Playboy bunny can't get charges dropped in privacy case

Adjust Comment Print

Dani Mathers, 30, has been charged with a misdemeanour of invasion of privacy after she uploaded a picture of a naked 70-year-old woman, who was getting changed in the gym, onto social media platform Snapchat.

Mathers was Playmate of the Year in 2015, and she is arguably an example of classic beauty-she is thin, has a symmetrical face, and has long blonde hair. "I chose to do what I do for a living because I love the female body, and I know body shaming is wrong".

"I've never body shamed a person in my life and I don't intend on starting now", she tweeted on May 3.

"She apologized for her behavior and we're looking forward to resolving this case in a very fair manner", her defense attorney stated on November 29.

She hit headlines in July past year when she shared a photo of another woman at her LA gym on the photo messaging app with the words "If I can't unsee this then you can't either".

Asked if Ms Mathers would be testifying at her trial, her lawyer responded, "Oh yeah, definitely".

Mathers' career as a model and radio host has been destroyed by the incident, defence lawyers say.

Police officer overdoses after brushing fentanyl powder off his uniform
Cortez Collins (left) and Justin Buckle were pulled over by OH police officer Chris Green of the East Liverpool Police Department. Here's a frightening reminder of the dangers of fentanyl, a powerful opioid that can be lethal even in tiny amounts.

A day after suffering a big legal setback in the body-shaming case against her, Playboy Playmate Dani Mathers lashed out at the haters Tuesday on Twitter, declaring, "I'm pretty upset and hurt too".

Prosecutors have pushed for a conviction on the charge and four weeks of community service with a road crew, according to court papers. "I'm sorry that if it can't be seen on social media the remorse doesn't exist to you". Her defense argued that the image, "was a far-away shot, and the victim, her features can not be identified", but the presiding judge ruled differently. They claim the victim wasn't easily identified in the photo.

He said it took considerable effort for Los Angeles police and the gym to identify the woman, who has not been named.

Kim called the argument a "leap of illogic".

However, LA judge Gustavo Sztraicher disagreed, ruling, "The court finds the statute is constitutional and not void for vagueness".

The trial is scheduled for May 26.

Comments