Brosnan under investigation for battery.

[WhiteKnight]

Dissappointing if it's true. Understandable, but dissappointing all the same.

http://www.tmz.com/2007/10/30/pierce-brosnan-the-name-is-battery-suspect/

[mckracken]

WhiteKnight... even if this was true, TMZ is like a tabloid webzine.

personally when taking photos (of anyone) I always ask if its ok with them first, I never just take peoples photos in public especially if they are a celeb with their wife and kids.

I can understand why Pierce would be upset however on the flip side it sounds like Pierce was kicked in the stomach by Rosen so why isnt Brosnan filing a battery claim of his own?

[WhiteKnight]

I work for a newspaper and I too always ask permission before taking a photo of a family.

As for TMZ, they aren't the only ones reporting it. I found the same story on Yahoo news and MI6.co.uk. TMZ is just where I happened to be when I had the presence of mind to copy a link for posting here.

[LeiterCIA]

I dont know who's right or wrong in these cases, and I'm not one to shed many tears for celebrities... But, I absolutely loathe those photographers. I dont see why they cant be brought up on harassment charges.

[UNCLEagent]

I agree with Leiter, but there is that twisted argument that suggests celebrities are public domain. I would like to believe that the public is privy only to what is shown on the screen, but that isn't the real world.

Then again... there's Brittney....... :p

[Daltons Chin Dimple]

Well there is the rub isn't it ? I think for movie and TV stars you are dead right, the public domain and public consumption is the movie or show they are in. Same as music stars and so on. If you want to "consume" them then buy their CD or rent their movie and "consume" away.

However this line has been blurred by people like Paris Hilton who are famous for the sake of being famous and rely on the oxygen of (self) publicity and the papparazi to continue being famous for the sake of being famous. Their "consumable" is falling out of a club or getting out of a limo with no knickers on.

These second tier celebs fuel the demand that the ever increasing ranks of papparazi exist to satisfy and people like movie stars end up not being able to have anything like a private life, because people like Hilton can't afford not to be seen.

Everyone finds it difficult to sympathise with celebs but I simply cannot imagine what it must be like to have guys with cameras outside your house, your kids school, outside the restaraunt where you are eating with your partner and so on, 24/7.

These guys are actors. They go to work, play a character then come home. Their contract (for want of a better phrase) with us covers their time spent as that character, not their time spent being themselves on the beach with their kids.

[Kara Milovy]

I've had a small taste of it. Among a very small niche of people, my ex-husband is extremely well-known. I've seen fans follow him around asking him questions when he's just trying to get a meal or a nap. I've seen women try to get between me and him so they could have a piece of the Big Name.

I'm not talking about the media (who aren't interested in authors), but just a very small group of fans. And even that is enough to let me know what the lives of the very famous must be like.

That some of them become so screwed up that they need it and seek it is not the point, or it's a symptom of the larger problem, but it's certainly not an excuse for paparrazzi behavior. They're monsters, they really are. The bottom line is you're being followed, and if you say "Not now, please," you're ignored. Who wouldn't overreact?

[WhiteKnight]

I was back at TMZ today trying to figure out the alleged sex victim the identified was and ran across this video of Pierce talking shit to a pap camera man. This is a seperate instance than the one in October.

http://www.tmz.com/tmz_main_video?titleid=1529567390

This one is actually sort of funny.