Rothfield

HITMAN

HITMAN

Bull Shark
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Messages
1,955
Reaction score
10
Youd be suprised at the amount of venom you can cram into a tweet. You got to # wisely
 
C

CrankyShark

T Roll
Joined
Mar 13, 2013
Messages
3,517
Reaction score
6
Woody is wrong by the way. The DT hasn't broken any laws. The problem is that the boundaries between the media and sportspeople have changed in Australia. There was once an unwritten rule that the media respected the player's privacy. The telegraph no longer observe that rule. In Australian politics there still exists the unwritten rule that the media respects the private iives of politicians' partners. This unwritten rule is still respected.

What needs to happen is that the media should return to respecting the private lives of players. I don't know the answer to how to make that happen. Stringing Murdoch up by the nuts springs to mind, but it wouldn't actually work.
 
W

woody08

T Roll
Joined
Jul 10, 2010
Messages
137
Reaction score
6
CrankyShark said:
Woody is wrong by the way. The DT hasn't broken any laws. The problem is that the boundaries between the media and sportspeople have changed in Australia. There was once an unwritten rule that the media respected the player's privacy. The telegraph no longer observe that rule. In Australian politics there still exists the unwritten rule that the media respects the private iives of politicians' partners. This unwritten rule is still respected.

What needs to happen is that the media should return to respecting the private lives of players. I don't know the answer to how to make that happen. Stringing Murdoch up by the nuts springs to mind, but it wouldn't actually work.
Click to expand...

I don't think I'm wrong in terms of the laws relating to photography.

Firstly, no one has the right to privacy in a public place. You can photograph what you like and where you like.
There are some exceptions and I detailed those in my post.
It has nothing to do with the press, Daily Telegraph except that they have to obey the law. You cannot photograph (and publish) pictures of people in compromising situations in a private place. You also cannot stalk and follow people going about their business and spying on them. This is what the photographer did. So do many others, but its still against the law. The daily Telegraph has broken the law by publishing an unlawfully obtained photo. If the lady was to make a complaint to police, or if the police thought they could succeed with a prosecution, then they could be charged.
 
vicsharkfan

vicsharkfan

Jaws
Joined
Jul 29, 2006
Messages
13,437
Reaction score
1,005
Location
victoria
Wonder how long before he somehow links oscar petirious not guilty murder charge to the once CEO less peptide popping bubbler indulging titty ogling cronulla sharks.
 
W

woody08

T Roll
Joined
Jul 10, 2010
Messages
137
Reaction score
6
sharks2010 said:
youd hate to be her boyfriend/husband and find out she isn't a receptionist
Click to expand...

And that's why she should be seeing a lawyer. She'd have the sleazy photog, Buzz Lightyear and the DT's little testicles squeezed between her 38c's.
 
C

CrankyShark

T Roll
Joined
Mar 13, 2013
Messages
3,517
Reaction score
6
woody08 said:
I don't think I'm wrong in terms of the laws relating to photography.

Firstly, no one has the right to privacy in a public place. You can photograph what you like and where you like.
There are some exceptions and I detailed those in my post.
It has nothing to do with the press, Daily Telegraph except that they have to obey the law. You cannot photograph (and publish) pictures of people in compromising situations in a private place. You also cannot stalk and follow people going about their business and spying on them. This is what the photographer did. So do many others, but its still against the law. The daily Telegraph has broken the law by publishing an unlawfully obtained photo. If the lady was to make a complaint to police, or if the police thought they could succeed with a prosecution, then they could be charged.
Click to expand...
How can you stalk someone once? You aren't making sense.

If you wave your tits around behind a window on a major public road people are going to look at you. In the same way they may photograph you. You can't sit at the boundary of a public place and expect privacy.

Todd Carney on the other hand. And I agree with you.
 
BlackWhiteBlue

BlackWhiteBlue

Jaws
Joined
May 17, 2010
Messages
28,440
Reaction score
811
Location
NSW
CrankyShark said:
How can you stalk someone once? You aren't making sense.

If you wave your tits around behind a window on a major public road people are going to look at you. In the same way they may photograph you. You can't sit at the boundary of a public place and expect privacy.

Todd Carney on the other hand. And I agree with you.
Click to expand...

The photograph is only half the issue. Its the fact they printed it, without censoring any part of her face. To people who know her, she is easily identifiable. So many scenarios come to mind where her life could be severely damaged because of this. If i were her id be complaining (after i played with my tits)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top