17-Year-Old Accused of Having a Camera Bag

"Jodie Foster accused of roughing up a boy:
Family says actress poked 17-year-old in the chest and grabbed his arm"


LOS ANGELES — The family of a 17-year-old teenager has accused Oscar-winner Jodie Foster of being rough with the boy after he snapped photographs of the actress and her sons outside a movie theater.

... She [Foster's spokeswoman] also said he had a camera bag and a telephoto lens.





http://today.msnbc.msn​.com …91/ns/today-entertainment

Ummm...he's not accused of having a camera bag, he's accused of being an annoying little turd I like how the article plays it off like he's a defenseless little child. Most 17 yr old males today are giants compared to Jodie Foster.

celebrities and us ordinary folk share equal rights. If the 17 year old was close enough to get pushed in the chest and grabbed by the arm, there is a good possibility that their space was being intruded upon by an overzealous rude idiot with a camera (papparazzi or ordinary rude idiot with a camera)

Is the kid really complaining about getting poked in the chest?

He was probably invading her space anyways

Wilt: assault is assault. I'm not saying the kid was in the right, but on the other hand, she should know better. I can't push and shove and punch everyone who comes near me and neither should someone who happens to be rich and famous.

Stanley: Invasion of space in a public space isn't a crime. Assault is. She crossed a line. (Again, not saying he was in the right, but obviously she lost her temper, and that's not cool either).

LowriderS10 wrote in post #10349173
Wilt: assault is assault. I'm not saying the kid was in the right, but on the other hand, she should know better. I can't push and shove and punch everyone who comes near me and neither should someone who happens to be rich and famous.

Stanley: Invasion of space in a public space isn't a crime. Assault is. She crossed a line. (Again, not saying he was in the right, but obviously she lost her temper, and that's not cool either).

I did not condone her actions, I was pointing out the contributory misbehavior of the photograher. The article did mention, "that he "crowded" them as he took pictures, scaring the actress' children"...as much an act of assault as what she did, which might simply be a protective reflex of a mother!

Poked him in the chest and grabbed his arm...pfft that's not "roughing up" - what a load of bull, some people are way too eager to sue these days

Totally take for granted that they have the freedom everyday to even see these people, try living in a place like Iraq or North Korea or Central Africa where your lucky to even go to school and learn about the world.

Hell some freaky people would probably never wash again if Jodie Foster poked them

What the hell has happened to this world. According to the law (at least in the US) I guess touching my finger to your chest is assault unless you happen to be a woman then I suppose it would be sexual assault. The laws have just gotten stupid, imo. Assault to me is when you beat the hell out of someone, not simply touching them.

I wonder how many people in the Los Angeles area carry around those good cameras just hoping that they can get a decent shot of a celebrity and sell it. That doesn't necessarily make them a paparazzi, just a pain in the.... I bet the teenager and/or his father are seeing dollar signs right about now.

I know that they are public figures but surely they should be able to take their children to a movie without being hassled.

Amen ssim, well said. I can't stand the pussification of America.

ssim wrote in post #10350663
What the hell has happened to this world. According to the law (at least in the US) I guess touching my finger to your chest is assault unless you happen to be a woman then I suppose it would be sexual assault. The laws have just gotten stupid, imo. Assault to me is when you beat the hell out of someone, not simply touching them.

Hmm.. Not enough info to make any kind of conclusion. Taking pictures in a public place no matter who the individual is is legal. Being a paparazzi is also legal. There may have been more going on than Jodie's spin doctors are saying.
http://blog.taragana.c​om …cking-teenage-fan-140356/
http://www.mashceleb.c​om …nage-boy-with-nice-camera

The interesting thing is that of the 20 or so sites i visited, I only found these two that had a different story than the msnbc story. Pretty much everyone parrots what Jodies folks are saying.

LowriderS10 wrote in post #10349173
Wilt: assault is assault.

since she actually touched him, it would actually be battery most likely. However I think this happened in LA, so it doesn't matter because celebs can do whatever they please there.

According to common law in the US (from my one year of sharing an apartment with a law student!), to make one fearful for one's welfare -- even without physical contact -- is 'assault'...i.e. reasonable fear of bodily injury. It only needs intent and the resulting apprehension. Physical follow thru of assault, to physically cause bodily injury, is 'battery'. One could question Jodie's intent to cause bodily harm, with either the push at his chest or the grab of the arm. The photographer would have a hard time convincing a judge that this small slip of a lady could have done much real harm with such innocuous contact. On the other hand, children being fearful of the photographer's proximity is evidence of their feeling of potential harm to them and/or their mother.

I don't ever want to be the guy that gets poked in the chest, but I would sure enjoy the heck out of being about fifteen feet away with a 24-70 and a flash.

birdfromboat wrote in post #10350779
I don't ever want to be the guy that gets poked in the chest, but I would sure enjoy the heck out of being about fifteen feet away with a 24-70 and a flash.

According to one article he had a 1000mm lens. Whats he doing so close anyway with a beast like that.

I feel so sorry for...

I feel so sorry for the celebrities who choose to make bundles of money because of their fame but, still want the privacy of ordinary folks too!
You can't have both. I haven't made gobs of money as a performer but, no paparazzi intrudes on my life. Would I trade a little intrusion for those bucks? Darned right I would!!!