Another paparazzi traffic accident: this time it’s Michael Jackson’s kids

Michael Jackson memorial service held at Staples Center in Los Angeles.
The situation with paparazzi going to any lengths to get photos of celebs and their kids has been out of control for a long time. A couple of weeks ago we told you about an intentional fender bender involving new mom Nicole Richie, in which a paparazzi rear-ended her and then his co-hort snapped away while Nicole cried and the photog was led away in cuffs. Last night, a similar scenario played out in L.A. when photogs chasing the Jackson family rear-ended one of the cars – but sources say that only the security detail was in the car and not any of the kids. Still, injuries were reported.

A photographer following Michael Jackson’s children got into an accident Wednesday with one of the family’s vehicles in Los Angeles, according to police.

“The damage was minor and there were no injuries,” says Sgt. Ann Pickering. “A report was taken and it’s under investigation.”

It wasn’t known whose car was struck in the San Fernando Valley except that it wasn’t the one carrying the late singer’s children. The Jackson kids are often accompanied by a nanny and security guards.

[From People]

It must have been scary for the kids to hear about, but unfortunately it isn’t the first time they’ve been in one of these situations. Anyone who has seen the Martin Bashir documentary “Living With Michael Jackson” will recall the segment in which a Jackson fanatic approaches the children and starts touching them. Then, Jackson attempted to take the children, who were very young, to the zoo. The kids were swarmed by photographers and Prince Michael was poked in the eye by a cameraman. It’s sad, but these children are used to being chased and harassed. It’s just a good thing that no one was seriously hurt this time.

Michael Jackson memorial service held at Staples Center in Los Angeles.

Related stories

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

15 Responses to “Another paparazzi traffic accident: this time it’s Michael Jackson’s kids”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Kaboom says:

    Time to regulate the profession like private investigators.

  2. Firestarter says:

    With the tragedy of the death of Princess Diana and all the other celeb incidents, isn’t it about time the paps are held to some sort of distance rule and also severely punished? It won’t be long before there is another incident like the Diana one if they keep up their rapid pursuits of celebs when they are in their cars.

  3. Just a Poster says:

    Firestarter I agree. Those poor things, this is the last thing they need right now.

  4. gg says:

    You wonder, as the years go by, and this stuff escalates to worse proportions, when somebody’s going to wake up and enact a law … Wasn’t all the Britney stuff enough to make an impression? Apparently not. Sad situation. The sleazeballs don’t care about getting injured themselves, they’re desperate for the money shot. There should also be a cap on incentives for photographs, but I don’t know how they would enforce that. The purchasers are just as unscrupulous.

  5. Firestarter says:

    I meant RABID, not rapid.

  6. Sumodo says:

    No following celeb kids. No more paps running after the Jackson kids, Suri “I am really 4″ Cruise, the Madden kids, etc. No publishing the pics unless they are posed and the paps were invited to take them. It’s ridiculous. They are not celebrities unless the world has gone all pervvy and pedophilic.

  7. Lita says:

    Msat you said injuries were reported but then they don’t say that in the news excerpt – is there some part of the report I missed or was that a typo?

    I agree that “something needs to be done,” but I cannot think of how it would work. – ? On the other hand though it looks like paparazzi break existing laws all the time (privacy, negligent driving, endangerment) so maybe under those laws pap’s could be prosecuted to the extent of the law. Not knowledgeable about US/CA law though so maybe that is difficult for some reason.

  8. Lita says:

    @firestarter – “rapid” worked nicely as well :o )

  9. Westender says:

    Why this obsession to take photographs of the children of celebrities? Let them have a childhood, and maybe it is time to look at restrictions for the paparazzi. Does someone have to die for that to be done?

  10. Anak says:

    I thought that after the Lady Di episode, governments all over the world would do something to stop these crazy paparazzi. They should be put in jail, like anyone is, when doing something so dangerous, especially when there are kids involved.

  11. GatsbyGal says:

    Unreal. Isn’t this behavior technically stalking? I dunno, it just seems like legal action needs to be taken in cases like these. The kids could’ve been seriously hurt.

  12. Tess says:

    The older kids, esp the boy, look just like their father, the good Doctor Klein, dermatologist (and apparently sperm donor) to the stars.

  13. Lenore says:

    I just find it totally bizarre that there aren’t already laws sufficient to deal with the paparazzi, from the long-lens on the beach type to the mob chasing the schoolkids home in busy traffic. Isn’t spying illegal? Isn’t stalking illegal? Harassment? Reckless endangerment?

    My brother can’t even film his son’s school play without special permission. How can it be legal to follow a total stranger around in public, taking pictures of their children, for profit, without permission?

    I’ve never ever bought into this whole “Well, you wanted to be a celebrity so you have to put up with the paparazzi” horseshit. Someone makes a movie, maybe they should expect the natural human reaction of people looking at them and going, “Hey, isn’t that…?” But to have your privacy completely stripped from you is despicable, it’s a denial of human rights. FFS, they’re only actors and musicians; criminals on probation aren’t hounded like this! And to do it to their children – who didn’t volunteer to be famous – is just vile.

    And yeah, there are a few celebs who court it and for whom one’s sympathy is limited, but if it pisses off Lindsay and Paris and the Kardashians not to be photographed everywhere they go, and if restricting the paparazzi causes famewhores like Heidi Whatever and Spencer Tit to shrivel up and die, then that’s got to be a plus…

  14. Beth says:

    California did pass some kind of paparazzi law and I thought their were others in the books but I don’t think law enforcement takes it seriously. When I see some videos and hear 911 tapes the police seem more upset with the celebrity than the paps. When a story comes out about a pap incident a lot of posts say that’s the price of fame, the celebrity shouldn’t go out, or they should hire better security. I don’t think the general public and law enforcement will take the paps seriously until a private citizen is severely hurt by them. A lot of people see this as a celebrity problem not a public one.

  15. Kathie says:

    Anyone out there know if it would limit a celebrity’s exposure if they licensed their image and the images of their family? If the court held that said images were being sold for profit regardless of where they were taken and that was in violation of the licensure agreement could they then sue the tabloid outlet who published it. Does this make sense or not, it does to me but I know nothing about the law.