Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

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 1-5051 next last

1 posted on 09/16/2012 2:06:40 PM PDT by EveningStar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

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.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar

Billy, Chuck, Lizzy and Kate need to lighten-up and get over it without running to the courts.


4 posted on 09/16/2012 2:11:25 PM PDT by Uncle Slayton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

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.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar

TTIWWP.


7 posted on 09/16/2012 2:18:17 PM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cbvanb
Except that it wasn’t 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.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: raybbr
Wasn’t 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)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

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...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

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
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

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!


16 posted on 09/16/2012 2:35:41 PM PDT by mplsconservative (Impeach Obama Now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

17 posted on 09/16/2012 2:45:51 PM PDT by Gay State Conservative (If Obama's Reelected Imagine The Mess He'll Inherit!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar

Build a fence.


19 posted on 09/16/2012 2:51:30 PM PDT by Doomonyou (Let them eat Lead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar

I admire Kate and William. I think they are a very young, upbeat, youthful thinking couple who have teken the Royalty to a more human level. I wish them well and look forward to seeing them for many years and one day seeing them as a family.

However, that being said... you don’t go nude anywhere but your own home inside. If you are famous as these two are you have to know there are pervs out there with cameras that can see you. Is it right? No!!! Is it decent behavior?? NO!!! However, those taking these shots are neither right nor well behaved.

Those photos just like sex tapes and other photos taken when people decide to do that will surface especially if you are famous. It’s a fact of life.

It should be a good lesson for all people but...it won’t and so the saga will continue.

Good luck William and Kate.


21 posted on 09/16/2012 3:00:18 PM PDT by cubreporter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PapaBear3625

True. If he got that close he could have gotten closer.


22 posted on 09/16/2012 3:01:45 PM PDT by cubreporter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: cubreporter
Go to the Telegraph and look for the article that shows where the photographer was when he took the photo. It's a few miles down the road, in a place where there is a slight gap between trees so you can get a distant look at the chateaux. He used a telescopic lens at God knows what magnification to get grainy pictures.

If some pervert from miles away uses a telescope to spy on your daughter changing clothes, I bet you wouldn't feel the same way about it.

23 posted on 09/16/2012 3:11:03 PM PDT by Defiant (If there are infinite parallel universes, why Lord, am I living in the one with Obama as President?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: PapaBear3625

He just used a good lens from the road. With modern stabilized lenses and camera bodies you don’t even need a tripod.


24 posted on 09/16/2012 3:13:30 PM PDT by SWAMPSNIPER (The Second Amendment, a Matter of Fact, Not a Matter of Opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: mplsconservative

No chance in our family - or as my wife has always said, “there are three places in body that I will NEVER get sunburned!”


25 posted on 09/16/2012 3:18:01 PM PDT by I cannot think of a name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: I cannot think of a name

It is pure crazy. As I said in my previous post. These people are media whores. They know they are being followed 24/7, but let’s just whip off the bikini top. The only person I ever knew of doing that was the local big whig’s daughter in high school. I think she got her jollies knowing the boys peeked at her through the fence. Creepy.


26 posted on 09/16/2012 3:42:36 PM PDT by mplsconservative (Impeach Obama Now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar
I sincerely hope they do. This was a ridiculous stunt that the paper pulled. She and her husband were on a vacation together and she decided to get a little sun on her tata’s. I could see if it wasn't her husband or if she was out in public but she was in a secluded area that should have been a place for solace for her and William. Sue for billions!!!!
27 posted on 09/16/2012 3:52:53 PM PDT by napscoordinator (Paul Ryan/Rick Santorum 2012....That would be the best scenario ever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar

Anyone who thinks these photos weren’t planned by the royals isn’t thinking things through. The heir to the throne and his wife are vacationing in a place that has a bend in the road where photos can be taken of them by the pool, and security knows nothing of it, or if they do, they do nothing about it?

Right.

Because, like, what could happen? Some photos, that’s all. And that’s like no big deal to the concerns to security.

Right.

After all, it’s not like anyone would affix that telephoto lense to a rifle, instead of a camera.

Right?

Let’s see, Harry’s naked. Now Kate is naked.

WHAT a coinkydink!

So, either we’re seeing some sort of arcane ritual or... Kate is being used to “normalize” and trivialize Harry... or something of the sort.

And don’t tell me they don’t do such things, just look at the over-the-top giant baby and ship of the dead and burning phoenix of the London Olympics - oh yeah, they really fit in! LOL!

Anyway, one thing you can bank on - security was on this the ENTIRE time, start to finish. Guaranteed.

Oh, and P.S. - Harry’s not where everyone was told he is. He could be anywhere BUT there. Because if he IS there, he’s been set up BIG time - there’s no other explanation for it.


28 posted on 09/16/2012 4:03:31 PM PDT by Talisker (One who commands, must obey.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cbvanb
Except that it wasn’t in public.

Outside is most definitely public. An open window is public if you can be seen from outside. Kate knows there are cameras on her 24/7 so it was her own stupidity for wandering around topless outside. With all the publicity Harry got over his nudie pics a few days ago, maybe she was wanting some attention herself. Either way, she should know better. The future queen, of all people, needs to be minding her p's and q's and take to heart that old saying about not doing something you would want to tell your grandmother.

29 posted on 09/16/2012 4:09:28 PM PDT by bgill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

How do you know he didn’t use a Kodak box camera?


30 posted on 09/16/2012 4:11:46 PM PDT by 353FMG (The US Constitution is only as effective as those who enforce it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: wastedyears

Except that this was so clearly the opposite of being in public, and that the laws in the country they were in at the time are incredibly strict. It is a super-secluded estate, and the photog used a VERY, VERY long range lens to capture the image whereas to the naked eye they would not have been seen - especially without setting out to purposefully disrupt their privacy to capture a photo of this nature.


31 posted on 09/16/2012 4:22:57 PM PDT by LibertyRocks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mplsconservative

Same here. Anyone with morals doesn’t show off the girls. I do know of one skank who’s kids dread when she parties because the shirt comes off after the first beer. The kids are mortified. You know those photos of Kate’s jigglies will be dug up again when her kids are school age. You’d think she’d have learned from Fergie’s airing of the boobs scandal.


32 posted on 09/16/2012 4:26:02 PM PDT by bgill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: LibertyRocks
the photog used a VERY, VERY long range lens to capture the image whereas to the naked eye they would not have been seen - especially without setting out to purposefully disrupt their privacy to capture a photo of this nature.

Right there is where your argument fails. My, my, the Katiettes just happened to pose at that precise spot at that precise time.

33 posted on 09/16/2012 4:42:52 PM PDT by bgill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Mister Da

Thank you, exactly.


34 posted on 09/16/2012 5:18:24 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (I can neither confirm or deny that; even if I could, I couldn't - it's classified.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar
There may be more to this story.

French Magazine Editor Hints She Has SEX PICS of Kate and William

35 posted on 09/16/2012 5:39:27 PM PDT by Bratch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bratch
There may be more to this story.

Remember how Dodi's father was running around (may still be, but no one's paying attention to him) claiming that Phillip, along with MI6 and the SAS, orchestrated the deaths of his son and Diana?

I never really believed that to have any credibility. But I'm sure that the capability exists. And has probably been enhanced by 10+ years of war in Afghanistan and Iraq.

If I were this editor I wouldn't be sleeping all that well after making this kind of threat.
36 posted on 09/16/2012 5:54:41 PM PDT by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar

yep they will get exactly nowhere with that


37 posted on 09/16/2012 6:03:51 PM PDT by yldstrk (My heroes have always been cowboys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: raybbr

they were outside on the deck of some mansion i France where their expectation of privacy was exactly nothing


38 posted on 09/16/2012 6:05:07 PM PDT by yldstrk (My heroes have always been cowboys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Twinkie

The royals are depraved themselves, you know she was flashing a bunch of the staff and security guys, big deal if some dipstick photographer took some pics


39 posted on 09/16/2012 6:07:16 PM PDT by yldstrk (My heroes have always been cowboys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Mister Da

Adults know that if you are naked in the open, you WILL be photographed.


In my case, people run away screaming.


40 posted on 09/16/2012 6:08:52 PM PDT by Rides_A_Red_Horse (If there is a war on women, the Kennedys are the Spec Ops troops.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar; a fool in paradise; Slings and Arrows

Well, let’s see them suckers! (Pun, uh, intended, maybe.)


41 posted on 09/16/2012 6:09:25 PM PDT by Revolting cat! (Bad things are wrong!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Defiant

What a. Nasty remark.


42 posted on 09/16/2012 6:19:28 PM PDT by cubreporter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Defiant

What a. Nasty remark.


43 posted on 09/16/2012 6:19:27 PM PDT by cubreporter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: cubreporter
Here's where the pictures were taken:

I don't think any of us would consider pictures of us or a family member shot from this location to be fair game. We don't consider using telescopes to see us in places where the naked eye can't see to be appropriate. If it's nasty to point out that the same courtesy should apply to Kate Middleton, then I guess you and I disagree about that. I think you may have been under the misunderstanding that the photographer snuck onto the grounds. That is not the case.

44 posted on 09/16/2012 7:02:20 PM PDT by Defiant (If there are infinite parallel universes, why Lord, am I living in the one with Obama as President?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: yldstrk

You *know* for a certainty that she was flashing a bunch of the staff and security guys? Could it be . . . just gossip? Queen Elizabeth has been very faithful from the first in her duties to her country.


45 posted on 09/16/2012 7:03:06 PM PDT by Twinkie (In whose eyes a vile person is contemned. Ps. 15:4a)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Usually_Disappointed
It would be just as useless with the pics, which I've seen.

She's a thin girl with small breasts. I don't know why anyone would care to see them. If she wasn't a "royal" nobody would care in the slightest.

46 posted on 09/16/2012 7:56:16 PM PDT by Lizavetta (You get what you tolerate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar; a fool in paradise; Slings and Arrows
Saw them things. They look like this!
47 posted on 09/16/2012 8:02:28 PM PDT by Revolting cat! (Bad things are wrong!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tanknetter
If I were this editor I wouldn't be sleeping all that well after making this kind of threat.
Well, it's certainly brought out the bottom feeders.

0914_youporn_launch

Kate Middleton, Prince William - Porn Co. Offers 'Open Check' FOR SEX PICS

48 posted on 09/16/2012 8:02:40 PM PDT by Bratch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: bgill

Oh, give me a break... You and I both know that photog was probably camped out there through the entirety of their stay - there was no “precise moment” about it.


49 posted on 09/17/2012 5:04:36 AM PDT by LibertyRocks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Defiant

First off I never said she or anyone else is “fair game.” That is ludicrous. I said however that the behaviors of the photographers is bad but that’s who they are. Howver, what I DID say was when you are famous and we all know how photographers behave... I don’t see WHY ANYONE would put themselves into that kind of a situation. I dont’ care if she is nude. I don’t go looking for the photos but...she is in a very dignified positon in the Royal Family (and while I do not believe in ROYALTY) nonetheless she is there and open to scrutiny of all kinds. Perhaps there is anothe venue far from the road where she could do this if she wanted. This does not seem very far off the road to me when you consider the advances of today’s photography.
At any rate... I don’t care. However, when you are in a position such as hers... perhaps discretion should be considered.


50 posted on 09/17/2012 8:41:45 AM PDT by cubreporter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson