Prince William and Kate Middleton Current Events 6: August-November 2008

[Al_bina]

I beg your pardon ... Where did I mention Miss Middleton in my last sentence? However I forgot "s" in the word "situation"

 

[Skydragon]

I am sorry, but I do believe Catherine is being harassed.
Yes, if she broke the law then by all means punish her.

What evidence do the police have, none. They it would appear, like us have a still shot of her talking into a mobile whilst behind the wheel of a car. Does the photo show the keys in the ignition, does it show the car moving, in both cases no, so on what evidence are the police wasting taxpayers money to investigate a non proven crime? Even if Kate contacted the police and said 'hands up guv, I was doing 3 miles an hour whilst talking on my mobile', the most she will get will be a letter advising her not to do it again. There is simply not enough evidence, from what we have seen, to warrant a prosecution, in the same way the police were unable to prosecute Kate Moss for snorting coke.

The photographer with his telephoto on the other hand, needs investigating. What was he doing in a country lane photographing young women?

 

[Zonk]

Al_bina..my comment was not directed towards you

Skydragon...exactly! Wasted tax money. I am not sure how it is in England but in the States, due to the economic conditions, most county and state government are cutting services. Surely, the money used to investiage this (if its just for the driving while on mobile) could be used for other services?

 

[Skydragon]

Actually, I don't think Catherine has been on record as saying poor me, its more of her "supporters".

I for one can't help but feel sorry for the way she is being harassed and constantly criticised, by the media and some posters on a variety of forums. So I am afraid the expression, poor girl does come to mind. She is entitled to privacy, she is entitled to a life away from William, but those perhaps that guard their own privacy (i.e. anonymous posters), are unwillingly to afford her the same courtesy. To get back to the driving incident, I have to wonder how many posters use their mobile/cell phones whilst driving, afterall it is not illegal in many countries.

 

[Skydragon]

Skydragon...exactly! Wasted tax money. I am not sure how it is in England but in the States, due to the economic conditions, most county and state government are cutting services. Surely, the money used to investiage this (if its just for the driving while on mobile) could be used for other services?

When you consider the amount of burglaries, muggings, stabbings, joy riding incidents, the money spent on 'looking into' a couple of pictures submitted by a tabloid, should amount to pence. My own daughter had cause to dial 999 very recently, the police arrived 45 minutes later, she could have been dead by then! Those that worry that Kate should be investigated, need to get their priorities in right.

 

[Zonk]

Skydragon...I totally agree!

I read the Daily Mail, hey...I know its not a great newspaper but its one of one English papers I read via the web.

Some of the comments were just really nasty. You would have thought she had done bodily harm to someone. And no, I am not making light of driving on the phone. I realize that a lot of accidents do occur because of this but thankfully this was not the case with Catherine.

 

[Little_star]

We may only see one or two photographs once or twice per month, but the photographers are probably there, day in day out. Stalking comes, as with everything, in degree's, as I am sure you are aware and there is nothing to suggest this was a random photographer who just happened to be standing with his telephoto lens attached in rural Berkshire!
Kate might possibly be caught on CCTV, but that all depends which Town or City she goes to, the papparazzi tend to folllow, hide and sneak.

It doesn't matter how many times members on this forum keep saying it there has been nothing to suggest that Kate Middleton was being harassed by photographers when this was taken.

 

[Skydragon]

It doesn't matter how many times members on this forum keep saying it there has been nothing to suggest that Kate Middleton was being harassed by photographers when this was taken.

So what excuse do you think he will give to explain why he was standing in the hedgerow of a country lane, with a camera in his hand, taking pictures of girls? Having a tiddle perhaps, he felt the need and took his camera, fitted with the appropriate telephoto (for clarity), with him?

 

[Al_bina]

Does the hedgerow of a country lane belong to the Middletons? If yes, a photographer should be punished in accordance with local laws. If not, a photographer is within his legal rights to take photos as well as Miss Middleton is within her legal rights to take legal actions against this photographer. As pointed out by you on one occasion in the thread to "Smear campaign? And if so, by whom?", the UK is a democratic country, where mass media can not be ordered not to take photoes. To take legal actions in the court of law sounds more democratic.

 

[Menarue]

I think the photographer was tipped off by someone who knew that Kate did this quite often, I really can´t believe that a photographer camped outside her house to get uninteresting photos of her going in and out of her family property, there must have been something else......
I am surprised that she is still so interesting to the newsppers, I am sure that they wouldn´t have gone there if they hadn´t thought that it was going to be worth it, monetarily speaking of course. This whole business is making a mountain out of a molehill and it only shows that she isn´t that popular these days as she seemed to be before with the photographers. I think this has something to do with her complaining they were harassing her. It was probably was true but they are retaliating.
It will be interesting to know if she is going to get a fine or not.

 

[Skydragon]

Does the hedgerow of a country lane belong to the Middletons? If yes, a photographer should be punished in accordance with local laws. If not, a photographer is within his legal rights to take photos as well as Miss Middleton is within her legal rights to take legal actions against this photographer.

If the photographer has no legitimate reason to be there, then he is stalking either Kate or anyone else he was taking photo's of, which in the UK is illegal.

As pointed out by you on multiple occasions, the UK is a democratic country, where mass media can not be ordered not to take photoes.

I have? I have to say that would be news to me, I don't even know whether the UK is a Democratic country, much less point it out.

 

[Zonk]

I think the photographer was tipped off by someone who knew that Kate did this quite often, I really can´t believe that a photographer camped outside her house to get uninteresting photos of her going in and out of her family property, there must have been something else......
I am surprised that she is still so interesting to the newsppers, I am sure that they wouldn´t have gone there if they hadn´t thought that it was going to be worth it, monetarily speaking of course. This whole business is making a mountain out of a molehill and it only shows that she isn´t that popular these days as she seemed to be before with the photographers. I think this has something to do with her complaining they were harassing her. It was probably was true but they are retaliating.
It will be interesting to know if she is going to get a fine or not.

Actually, I can imagine the photographer (just making an comment not saying this is the case) sitting outside of her house looking for an interesting shot. How many times do you see pictures of well known figures coming out of their house ( I see tons of Kerry Katona - I know that is another topic - leaving her house).

In the states, there is a tabloid that has a regular feature that is titled "Stars--they are just like US! And its photos of well known people doing regular stuff i.e. getting out of their car, walking their dog, talking on a cell phone, etc.

 

[Skydragon]

I think the photographer was tipped off by someone who knew that Kate did this quite often, I really can´t believe that a photographer camped outside her house to get uninteresting photos of her going in and out of her family property, there must have been something else......

Perhaps he was hoping for shots of other women, but got Kate!

It will be interesting to know if she is going to get a fine or not.

In order to levy a fine, they must prove the car was moving, almost an impossible task on the evidence of a couple of still photos, after all the ones that were withdrawn, looked as if the cameraman extended the telephoto lens.

 

[Al_bina]

If the photographer has no legitimate reason to be there, then he is stalking either Kate or anyone else he was taking photo's of, which in the UK is illegal.

Stalking is illegal. This means that Miss Middleton can file a complaint with a local office that deal with such situations.

I have? I have to say that would be news to me, I don't even know whether the UK is a Democratic country, much less point it out.

http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=822763&postcount=105

 

[crm2317]

I agree with Skydragon. Kate is evidently on the phone however there is absolutle no evidence to suggest that car was moving. It might not even have been turned on. She might have been driving and pulled over to answer her phone, perfectly legal as far as I'm aware.

However if she was driving while talking on her mobile then of course this could have caused an accident. But she is definately not the first and won't be the last. I pass drivers talking on mobiles in Belfast all the time!

Despite the fact its illegal and dangerous, I feel it is a complete waste of taxpayers money investigating the incident when far more serious crimes are commited everyday. Especially when there is no way of proving whether or not the car was in motion.

I also have absolutley no doubt that photographers wait around trying to catch a glimpse of Kate. Waiting for a big story like this I'd imagine

 

[Skydragon]

Shttp://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=822763&postcount=105

One occasion not the

As pointed out by you on multiple occasions,

as stated by you. You also appear to have misunderstood the original point I was making But lets not get into another pointless tit for tat, that the mods have to sort out, I suspect it would be nicer for the other posters if the subject under discussion was the focus of the conversation.

 

[Al_bina]

The appropriate changes have been introduced to the post.

 

[CasiraghiTrio]

She should just get bluetooth then she nor we will ever have to "worry" again. I read the VF article some days ago. It wasn't bad. The writer seems to think there will be an announcement of engagement sometime next year. But then, well, various people have been saying "next year" since like 2005 or something. I just hope they be happy together, whatever the status is. And I hope if they get married it's for the right reasons, a "wrong" one being because he can't find someone else "better" or something. I know it's coming out weird, but what I mean is, I hope if he marries her, it's because he loves her, and not because he's getting desperate or something, not that I'm saying that, but I just hope they love each other, period. If you know what I mean, haha.

 

[Skydragon]

---snipped--- But she is definately not the first and won't be the last. I pass drivers talking on mobiles in Belfast all the time!

Despite the fact its illegal and dangerous, I feel it is a complete waste of taxpayers money investigating the incident when far more serious crimes are commited everyday. Especially when there is no way of proving whether or not the car was in motion.

I also have absolutely no doubt that photographers wait around trying to catch a glimpse of Kate. Waiting for a big story like this I'd imagine

Goodness, Belfast isn't the only major city. London, Manchester, Sheffield, Cheltenham, everywhere you go, stand in the busiest street and count, if you can, the amount of drivers with a phone in their ear. The M1, M4 and M6 are just as packed with mobile users, perhaps the police would like to concentrate on them!

 

[Menarue]

Try Lisbon, Cascais. I have counted about 6 within a few minutes. Yes, it is against the law here but very hard to implement this law - unless there is a little paparazzo waiting to take a photo - even then....
I only hope that no one this forum or their loved ones are killed by someone doing this.
Even when someone pulls over it can be unsafe, it wasn´t that many years ago that a businessman on the main Porto-Lisbon highway pulled over to take a call, became absent minded and stepped out of the car..... well you can imagine the rest.
Let the phones ring, as soon as you are in a safe place you just pick up the phone and call back - simple.

 

[Duchess]

i've looked at several of the pictures and while a telephoto lens "could" have been used, it wouldn't have had to be a very powerful one as the photographer is quite close by...many of the cameras the average person buys today have a telephoto powerful enough to capture these types of shots. also, if she's on a public road, or in any public place where photography isn't prohibited, unless the laws are vastly different in the UK and i confess i don't know what they are, then taking her picture wouldn't be against the law.

 

[Skydragon]

Maybe not, but what reasonable excuse could there have been for an uninterested stranger, to be stood at the side of a road, camera in hand? We have in our 'collection', a Canon G9, mine, an EOS, and a rather nice Nikon D2H and on experimenting this morning, the only only IMO that could take the pictures, without glare on the screen or noise, would have to be the Nikon and not many people happen to be standing about with one of those in their pocket. I'm not a professional photographer, so perhaps they can do better with a different camera, the next ploy will probably be to 'bring forth' the innocent amateur, who just happened to be there camera in hand.

Or was it a case of he telephoned the various rags and said he knows Kate travels down road B, (her security advisors would have told her to ensure she varies the route and time she uses it each day) and how much would they pay if he got a shot. He then went to his place in the lane for a couple of weeks until he got the shot, which in my book equals stalking! Taking photographs of anyone without their express consent is illegal in many towns now, some call it PC gone mad, others welcome it.

 

[zembla]

I don't see the big deal of her driving, on what looks like a desolate road, talking on her cell. The most she would get in America is a ticket for like $75.00...some of the headlines in The UK suggesting jail time for 2 years are just so bizarre...

 

[Incas]

For some of the anonymouse posters on Daily Mail's site is to be believed, two years jail term is not enough.

 

[kinga77]

The night Paris and Christina met Wills, Eugenie and Bea | Mail Online

 

[Skydragon]

I don't see the big deal of her driving, on what looks like a desolate road, talking on her cell. The most she would get in America is a ticket for like $75.00...some of the headlines in The UK suggesting jail time for 2 years are just so bizarre...

They are just that. This is the official statement

The offences of using a hand held mobile phone whilst driving and failing to have proper control of a vehicle have now become endorsable. Drivers now automatically have their licence endorsed with three penalty points and receive a £60 fine – double the previous charge. Any cases that reach court could involve discretionary disqualification and a maximum fine of £1,000 - or £2,500 in the case of the driver of a bus, coach or goods vehicle

Sussex Police Online - Mobile phones and the new law

As you can see, the UK papers are not always accurate!

 

[Isana]

I think jail time only applies if you cause an accident. Which Kate hasn't but it sounds so much better to point out that a maximum sentence of 2 years in jail is possible than to merely mention the rather moderate fine of £60. Otherwise everyone would be like - what's the big deal then?


Thank you for the link, kinga. Good to see William alive and kicking, long time no see. But what is Chelsy doing in London in a nightclub in the middle of the week? Isn't she supposed to be a good law student in Leeds?

 

[Jo of Palatine]

The article didn't say that Chelsy was there. It only alleged that Chelsy and Paris Hilton (who was there) could become good friends because they're both blondes. And illustrated that opinion with an older pic of Chelsy.

 

[Isana]

Heiress Paris Hilton and singer Christina Aguilera spent the evening rubbing shoulders with Prince William, Princesses Eugenie and Beatrice and royal girlfriend Chelsy Davy at the Mayfair venue.

Now I am not saying that the DM is alway right but they clearly say that Chelsy was there last night and zimbio has pics of her from last night.

http://www.zimbio.com/pictures/n28Vot5dUTz/Celebs+Out+Whisky+Mist+Nightclub/2TFI2joZMXO/Chelsy+Davy

 

[Menarue]

From the Sussex police online.

"This is not another bash at the motoring public, it's about helping to prevent people getting injured on our roads. The severity of the penalty reflects the dangers posed through mobile phone use and not maintaining proper control of your car. We will stringently enforce this law and believe it will lead to safer roads and safer communities."

Well I heartily agree with this as any one with any sense would.