Carrie Prejean Wants Exposed Pics Taken Down, Celebrity Gossip Site ...

Chris Munoz

11 May 2009

In the letter to the site, her lawyer makes the claim that "One of the displayed pictures of Ms Prejean was unlawfully taken under false pretenses when she was a 17-year-old minor and not able to agree to its creation.". Unable to consent? Is she not a model? Is this a photograph shoot or a candid image she wasn't aware was being taken? What are we missing here? Even more intriguingly, the letter goes on to claim : "The other image outlines Ms Prejean's likeness but isn't an honest to goodness photograph. It is an electronic manipulation ["photoshopped'] of her image made without her consent.". Pretty fragile discussion if you ask us - and the site that posted them.

"This isn't conduct for which your customer's consent is required.". Follow the jump to see the photographs in question. Her solicitor claims the 2nd photograph isn't even her. 2009

The Hollywood Gossip - a star gossip and reports site.

Atomos said:
or we can just label them Majorly. this's pretty usual. .
11 May 2009 06:45:51

2 sheds said:
Freezing article up to the point when you find these crap comments
11 May 2009 15:19:40

Declan said:
It is an electronic manipulation ["photoshopped'] of her image made without her consent.".
12 May 2009 06:08:31

Brock said:
There's more to life than work, stress and cash.
13 May 2009 04:21:06

loafer said:
Frederick M Brown / Getty Footage Show for Tyler. !
13 May 2009 10:13:33

Celebrity Gossip Valter said:
thanks for this Gossip news
14 May 2009 03:48:21

Kieran Freeman said:
BefRre we completely diss Celebrity Gossip understand that it's pointless if the transcript means diddly squat in one daqs it will likely be it will most likely be absolutely immaterial ?
16 May 2009 10:44:58

Mariano Berger said:
The two hit it off and exchanged numbers, and directly enough, they were also exchanging bodily liqkids at his leased home in Calabasas, Calif.
24 May 2009 07:37:07