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

[mslewis]

Look, Kate is a lovely young woman. They thrive on publicity and then they shun it. If you don't want to be photographed this way, you don't do this. It is not that important. When you suck on publicity, it is like living and dying by the sword. The RF claims they don't, but if they didn't, they would live in seclusion. They need the media, otherwise they would become irrelevant.

In this particular case, Kate and William were staying at a private villa, situated far back from the road, behind a very tall fence. They had expectations of privacy and this photographer evidently climbed a tree and used a powerful telephoto lens to get these photos of the Duchess sunbathing in the nude. I really don't think it's fair to blame them for what the photographer did. I think they give much of themselves to the media and they should be able to be private when they want to be private. These people deserve some sort of punishment for what they did.`

 

[COUNTESS]

You know that is true. But when, I was young I never did stuff like this, because I knew what was private and what was public. So, you can use discretion or you can carry on about the ramifications. Today's camera's are spectacular. Use your brain. Is it so necessary to do. You, meaning they, also, live in the public, all of the time. Privacy is gone. It is a fools gambit to think, at their level you can live off camera.

 

[NGalitzine]

France, unlike some other countries recognizes the concept of privacy even for the famous. They have laws about violation of privacy. According to the French law the right to privacy was violated and as such people will be prosecuted. Why should the laws be overlooked just because the victim is a member of the BRF?

 

[Daria_S]

Look, Kate is a lovely young woman. They thrive on publicity and then they shun it. If you don't want to be photographed this way, you don't do this. It is not that important. When you suck on publicity, it is like living and dying by the sword. The RF claims they don't, but if they didn't, they would live in seclusion. They need the media, otherwise they would become irrelevant.

This little stunt was not publicity, but blatant invasion of privacy. There's a huge difference. You make these people sound like Hollywood attention-seekers, and from what I've seen, that's very far from the truth. Any embarrassing moments that any member of the BRF has experienced was captured by some pap, or another, and was done during a private outing to a night club, or what have you. I'm sorry, but when one is staying on private property, during one's private holiday, one shouldn't worry about being caught on camera in any way, shape, or form, be that person a royal, or a regular Joe. Catherine was on private holiday with her husband, and decided to relax, and sunbathe without a bra/bathing suit top. It should not have been photographed, and the fault is with the photographer/publisher, not the individual that was violated, in this case, Catherine.

What you are saying would be condoning a crime in some countries. It is an infringement of their privacy.

They are entitled to private time.

But this is a loop cos you and I have said this all before.

I agree with you.

 

[sndral]

Look, Kate is a lovely young woman. They thrive on publicity and then they shun it. If you don't want to be photographed this way, you don't do this. It is not that important. When you suck on publicity, it is like living and dying by the sword. The RF claims they don't, but if they didn't, they would live in seclusion. They need the media, otherwise they would become irrelevant.

To me this rationale/justification is akin to justifying rape by claiming the victim dressed or acted provocatively. It shifts blame to the victim rather than focusing on the perpetrator of the crime.
Invasion of privacy via photographs w/out consent is not a crime everywhere, but in France it is. Why have the law if it is not going to be enforced? All defendants were in France and presumably French citizens and knew what they were doing was a crime and were willing to gamble that they'd only be fined for their flagrant violation of France's law rather than being imprisoned - I hope they lose their gamble and French authorities throw the book at them. Why have a law if you don't intend to enforce it?

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Well for me personally, when she walked out with her son these photographs were far from my mind even though these morons had just recently been charged.
I will not repeat what others have already said about certain people blaming the victim.

 

[COUNTESS]

There is a difference between being raped and being photographed. And no matter what you are wearing, being forced into sexual contact is a violent crime. Actually, rape has more to do with violence than sex. Whether or not one should have the right to a private space is not my argument. Sure you should, but when you are who you are you take into consideration the ramifications of your actions. Strip pool pictures in Vegas, well what a thought. Harry may know better now or not. Putting people in prison for this is ridiculous. When you write they were presumably French Citizens, why would you presume that? The Paps are many different nationalities and may never know that their way of making a living, repugnant as it is, is just that, a way to make a living and people buy these pictures, other wise no one would do it. Diana died, far more serious than some embarrassing photos. Frankly, if no one made a fuss, they would be long forgotten.

 

[NGalitzine]

^^^^
Even if they were foreign, which I do not think is the case, ignorance of the law has never been an acceptable defence. Are you suggesting because the victim is foreign and more importantly because the victim is a member of the BRF the French should just overlook the matter and not enforce their laws on privacy?

 

[HRHHermione]

I'm sure you'd feel the exact same way if people camped out around your private home surrounded by a ton of land where you thought you were totally alone, and perched in trees a mile down the road just waiting for an opportunity to use a telephoto lens to take a picture of you in an embarrassing moment to sell to the world media.

Seriously, this is not a hard concept. Photographers do not have the right to camp out half a mile down the road and use a telephoto lens to take pictures of people in their private homes. That would be considered stalking in some cases, and this photographer was nothing more than a peeping tom.

Just because they're famous doesn't mean that this kind of gross violation of their privacy should be condoned.

 

[Daria_S]

I'm sure you'd feel the exact same way if people camped out around your private home surrounded by a ton of land where you thought you were totally alone, and perched in trees a mile down the road just waiting for an opportunity to use a telephoto lens to take a picture of you in an embarrassing moment to sell to the world media.

Seriously, this is not a hard concept. Photographers do not have the right to camp out half a mile down the road and use a telephoto lens to take pictures of people in their private homes. That would be considered stalking in some cases, and this photographer was nothing more than a peeping tom.

Just because they're famous doesn't mean that this kind of gross violation of their privacy should be condoned.

Well said!

 

[COUNTESS]

When you are a target, you keep your back to the wall. They are a target and they know this. It is an age of long lens cameras. Not a great revelation. Do I think it is right. NO. Do I think it was not well thought out on Kate's part. Yes. You can sunbathe without removing your clothes. What is the big difference? By the way, Ignorance of the law is an American thing, not necessarily French. I do not know. And the remuneration was great. Kate and William knew that. People will risk a great deal for money. And, that it was saleable was the bigger issue. So, not the photographers, but the people who bought the photos. No buyers, no market, no photos.

 

[COUNTESS]

Just checked, Ignorance of the Law is no Excuse, in France, too.

 

[soapstar]

I'm sure you'd feel the exact same way if people camped out around your private home surrounded by a ton of land where you thought you were totally alone, and perched in trees a mile down the road just waiting for an opportunity to use a telephoto lens to take a picture of you in an embarrassing moment to sell to the world media.

Seriously, this is not a hard concept. Photographers do not have the right to camp out half a mile down the road and use a telephoto lens to take pictures of people in their private homes. That would be considered stalking in some cases, and this photographer was nothing more than a peeping tom.

Just because they're famous doesn't mean that this kind of gross violation of their privacy should be condoned.

Exactly!

The paps broke the law and now they have to deal with the consequences.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

If you don't want to be photographed this way, you don't do this.

Agree 100%. Besides, the pictures are out there forever. No matter what happens now in court, at some point nobody will remember the circumstances, only see that Queen Kate did topless when she was younger.

 

[HRHHermione]

Agree 100%. Besides, the pictures are out there forever. No matter what happens now in court, at some point nobody will remember the circumstances, only see that Queen Kate did topless when she was younger.

That's utterly absurd. That might actually be the most absurd post I've ever seen here.

Kate's privacy was violated horrifically and pictures were taken of her alone with her husband sunbathing. The idea that this will negatively impact her reputation for the rest of her life is both stupid and insulting.

 

[Ladyelena]

So true. She has nothing to be ashamed about.

 

[COUNTESS]

It will never impact her reputation. Just a silly situation. She did what she did, they took pictures, if one would let it die, it would die a lonely death. People have short memories. The more complaints about a story the longer "you" keep it in the public presence. This was taught to me by a wise man. It is only a discussion, because of the continual chatter, by lawsuits, etc.

 

[Dman]

It was horrible that their privacy was violated like that. I felt very bad that happened to them and for others to make it seem like Catherine did something wrong. She was with her husband on private property and minding their own business. That's what the photographer and others media outlets should've done. Mind their own business and leave William & Catherine's alone.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

It will never impact her reputation. Just a silly situation. She did what she did, they took pictures, if one would let it die, it would die a lonely death. People have short memories. The more complaints about a story the longer "you" keep it in the public presence. This was taught to me by a wise man. It is only a discussion, because of the continual chatter, by lawsuits, etc.

People may have short memories, but the internet hasn't.

 

[blauerengel]

It will never impact her reputation. Just a silly situation. She did what she did, they took pictures, if one would let it die, it would die a lonely death. People have short memories. The more complaints about a story the longer "you" keep it in the public presence. This was taught to me by a wise man. It is only a discussion, because of the continual chatter, by lawsuits, etc.

That is true,Brigitte Bardot has said the same thing & she was used to a lot of paparazzi and gossip when she was younger ;-)

On another hand we should also be aware that paparazzi only do such pictures because there is so much demand for gossip and pictures of William and Catherine....

 

[Marty91charmed]

I thought I 'd never comment on this. Especially now that a bit of time has passed. However my opinion is that kate made a big mistake. I agree with those that said she should have been more careful. I admire and like kate but when I think she did something wrong I have to tell it. I can't always justify her. What paparazzi did were disgusting though.
I think what happened was kate's false step but she is brilliant, young and smart so this is only ONE spot in her life as a member of the royal family. Nothing compares to what other royals did throughout their lives.
What disapointed me a bit was that they were vacationig AGAIN. Not a good impression. But this is just my point of view.
I respect who is sided whit kate and their opinion so please repect mine. An I don't wanna be attacked just because I said my opinion.

 

[blauerengel]

Well,I am sure that Catherine has learned from this story;-)
However there are things that I find more worry-worthy than a young British princess sun-bathing during her holidays in France! As long as the Duchess of Cambridge has such a decent behavior,elegant fashion and a warm smile during her official outings and royal duty, I do not expect this unfortunate mistake will overshadow her good reputation. After all we are living in a world with lots of sexual images in advertisement/movies and mass-media...
It is just a topless picture, nobody got hurt or suffered because of her actions-it is really a non-issue to me.
In France lots of women enjoy the sun and wear no bikini tops, nudity is nothing to be ashamed for and the only thing that bothers me is that there seems to be no self-restriction on the side of the photographers to respect the privacy of a royal. I know that the pictures of Catherine,William,George,Harry etc. are very valuable due to extreme demand for gossip and new "juicy" pictures always sell, but there were many magazines who refused to print the pictures because they respect William& Catherine and their right for a private life!

 

[GracieGiraffe]

I quite forgot that we had all seen the Duchess naked until this thread started back up.

Not to worry - advocates for the Duchess can now superimpose the photos of the infant prince at her breast, turning the image into a Madonna and Child.

Problem solved. No need to thank me.

 

[soapstar]

Agree 100%. Besides, the pictures are out there forever. No matter what happens now in court, at some point nobody will remember the circumstances, only see that Queen Kate did topless when she was younger.

They may see that she did topless, but they won't care. Especially since King Charles and King William have bottomless photos floating about. And it's not like they are the only members of the BRF that have been exposed. We can add Harry, Andrew, Fergie, Sophie, Diana and Prince Philip to that list. Not to mention the topless photos of Princess Caroline, Princess Stephanie and the photos of Prince Frederik.

Over time, people forget or stop caring about past nude/semi-nude photos of royals. That's why those photos from past scandals are rarely brought up. The only time you really hear about them, is when the media is discussing a new royal scandal. So Kate's photos will go the way of all the other royal photos...they'll be forgotten and when brought up, shrugged off.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

Six journalists to face trial in France over Kate Middleton topless photos | Daily Mail Online

 

[Mermaid1962]

I hope that Catherine doesn't have to give evidence. What a circus that would be!!!

 

[Moonmaiden23]

Six journalists to face trial in France over Kate Middleton topless photos | Daily Mail Online

Will the press never stop referring to this young woman as "KATE MIDDLETON"??

Will they still call her that when she is queen? Seriously?

I cannot think of any other non Royal or aristocratic married in who is still called by her commoner name. Not Letizia. Not Maxima. Not MM. Not Sofia Hellqvist.

It's a little thing but it bugs the heck out of me!

 

[melina premiere]

Kate is not the only princess to be still called ' Kate Middleton', Charlene is still called ' Charlene Wittsock' in the tabloids and not princess of Monaco.

I think that both dated a long time with William and Albert that people who are reading these tabloids are used to know Kate and Charlene under the name of their family

They are princesses and no more single women and I agree with you

 

[Spheno]

Will the press never stop referring to this young woman as "KATE MIDDLETON"??

Will they still call her that when she is queen? Seriously?

I cannot think of any other non Royal or aristocratic married in who is still called by her commoner name. Not Letizia. Not Maxima. Not MM. Not Sofia Hellqvist.

It's a little thing but it bugs the heck out of me!

Elizabeth Woodville, Anne Neville, Anne Boleyn, Jane Seymour, Catherine Howard, Catherine Parr, etc.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

The fact that you needed to reach back 500 years for similar examples kind of underlines my point.

I agree with melina premiere that the fact that the DoC was in the public consciousness for a decade as William's girlfriend might be a contributing factor as to why her maiden name has stuck, but I still think the press is simply lazy and can't be bothered to get it right.

ETA: I mostly see Charlene referred to as Princess of Monaco in tabloids even though she also spend a decade as Albert's girlfriend before marrying him.