egafd.com

Lol.

Morph

kerry78 wrote:

>
>
> Hope we see them.
>
>
Well, you can see them - just look on the internet.

!wink!

I expect this will be the law firm that will go and kick the sleazy Fench butts of Closer magazine. It's just a shame they can't string up a few of those disgusting paps into the bargain!

She should make a statement, rather than getting all upset, just saying "All this proves is I have tits and no privacy. Are you all forgetting the papperazi chased my husband's mother into a lamppost?" Then she'll come across as a no-nonsense likable person and the world will turn on the paps.

Simple. Call me Max Clifford.

To be fair if you are in the public image and get your lids out outside it is expected a sleezy pap will publish them, if your friggin' royalty you should know better.

I have seen them and I will say we have much better posting on this very forum, and I have seen sweeter on twitter. Don't get your hopes up guys.

They were in a private location, they can't just lock themselves away in a sealed vault whenever they want to take an item of clothing off. They aren't fame chasers like the types you get on the only way is essex, big brother, x factor etc. They don't ask for or deserve their privacy to be invaded at any given opportunity.
I think it's about time these rags were taken to court over this sort of invasion of privacy. It doesn't serve the public interest to see stuff like this other than for some pervs to wank over. Can't stand it when 'news' papers do this type of thing.

Cant but agree with you. They were in a situation where they would have had clear expectation of privacy. To intrude for nothing other than prurient 'interest' is despicable.