Catherine & William: 'Closer' Magazine and Breach of Privacy - September 2012

[Dman]

That's exactly what i'm trying to say. They try to make them look like pure angelic people when there not. Now the cover is blown and this shows who they really are.

It just goes to show everybody that members of the royal family are human and have feelings just like everybody else. They are human despite all the praise they get in the media and they have always been human. Yes the royals make mistakes but in this case, I really don't think William & Catherine made any mistakes. What they were doing was something very private and was done on private property.

I couldn't be a member of the paparazzi. I can't see myself hounding, stalking other people and throwing the law out of the window just for some financial gain. In oprder to do that job you have to not care about peoples feelings, their privacy and laugh in the face of the law. I think life is too short to live your life like that.

 

[Happiness is sweet]

The media honey. The sends this message out to the world that there perfect they can't make mistakes.

 

[miche]

When did they do that?

 

[Happiness is sweet]

what do you mean the media or kate

 

[Iluvbertie]

My concern is that William and Kate said they had 'other commitments' as their excuse to not attend the closing ceremony of the Paralympics when they went on a holiday - hardly a way to endear themselves to any right thinking people.

This couple come across as a couple who have no idea of how to behave as royals - which is duty first - but to them it is holidays and pleasure and duty if we can fit it in. This is not the attitude I expect of a future King.

I am surprised at how little focus there has been on to me the much bigger issue - security. If a photographer can get those photos a sniper could just as easily have taken them out but because of the fuss William is making over the photos the bigger issue isn't even being discussed.

 

[padams2359]

My wife showed the pics to me. I think they were unnecessary, and I have one thing to say, "Lucky Will"! Sue for invasion of privacy, trespassing and anything else that can be thrown at the photographer and mags. Not to go in the whole Diana thing, but I remember her walking and driving and wondering can they do that, and how can she see? Especially at night and driving off. She had to be blinded by the lights. It's like a mob riot.

 

[Bensgal]

That's exactly what i'm trying to say. They try to make them look like pure angelic people when there not. Now the cover is blown and this shows who they really are.

I'm confused...who are they really and what cover was blown?

 

[Lmarch]

As an American, my response may be a little daft for those of you in the UK....but why can't the royals just cover up when they go outside? Like we do in America? What is the draw of exposing oneself and taking a risk like that? Even if there aren't paparazzi around....there are security personnel. Do you really want to expose yourself to security personnel who work for the crown? Why can't they just cover up? Can't you just tan around the bikini top?

 

[camelot23ca]

Has anything "scandalous" ever happened to the Queen? I really hate that Kate is having to endure this, and it got me wondering if the Queen had ever had to endure anything similar. I am quite positive she has never been photographed topless but I think I remember reading about her throwing something (a shoe?) At Prince Phillip one time and the incident being reported. Forgive me if I have gotten this wrong.

I doubt we'd ever know if the Queen did "scandalous" things like this because when she was Catherine's age there was no internet and the media exercised much more restraint, both in general and especially regarding the royal family. We have second hand accounts of things like the argument mentioned above but that's it. Imagine if Kate was caught on tape throwing something at William during an argument!

 

[Dman]

My concern is that William and Kate said they had 'other commitments' as their excuse to not attend the closing ceremony of the Paralympics when they went on a holiday - hardly a way to endear themselves to any right thinking people.

This couple come across as a couple who have no idea of how to behave as royals - which is duty first - but to them it is holidays and pleasure and duty if we can fit it in. This is not the attitude I expect of a future King.

I am surprised at how little focus there has been on to me the much bigger issue - security. If a photographer can get those photos a sniper could just as easily have taken them out but because of the fuss William is making over the photos the bigger issue isn't even being discussed.

I think the Cambridges had some sort of security with them.

William & catherine did put duty first ahead of their short vacation. They carried out official engagements throughout this year. They attended the official engagements with The Queen & Duke of Edinburgh, they attended the Diamond Jubilee celebrations, Trooping the Colour, Olympic & Paralympic ceremonies and games. They have also supported their charities too. So what do you mean that they haven't put royal duty first? They can take a little vacation if they want to, just like all the other royals and non royals.

 

[Lmarch]

And as for Harry....really poor judgment. Everybody has a cell phone these days and again, why do you have to expose yourself in a room full of strangers?

 

[TortillaChips]

As an American, my response may be a little daft for those of you in the UK....but why can't the royals just cover up when they go outside? Like we do in America?

I'm laughing because I assume this is a wind-up

 

[soapstar]

As an American, my response may be a little daft for those of you in the UK....but why can't the royals just cover up when they go outside? Like we do in America? What is the draw of exposing oneself and taking a risk like that? Even if there aren't paparazzi around....there are security personnel. Do you really want to expose yourself to security personnel who work for the crown? Why can't they just cover up? Can't you just tan around the bikini top?

What? Plenty of Americans take their tops of outside. In fact, Jackie O was photographed sunbathing naked back in the 70's.

 

[HRHHermione]

What? Plenty of Americans take their tops of outside. In fact, Jackie O was photographed sunbathing naked back in the 70's.

Yea, American here. Also occasional topless sunbather.

 

[Dman]

As an American, my response may be a little daft for those of you in the UK....but why can't the royals just cover up when they go outside? Like we do in America? What is the draw of exposing oneself and taking a risk like that? Even if there aren't paparazzi around....there are security personnel. Do you really want to expose yourself to security personnel who work for the crown? Why can't they just cover up? Can't you just tan around the bikini top?

Well, I'm sure William & Catherine would've covered up if they were among the public and on public property but they did this in private and on private property. I don't think they did this in the presence of the security team.

Many people get tans in different ways. They were just happening to get some sun with their tops off but in a private space. People do stuff like this all the time and if it's done in private, then it should stay private.

 

[Sonjapearl]

As an American, my response may be a little daft for those of you in the UK....but why can't the royals just cover up when they go outside? Like we do in America? What is the draw of exposing oneself and taking a risk like that? Even if there aren't paparazzi around....there are security personnel. Do you really want to expose yourself to security personnel who work for the crown? Why can't they just cover up? Can't you just tan around the bikini top?

I'm not sure if you mean this, but by saying "Like we do in America?" sounds arrogant. Why is the American way the only way and everyone must do what some Americans do?

And like others have said, there are Americans who are all for topless and even nude sunbathing. I would do it, if I were much thinner of course - and I am a proud American!

 

[camelot23ca]

I am surprised at how little focus there has been on to me the much bigger issue - security. If a photographer can get those photos a sniper could just as easily have taken them out but because of the fuss William is making over the photos the bigger issue isn't even being discussed.

You could ask the same question about the balcony appearance of the entire family this summer, or about the open carriages parading through London on William's wedding day. And the answer to those questions, I think, would be the same as the question regarding security during this holiday: reasonable precautions are taken but members of the British royal family are willing to accept a certain level of risk to their personal safety in exchange for a greater amount of freedom of movement.

 

[GrammaSueSue]

There is a very interesting poll being conducted concerning the viewing of the pictures of Catherine at:

Gretawire | The Official Blog of Greta Van Susteren

I did not!

 

[Catherine J]

What?

That's exactly what i'm trying to say. They try to make them look like pure angelic people when there not. Now the cover is blown and this shows who they really are.

Oh. My. Goodness.

I, for one (and I suspect I am not alone) never saw them as either pure or angelic. Rather I find them human and natural, if not normal. That's their charm, really.

And, in what world, on what planet, in what cultural norm is being topless in front of your husband "impure"?

Further, what cover?

Yes, it does show who they really are. And I found it charming and heartwarming and I was happy for them that they seem to have a rich, happy, normal private life.

I saw a quick image in a video (I think, can't recall) where they were getting on a plane the day this all broke. She had her hand on his back as they went into the plane and, I swear, I thought it one of the most touching things I have ever seen.

I cannot believe some of these responses.

Apologies if I seem rude. I'm just shocked - that comes out as rude sometimes.

 

[NGalitzine]

That's exactly what i'm trying to say. They try to make them look like pure angelic people when there not. Now the cover is blown and this shows who they really are.

Good grief!!! What exactly does it show? That they are a married couple? That in private on private property they might sunbathe topless or even nude? Big whoop!!! Hardly shocking or wrong or unangelic. Many people do exactly the same thing in private and if you happen to visit the beaches of the Mediterranean or the lakes around Berlin you will see exactly the same thing in public. Heck since you are I believe in Toronto I suggest you hop onto a ferry to the Toronto islands on a hot sunny day and take yourself to Hanlans Point and you will find hundreds of ordinary Torontonians letting it all hang out on the beach there. Not shocking. Not scandalous. Not wrong. Not impure.

FYI you even live in a place where it is perfectly legal for a woman to walk topless through the streets of the city, and yes it has been done.

 

[Hilda Thomas]

This story has many angles to it. Privacy, A member of the royal family or it could be anyone else exposing themselves to members of the servant staff?. A camerawoman (middle aged) taking pictures. Who alerted this camera woman that the Winsors were visiting the private house? and Kate was sun bathing in the almost nude. Where were the bodyguards?. My apartment has a terrace which extents from the diningroom past the livingroom through the bedroom and I do not venture out without being properly covered eventhough my apartment is higher than the 14th floor.Agatha Christie could not write a better story. A high powered camera could have been a high powered rifle. I always keep my curtains closed. They are sickos with By----. Kate and Williams should not let their hair down. Who took those pictures?. A Woman.

 

[Catherine J]

As an American, my response may be a little daft for those of you in the UK....but why can't the royals just cover up when they go outside? Like we do in America? What is the draw of exposing oneself and taking a risk like that? Even if there aren't paparazzi around....there are security personnel. Do you really want to expose yourself to security personnel who work for the crown? Why can't they just cover up? Can't you just tan around the bikini top?

You're trolling, right?

"Like we do in America?" Been out on Main Street, AnyCity, USA lately? What passes for "dressed" can be mighty trashy and revealing in the good old USA.

I think this ought not to be a debate on the toplessness itself. Since there is nothing illegal, immoral or improper about the act and privacy was expected and planned for it veers too closely to blaming the victim.

YMMV

 

[Frelinghighness]

This story has many angles to it. Privacy, A member of the royal family or it could be anyone else exposing themselves to members of the servant staff?. A camerawoman (middle aged) taking pictures. Who alerted this camera woman that the Winsors were visiting the private house? and Kate was sun bathing in the almost nude. Where were the bodyguards?. My apartment has a terrace which extents from the diningroom past the livingroom through the bedroom and I do not venture out without being properly covered eventhough my apartment is higher than the 14th floor.Agatha Christie could not write a better story. A high powered camera could have been a high powered rifle. I always keep my curtains closed. They are sickos with By----. Kate and Williams should not let their hair down. Who took those pictures?. A Woman.

Their naivte is what strikes me also. I can totally relate to your apartment dwelling experience as I lived in both NYC and Paris apts for some years. In each case, I could unwillingly see into others' apartments so took extra precautions for myself.
Maybe they have always lived in the country.
The security aspect is of course, what matters.

 

[Royal Newbie]

Their naivte is what strikes me also. I can totally relate to your apartment dwelling experience as I lived in both NYC and Paris apts for some years. In each case, I could unwillingly see into others' apartments so took extra precautions for myself.
Maybe they have always lived in the country.
The security aspect is of course, what matters.

While I think security is one of the issues, I feel that the invasion of privacy is the paramount issue.

IMHO, of course.

 

[Isabella]

Their naivte is what strikes me also. I can totally relate to your apartment dwelling experience as I lived in both NYC and Paris apts for some years. In each case, I could unwillingly see into others' apartments so took extra precautions for myself.
Maybe they have always lived in the country.
The security aspect is of course, what matters.

William and Kate were not in the middle of NYC or Paris or in an apartment, though - they were at a secluded house, not even particularly close to a road. Completely different situations.

And no, they haven't always lived in the country.

 

[Princess of Durham]

Clothed, half clothed, naked .... In this case there was a reasonable expectation of privacy. It is really not the level of dress, it is the fact that a peeping Tom (yes, that is correct) trained a camera on people who were on private property and took pictures unbeknownst to them, dressed, half dressed, or undressed makes NO DIFFERENCE. It is, as I understand against the law in that country to take pictures without permission of those being photographed in a private situation.

 

[COESpiral]

Oh. My. Goodness.

I cannot believe some of these responses.

You and me both. The utter obtuseness of certain people leaves me discouraged and angry. How do you engender such loathing towards people you've never met and never will meet?

There are celebrities I don't care for and because of that I don't read about them, I don't go on message boards and insult them, nor do I take every opportunity to call them lazy or entitled or any other hateful word that comes to mind. I just ignore said celebrities and get on with life.

 

[duchessrachel]

Thank you. I really enjoyed reading that.

 

[duchessrachel]

Oh. My. Goodness.



I saw a quick image in a video (I think, can't recall) where they were getting on a plane the day this all broke. She had her hand on his back as they went into the plane and, I swear, I thought it one of the most touching things I have ever seen.

I cannot believe some of these responses.

Apologies if I seem rude. I'm just shocked - that comes out as rude sometimes.

I saw a picture of her hand on his back and it was very touching. It was almost as if she was consoling him and assuring him that everything was going to be okay.

 

[sndral]

I saw a picture of her hand on his back and it was very touching. It was almost as if she was consoling him and assuring him that everything was going to be okay.

William and Harry have both voiced concerns regarding the difficulties their future wives will face due to their positions. I cannot help but suspect that this stems from what they have experienced in their own lives. William's huge concern has always been to protect Catherine, unlike his mother she has not courted the press in any way, moreover, she was in his presence when the photos were snapped, thus he undoubtedly feels responsible for not protecting her on many levels. Technically, of course, he is a victim as well, and could have taken the same legal steps if he had been photographed alone.
As for those complaining about 'playing the Diana card' too often, I disagree, the press certainly plays that card w/ great regularity in several ways to sell their drivel, but, unlike this incident, I do not recall either Harry or William doing so in regards to other cases of press intrusion.
I was pleased to see they are seeking criminal charges, but somewhat surprised at how little in civil damages they are seeking. We'll know tues. whether injunctive relief will be granted. Does anyone know enough about French law to explain why they are seeking a set dollar amount as a penalty for each day the publication fails to remove the magazines? How often do they print this magazine - is it a weekly? One hopes it will cost the magazine a pretty penny to collect and destroy all of the issues.