The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals > The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Family

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #121  
Old 09-14-2012, 01:21 PM
zembla's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Camden, United States
Posts: 875
The photos are everywhere now...and are way more full-on than I expected. She must be horrified.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #122  
Old 09-14-2012, 01:40 PM
kathia_sophia's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: South, Portugal
Posts: 1,702
thank god they are taking action against the mag.
they violated Catherine's integrity, and yes she's the victim!! i would agree with those who said for her to be more aware and always with a top but if they were in a 'public zone', but they WERENT.

i actually saw the pictures by incident (maybe i should be ashamed of considering my statement), i actually opened a web page thinking it will be an article explaining some info, but there were big pictures in the front page, gosh, they took lots of them, even a picture with her taking her pants half way through while William put cream on her butt. it was way to much...
__________________

__________________
♫A man is not old until regrets take the place of dreams.♥
Reply With Quote
  #123  
Old 09-14-2012, 01:44 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New Orleans, United States
Posts: 1,034
Quote:
Originally Posted by grevinnan
For them to think that they will not be hounded when outside of the royals very personal space and security was naive. It does not make the photos right but the reality does not always follow right or wrong.
Two things: 1. I, and many others, would have been just as naive in this instance. 2. It is the reality, but legal invasions of privacy should absolutely be investigated and prosecuted in this case.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #124  
Old 09-14-2012, 01:44 PM
EIIR's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Somewhere, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,624
As others have said, some of the posts here are just disgusting.

I suppose Charles and Camilla were to blame when their privacy was trampled over by someone tapping their phone calls. I suppose it was their own fault, they never should've had a personal conversation on the phone given someone might possibly somewhere be listening in and publish it.

We've seen this earlier in the year when posters here blamed Kate for a photographer trying to take a picture up her skirt when she bent over to talk to a child. That was apparently Kate's fault for 1) choosing to bend over, and 2) choosing not to wear a skirt the same length as the Queen's. What else does she expect?

People don't seem to want to admit where that sort of logic inevitably ends up - where men who assault or rape women can say 'what did she expect going out in a short skirt and tight top? She got what she asked for'.

An unfortunate aspect of all this for William and Kate is that someone from within their circle must have tipped off the paparazzi where they were going and when. I'd hate that feeling of being able to trust pretty much no-one.

I know he'd never do it, but I wouldn't blame William if he were to tell the country to get stuffed and refuse to fulfill his role in the royal family. He's a wealthy guy in his own right, he's got a good job and a beautiful wife. No amount of living in palaces and having people bow to you would make the total absence of any private life worthwhile.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #125  
Old 09-14-2012, 01:45 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New Orleans, United States
Posts: 1,034
Quote:
Originally Posted by miche
"They should not feel safe around their personal surrounding" How sad is that and how sad that people think this is okay
Absolutely!

Quote:
Originally Posted by susan alicia
she definitely should have kept her top on, they both created an opportunity for the paperazzi which does not make them victims but just plain stupid.
By following that logic, no one would ever be convicted of a crime of opportunity because the victims could never take enough precautions.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #126  
Old 09-14-2012, 01:55 PM
miche's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: N/A, United States
Posts: 527
Quote:
Originally Posted by casualfan View Post
By following that logic, no one would ever be convicted of a crime of opportunity because the victims could never take enough precautions.
Exactly

CBS is reporting that the road and the chateau was .5 miles away. Not close at all.

Here is a photo

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A2xTKNYCMAAKRgH.jpg
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #127  
Old 09-14-2012, 01:57 PM
Hollie's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: heartlands, United States
Posts: 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by miche View Post
Exactly

CBS is reporting that the road and the chateau was .5 miles away. Not close at all.

Here is a photo

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A2xTKNYCMAAKRgH.jpg
OMG, this pic is shocking. How could William and Kate ever spot the camera from that distance!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #128  
Old 09-14-2012, 01:58 PM
Frelinghighness's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New England, United States
Posts: 2,599
The British tabloid holier than thou position in this is very amusing.

P. Caroline of Monoco regularly wins judgements in court re:paps, Mostly, I think, it is from images of minors, her children, which have stronger privacy protections, I think.
They could certainly get some tips from her on suing, also, from what subathing will do to your skin.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #129  
Old 09-14-2012, 02:01 PM
Nico's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 1,314
Uh oh, seems that some heads will roll :

Bauer Media, Closer 's orginal owner, just issued this statement :

"As the owners of the Closer brand and publishers of Closer magazine we have complained in the strongest terms to the licensee of Closer France, over the publication by them of photographs of their Royal Highnesses, Prince William and the Duchess of Cambridge.
We deplore the publication of these intrusive and offensive pictures and have asked that Closer France takes these pictures down immediately from its website and desist from publishing any further pictures.
Bauer Media and Closer UK regards publication of these photographs as a gross intrusion of their Royal Highnesses’ privacy.
We were not aware in advance of the purchase of these photographs or of any intention to publish. We have absolutely no control over the editorial decisions of Closer France.
In the light of their publication, we are now urgently discussing this matter with our licensee and reviewing the terms of our licence agreement with Closer France.
Like our readers we are appalled and regret the pain the publication of these photographs has caused. "
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #130  
Old 09-14-2012, 02:01 PM
Empress Merel's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: -, Netherlands
Posts: 1,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hollie View Post
OMG, this pic is shocking. How could William and Kate ever spot the camera from that distance!
They couldn't, ever. The paps have these huge lenses that take insanely good pictures from great distances. Then how would she even know there were pics being taken? She wouldn't. Apparently there were also pics of her smoking.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #131  
Old 09-14-2012, 02:02 PM
carlota's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: , United States
Posts: 5,768
Quote:
Originally Posted by NGalitzine View Post
It wasn't a public place. The Duke and Duchess were on a private estate owned by her husbands cousin. The photographer would have had to trespass (which is illegal) on private property and then use long lense to take the pictures. Invasions of privacy, even of public persons, is still illegal in France. There is a reasonable expectation of the right to privacy on private property.

I am rather amazed at the "blame the victim" mentality of some posters.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
She wasn't in a public place.
as far as i know, it is a public place: the chateau is a hotel for other people such as visitors or other public, even if owned by her husband's cousin.

Chateau D'Autet

so yes, if you don't want compromising pictures circulating, then don't engage in compromising situations. it's simple, even normal people do so when not exposing themselves to pictures when in certain situations. it's just common sense.
__________________
Sign the United Nations Universal Declaration on Animal Welfare: http://www.animalsmatter.org
YOUR DAILY CLICK HELPS ANIMALS SURVIVE!
Feed an animal in need, click for free.
http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com/
Take some time to sign the petitions @: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/animal-welfare/all
Reply With Quote
  #132  
Old 09-14-2012, 02:14 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by carlota View Post
as far as i know, it is a public place: the chateau is a hotel for other people such as visitors or other public, even if owned by her husband's cousin.

Chateau D'Autet
It is not a hotel like checking into your local Hilton. It IS a private place that one has to lease from Lord Linely. Its rather like me renting out my cottage for periods when I don't need it. The general public cannot just wander around the grounds or into the chateau. That means that the photographer had to be trespassing on the grounds. France has rather tough privacy laws which makes it quite likely their lawsuit will be successful, although damages will likely be minimal. This will undoubtably increase moves to increase the penalties for such violations of privacy.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #133  
Old 09-14-2012, 02:17 PM
Duchess of Durham's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Durham, United States
Posts: 595
Quote:
Originally Posted by carlota View Post
as far as i know, it is a public place: the chateau is a hotel for other people such as visitors or other public, even if owned by her husband's cousin.

Chateau D'Autet

so yes, if you don't want compromising pictures circulating, then don't engage in compromising situations. it's simple, even normal people do so when not exposing themselves to pictures when in certain situations. it's just common sense.
Oh Puhleeze!! I occasionally walk around my house without clothes on. The blinds to my front and side windows are closed so that my neighbors can't see anything. However the windows that face my back yard are far enough away from my back yard neighbors that they shouldn't see anything, unless they are using high powered binoculars. I have every expectation of privacy. I should not have to cover up those back windows. And neither should you if it were your house.

TRH had every expectation of privacy. As I could not open the link you posted I can't say with 100% certainty that the chateau is closed to the public. However, knowing W&K from what I've read here and in the news, I seriously doubt K would have taken her top off if there were other people around.

I am so sick of people saying this is K's fault, and that she should have known better. Like others have posted, blaming the victim is just plain WRONG. Shame on YOU for blaming Kate. Wonder if you would feel the same way if these were photos of you or a loved one.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #134  
Old 09-14-2012, 02:21 PM
Queen Penelope's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Camrose, Canada
Posts: 640
I'm pretty much of two minds. On one hand I feel terribly for Kate - you should be able to expect a reasonable amount of privacy on a private estate, but on the other hand she knows/should know that she is unfortunately a target for the paparazzi and they will not respect her privacy - if they can get a picture of her, they will.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Al_bina
Spletnik.ru --- The scandal in the British royal family

I have never understood a desire to voluntarily bake oneself.
I wholeheartedly agree!! I don't get it!!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #135  
Old 09-14-2012, 02:24 PM
Empress Merel's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: -, Netherlands
Posts: 1,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Penelope View Post
I'm pretty much of two minds. On one hand I feel terribly for Kate - you should be able to expect a reasonable amount of privacy on a private estate, but on the other hand she knows/should know that she is unfortunately a target for the paparazzi and they will not respect her privacy - if they can get a picture of her, they will.
They were a mile away. She didn't even see them and she didn't have a chance to go inside or put her top back on.

That's not a very reassuring thought for any woman. Let alone one in her position.

[edit] And oh, for all the people saying that she was/wasn't in a public place. Whetever that's the case or not, nobody should have the audicity to take photos of her boobs. Ever. And that goes for everyone. No woman should be put up with a creep either watching her off or taking pictures for merely taking off her top.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #136  
Old 09-14-2012, 02:24 PM
Archduchess Zelia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 2,007
It's sad that the paparazzi can't leave them alone for a second, I feel sorry for them.
They should be entitled to a certain amount of privacy and this shouldn't be allowed to happen.
__________________
"Blessed be god, the king, the queen and all our sweet children be in good health."
— Lady Margaret Beaufort, April 1497

Reply With Quote
  #137  
Old 09-14-2012, 02:25 PM
Lady Ann's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: IN THE CITY, United States
Posts: 857
It always gets me how people can nod once and agree that this is correct or exceptable behavor when it comes to the people in public life. That the glass tank never ends."she should have known better, they should have learned form passed mistakes." How dare they try to live and have a privite honeymoon or vacation... what could they be thinking??

Really, how about the man who took these photo's have they not learned from past mistakes.. guess not! We have to remember that these are young married people. I think they should have some privacy in life.
__________________
Lady Ann
Life began with waking up and loving my mother's face…~ George Eliot ~
Reply With Quote
  #138  
Old 09-14-2012, 02:29 PM
Nico's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 1,314
Thanks to the french law regarding the invasion of privacy, Will and Kate's case will be presented before the judge probably on monday. It's already expected that Closer will lose and of course pay a lot...

Kate Middleton seins nus dans "Closer" : le magazine le paiera cher au procčs - le Plus
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #139  
Old 09-14-2012, 02:32 PM
Lady Ann's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: IN THE CITY, United States
Posts: 857
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nico View Post
Thanks to the french law regarding the invasion of privacy, Will and Kate's case will be presented before the judge probably on monday. It's already expected that Closer will lose and of course pay a lot...

Kate Middleton seins nus dans "Closer" : le magazine le paiera cher au procčs - le Plus



Good, as they should... the person who took these should be FINED as well...IMO

These people should have to answer the question of, HOW, after the fact does The Duchess of Cambridge get back her peace of mind! That her mother, father, and the world has seen these pictures.

The answer is they can never give back what the magazine and the man who took the pictures have taken from her.
It is a very sad thing.
__________________
Lady Ann
Life began with waking up and loving my mother's face…~ George Eliot ~
Reply With Quote
  #140  
Old 09-14-2012, 02:35 PM
soapstar's Avatar
Serene Highness - Picture of the Month Representative - Britain
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hermosa Beach (CA), United States
Posts: 1,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by miche View Post
Exactly

CBS is reporting that the road and the chateau was .5 miles away. Not close at all.

Here is a photo

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A2xTKNYCMAAKRgH.jpg
Disgusting. Their case should be easy to win.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply


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





Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge dutch royal history fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav 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 constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess anita princess astrid princess beatrix princess charlene princess laurentien princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion princess of asturias queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:51 AM.

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]