To think Kate Middleton should have kept her tits in

[moogster1a]

Surely she can't be unaware that she's one of the most photographed women in the world and there are paparazzi everywhere.
I know in an ideal lovely world she should be able to skinny dip in privacy, but in the real world I think she is being a bit naiive to go topless and then be so upset when the pictures are published

Yes Kate should have been more aware now she might get papped, but she is a human being who is still entitled to her own privacy . If someone had done that to a non royal woman they would be seen as being a pervert, and would be prosecuted so no different to Kate.

Maybe she did think about it but decided to "risk" it?

Was she topless for a long time or only momentarily-but they´d been snapping all day?

How did they know that they were there?

I would like to know who tipped off the press too.

It is not about her attire its about whether the photo should have been taken at all and published. Someone must have tipped off the press though

In this country it is legal to take or publish a picture of someone in a place hey have a reasonable expectation of privacy.

But not if they are in public. So Kate should have privacy as she was in the comfort or their villa. Is as if someone had took a pictur of her with a long lens in her bedroom getting changed.

Where as Harry getting nude nfront or half of Vegas in a pool had no reasonable expectation of privacy.

Totall different cases!

yellowtip My own very personal view I'm sure not shared by others is that she does deserve it, kind of. She is being paid for -yet all I seem to see is just one effing holiday after another. Tough.

So in your opinion it's ok to take this kind of pictures from any public worker and publish them without their consent?

Their wages,and with that any holiday they would take, are being paid by the tax payer after all........

thing is though a normal woman's naked pics would not make it into a magazine.
If you don't want perverts taking covert pictures of you then don't leave the house half naked, simple.
I would not risk it in my own back garden

washfairy - by that logic you are suggesting that all those on state benefits lose their right to privacy too! They're lives are being paid for by the tax payer after all - so shall we get in there are start taking pictures of them while they get ready for bed at night?

Apparently the photo was taken from a mile away. What next, pictures of the conception of the heir through the bedroom window, in the shower, wiping their arse on the toilet?

Yes, I do think they should have a reasonable expectation of privacy.

The wash fairy what a load of none sense. Ok then those on benefts are supported npby the taxpayer should have no privacy then as tey are wend by the taxpayer. What a lad if rubbish

Gosh sorry I'm on my I pad and my typing is dreadful on it

Exactly Mary, where does it stop

Our privacy is invaded all the time. It is a fact of modern life.

There are CCTV cameras by the thousands taking photos of us

The council have a number of us under surveillance for days, recording our private lives for something as simple as a suspicion of benefit theft or dog fouling

If we are involved in a court case, the opposite side probably has private detectives digging into our private lives to find dirt

If we go on protest marches, the police has a file on us and watches our private lives

We deal with it, as we understand life is not perfect, and we need to be vigilant about our own privacy and safety.

These royal parasites seem too dim and entitled to get it. They think they are entitled to public adulation and all the benefits that come with it, but none of the downsides.

I don't think the long lens peeping tom stuff is ok but what I do dislike even more is the manipulation of the media by the Palace. These people are getting shedloads of money from the taxpayer to shore themselves up and they're ill-equipped in any way to give a decent return. I think it's a good idea to flag up their endless holidays and to see a decent balance to counter the utterly false image which is being touted these days. The Queen does a fab job and always has done and is pretty much where it's at. Same with Princess Anne. Very different kettle of fish with Waity Katie.

I believe that all official expenses of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge are met by Prince Charles from his income from The Duchy of Cornwall. They are NOT funded by the civil list. Unlike the Civil List, The Duchy of Cornwall income is derived from property, goods etc, not from general taxation. So actually, WE are NOT paying for them. And even if we were, there is still no way that she 'deserves it' - it is not as though she stood in the middle of a crowded area and lifted her top to give us all an eyeful. She was on her holiday. The villa is apparently about half a mile away from where the pictures were taken. That is not a chance sighting, it is stalking.

I am a public sector worker. My salary IS paid by tax payers. Are you really saying that I should have expected to have pictures of me on my holiday splashed all over the press because of that? That I deserved it?

Well I think I just said that the long lens peeping isn't ok....But fiddlesticks to not paying for this bunch. Of course we are; we always have done.

Flatbread that is in the public domain, Kate was on private property a mile away from the road. Yes they are entitled to some degree of privacy we don't own them

When are they not on holiday?

Here here say it how it is

If a long lense is able to capture Kate a mile away in great detail, where does it stop, Kate and William dressing, taking a shower, having sex

Whao,I meant that as in: saying that Kate 'deserved' her pictures smeared all over the tabloids,as had been suggested, for the sole reason that her wages are being paid by the tax payers should that same reasoning then count for everyone whose wages are being paid by the tax payer!! I am very much against this violation of privacy,no matter who the pictures are taken off.....

melika, I'm neither pro or anti monarchy. I haven't made up my mind yet - but I'm not ignorant either. Believe it or not, the royal family under the Queen's direction is expected to do their job of providing public service. Have a look at the court circulars & you'll find they are busy, have a look at their website & you'll get an even better idea of what they do. Yes, they get to go on holiday - so do most of us - including public sector workers - who are of course taking their holidays at the tax payers expense too!

Apols, washfairy - I must have mis-read your post.

No problem PostBellumBugsy you might not have realised the first bit of my post was quoted from yellowtips post. I didn't make that very clear

I think after past history, eg. Fergies toe sucking, they would have learned a hard lesson. Meanwhile all the worlds press with underlying motives are having a field day with it. It's a bit naive for them to think they could sunbathe without anyone taking a picture at anytime.