Originally Posted by Dorothy

So whose marriage should we dissect next? Perhaps some of the posters here spouting all this vitriol should think about how they would feel having blatant lies and half truths spread about their marriages. Honestly I find it disgusting the things some of the posters here are writing about a family they know nothing about other than what's being written in the gutter press.

All his life Harry has been subjected to speculation about his parentage, his mother was hounded relentlessly by the press (whether she manipulated the coverage or not is speculation) until she died being chased by them. Now his wife is being treated like something to scrape off the bottom of a shoe. And people blame her for his decision to protect his wife and child. It's ddespicable the way some of you on these threads behave.

Originally Posted by Dorothy

So whose marriage should we dissect next? Perhaps some of the posters here spouting all this vitriol should think about how they would feel having blatant lies and half truths spread about their marriages. Honestly I find it disgusting the things some of the posters here are writing about a family they know nothing about other than what's being written in the gutter press.

Originally Posted by ann m

I’ve always thought that someone very rich, who has money to burn, should start their own rag, and hound certain reporters ( and I use that term loosely) and paparazzi and their families and write tons of shit and lies and sensationalist drivel about them, and then publish it. Long range camera lenses into their back garden, bad photos at the gym, who wore it best, “an unnamed source said...”, rumours of infidelity, chase their kids by the school gates for comments. Turn those tables fast and furious. How long do you think they’d last before wittering on about intrusion of their privacy? How much of a ‘public’ figure do you need to be to be ‘asking for attention’ and ‘deserve all they get’. Attention seeking media whores.

Elton, are you reading this?

Originally Posted by confused_uk

This is a forum for people to share their opinions on topics, if you don’t like it, don’t read it. There’s no need for chastising and name calling of others who don’t share yours.

Originally Posted by dbd33

<snip>if you're going to dish it out you should expect some of it to come back.

Originally Posted by confused_uk

This is a forum for people to share their opinions on topics, if you don’t like it, don’t read it. There’s no need for chastising and name calling of others who don’t share yours.

Originally Posted by confused_uk

so have no right to the moral high ground.

Originally Posted by scilly

...the workers would also have access to the inside...

Originally Posted by ann m

I’ve always thought that someone very rich, who has money to burn, should start their own rag, and hound certain reporters ( and I use that term loosely) and paparazzi and their families and write tons of shit and lies and sensationalist drivel about them, and then publish it. Long range camera lenses into their back garden, bad photos at the gym, who wore it best, “an unnamed source said...”, rumours of infidelity, chase their kids by the school gates for comments. Turn those tables fast and furious. How long do you think they’d last before wittering on about intrusion of their privacy? How much of a ‘public’ figure do you need to be to be ‘asking for attention’ and ‘deserve all they get’. Attention seeking media whores.

Elton, are you reading this?

Originally Posted by scilly

This is what has been puzzling me ever since the Safe Street Act was mentioned as protecting them in Canada, and in BC (different acts federally & provincially).

The BC act is against aggressive panhandling, whether that be within a certain distance from ATM machines, shop or bank doorways, or "washing windshields" at an intersection.

There is no mention that I could find of anything other than that.

So I'm not sure how any one could expect to use that Act as a means of prosecuting paparazzi, or even Joe Blow taking a photo with his cell phone.

Originally Posted by swagwalk

Elton John...as the God father to Harry, clearly had some influence in the decision to move to BC/Canada, after they spent Xmas here. Elton lives in BC with his partner

Originally Posted by Dorothy

So whose marriage should we dissect next? Perhaps some of the posters here spouting all this vitriol should think about how they would feel having blatant lies and half truths spread about their marriages. Honestly I find it disgusting the things some of the posters here are writing about a family they know nothing about other than what's being written in the gutter press.

All his life Harry has been subjected to speculation about his parentage, his mother was hounded relentlessly by the press (whether she manipulated the coverage or not is speculation) until she died being chased by them. Now his wife is being treated like something to scrape off the bottom of a shoe. And people blame her for his decision to protect his wife and child. It's ddespicable the way some of you on these threads behave.

Originally Posted by scilly

This is what has been puzzling me ever since the Safe Street Act was mentioned as protecting them in Canada, and in BC (different acts federally & provincially).

The BC act is against aggressive panhandling, whether that be within a certain distance from ATM machines, shop or bank doorways, or "washing windshields" at an intersection.

There is no mention that I could find of anything other than that.

So I'm not sure how any one could expect to use that Act as a means of prosecuting paparazzi, or even Joe Blow taking a photo with his cell phone.