Duke and Duchess of Cambridge consider legal action over 'unjustifiable' publication of topless pict

[Jazzy]

The Royal couple are furious that the French magazine Closer has published the photographs, taken during their holiday in Provence last month, saying it was “unthinkable” that anyone should print them.



A statement from St James’s Palace, produced in consultation with the couple, likened the long-lens pictures to “the worst excesses of the press and paparazzi during the life of Diana, Princess of Wales”.



Aides said the “level of intrusiveness” meant “a red line has been crossed”, suggesting the couple are giving serious thought to suing the magazine and the photographer for breach of privacy.



Traditionally, the Royal family never take legal action against the media, but the pictures are perhaps the most intrusive ever published of a senior member of the Royal family and the Duke and Duchess may now decide enough is enough.



In the most strongly-worded statement to come from the Royal family in years, a spokesman for St James’s Palace said: “Their Royal Highnesses have been hugely saddened to learn that a French publication and a photographer have invaded their privacy in such a grotesque and totally unjustifiable manner.



The couple were enjoying a short break at the Chateau D’Autet, owned by Lord Linley, the Queen’s nephew, in Luberon, when the pictures were taken.



The Duchess is seen looking relaxed and happy in the pictures as she wears nothing but a pair of bikini bottoms, while William is in a pair of shorts.



Closer claimed the swimming pool was in full view of a public road, and sources in the area have said that even local French newspaper photographers who have nothing to do with the international paparazzi were able to stand on the road and take pictures.



A source at the magazine said: “If two public figures chose to strip off in full view of a public road then they can expect to be pictured, and they were.”



Full article



Given the fact that the swimming pool was in full view of a public road, do you consider this an invasion of privacy? Why or why not?

 

[Headliner]

An Italian weekly magazine says it plans to publish photographs of the Duchess of Cambridge sunbathing topless in a special issue next week.

View the full article

 

[DrLeftover]

Shades of Di.

 

[Headliner]

Lawyers for the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, who are touring the South Pacific, will make a criminal complaint to a French prosecutor over topless photographs of the duchess.

View the full article

 

[Sinon]

Good luck.

If one doesn't want to be seen topless then don't be anywhere that the public can see you topless.

Not a smart move or very ill advised.

I dunno. I sort of agree, but then I don't. There's a difference between being seen topless, and having someone take over 200 photos of you topless without consent.

 

[Locke]

I dunno. I sort of agree, but then I don't. There's a difference between being seen topless, and having someone take over 200 photos of you topless without consent.

Then one shouldn't be in public if one doesn't want said photos taken. Especially if one is a public figure.

 

[Raven]

Good luck.

If one doesn't want to be seen topless then don't be anywhere that the public can see you topless.

Not a smart move or very ill advised.

It was a private place. The public shouldn't have been able to see that is the point.

 

[Raven]

Well there are two ways paths of thought l have on this issue.

First l think for anyone to publish these pictures is nothing but a classless and tasteless act in order to sell magazines. But on the other hand why did Kate put herself in a position that she could be seen topless in the first place ?

Don't get me wrong l think Kate is great but l think she made a mistake in judgement here big time.

If she could be seen from a public road then how can one argue that they had a expectation of privacy ?

I don't think she would have gone topless if she had known there were photographers. The point to this case is that some guy took photos from a PRIVATE residence. He shouldn't have been there in the first place.

 

[Headliner]

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge launch a criminal complaint in France in relation to the publication of pictures of the duchess topless.

View the full article

 

[Jazzy]

It was a private place. The public shouldn't have been able to see that is the point.

Not as private as they assumed:

[background=rgb(251, 253, 254)]Closer claimed the swimming pool was in full view of a public road, and sources in the area have said that even local French newspaper photographers who have nothing to do with the international paparazzi were able to stand on the road and take pictures.[/background]

 

[Jazzy]

The point to this case is that some guy took photos from a PRIVATE residence. He shouldn't have been there in the first place.

That statement is incorrect unless you have a link that states otherwise. The facts are:



The couple were staying at the French chateau of the Queen's nephew, Lord Linley, when the photos were taken.



The couple were visible from the street.

 

[The Dragon Master]

That statement is incorrect unless you have a link that states otherwise. The facts are:



The couple were staying at the French chateau of the Queen's nephew, Lord Linley, when the photos were taken.



The couple were visible from the street.

Link: http://www.dailymail...f=Katy+Dartford



It's visible from the road with a long range camera.



In my view this is an infringement of privacy. The Chateau is barley visible, so Kate would be almost impossible to see. Yeah the photo's may have been taken from a public road, but the fact is that they needed a long range camera to see them in the first place, which in my eyes, amounts to stalking. God knows how long they may have been camped out there waiting for the perfect shot.

 

[The Dragon Master]

IT WAS NOT PRIVATE that's the whole point. Where she was sunbathing was available to anyone using the PUBLIC ROAD. So how it that private ?

If it was private she shouldn't have have been able to be seen at all from anywhere. It would be a different story if there was a wall or fence between her and the public.

And just because someone says it's private doesn't make it so.

Maybe not, but the fact is that a long range camera was needed to take the photo's in the first place. From the road the photo's were took and the place they were staying in, the general public couldn't of seen them with normal eye sight. It's not like they were in the middle of a town with no walls, they were almost smack bang in the middle of some countryside with, what, one or two roads around them.

 

[Raven]

IT WAS NOT PRIVATE that's the whole point. Where she was sunbathing was available to anyone using the PUBLIC ROAD. So how it that private ?

If it was private she shouldn't have have been able to be seen at all from anywhere. It would be a different story if there was a wall or fence between her and the public.

And just because someone says it's private doesn't make it so.

Well on the sky news report the road didn't look right next to it.



EDIT. Thank you master for posting the pic.. Like I said. Road is no-where near it

 

[The Dragon Master]

​ Well l didn't see any picture. So l'll asume it's how you stated and therefore it would put the whole event in a different light.

However l don't know what you mean by your EDIT comment.

Link: http://www.dailymail...f=Katy+Dartford



It's visible from the road with a long range camera.



In my view this is an infringement of privacy. The Chateau is barley visible, so Kate would be almost impossible to see. Yeah the photo's may have been taken from a public road, but the fact is that they needed a long range camera to see them in the first place, which in my eyes, amounts to stalking. God knows how long they may have been camped out there waiting for the perfect shot.

 

[The Dragon Master]

More news. They've managed to get an injunction stopping the spread of the pictures in France. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...t-rule-Royals-block-publication-pictures.html

 

[Jazzy]

What good is the injunction now? People in France have already seen the pictures.



Now the pictures are being spread in Italy and Ireland.



The damage is done and the more attention they bring to it, the more it's going to keep up. They should chalk it up to bad judgement on Kate's part and let it die down.

 

[Raven]

To stop more countries getting them.

 

[Raven]

Plus they went fot it before the other countries got the pics

 

[Raven]

Your not alone. I havent seen them either