Posted on 12/05/2005 11:54:32 AM PST by new cruelty
DECEMBER 5--Lawyers for Jennifer Aniston have warned publications that they will face an invasion of privacy lawsuit if they print topless photos of the actress taken recently while she was apparently sunbathing at her Los Angeles home. In a blistering letter sent to celebrity magazines, attorney John Lavely wrote that the publication of photographs "showing [Aniston] topless or in the act of taking off or putting on her top" would expose those titles to "substantial monetary damages." In his letter, Lavely wrote that the topless photos were taken by paparazzo Peter Brandt, who allegedly used a "powerful telephoto lens" from a perch more than a mile away from Aniston's home. Below you'll find a copy of the Lavely letter, which includes a few redactions requested by TSG's source. Lavely, of the powerhouse L.A. litigation firm Lavely & Singer, noted that Aniston has just filed a lawsuit against Brandt in Los Angeles Superior Court and that the star's London lawyers had obtained a restraining order barring publication of the topless photos in the U.K. (3 pages)
Yep.
I find that with my guys - they are really thinking about something that is too complex to be answered in one line.
What are you thinking about... would become... "I was thinking about maybe buying a new office building around the corner from blah blah blah... "
Which is still in the early stages of constructive thought - therefore, hard to discuss.
Know what I mean?
agreed. I have yet to see an episode.
Leeann Tweeden eh'. I'll add her to my "research". Thanks.
"Still, boobage is boobage. :)"
Careful, people have been posting Helen Thomas pics all night.
Valid point, but it's all about the timing. It's amazing how important stuff can be with 2 laps left in a great race. Most of the time, I'm up for any kind of discussion, but let me see theend of the race, please. If it's really important, it can wait 2 minutes, unless it's the dog on fire again.
So how's that relationship thing going for you anyhow?
TIVO.
Which one?
I'm trying to find the perfect man and decide to date semi-perfect men in the meantime. It's all good. The pity is many of them actually know each other - vaguely, at least.
Shhh...
When I pick one - I'll let you know.
That's a long-odds gamble. Of course, it helps if you're perfect yourself.
I settled for merely excellent, myself. Now I've got four kids and the picket fence. My excellent mate isn't a Pitts jockey, but I'm doing my best to turn my daughter into one.
---She has been photographed topless at the beach before she made it big, now she is worried about unauthorized photos? Double standards. Guess it is ok to show them when you are climbing the ladder, but now they are worth more? She makes me sick just like the rest of the Hollywood sluts that do it when they get paid huge amounts, then act like Born again Christians at a Sunday picnic when the photogs catch 'em off gaurd.
On the other hand, I despise the yellow rag media and the paparazzi whose output fuels them.
I don't know where she lives, but I'm assuming that her deck/backyard is secluded. Otherwise, why would the photographer need to sit back so far and use heavy duty equipment to get a shot of her?
Here's a thought: What if that man was a stalker with a loaded rifle, and Jen was outside weeding her garden? People do have a right to privacy.
She lives on the beach in Malibu, a beach where the public has access (although the libs, including David Geffen, have fought allowing the public to have that access for 20 years.) And the photographer has denied the claim that he was a mile away, pointing out that he'd have to have NASA-worthy satelllite equipment to get such clear pictures from so far away.
Here's a thought: What if that man was a stalker with a loaded rifle, and Jen was outside weeding her garden? People do have a right to privacy.
Red herring. If the students at Penn who had the windows open inside while having sex could not expect to have an alleged right to privacy, somebody whose backyard is the beach certainly cannot expect that.
And I frankly think it quite disingenuous that Aniston, who knows that photographers follow her everywhere, is all in a tizzy because they caught her outside topless. This was a deliberate act to get her names in the papers, and get people talking about her, now that nobody seems to care about how she feels about Brad Pitt anymore.
I didn't know she lived on the beach. I'm familiar with the celebs trying to block access to the peons, several years ago. Lol, why didn't they just buy property in the mountains if they want privacy?
Celebrities need to exercise common sense and prudence. We just passed the anniversary of John Lennon's murder. Yes there is a trade off for being a celebrity, but the kooks keep pushing the line. Years ago, Arnold Schwarzenegger and his wife Maria, were run off the road taking their kids to school. Arnold had just gotten out of the hospital for heart surgery. I quit buying the supermarket rags after that.
This morning, I saw a clip of Angelina Jolie(speaking of Brad Pitt), being mobbed by a bunch of reporters. Her assistant was knocked to the floor. Her crime? She snuck into a building for a speaking appearance, and stopped to sign a couple of autographs. That'll teach her for being gracious.
Maybe this was a publicity stunt on Jen's part, but it was a stupid one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.