take pictures of either of them. They weren’t doing a royal duty, they were having a weekend away. For a country that prides itself on having the strictest privacy laws, this is disgusting. Kate has a right to do what she wants when she is on vacation- and nobody saying “oh she should have expected something like this” can make me see it differently. As for the alleged 26 page spread by an Italian magazine, of course they would devote the same magazine space to a normal celebrity- not. This whole episode has thoroughly jaded, even further, my view of the media. I am a British citizen, and I’m just thoroughly upset at the whole thing- including the Irish media who have published the pics. There was no need for any of this.

    • Jaded says:

      Well stated Duckie!

    • LAK says:

      @Duckie – As a British citizen you should be upset at being lied to.

      This wasn’t a weekend away. They went on a Tuesday returning at Friday. During the paralympics for which they were ambassadors. The Palace explained their absence by saying William had RAf duties and Kate was preparing for Asian tour.

      If they hadn’t been papped, we’d be none the wiser. Yes it is a breach of privacy, but the bigger and more important point is that they were caught out in a lie and now this veryy disproportionate response.

      • charl_huntress says:

        @LAK

        I don’t get why that is such an issue. Lots of people play hooky from work sometime.

      • Duckie says:

        http://uk.eonline.com/news/344497/kate-middleton-prince-william-holiday-in-france-ahead-of-south-pacific-royal-tour this states that they were away for the weekend. either way, i don’t care- they’re entitled to a vacation, and they didn’t “ditch” the paralympics, like people keep insisting! it doesn’t bother me whether or not i’ve been “lied to”, what bothers me is the fact that people’s privacy is obviously fair game now. it’s ludicrous and ridiculously unfair.

      • JulieM says:

        Charl— Yes, lots of people play hooky sometimes. The Cambridges whole life seems to revolve around playing hooky from their responsibilities to enjoy what seems like one endless holiday. That’s the difference here. I cannot stand this pair. They really do deserve each other.

        LAK- Yes, the response is very disproportionate. A little deflection/redirection going on here perhaps? OOOH- look over there; why it’s a lawsuit brought to you by the laziest royal couple in the family.

      • LAK says:

        @charl_huntress. – it’s a big deal because we are constantly told how hard working at their various jobs these 2 young people, and don’t take holidays but are being good citizens down in Wales.

        People play hooky from work, but I am sure should your employers, in this case the British Public, find out that you were playing hooky, they would and should be pissed.

        They lied to avoid the paralympics for which they had been hired for PR purposes to be ambassadors by saying there other commitments RAF (William),Tour Prep (Kate) were keeping them too busy to attend.

        Unfortuneately for them, we now find they were on holiday!!!!

      • LAK says:

        @Duckie – that report is wrong. They went on Tuesday and returned on Friday.

        A lone pap pic of them after the fact circulated but as Kate had a top on in that one, few people picked up on it, but it triggerred a few news articles saying that they were on holiday, making it seem that they had gone at the weekend when they infact they went mid-week.

        This points to a pattern of behaviour from them where they do as they please, and the rest of the world be damned whilst receiving and emjoying all the privileges and perks.

  47. Hayley says:

    If there are pictures of them making whoopie outside, it’s partly their fault. They know photogs are out there EVERYWHERE looking to get pictures. How do they know their own security people aren’t taking pics and selling them? If they want privacy during intimacy they should retire to a room with a closed door.

    • christinne says:

      that’s most likely what happened: someone told someone else that will and kate are going to vacation there AND kept them posted with what the young couple does.

      it looks like someone is pissed off at the royal family…..and pics are leaking….

      i can’t not even imagine their state of mind right now…if they really did have sex then…juts thinking those pics might leak out as well…..

      terrible situation to be in.

      ps the boobe are not good. IMO…

  48. teehee says:

    Im starting not only to like her less, but to begin disliking her?

  49. Perfume says:

    All I want to know is who told the photographers, that these two were on holiday at the Villa. I don’t see any articles stating that the photographers were camped outside the villa waiting for these two to arrive, this sounds like someone received a tip off. I hope some journalist gets to ask this question, it has been bugging me since this article broke.

    Secondly why blame security, was this villa not CCTV enabled knowing that William will be there with her. Thirdly are the security employed to tell Kate when to tan topless or are they employed to make sure they are kept out of harms ways. Fourthly were the security employed to be running up and down the road making sure no paps are around. My take on this is that someone tipped the paps off, or someone took these photos and sold them to the media. The truth will come out eventually.

    • Jaded says:

      There were a few articles about them planning a short vacation in France before their tour, it was public knowledge. Also, the paps stop at nothing to find out where the royals go – they managed to get honeymoon pics of William and Kate despite NO press about where they were going. They pay tipsters, they stalk airports, they’re like a secret service with a whole army of paid informants so no matter where the royals go in private, the paps will always find out.

      • LAK says:

        Actually it was the other way round. There was no public hints of this holiday. There was public reports about holiday mid tour which i guess they are doing right now, but not before. They were supposed to be at the paralympics and when they only showed for a few dates, it was explained away with William at RAF duties and KAte prepping for the tour.

        Their honeymoon destination was broadcast along with fact that they booked out entire resort, and the fact that they had to delay due to Osama Bin Laden being killed the weekend they were supposed to fly.

        It was also widely reported that they had asked for and been granted a press ban worldwide to enjoy the honeymoon. The fact that pictures surfaced a year later, almost to the day indicated that the press ban was for exactly one year.

  50. Snappyfish says:

    I think the point of this suit is that it occurred in France. The same country where the paparazzi hunted his mother to her death. He has always been v v protective of Catherine (& her family, for that matter) they they not be subjective to that same “in season” his mother had to endure.

    They were on private property owned by family. They should be afforded their privacy. Good for him to sue. By drawing a line in the sand might be the only way to protect his family from the tragedies of his past

  51. Pandy says:

    i feel sorry for her/them. She’s not some drunken starlet out partying on a beach. Their duties require a certain dignity. She looks like she’s lost some of her sparkle. It must be difficult to hold your head up knowing everyone’s had the opportunity to scope out your breasts and doubly so in a conservative country.

  52. skuddles says:

    Good, I’m glad they’re suing. Royal or not, they are still entitled to privacy. And if they don’t nip this garbage in the bud, paps will just go to further and further lengths to get those money shots – same as they did with Prince Di.

  53. Less is More says:

    Privacy shmivacy. That’s what u get when marrying into royalty as outsiders.
    It’s been happening for centuries. Poor Diana; arguably more blue blood than Chuckie Boy was just another victim outsider.

  54. Name says:

    Why does she keep wearing the same nude heels?

  55. A Fan says:

    Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should (meaning the paparazzi).

  56. Liberty says:

    Is this the same “France” where some celebs want to move with their daughter for privacy?

  57. Angelique says:

    Kate showed her boobies off outside closed doors as far back as 2006 (google Kate bikini Ibiza). She has also shown the world her bare bum on a Canadian tarmac. As well, an endless array of panties, thongs and yes, as the English call them, “bits”. Is anyone that surprised by all this?

    • Lauren says:

      Kate’s bits are teeny-tiny, and look as if they have never outgrown a training bra. Most boring scandal ever.

  58. charlie says:

    Dollycurls deserves every bit of this. As ambassadors of the Paralympic Games, they should have been “working” there, not taking yet another vacation disguised as a “previous commitment” and sending a strong message that the Paralympics are beneath them. Karma, Waity! Gets ya every time.

  59. Lushus L. says:

    This gives new meaning to Kate’s button obsession.

  60. shewolf says:

    I don’t think she is aging terribly. How hot would you look being photographed point blank in the face? Kate’s always out and about doing things (albeit nothing strenuous) but she isnt exactly standing around on a red carpet or posing for photos in a studio.

  61. F5 says:

    Ugh she looks so old and matronly..She’s pretty though ( and pretty boring)

  62. erika says:

    Le F***que Off to le French!

    and Bastardos! to the Italians!

    i agree, they are in love, and shagging like bunnies, hurrah hurrah!!! and i totally embrace european (which FYI, brits get ‘pissed’ when you refer to them as ‘European’ as well…they’re adamant they’re not, they’re British, the British Isles….and you know what? they are!)

    regardless of this french bitche’s ‘joy’ excuse, it really, really is so tacky and crude…

    ESPECIALLY…given the fact that French Papparazzi DROVE DOWN PRINCESS DI to her DEATH!

    for the French paps, to pull this over prince william, near the date of diana’s anniversary, is really pure crude, mean and vindictive.

    sue their asses.

    and kate? i’m on your side, doll, but don’t worry, you have a STUNNING body, you’re beautiful, let it all be.

    at least you’re not reaching to be a 36B at best : )

  63. Bex says:

    The argument over whether or not the pictures were ‘shocking’ or whether the response was disproportionate has no relationship to the argument that privacy was violated.

    I’d like to think a woman has some choice whether her breasts (photographed unknowingly while she was vacationing on PRIVATE property) are splashed across the pages of a magazine.

  64. Anne says:

    For a woman who practically lives at her salon, Kate has a surprising amount of white hair.

  65. erika says:

    ladies…wait a minute.

    I have a best friend, she was fairly obese, 5.5″ and almost 300. She is the gal, everyone LOVES to be around but she had a lot of insecurities about her weight. She lived on the bottom floor of this 8 story apartment in downtown Portland.

    One afternoon, NOT evening, she came out of the shower, w/a towel, but bra on top. she saw a dude, PEEPING TOM, right outside her window, squatting on the floor, pants down,masturbating.

    They caught each others eyes. She was out of her mind, violated, scared.

    Now, I lived in the same nieghborhood, downtown, and from where she showed me he was hiding, he was actually on the grounds of the aprt complex NEXT door!

    According to some folks theory here, HE would have had the right to wank his johnson from where he was! wouldn’t that infuriate YOU!and if he had a zoom lense, he could take pics of you too

    so, think of it, next time you’re picking your nose, or scratching your camel toe, getting drunk, picking a zit or giving your hubbie a BJ, I don’t know!

    would YOU want zoom long shot pics of YOU blasted ALL OVER THE WORLD?

  66. Elisabeth says:

    at least with those photos, we can be sure of 2 things: she’s far too skinny and she’s not pregnant!

  67. Marta says:

    she is looking more and more like Wallis Simpson:)

  68. LAK says:

    i wish they”d stop pulling the Diana card. It’s amazing what short memories people have which the Palace and William are counting on.

    Diana GAVE UP her security which increased the number of paps and their cheekiness. She was so paranoid about them spying on her that she wouldn’t habe them back when they offerred to reinstate them because of the harrassment.

    She ended up reliant on the shoddy security measures taken by which ever person was hosting her. Unfortunate for all, those security measures turned out to be fatally lax.

    In this case, no one was hunting down William in quite the same way they hunted his mother. This was clearly an opportunistic get. The fact is W&C have been able to holiday and live their lives quite well without paps chasing them down. The one time they are caught out and Diana is invoked???!!! BITCHES PLEASE!!!! As the Americans would say.

    Diana didn’t have to go to France to be hounded. She had to run whilst attempting to go about her daily life in London as paps shamelessly chased her down the street. Even in death, they still took pictures of her dying moments.

    Saying this is turning into a Diana situation is such hyperbole but clearly the Palace knows what buttons to push for the public to sympathise with William without looking at the situation.

    And the very pertinent fact that they were caught out in a lie.

    And all this talk of jailing the paps!!!!disproportionate much?? Whatever will he want to do to real criminals.

    Finally, why isn’t the palace and indeed the public in general up in arms about Prince Philip’s upskirt peen photos from last month?

    If they can go to France after the Harry photos, and the Prince Philip photos, and still take their clothes off outdoors hoping that no one will opportunistically take pictures, then they don’t have brains.

    • Nymeria says:

      +1. By the way, I never knew that RAF duties & prepping for an Asian tour were defined as “sunbathing in France.” Those dankish, dread-bolted barnacles! (Shakespearean insults, how I adore thee!)

  69. Benny says:

    I don’t know the laws in France. But in America, the police are allowed to fly over your residence and use binoculars or other enhancement devices to see what you’re doing OUTSIDE. If William and Kate were selling drugs,for example, instead of sunbathing, the cops could photograph and arrest them for it. I think it’s incredibly naive of them to think that they ever have privacy when they are outdoors. Ever. Here’s a “crib sheet” — if your position on the property means the cops would have been able to see you from a helicopter, then you didn’t really have an expectation on privacy.

    I also think the exaggerated outrage is just a smokescreen to cover their laziness and uselessness. Now “poor judgment” can be added to the list.

  70. ShugAveryPee says:

    Well I will state this since I see no one has… I always say this … If the paps will take a full frontal nude picture of a dead Presidents Widow ( Jackie O) while she is on a private Island that her new hubby owns … then who are you that they won’t? They took pictures of the Late Princess Diana while she lay in a car dying from injuries… Look it is what it is… The exchange you make for never having to work another day in your life… For not having to worry about basic needs that everyday people must worry about… She as well as anyone over 18 is aware of when you marry into a royal family … especially the british royals… No if they peeked into her bedroom that would be considered a violation of privacy and illegal… When you are out doors in public be it behind mansion walls or on a yacht in the middle of the ocean you are opening your self up to be photographed PERIOD…. Does it suck !! I suppose… but in the grand scheme of things compared to the luxuries she gained.. it ain’t that bad…. I never understood people being outside naked anyway but hey to each his own… She is the next Queen of England so she has to carry herself different… That is why a lot of people were saying in AMERICA *and I am a proud American* ” Hope she knows what she is in for” .. We American’s could care less about some topless pictures of a “Princess” because we do not even understand for the life of us why you all still even have a monarch … Plus we have a reality star that is famous for making a sex tape and leaking it .. so a little titties we could care less about.. a far as privacy laws… EVERY COUNTRY IS DIFFERENT

  71. Mrs.krabapple says:

    Seems like karma to me. They shouldn’t have lied about having to ” work” as an excuse to ditch the Paralympics.

    I wonder if the Paralympics will sue them for breach of promise, or emotional distress when they found out the royals lied to get out of their duties? Probably not. But it would be just as much “justice” as the royals suing a tabloid.

  72. Angelinaballerina says:

    Sorry I think it’s a human right to have some privacy and the same goes for celebs and royals
    Nothing can change the fact that it’s a gross invasion of privacy
    I can understand why in America you have those laws to monitor people outside but it does seem a bit scary that the police and god knows who else are allowed to spy on you
    I just think laws and rules we have are being chipped away at and before long they will have cameras in our homes
    I know they are sought after but as long as they do their duties I think they should be allowed some privacy. It must be hard having your life under the microscope how will they be able to have grounded happy children if they are photographed every time they walk outside I would hate to have been born into that life I’d rather be poor than put up with what he has to

    • LAK says:

      ….But they weren’t doing their duty. A fact that seems to have been lost in all this. They ditched the paralympics for which they were ambassadors and claimed to be working RAF,tour prep respectively. If they hadn’t been papped people would think that’s what they were doing and look what dytiful young royals they are.

  73. Dana says:

    No wonder the palace is upset, Kate’s boobs are atrocious looking.

  74. Shoe_lover says:

    the photographer was a kilometre away- I don’t think security patrols a kilometre away from the royals. I saw a photo of where the photographer was standing with the chateau marked in the distance and it was a speck

    the big deal about these photos is
    a) they are an invasion of privacy. they are akin to taking photos through her bedroom window and
    b) Catherine is the future Queen of England and the Commonwealth and she deserves respect.

    Have people forgotten that Princess Diana died because of overzealous paparazzi? these people need to be reined in.