The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > Royal House of Denmark > Current Events Archive

Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #41  
Old 08-17-2010, 07:19 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Victoria, Australia
Posts: 613
I don't think Mary has a baby bump as such, but I do notice she is a bit wider or thicker around the waist...maybe this is just how the weight is distributed in her pregnancies...You can see the thickening in the navy blue dress and brown dress she was wearing a few days ago...
__________________

__________________
  #42  
Old 08-17-2010, 08:00 AM
dazzling's Avatar
Super Moderator
Blog Editor
Royal Blogger
Picture of the Month Assistant Coordinator
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: -, France
Posts: 18,498
Quote:
Originally Posted by JessRulz View Post
Yes - an amendmend to an Act was passed last year, and states that a person cannot "visually record a person 'in circumstances where a reasonable person would expect to be afforded privacy' and then distribute the images". Essentially, if Mary is within the bounds of her sister's home, photos of her there cannot be sold without the photographer (and possibly also the purchaser) facing a fine or 12 months in jail.
Thanks Jess.
Wasn't this law passed after Mary's last visit to Australia? From all the photographers that surrounded her and the family?
__________________

  #43  
Old 08-17-2010, 08:17 AM
JessRulz's Avatar
Administrator
Blog Editor
Picture of the Month Representative - Luxembourg
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 4,846


Possbily, as the law was an amendment in Tasmania, not the whole of Australia. Although there is most likely a similar sort of law in the rest of the states. I think that it's a great step - it protects not only Mary, but other celebrities/people of status when they are within private property minding their own business (Nicole Kidman will definately like it ).
__________________
**TRF Rules and FAQ**
  #44  
Old 08-17-2010, 08:18 AM
Marika86's Avatar
Courtier
Royal Blogger
Picture of the Month Representative – The Netherlands
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Villa San Giovanni, Italy
Posts: 3,485
News about the visit on Billed Bladet:

Billed-Bladet - Kronprinsesse Mary er nu hos familien i Hobart
__________________
Marika86
"It's very special, as Kate is very special. It's my way of making sure my mother didn't miss out on today and the excitement." Prince William, November 16 2010
  #45  
Old 08-17-2010, 11:13 AM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,200
Well I think the new law should take care of some of those problems.

I imagine that the Danish court announced that Mary was in Australia as way to deal with inquiries of people wondering where she was if she wasn't seen in Denmark for a few days or if she is seen in Australia and no one said anything. We know how those conspriacy theories go don't we?

In addition, I am sure Mary got the necessary approvals to travel via plane from her doctor. I have never been pregnant but I believe you can't fly after six months right? If that is the case, this is her last opportunity to visit her family before the babies are born. She certainly won't have the time after the babies are born.
__________________
.

  #46  
Old 08-17-2010, 01:16 PM
dazzling's Avatar
Super Moderator
Blog Editor
Royal Blogger
Picture of the Month Assistant Coordinator
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: -, France
Posts: 18,498
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk View Post
Well I think the new law should take care of some of those problems.

I imagine that the Danish court announced that Mary was in Australia as way to deal with inquiries of people wondering where she was if she wasn't seen in Denmark for a few days or if she is seen in Australia and no one said anything. We know how those conspriacy theories go don't we?
But the court usually doesn't announce when the family leave on private holidays because its private if im not mistaken.
  #47  
Old 08-17-2010, 01:32 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by dazzling View Post
But the court usually doesn't announce when the family leave on private holidays because its private if im not mistaken.
There is a first time for everything. The Danish Court was proactive and did the right thing in announcing that Mary was/is going to Australia for the following reasons:

1) This would have prevented the "Where are Mary's questions" if she wasn't seen in Denmark. If they had announced this.....some people might have assumed that the Court was hiding Mary and that something wasn't going well in her pregnancy OR

2) If the Danish court didn't say anything abut Mary being in Australia, when she was actually seen in Australia either with her sisters or going to Amber's 40th birthday, then the Court might have held to deal with this...why is Mary in Australia? Is everything okay.

This way...its out in the open. People are going to make their own judgements calls but at least you can minimize any issues.
__________________
.

  #48  
Old 08-17-2010, 03:32 PM
crownprincessrhey's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Cebu, Philippines
Posts: 176
i think it's great that she has some time alone with her family...with the twins coming, she'll definitely have her hands full
__________________
  #49  
Old 08-17-2010, 04:21 PM
iceflower's Avatar
Super Moderator
Picture of the Month Representative - Monaco and Sweden
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: , Germany
Posts: 26,432
All posts from today about CP Mary's sunglasses have been moved
to the appropriate fashion thread:

** Princess Mary's Daytime Fashion Part 11: July 2010 - **
__________________
**** Welcome aboard! ****
  #50  
Old 08-17-2010, 05:15 PM
lancchick's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 420
I've noticed that she's visited the Salamanca Markets every time she's headed back to Hobart. Given that it's still early morning there, it will take some time before venturing out.
__________________
  #51  
Old 08-17-2010, 06:16 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 1,915
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk View Post

In addition, I am sure Mary got the necessary approvals to travel via plane from her doctor. I have never been pregnant but I believe you can't fly after six months right? If that is the case, this is her last opportunity to visit her family before the babies are born. She certainly won't have the time after the babies are born.
Generally speaking, most drs prefer that you NOT travel during the last trimester. With the other two starting school this is a great time for her to get a visit in with her family.
__________________
  #52  
Old 08-17-2010, 09:35 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne & Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,983
The Crown Princess and her sisters, Jane and Patricia, managed to escape the media's grasp this morning as they drove into Hobart. A police blockade (a car) at a roundabout (I believe) cut off the following media pack that was in pusuit, and the three sisters managed to drive on, unfollowed and free to enjoy their day.
__________________

"Dressing is a way of life" - Monsieur Saint Laurent
  #53  
Old 08-17-2010, 11:46 PM
greenways's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 269
Seems Mary or her minder's are learning a few tricks on keeping the media at bay! She is entitled to private time for sure but the danish taxpayer will be stumping up for various casts involved with her visit and the australian tax payer as well. (cops blocking round about)? So, hopefully, she will afford the media some 'snapping' time at some stage. Part of the pay off for the life she lives IMO. Saying that, happy holiday Mary!
__________________
  #54  
Old 08-18-2010, 03:09 AM
Duke of Marmalade's Avatar
Majesty
TRF Author
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Posts: 8,614
The Danish court is good at confirming issues that should be private (eg holiday in OZ) but warning about respecting privacy at the same time. How ridiculous. We've been here before. They are big attention creaters while claiming at the same time they want privacy what you dont get when you shout from the rooftops what you are going to do.

This OZ visit will be no different from the ones before. It will be a big "Mary Homecoming Tour" with lots of media that of course nobody wanted there. It will be a "Here I am" behind sunglasses on the most public places and statements requesting for privacy.

This whole circus reminds me of certain Hollywood B or C listers: Telling the Paps where there are going and then complaining about the harrassment.

Pictures of the pregnant Mary coming home to OZ in the world media are priceless, you dont need to be Einstein to know that. Its all about attention, the DRF is no different. Only that they usually do this ridiculous attempt to cover their true intentions.
__________________
  #55  
Old 08-18-2010, 04:19 AM
Muhler's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 5,122
I disagree with you.

It's Tasmania that has imposed privacy laws, which in my opinion should be a basic human right. It was the Tasmanian police which cautioned the photographers and informed them of the legislation.
Not the DRF.
What was the court supposed to do?
The interest surrounding Mary and her pregnancy is high and you can hardly hide her going to Tasmania. So why not confirm it while she is on her way? It would appear the press had got wind of it anyway.
The DRF did not publish her visit beforehand.

As for this being a publicity stunt. I think you are being unfair towards Mary and the DRF. What would be the purpose of going all the way to Tasmania just to hide behind sunglasses? If she wanted genuine exposure, she would attend some function in the full media glare.

I mean, come on! What is Mary supposed to do?
If she stay low, she is an attention seeker.
If she hold a press conference, she is an attention seeker.
Is she is out in public she is an attention seeker.
If she is at an event, she is an attention seeker.
- Is she not allowed to visit her family in Australia?
Would you prefer that her entire family was shipped to Denmark or to another country? Eventhough some of them presumably have jobs and what not, they can't get away from just like that.

Try give Mary the benefit of doubt and accept that she might also be a human being.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke of Marmalade View Post
The Danish court is good at confirming issues that should be private (eg holiday in OZ) but warning about respecting privacy at the same time. How ridiculous. We've been here before. They are big attention creaters while claiming at the same time they want privacy what you dont get when you shout from the rooftops what you are going to do.

This OZ visit will be no different from the ones before. It will be a big "Mary Homecoming Tour" with lots of media that of course nobody wanted there. It will be a "Here I am" behind sunglasses on the most public places and statements requesting for privacy.

This whole circus reminds me of certain Hollywood B or C listers: Telling the Paps where there are going and then complaining about the harrassment.

Pictures of the pregnant Mary coming home to OZ in the world media are priceless, you dont need to be Einstein to know that. Its all about attention, the DRF is no different. Only that they usually do this ridiculous attempt to cover their true intentions.
__________________
  #56  
Old 08-18-2010, 05:31 AM
Katelle's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 189


Couldn't say it better Muhler. And above all, LAW IS LAW. In some countries like mine, thank God it is a basic knowledge and understanding that people can control their image. Mary has every right to do whatever she wants. She is the Crownprincess in Denmark, so there is nothing ridiculous if you get some pics of her doing anything be it at the circus or on a more official event. And then if she wants to get pivate at her sister's then it's her will and the law gives her the right to do it so what's the problem? Poor us, poor paps, no twin-bump pics to sell to tabs or other magazines but that's life.
__________________
  #57  
Old 08-18-2010, 06:02 AM
Lighthouse's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 383
I found an on-line article about Mary's stay:

Mary ventures out and about Tasmania News - The Mercury - The Voice of Tasmania
__________________
Denial ain't just a river in Egypt.
- Mark Twain
  #58  
Old 08-18-2010, 06:08 AM
dee4855's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Dallas, United States
Posts: 610
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muhler View Post
I disagree with you.

It's Tasmania that has imposed privacy laws, which in my opinion should be a basic human right. It was the Tasmanian police which cautioned the photographers and informed them of the legislation.
Not the DRF.
What was the court supposed to do?
The interest surrounding Mary and her pregnancy is high and you can hardly hide her going to Tasmania. So why not confirm it while she is on her way? It would appear the press had got wind of it anyway.
The DRF did not publish her visit beforehand.

As for this being a publicity stunt. I think you are being unfair towards Mary and the DRF. What would be the purpose of going all the way to Tasmania just to hide behind sunglasses? If she wanted genuine exposure, she would attend some function in the full media glare.

I mean, come on! What is Mary supposed to do?
If she stay low, she is an attention seeker.
If she hold a press conference, she is an attention seeker.
Is she is out in public she is an attention seeker.
If she is at an event, she is an attention seeker.
- Is she not allowed to visit her family in Australia?
Would you prefer that her entire family was shipped to Denmark or to another country? Eventhough some of them presumably have jobs and what not, they can't get away from just like that.

Try give Mary the benefit of doubt and accept that she might also be a human being.
Thank you Muhler! Finally someone gets it. It does not matter what she does it is always wrong, or there is some hidden agenda behind it. I see a young woman going home for a visit that will be very hard for her in a few months with two newborns. Did you ever think DoM that she might just be homesick and miss her family. She does not have a mother to discuss things with. It has been said many times she is very close to her older sister. I am sure the prospect of two new babies is overwhelming to her. It would be to anyone. Maybe she just needs a motherly shoulder and reassurance for a few days.

If she just dropped out of sight for a few days of not taking the kids to school, picking them up there would be rumors flying all over the place. I am sure the DRF knew something had to be said to stop it before it started. It is really time to stop making a mountain out of a family visit.
__________________
  #59  
Old 08-18-2010, 06:28 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne & Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,983
The media interest in Mary will never go away. Not here. And It's somewhat sure to only intensify as the years move forward with the growing of her children and the expectation of her becoming Queen.
__________________

"Dressing is a way of life" - Monsieur Saint Laurent
  #60  
Old 08-18-2010, 12:24 PM
marymaxima's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Barcelona, Spain
Posts: 239
Princess Mary arrives in Hobart, ahead of trip to Adelaide | Adelaide Now
__________________

__________________
"Right now we have our hands full"
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
General News about Frederik, Mary and Family 7: October 2010 - March 2011 dazzling Current Events Archive 393 03-27-2011 08:17 AM
General News about Frederik, Mary and Family 5: December 2009 - July 2010 dazzling Current Events Archive 397 07-28-2010 03:26 AM
General News about Frederik, Mary and Family 4: July - December 2009 dazzling Current Events Archive 401 12-15-2009 04:38 AM
General News about Frederik, Mary and Family 3: November 2008 - July 2009 Empress Current Events Archive 393 06-30-2009 02:29 PM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit current events dutch royal history fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia jewellery jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king constantine ii king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg nobility olympic games olympics ottoman picture of the month poland pom president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince felipe prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess astrid princess beatrix princess charlene princess letizia princess madeleine princess margriet princess mary princess mary fashion princess of asturias queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:15 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]