Irish tabloid prints topless Kate pics

2012-09-15 18:34
London - The Irish Daily Star printed the topless pictures of the Duchess of Cambridge, wife of Britain's Prince William, in its Saturday edition, as an Italian magazine announced plans to run the photos next week.

St James's Palace condemned the publication by the Irish tabloid, saying "there can be no motivation for this action other than greed".

The tabloid's editor, Michael O'Kane, argued that the pictures were "very, very tasteful".

"The duchess would be no different to any other celeb pics we would get in, for example Rihanna or Lady Gaga," O'Kane told the BBC, adding that the images were of the type that might be included among family holiday photo albums in continental Europe.

"She's not the future queen of Ireland, so really the only place this is causing fury seems to be in the UK," he said.

Italian gossip magazine Chi, part of Silvio Berlusconi's media empire, is also to publish the topless pictures, local media reported on Saturday.

Chi is planning a 26-page report in a special edition out on Monday, including unpublished pictures, despite the decision Friday by Britain's Prince William and his wife to sue for breach of privacy Closer, the French magazine which first published the photos.

"It is a report worthy of a special edition because it shows with complete candour the daily life of a very famous, modern young couple who are in love," Chi editor Alfonso Signorini said.

The French edition of Closer magazine is also part of the Berlusconi media empire.

The duke and duchess are currently on a nine-day tour of Asia, with the couple having toured a forest in eastern Malaysia on Saturday.


  • martin.gee.godfrey - 2012-09-15 18:56

    They printed them "to be sure, to be sure" it was Kate

  • jasper.booysen - 2012-09-16 09:12

    Die antie is te maer - lyk soos 'n windhond!

      reg.nagel - 2012-09-16 21:08

      Jasper, Why insult her......YOU DONT LOOK TO GREAT EITHER.....

      beach.cherry - 2012-09-17 07:23

      Somebody has got a weight issue problem... Here

      jam3son.walk3r - 2012-09-17 11:00

      I think she looks like a princess, and her privacy has been invaded, I hope these talboids get sued shirtless by the royals.

  • riette.nothling - 2012-09-16 10:15

    The media invaded her privacy and now wants to publish the pictures, it's about money and nothing else. She was in her own private space when she walked topless, it does not belong in tabloids. They did the same thing to his mother, and it caused her great misery, now they are doing it to her children. It's sick.

      jay.kganyago.5 - 2012-09-16 17:28

      What's sick is that ordinary people like you or I have to work for a living, while these people live lives of absolute luxury and privilege while leeching off taxpayers.

      Bok.tjop - 2012-09-17 12:27

      Jay, I agree...and for goodness sake, she should have known better

      joubert.joep - 2012-09-18 04:14

      Totally sick! And she was with her husband... The media will drive her the Diana way! They are in love, they are married and they are human - leave them alone!!

  • Pulverturm - 2012-09-16 12:02

    Sis, this is exactly what drove Princess Diana to an early demise. It is deplorable!

      jay.kganyago.5 - 2012-09-16 17:29

      Princess Diana's death was an accident caused by her driver being drunk.

      jay.kganyago.5 - 2012-09-17 00:05

      1997: Diana driver was 'drunk and speeding' The driver of the car in which Princess Diana was fatally injured had criminal levels of alcohol in his blood and may have been travelling at over 100 mph (161 km/h), French investigators have revealed. The Prosecutors' Office in Paris said Henri Paul had three times the French legal limit of alcohol in his blood - the equivalent of double the British limit or 10 glasses of wine.

      jacqui.grigg - 2012-09-17 10:08

      @ Jay Please cut and paste not just what makes sense in order to prove your point. Her driver may have been intoxicated but they were being chased by photographers. Hence the analogy.

      jay.kganyago.5 - 2012-09-17 17:54

      Sorry you can't put 2 and 2 together jacqui but that's not my problem

  • hendrik.schutte.3152 - 2012-09-16 14:23

    so where are the pictures? let us judge for ourself.

  • frank.crane.180 - 2012-09-16 17:49

    Publish the pics of Michael O'Kane willy and see how he likes it.

  • Spittalsue - 2012-09-16 18:42

    Come on...... she looks like a really nice person, and everyone in my country who has met William and Harry say that they are just nice ordinary people; can't we as a species ever leave anyone alone??? and in peace??? and live in harmony???

      victor.windsor - 2012-09-17 10:55

      They are not ordinary people as they do not have a nine to five job or have to put up with travelling to work everyday in the peak hour traffic or have to go down to the supermarket to buy groceries for themselves to eat, they are spoilt rotten, can go anywhere they like at anytime spend whatever they want and how much they want. It is time to do away with royalty as it is completely outdated and a drain on the taxpayers of that country.I wish I could just pop onto a plane and spend a couple of days at a private french villa and then shoot off to the rain forests and sail about in the tree canopy, it is always something I have always wanted to do, but in order to do that I have to save up for virtually the rest of my life before I can even think of doing anything like that. So don't tell me or the other people out there that they are just ordinary people !!!!!!!

      Bok.tjop - 2012-09-17 12:29

      I agree Victor...they are not ordinary and can't claim to be when it pleases them

      raymond.dick.12 - 2012-09-17 17:50

      @Victor Windsor: You have no idea what you are talking about. The royals are in fact a positive cash flow to the UK coffers. Additionally, they do a tremendous amount of good work and probably have more of a positive impact on society than your sick envious arse.

      jay.kganyago.5 - 2012-09-17 18:02

      @Raymond that is simply a lie, the Royal Family liuterally DIRECTLY take over 40 million pounds a year (that is about HALF A BILLION RAND) from the taxpayers. If they are positive revenue generators then tell me why do they need to TAKE HALF A BILLION RAND A YEAR, they can sipmly say "no thank you we can pay our own way". Victor is completely right, they are a relic of a bygone era and even worse, they represent a time when Kings ruled tyranically and could kill you at their whim. Monarchies were DICTATORSHIPS people, why are you worshipping dictators!?

  • Mandy Casey - 2012-09-16 20:39

    Please, we must respect her privates.

  • Jason - 2012-09-16 22:13

    Private house and deplorable paparazzi or not - if she kept her topless antics to the bedroom, none of this would be happening. Regardless, she won't be doing it again.

  • lhfick - 2012-09-17 08:09

    Put them on safe and let them hang Kate, if one needs to do it one should be free to do so!

  • matshidiso.rantai - 2012-09-17 10:06

    Zuma was never seen naked anywhere but its fine to paint him naked and the royal lady was seen topless and is offensive to publish actual evidence. How unbiased are we realy.

      beliinda.sham - 2012-09-17 11:56

      This was a complete invasion of privacy! How would you like it if someone took pictures of naked you and outting them up on the internet? As you have pointed out, the paintings of "Zuma" are imaginary so not the same thing at all.

      lynette.venter.12 - 2012-09-17 15:41

      beliinda - If I didn't want to be seen naked, I wont go out on the balcony naked... easy as that. She flaunted, they captured - maybe that's what she wanted

      raymond.dick.12 - 2012-09-17 17:53

      @Lynette ~ that is akin to saying of the young girl who got raped that she wanted it because she had a short dress or no bra or some other excuse.

      joubert.joep - 2012-09-18 04:22

      Wish somebody would take a picture of Zuma - might a good laugh! But then again who has got time to waste on taking pictures of a nobody?

  • nicolaas.geldenhuys - 2012-09-17 10:27

    Where can we see the pics?

  • michael.awood.313 - 2012-09-17 11:19

    live and let live I say mense lets just allow the lady her personal space

  • bernadette.francois.75 - 2012-09-17 13:04

    Mmm? So because they are not normal people it's ok to invade their privacy?

      jay.kganyago.5 - 2012-09-17 17:57

      Actually they are saying it's not OK because they are "special" and we are not.

  • thabang.bonang.7 - 2012-09-17 14:06

    Who changed the old way of seeing tits as normal? Traditionally tits were not perceived as being naked. I suggest we start treating them like that again.

      lynette.venter.12 - 2012-09-17 15:43

      Why do you have a "naked" picture as your avatar then hmmm?

  • captaine.morgan.90 - 2012-09-17 14:57

    Service Temporarily Unavailable - Damn!

  • justinasher - 2012-09-17 15:32

    I'm more curious what she was doing walking topless in the first place? Surely she should know the Press are nearby?

  • christopher.collings.9 - 2012-09-17 21:58

    Ag please who cares? Its not like any of us have never seen a pair of boobs in our lives, every woman has them.

  • louise.minnie - 2012-09-17 22:14

    shame poor Kate and William

  • maria.kave.5 - 2012-09-18 15:23

    Franky - Franky - anyway show dem - we want to see

  • pages:
  • 1