♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Sept 15, 2012 7:47:24 GMT
de.eonline.com/news/346217/kate-middleton-s-topless-photo-taker-jail-time-huge-fine-a-possibility QUOTE: Kate Middleton's Topless Photo Taker: Jail Time, Huge Fine a PossibilityDid the paparazzo who zoomed in on Kate Middleton and her naked chest commit a crime? Sacre bleu—quite possibly! A French attorney tells E! News that the Duchess of Cambridge—who, with the weight of the royal family behind her, has already sued the tabloid that published topless photos of her—has the option of lodging a criminal complaint. Why did Kate Middleton sue but Prince Harry didn't? The pics that ended up on the cover (and within the pages) of French mag Closer were allegedly taken from half a mile away while Kate was sunning herself with husband Prince William at what they presumably thought was a private chateau in Provence. "If photographs of Kate Middleton have been taken and published without her consent during her holidays, she may file a complaint on the basis of article 9 of the French civil code and article 226-1 of the penal code," says attorney Pierre Hourcade (who is not associated with the royal). Hourcade says that French law dictates that people have the right to respect for their private lives and, as a picture of a person is considered an attribute of that person, photographic images fall under that protection. Pippa Middleton is back in London while her sister stares down scandal abroad. If convicted of violating a person's right to privacy, punishment is up to a year in jail and a fine of 45,000 euros, or almost $60,000. And even the fact that Kate and her hubby were on vacation factors into what is or isn't legal, according to Hourcade. He says that public figures like Will and Kate can be photographed by anyone without personal authorization only so long as they are in a public space performing their official duties. But, he adds, if they are in a public space and on holiday when photographed, that can constitute a violation of the aforementioned codes because there has been a theft of private image. Kate channels Princess Diana's demure style in Malaysia Moreover, if the sneaky shutterbug who took the photos of Kate is convicted, the magazine that published the images could end up having the photos seized or be compelled to publish the result of the duchess' legal action on its cover. Now that sounds sexy. Laurence Pieau, the editor of the under-the-gun Closer, defended the decision to publish the photos—which have since been removed from the French publication's website—calling them "beautiful" and "not in the least bit shocking." The photos disappeared from their site hours after the magazine's brand owner, the U.K.-based Bauer Media, demanded that they pull the photos down and desist from publishing any further pictures, calling the so-called scoop a "gross intrusion of their Royal Highnesses' privacy."
|
|
|
Post by toby on Sept 15, 2012 10:20:29 GMT
Toby comments.:- I saw a couple of photo's and to be honest the poor lass has nearly nothing to show, so what all the fuss is about is anybody's guess.
|
|
|
Post by Hunny on Sept 15, 2012 11:08:32 GMT
Oh that's pretty invasive, zooming in from half a mile away..
|
|
|
Post by toby on Sept 23, 2012 10:07:58 GMT
Hunny posted.:-Oh that's pretty invasive, zooming in from half a mile away..
Toby comments.:- Invasive ? Let us consider all our telephone calls are recorded and logged. All our e-mails are recorded and logged. The Sites we visit on the Internet are recorded and logged.
We are all photographed from numerous Satellites orbiting the Earth on a 24/24 hour basis. We all all photographed at each Airport, Train Station, Ferry Port and even in most Supermarkets. Our cars whereabouts are monitored on a constant basis and we are photographed when we enter a city either on foot or in vehicles.
That's 'Invasive', ! not some silly woman who got her paps out because it was a sunny day !
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2012 16:36:56 GMT
What toby says makes sense. WE are ALL being subjected to our privacy being violated, all the time, and yet we (just your everyday Joes and Janes) can do nothing about it.
I don't particularly want my street and house on Google, who does? And yet what choice do we have?
I'm quite sick of the hypocrisy.
|
|
|
Post by Hunny on Oct 28, 2012 20:21:39 GMT
Photographer who took topless pictures of Kate Middleton set to be arrested by French policeREAD MORE...They have my sympathy, but they should have no more remedy than any other person would have. Yet it seems they do. They're pretty much going to jail this guy, because William said so, it appears. Normally, someone probably wouldn't get jail out of this. It's not right. I dont know if I'll offend anyone with this, but the royal family just kind of pisses me off when I even see them. The whole notion of "special people" who are so much better than us. No. I'm glad we saw her naked. It brings her down a few pegs to where we have to live
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2012 20:35:17 GMT
I agree with how you see this, hunny. The Royals have privilege far beyond what is normal in my opinion.
There should be no difference in the kind of sentence this photographer gets than if he were caught taking pics of your average Jane and Joe.
Especially when they are still getting money from tax-payers to live their lavish lives!
|
|
|
Post by mikemarshall on Oct 28, 2012 22:59:19 GMT
Photographer who took topless pictures of Kate Middleton set to be arrested by French policeREAD MORE...They have my sympathy, but they should have no more remedy than any other person would have. Yet it seems they do. They're pretty much going to jail this guy, because William said so, it appears. Normally, someone probably wouldn't get jail out of this. It's not right. I dont know if I'll offend anyone with this, but the royal family just kind of pisses me off when I even see them. The whole notion of "special people" who are so much better than us. No. I'm glad we saw her naked. It brings her down a few pegs to where we have to live I do not see the case in those terms at all. Obviously I am no more enamoured of the royals than I am of any other representatives of the authorities but we must always remember that their role is a purely ceremonial one and they exercise no political power at all. And curiously countries with constitutional monarchies appear to be far more stable than republics. They also at times provide a genuinely non-partisan symbol behind which people of all persuasions, cultures, religions, skin colours and so on can rally and they have in their turn made a genuine attempt to interact with ordinary people. Many years ago (before he was married to Diana) I met Prince Charles and found him an extremely likeable and down to earth man. I also met Prince Philip and found him an interesting if perhaps not terribly charming man. Princess Anne was another royal I have met and she was personable and friendly enough. Now there are many myths put out by people with republican agendas about the alleged cost of the monarchy but the reality is that it is cheaper than the republican alternatives. We should also never forget that when sections of the Spanish armed forces attempted a military coup to overthrow the fledgling democracy in Spain it was the effect of a direct command by King Juan Carlos upon them to surrender that quashed the coup. The king's voice had an authority far more impressive than any mere condemnation by a President would have been. On the specific issue of the photographs the royals deserve no more and no less privacy than any other couple. It was quite wrong for the paparazzi to engage in obtaining these pictures without the full knowledge and consent of Kate and William. And if they were simply Mr and Mrs Wales rather than the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge I doubt very much whether anyone beyond a local peeping Tom would have bothered to take the pictures in the first place. Rank brings problems as well as privileges. As for the photographer or photographers themself/themselves, I of course oppose any kind of custodial sentence for the crime which they committed. But that is because I do not support the jailing of any offender for a non-violent offence. I would certainly support the fining of the paper and/or those who took these photographs.
|
|
|
Post by mikemarshall on Oct 28, 2012 23:01:37 GMT
What toby says makes sense. WE are ALL being subjected to our privacy being violated, all the time, and yet we (just your everyday Joes and Janes) can do nothing about it. I don't particularly want my street and house on Google, who does? And yet what choice do we have? I'm quite sick of the hypocrisy. Google is currently the subject of legal action over their invasive assault on privacy and their wantonly irresponsible display of private homes and neighbourhoods on the internet. It is quite possible that they will be forced to take down these items and heavily fined. But the lawyers will find ways to drag out the case for some years yet I suspect.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2012 23:36:30 GMT
Well it's good to hear that I'm not the only one who finds that we can check on just about anyone's abode any time we want anywhere in the world we want. I personally couldn't care less where anyone lives, but there are some pretty awful stalkers out there. I hope Google is made to stop this total invasion of our privacy.
Mike, I'm sure it will take forever, but it's a step in the right direction.
|
|
|
Post by sadie1263 on Oct 30, 2012 0:12:23 GMT
I can agree with hefty fines for this type of crime also. Jail is a bit much......but seriously........I think anyone should be alarmed about people taking pictures of anyone in their private yards and using them. Sure.....this usually happens to celebrities or famous figures.....but the truth is thousands of other people are stalked by nutjobs.......and the idea of someone peeking at me from any distance.....but half of a mile away.....that is just scary......the paparazzi is out of control........they are no longer capturing the news.....but pushing people into making news and stories.........
|
|