Not that it really matters, but Chris Brown was famous long before that song. This is the song that started his career really off like 4 years ago: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8vI1R4L4ac
And his career is completely over. I wouldn’t be surprised to see some crazed fan take a shot at him either (and I just don’t mean physical altercation, I mean biggy and tupac style).
If she gets back together with him, I believe her career may be over as well. That would be most unfortunate for her.
I do understand not publishing the photos for evidentiary reasons, I guess.
In some respects, I understand the sex-crimes privacy. There was, and unfortunately still is, a social stigma against victims of rape. The victims are now “soiled” or they were “asking for it” or some other equally stupid conclusions made by the general public.
At least for me, domestic violence is in a whole 'nuther realm. I don’t understand the “shame” that the victims are made to feel. The victim’s only crime was to love a deplorable asshole. When I look at that picture, I don’t see a woman to be shamed. I see a woman who has been beaten.
My ex FIL was a beater. I never blamed my MIL or made her feel shameful. He was an awful, awful man and for whatever her reasons, she felt that she didn’t have any other alternatives but to stay with him.
If Rhianna does want him back, then she may need therapy, but publishing the photos doesn’t change anything for me.
I’ve watched TMZ’s tv show a couple times, and it seems like they’re always pretty careful to only use legal means to obtain photos and videos of celebrities, and TMZ’s head honcho is/was a lawyer.
I’m inclined to think it’s more likely than not that TMZ’s telling the truth about obtaining Rihanna’s photo legally. In the news yesterday I saw a bunch of commentators saying how releasing the photo re-victimizes Rihanna, but the statement she released only said that she’s going through a difficult time and appreciates the support she’s received.
I’m just speculating, but maybe her lawyer or publicist, or one of her friends/staff released the photo to TMZ? I’ve heard that the tabloids and paparazzi get a large proportion of the their “leads” directly from celebrities or their handlers, so the celebrity is able to somewhat control how/what the paparazzi get.
Would that mean , that Chris Brown might walk because he could not get a fair trial ?
I know that you mentioned that you are neither a police officer or the DA, but what you passed on about being a walking deadman according to the street makes me think of that guy who mugged John Gotti’s mom , and the cops could not find any evidence to charge him, lol.
Wheels within wheels.
Declan
Story gets weirder.
It is the policy of the LAPD not to identify alleged victims of domestic violence, at least at this stage of the investigation. Therefore, they haven’t even been able to say her name during press conference (did you catch how stilted and careful the chief had to be?).
It is against LAPD policy to release information about above-noted people. So, whoever released that photo (if it is indeed a department photo, which has not been fully established- someone else might have taken it) is in deep shit with the department.
I don’t think much about publishing celebrities. You know they are the first to push themselves in line to get into clubs, and resturants and shows and exploit their celebrity when it’s to their advantage. Yet they cry foul when a “bad” side to them is exposed.
I would feel differently if it was a private person, but really she got beat, by publishing the photo she has shown women all over the world they are NOT alone. Their abuse isn’t deserved and they aren’t the only ones it happens to. It happens to even rich celebrities. It’s not just because they are poor, or drunk, or whatever.
But once again, celelbrites cry foul and instead of acknowledging their poor choices and choosing to DO something about it, they twist the facts when the light isn’t good.
I wonder how any celebrity would feel when they stop getting all the FAVOURABLE preferential treatment.
If she was a regular black women, they’d all be talking about how stupid she was to let a man beat her up like that.
I’ve known battered women who were absolutely terrified at the prospect of their suffering being exposed to public view.
Wasn’t TMZ the place that also published the picture and name of a 14 year old boy that was in the middle of a case where a 22 year old woman was being prosecuted for having sex with him?
The boy is the son of a famous guy, and other places had the story but ran it without pictures or names.
TMZ is fairly despicable in general so I doubt this one faux pas is going to do them in. Watching the show is somewhat akin to eating at Mcdonalds; enjoyable at the time, but you feel like you did damage to your undying soul.
Here is my impression of TMZ:
“Look at this picture of Claire Danes tripping… what a moronic klutz she must be. She shouldn’t be permitted to own or operate a motor vehicle.”
“We got a shot of Patrick Dempsey picking his nose… clearly he is a filthy, unwashed, maggot of a human being.”
Then I stand corrected. I still don’t understand their “terror” but not ever having been a battered woman, I will have to defer to their experience. It saddens me that a victim of a brutal crime would have to feel “terrified at the prospect of their suffering being exposed to public view.” They have nothing to be shameful of.
Oh, I didn’t say their response was rational. A concern need not be grounded in logic to be worthy fo respect.
Moreover, there’s a virtue to keeping some things private. I’m not ashamed of the fact that I broke down in tears the day after my mother’s death, but if someone were to broadcast video of it because I happened to be famous, I’d be justifably pissed, and the person who did it would be a vile asshole.
Why?
The TMZ people are disgusting. My gf likes their TV show so I’ve seen it a few times. If I ever get extremely wealthy, I’m going to pay some paparazzi to follow some of their correspondents around for a year and film their every move. I mean seriously fuck with their lives legally. They’re on TV so they’re “celebrities” too. I’ll make a special web site to post their embarrassing stuff too. Especially that smarmy dude with the long blond hair.
I think my other posts in this thread make it clear that I see no reason why a person’s celebrity should entail his or her surrendering all privacy to the prurient and intrusive curiosity of a ruthless and vile press. I also find it easy to believe that a battered woman might feel violated and humiliated again by having such a photograph published.
I’ll buy that. But, it also shows what a complete dirt-bag Chris Brown is.