Celebrities are constantly in the spotlight, with cameras watching their every move. Magazines speculate over the details of celebrities’ lives like vultures, working to photograph every moment that they can. For those who enjoy following the lives of their favorite celebrities, the paparazzi can be seen as a good thing because they provide an inside look at our favorite stars. But the celebrities being followed often don’t agree. Over the years, celebrities have gotten very creative in the ways that they have tried to get rid of the paparazzi. Naomi Campbell definitely falls into that category, and she recently got into a lot of trouble in Italy for that creativity.

Campbell was just convicted of assault by a Sicilian court after scratching paparazzo Gaetano di Giovanni’s eye with her purse in August 2009. The English model had reportedly just gotten to the Sicilian island of Lapri when the photographer began to immediately snap photos of Campbell and her then-boyfriend, Vladimir Doronin. Di Giovanni then continued to take photos of her as she walked the streets, and she proceed to hit him with her purse, scratching and bruising his eye in the process. The photographer reportedly sought medical treatment and took three days to recover. In 2013, when Campbell was ordered to stand trial, di Giovanni said, “I had just started taking some shots of her and I did not expect such a violent reaction.”

Campbell’s lawyer was able to reach an agreement with the photographer so that he withdrew the charges against her, but prosecutor Francesco Massara ordered the trial to go ahead for public interest reasons because of the gravity of the charges against her, Italy’s national news agency Ansa said. She was recently found guilty of assault and received a six-month suspended prison sentence. Essentially that means she probably won’t actually face jail time, unless she gets in trouble again during that time period or fails to finish her community service requirements. However, Campbell has also said that she will be appealing her sentence.

This isn’t the first time that Campbell has had to defend her actions in court. In the past, the model has faced legal troubles due to her quick temper, as early as 2002. In addition, she has been arrested and sued for different acts of violence and abuse, including assaulting police officers in 2008, and throwing her phone at her personal assistant and maid on different occasions.

But while Campbell has had a history of aggression, that doesn’t mean the paparazzi is completely innocent. Di Giovanni originally dropped the charges because he was not distraught by the situation, but ended up pursuing the lawsuit anyway, possibly because he wanted to take advantage of her being a public figure.

The entire situation is certainly messy, and does say a lot about the expectation of privacy that celebrities simply don’t have. There have been many who have spoken out about the way they’re treated by the paparazzi–for example, last year Kristen Bell created an anti paparazzi campaign, calling for the paparazzi photographing children to stop. Campbell was probably in the wrong for hitting di Giovanni, but there’s two sides to this story, and the harassment that celebrities have to undergo certainly does deserve to be taken into account. Campbell’s appeal is now pending, so this fight, and the overall question of celebrity privacy, is far from over.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Will Naomi Campbell Be Walking the Runway in Italian Prison? appeared first on Law Street.

Custody battles are often an issue among spouses who are not able to work out their personal differences for the sake of their children. Magazines today often depict celebrities as stars who are “just like us,” showing photos of them pumping their own gas, tanning in the park, or buying groceries at Whole Foods. So, just like us, celebrities also deal with intense and drawn out custody battles. Kelly Rutherford, better known as Lily van der Woodson on “Gossip Girl,” has been dealing with a custody battle regarding her two children, Hermés Giersch and Helena Giersch, with ex-husband Daniel Giersch since their divorce in 2008. This drawn out battle sheds a light on the issues that celebrities’ children face when their parents are in the news.

On May 22, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Mark Juhas ruled that Rutherford’s son and daughter be brought back to the United States from Monaco for a June 15 custody hearing, where she was to be temporarily granted sole custody. Her ex-husband’s lawyer argues that because the children are residents of Monaco, California does not have jurisdiction over the children. There has been widespread speculation that Rutherford made fraudulent statements and lied to receive custody of the children. It has now been ruled that the children will not return until just  before June 15, when the Los Angeles and Monaco judges will discuss the situation at a custody hearing. Rutherford’s lawyer says that there is still hope for Rutherford, since this decision does not grant Monaco jurisdiction.

Fighting for what she claims are the basic human rights of her children, Rutherford has started a Children’s Justice Campaign, including Youtube videos with updates on the status of her children, stating,
“American children should not be forced to leave their own country. My children were born here, they have a right to live here, just like the millions of children who were born in this county.”

https://t.co/jRv3MsQlH6 https://t.co/zqzncYk0Er

— Kelly Rutherford (@KellyRutherford) March 15, 2015

Rutherford hopes the court is able to come to a decision soon, claiming that she has spent everything she’s ever worked for on legal fees to get her children back. In December of 2008, Rutherford filed for divorce from her husband, Daniel Giersch, while pregnant with their second child. By August of 2009, the two were able to reach a temporary settlement of joint legal and physical custody, which lasted until April 2010. In April 2012, Giersch’s American visa was revoked after substantial evidence, including terrorist acts, fraud, and his involvement in drug and weapon dealings in South America, were discovered to deport him. The removal of his visa forced Giersch to be permanently removed from the United States, and because of this, he took up residence in Monaco. This resulted in the order by a California judge for the children to live in France with their father since he is unable to enter the U.S. Rutherford, however, claims that there is no official evidence to support Giersch’s claims of being denied access into the U.S. Giersch filed court papers in Monaco, causing the children to be declared habitual residents, subject solely to Monaco law. Both parties are still waiting for the June 15 court hearing.

But one thing to keep in mind is that given that Kelly Rutherford is a well-known celebrity who starred in television hits like “Melrose Place” and “Gossip Girl,” once the court makes a decision, the battle itself will have long residual effects. Years from now when her children are a little bit older and are able to understand the years of back and forth between their parents, they’ll be able to simply Google information on their custody battle.

Rutherford has not been the only celebrity to have her children deal with the issues that come with being in the lime light, and some are fighting back. In 2014, Kristen Bell and her husband Dax Shepard began a “no kids” policy to get news outlets to stop sharing, buying, or posting photos of celebrities’ children without consent. The movement nicknamed the photographers “pedorazzi,” and this action is changing the paparazzi culture. Bell has stated.

No parent should feel like their child is being taken advantage of because of the choices they made on their career paths.

In agreement with Bell, I fully believe celebrities have the right to a private lifestyle, but there is contradictory behavior that comes from other stars that makes it difficult for celebrities to request privacy. Take Kim Kardashian for example–her daughter is regularly talked about on social media for her extravagant outfits, has been taken to fashion shows, and has even been on the family’s reality television show, all before the age of three years old. To celebrities, privacy has become more of a request then a right. When Kardashian’s child gets older, she will be able to find countless photos of herself at six months old hiding under a blanket. News outlets exploit celebrities and their children to such an extent that their entire lives can be accessed at the tap of a mouse pad. This American obsession with celebrities is exactly how I was able to gain such detailed information on the history of Rutherford’s and Giersch’s custody battle.

Kelly Rutherford has been dealing with the consequences of her decision to part ways with Giersch since before the birth of her now five year old daughter. They’ve had years of constant custody battles under a very public microscope–eventually this nightmare has to end.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Should Celebrity Custody Battles Put Children in the Limelight? appeared first on Law Street.

Bruce Jenner, the Olympian and former patriarch of the Kardashian/Jenner clan, was involved in a car crash in Malibu, California yesterday. The four-car pile up left one driver dead and a few others with minor injuries. While it seems like the crash itself is a pretty routine, although tragic, reality of driving a car in the United States, there may be more to it than that.

The story is a sad one–a white Lexus stopped short in front of Jenner’s car on a road in Malibu after stopping to avoid another car in front of it. Apparently it was on a part of the road that is difficult to navigate. According to evidence from the scene of the accident, Jenner appeared to slam on the brakes in an attempt to avoid the Lexus; however, he wasn’t able to stop his car in time, and hit the back of the Lexus, pushing it into oncoming traffic. The Lexus was hit by a Hummer, and the resulting impact left the driver of the Lexus dead.

The Sheriff’s department has opened a vehicular manslaughter investigation. The department has said that everyone involved–including presumably, Jenner–is cooperating with the investigation.

There have been many rumors floating around about what exactly happened during the accident. Jenner is claiming that members of the paparazzi were following him; however, the police say that’s simply not true. In response to the paparazzi rumors, Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department Lt. John Lecrivain said:

That is a very regular occurrence, and (there is) no indication at this time it was a contributing factor of the crash.

If Jenner was trying to get away from the paparazzi, it makes sense that he would be driving too close to the car in front of him, maybe trying to get around the Lexus, or just in a frustrated rush. There’s also the chance that it wasn’t a member of the paparazzi following him, but Jenner just thought the paparazzi was after him. In the age of smartphones and easy-to-access cameras, passersby could have seen Jenner and tried to grab pictures of him. In addition, Jenner has been in the news a lot lately–an amateur paparazzo could have fooled him.

There are also rumors that he may have been using his cell phone at the time of the crash. According to news reports earlier today, the L.A. County Sheriff’s Department started looking into Jenner’s phone records to see if he was texting and driving at the time of the collision; however, even if they do find something, it might be hard to prove that the phone played a factor. It’s difficult to determine if a phone was actually being used at the exact time of the collision.

Whether or not there will be any legal ramifications for Jenner remains to be seen. It’s obviously good that he’s cooperating with the police, but that doesn’t guarantee that he’ll come out scot-free. While it may have been a total accident, if there was anything that Jenner did that contributed to it, he may be on the hook.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Will There Be Legal Charges for Bruce Jenner After Car Crash? appeared first on Law Street.

Justin Bieber can’t seem to stop getting into legal trouble whether in the U.S. or abroad. Bieber now has to show his face in an Argentinean court to provide answers to some assault allegation, or face arrest. Now Interpol has gotten involved, and it seems like Bieber is caught in an interesting Catch-22.

The case started on November 9, 2013, when Bieber was partying in a nightclub in Buenos Aires called “Ink.” A paparazzo named Diego Pesoa was there and attempted to take pictures of the singer. Bieber’s bodyguards were not having that, and apparently chased and beat Pesoa, who is now claiming that his injuries were bad enough to require hospital attention. Bieber is being accused of sending the body guards to go beat Pesoa up.

Bieber has obviously since left Argentina, but the Argentinean courts are demanding that he provide information about what happened. Now, an investigative judge, Magistrate Facundo Cubas, has demanded that Bieber provide a statement about what happened, although no charges have been filed yet.

Bieber now has 60 days to return to Argentina and give his testimony. Interpol, the Argentinean branch of the international police force, is tasked with locating Bieber and notifying him of Cubas’s request.

This creates a weird choice for the singer though–if he does choose to go back and give his testimony, and it results in charges being filed against him,  and he is found guilty, he could spend up to a year in prison. If he doesn’t show up, an international arrest warrant will be issued.

This is by no means the first brush with the law for Bieber, nor is my money on it being the last. Consider the time that he was deposed as a result of a battery suit brought against him by a photographer. Said deposition led to one of the most spectacularly asshole-like performances of all time, chronicled in this excellent mashup video created by TMZ:

I have to say, my favorite part is right at the beginning when he pretends to not know what Australia is, but he also calls the lawyer deposing him “Katie Couric,” which is pretty good. He also appears to mix up the words “instrumental” and “detrimental.”

There was also a case earlier this year when a neighbor in Calabasas, California accused Bieber of egging their house. The neighbor claimed that the incident led to damage to the house to the tune of thousands of dollars. Bieber ending up pleading no contest to the charge of misdemeanor vandalism, and was put on probation, ordered to pay restitution, do community service, and go to an anger management course. He has also been caught drinking while driving, and plead guilty to a DUI.

Overall, Bieber is pretty much the living embodiment of what can happen when a young person gets way too rich way too young and never really has to deal with any consequences of their actions. Hopefully this Argentinean suit, as unlikely as it may be, will provide some real consequences for the singer.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Where in the World is Justin Bieber? His Legal Troubles Continue appeared first on Law Street.