Skip to comments.
Palace to file criminal complaint over Kate pics
AP via Yahoo ^
| September 16, 2012
| Jill Lawless
Posted on 09/16/2012 2:06:31 PM PDT by EveningStar
Lawyers for Britain's royal family will make a criminal complaint against the photographer who took pictures of Prince William's wife Kate sunbathing topless in the south of France, William's office said Sunday.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
TOPICS: Chit/Chat; Society
KEYWORDS: duchessofcambridge; france; kate; paparazzi; photographer; princewilliam; royalfamily; royals; sunbathing
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-51 next last
To: EveningStar
If your name is in papers... it’s a bad idea to go topless in public.
2
posted on
09/16/2012 2:09:21 PM PDT
by
wastedyears
(The First Law of Heavy Metal: Not all metal is satanic.)
To: EveningStar
Who cares about this nothing event?
3
posted on
09/16/2012 2:11:23 PM PDT
by
bmwcyle
(Corollary - Electing the same person over and over and expecting a different outcome is insanity)
To: EveningStar
Billy, Chuck, Lizzy and Kate need to lighten-up and get over it without running to the courts.
To: wastedyears
Except that it wasn’t in public. Even Royals have some expectation that there are limits to violations of their privacy. This is getting ridiculous.
5
posted on
09/16/2012 2:12:57 PM PDT
by
cbvanb
To: cbvanb
Wasn’t in public? Since when is there privacy on the open water?
6
posted on
09/16/2012 2:17:39 PM PDT
by
raybbr
(People who still support Obama are either a Marxist or a moron.)
To: EveningStar
7
posted on
09/16/2012 2:18:17 PM PDT
by
Travis McGee
(www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
To: cbvanb
Except that it wasnt in public
But the photographer took the pics from a public road!!1!eleven!!
Yes, I'm being facetious. Having inadvertently seen one of the (censored) pics, it appears that "visible from a public road" means "somewhat visible through a high-magnification telephoto lens and even then so distant as to need serious blowing up of the image."
Actually, I'm not sure if the Royals have a case here, but what it's a shame that this situation has come about at all- if I saw somehow saw someone topless 400 yds from the road, I think I'd just look somewhere else and not care much about it.
I think that, all legalities notwithstanding, a reasonable expectation of privacy should just be a matter of common decency.
Now Prince Harry on the other hand...
8
posted on
09/16/2012 2:22:35 PM PDT
by
verum ago
(Be a bastard, and Karma'll be a bitch.)
To: raybbr
Wasnt in public? Since when is there privacy on the open water? She was on a balcony of a villa in France. The photographer apparently had to sneak onto the grounds in order to take the pic.
The bigger issue is that security should have stopped the guy from getting onto the grounds of the estate.
9
posted on
09/16/2012 2:22:59 PM PDT
by
PapaBear3625
(Charlie Daniels - Payback Time http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWwTJj_nosI)
To: EveningStar
This thread is useless without pics!
10
posted on
09/16/2012 2:23:31 PM PDT
by
Usually_Disappointed
(I think the tree of liberty is getting thirsty...)
To: Travis McGee
TTIWWP
Want a topless chick on the water? You got it!:
11
posted on
09/16/2012 2:24:37 PM PDT
by
verum ago
(Be a bastard, and Karma'll be a bitch.)
To: EveningStar
Kate seems to be handling it well. Maybe the rest of the royal family should follow her lead.
12
posted on
09/16/2012 2:27:42 PM PDT
by
pallis
To: EveningStar
The best thing she could do is just come out in public and say, “They’re boobs. Half the population has them. Get over it.”
13
posted on
09/16/2012 2:28:59 PM PDT
by
mlo
To: EveningStar
I saw some of the pictures.
In all honesty, there is one where she appears to be looking directly at the camera and smiling at the photographer.
14
posted on
09/16/2012 2:29:12 PM PDT
by
2111USMC
(aim small, miss small)
To: verum ago
“a reasonable expectation of privacy should just be a matter of common decency.”
Yes. It should. - These papparazzi have high powered lens and telescopic ones that get more powerful every day. No one could conceal anything much from them. - Lately, the royals have been given some hard lessons in the depravity and greed of their tabloids. - It is shameful.
15
posted on
09/16/2012 2:34:03 PM PDT
by
Twinkie
(In whose eyes a vile person is contemned. Ps. 15:4a)
To: EveningStar
Maybe I’m just old. I’ve done my fair share of suntanning in my life but never felt the need to let the girls pop out.
IMHO these people are just media whores. As an American, I have no need for Royalty. I thought that’s what we got away from in 1776. They know they are being followed 24/7, but let’s just sunbathe topless? You have to be kidding me!
To: EveningStar
If the photographer was trespassing when he took the picture then one can argue that he engaged in civil,or criminal,wrongdoing.Otherwise,tough luck for her.
And what kind of tramp exposes herself anywhere but in her bedroom,bathroom (OK,home) or doctor's office??
And yes,for those with poor eyesight I did say tramp.
To: Gay State Conservative
Amen, and EXACTLY correct. I could elaborate, but what you said is 100% accurate.
18
posted on
09/16/2012 2:48:25 PM PDT
by
SAR
(Son of THE Revolution.)
To: EveningStar
19
posted on
09/16/2012 2:51:30 PM PDT
by
Doomonyou
(Let them eat Lead.)
To: EveningStar
The Royals are losing respect for this whining.
Adults know that if you are naked in the open, you WILL be photographed.
They need to get over it.
20
posted on
09/16/2012 2:58:04 PM PDT
by
Mister Da
(The mark of a wise man is not what he knows, but what he knows he doesn't know!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-51 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson