Lindsay Lohan's "terrifying" incident involving Christian LaBella in New York over the weekend was reportedly sparked when the actress unhappily learned her guest had been taking cellphone photos of her, a discovery that allegedly led to a physical altercation.
So did Lindsay have a right to get upset over the pictures? A photography attorney says most likely yes, though the 26-year-old would have to prove in court that she had an expectation of privacy under the circumstances.
LaBella, 25, allegedly tried to grab his phone back from the actress as she was deleting those newfound photos in the wee hours Sunday, with choking and pushing and more alleged to have occurred before he finally left, according to Nation Now. Lohan — who'd reportedly locked herself in the bathroom at one point and left at another, only to run into LaBella again — triggered the hotel fire alarm as he finally fled, police told the New York Daily News.
expectation of privacy" when the pictures were taken, Wright said.
Also, "the understanding [of privacy] doesn't need to be vocalized," Wright said. "It's more of a stuation of what was happening at the time."
For example, if a person were, say, naked in a hotel room and he or she was not intentionally posing for cameras — and keep in mind, we have absolutely no reason to believe Lindsay pulled any kind of Prince Harry at the W hotel — there would be no legal need to expressly say "don't take pictures" to establish privacy. It would just go with the territory.
"Right now, we're just glad Lindsay's injuries were only minor," Lohan spokesman Steve Honig told the Ministry on Monday. "It was a terrifying experience for her and it's unfortunate it isn't being taken more seriously."
LaBella's uncle, Peter Jessop, told the New York Daily News his nephew, reportedly a congressional aide, was "a decent kid" who was now the target of "a full-scale witch hunt."
Meanwhile, back in Lohan's L.A. legal life, things were looking pretty good: The alleged scuffle won't likely affect her probation here, law-enforcement sources told L.A. Now.
So did Lindsay have a right to get upset over the pictures? A photography attorney says most likely yes, though the 26-year-old would have to prove in court that she had an expectation of privacy under the circumstances.
LaBella, 25, allegedly tried to grab his phone back from the actress as she was deleting those newfound photos in the wee hours Sunday, with choking and pushing and more alleged to have occurred before he finally left, according to Nation Now. Lohan — who'd reportedly locked herself in the bathroom at one point and left at another, only to run into LaBella again — triggered the hotel fire alarm as he finally fled, police told the New York Daily News.
Also, "the understanding [of privacy] doesn't need to be vocalized," Wright said. "It's more of a stuation of what was happening at the time."
For example, if a person were, say, naked in a hotel room and he or she was not intentionally posing for cameras — and keep in mind, we have absolutely no reason to believe Lindsay pulled any kind of Prince Harry at the W hotel — there would be no legal need to expressly say "don't take pictures" to establish privacy. It would just go with the territory.
"Right now, we're just glad Lindsay's injuries were only minor," Lohan spokesman Steve Honig told the Ministry on Monday. "It was a terrifying experience for her and it's unfortunate it isn't being taken more seriously."
LaBella's uncle, Peter Jessop, told the New York Daily News his nephew, reportedly a congressional aide, was "a decent kid" who was now the target of "a full-scale witch hunt."
Meanwhile, back in Lohan's L.A. legal life, things were looking pretty good: The alleged scuffle won't likely affect her probation here, law-enforcement sources told L.A. Now.
0 comments:
Speak up your mind
Tell us what you're thinking... !