Robert Pattinson

KStew apologizes privately on youtube.

themis wrote:I have faith in RP as a Brit to be able to take some ribbing from Will Farrell with aplomb. I saw that as more supportive than cruel - he only pointed up how nuts their fans are on the national stage - it may be still too early for him to find anything about the situation funny, but my favorite part of any breakup is when you can start to laugh about it. I kind of like those friends who can remind you to take yourself a little less seriously. She cheated, it's awful right now, but it's not famine and pestilence.

Now this, folks, is an archetypal revenge outfit: Note the sharp navy fabric, the gold-studded collar, the razor-sharp pleating, the flared hemlines, and the gleaming zipper that's almost completely fastened. This is a woman who is not to be messed with. She will cut you with that peplum if she has to.

Rob is set to appear next Wednesday, August 15 on Good Morning America. Given that they're already promoting it, I'm thinking GMA wants everyone to think Rob's there to talk about his situation with Kristen, when actually he's on to promote Cosmopolis. But no matter how much he would insist they not bring it up, you know they're going to ask him about it. .

swsa wrote:The wife has popped out. I love this write-up of her appearance.

Now this, folks, is an archetypal revenge outfit: Note the sharp navy fabric, the gold-studded collar, the razor-sharp pleating, the flared hemlines, and the gleaming zipper that's almost completely fastened. This is a woman who is not to be messed with. She will cut you with that peplum if she has to.

swsa wrote:Kristen has dropped out of her new movie. It was supposed to start filming in a few weeks, so this is pretty sudden. Speculation about mental breakdowns, etc., but I actually think she probably just dropped it because it sounds awful and her character was a stripper.

LESS THAN MEETS THE PUBLIC EYE: Part 1


Take a look at the link picture below and tell me if that looks like "an empty lot next to an abandoned building in a rundown part of town." If you think it does then perhaps you should go to work as a photographer - because that's how the US photographer described that location, which is where he took the first set of pictures of Kristen on July 17.


http://twitpic.com/ai4wxh/full


The buildimg with the red tiled roof is immediately adjacent to the LA offices of MJZ Productions, an intertnational commercial and video production company that lists Rupert Sanders among the directors on its roster, and where as a roster talent he would have office and editing bay privledges. It is at 2201 Carmelita Ave, Los Angeles, CA 90064

http://www.mjz.com/#loaded

The picture shows the back view of both MJZ and the adjavent building. The "empty lot" is the gated parking behind the adjacent buidling and is located at 2272 S. Centinela Ave, Los Angeles, CA 90064. As you can see from the photo, that is where Kristen's car was parked.

That area is West Hollywood - hardly a rundown section. And I can guarantee you that the photographer knew EXACTLY where he was - especially since the set up of the location( an open lot surrouded by walls and nothing to conceal him from his subjects) strongly points to him having already been there before Kristen was. As does the fact that despite the having claimed to have been following Kristen from the moment she left the gym, we've never seen any pictures of earlier in the day. Why would he have not taken them the moment he saw her - after all he wouldn't have known he had a big payday coming, would he? But that's not the biggest question about this.


The real issue here is:

Why misrepresent the location that way?

Was the seedier description used because it made the encounter seem more salacious and the photos less like a set-up? Saying that she “waited for him in an empty lot in a rundown part of town" certainly paint a more lurid picture than saying "she picked him up at his office," doesn’t it?.

Which raises the question - what else has been grossly exaggerated from the account of that day?

Stay tuned for Part 2.

Authors disclaimer: This is not an attempt to defend Kristen's actions - that's not my intention nor responsibility. After all, she's already owned up to her transgression. This is an effort to point out that how this event may have been both less and more than it was.
That is, less in terms of how those pictures were obtained - a happy accident of timing versus a planned surveillance
And more in terms of the encounter itself.

LESS THAN MEETS THE PUBLIC EYE Part 2

So now that we've seen how the narrator of the US story tried to enhance the salcious factor with the first part of the story, let's move on to the next location and see what else about that day was LESS than met the public eye.


Remember how the second stop was described in the article as being a “park like area” with people passing by and strolling along? How Kristen had driven around for hours looking for this ideal make out spot? Uh huh. Take a look:

http://twitpic.com/ai6u1y


This "park-like area" is in fact a residential street at the intersection of Pacific View Trail and Pacific View Drive. The infamous "lookout" point is a wooden guardrail between two homes - and in fact if you are standing at that railing (as a dear friend of mine actually did last week in the interset of forensic science) the people in the houses on either side can clearly see you.

Cropping sure does change a picture, doesn't it? Combined with wildly exaggerated descriptions it can be lethal to the truth.

There are so many disrepancies with this leg of the story it's hard to know where to start. So let's do it in order and begin with the claim that they were driving around specifically looking for someplace to be alone.

If you know LA at all you know that to take freeways all around -- 10 to 405 to Ventura Freeway to Hollywood freeway -- to get from where they were in West Hollywood to this point. Not sure how that translates to "looking for a place to make-out" unless you find asphalt and traffic jams an aphrodisiac.

And this was LA traffic in the afternoon - yet we're supposed to believe that the photographer was able to stay on her car without either losing her or being detected? Um, okaaay.

After all that driving you'd think they would have found a better spot for a tryst than a dead end residential street that's LESS THAN A THREE MINUTE DRIVE FROM SANDER'S HOUSE. Wasn't he worried that the beautiful wife or one of the heavenly children would see him?

Take another look at that street - do you want to tell me how photographers (because remember by this time there were 4 of them) who were TRAILING a car could have managed to get shots from the angle shown in those pictures without the subjects seeing them? And while we're noting the inconsistencies of the story - we were told that there were two hot make-out sessions in the car at this spot- one when they first got there and one when they got back in the car, but the only pictures were at the guard rail? Really? That's the shot you take?

And where are all those passersby? Maybe he meant the people in the house a few feet away from where Kristen and RuPig were supposedly going at it like bunnies came out to empty the trash or something?

So what are we left with at this point?

Version A:Waiting in an abandoned lot in seedy part of town, driving around all over the place to look for a trysting spot, and then making out in a park amidst strolling passersby.

Version B: Picking him up at his office and driving him home, with some kissing and weirdly abstract embracing along the way.

Again, Im not saying that the encounter wasn't inherently wrong in terms of what happened along the way. Kristen herself has admitted to an indiscretion. I'm just saying that so much about this story has been misrepresented - from the way the pictures were obtained to the details of the encounter -- that it raises a lot of questions about what really happened and why.

I for one think that the events of that day were much LESS than the story and pictures that met the public eye in terms of the nature of the encounter. And much MORE in terms of how this became public knowledge.
And in the words of Forrest Gump, that's all I have to say about that.

Jude wrote:I'm guessing what they were trying to prove is that Rupert may have set her up, given that the photographer knew to be there before Kristen drove up, and that the story US Magazine claimed he subsequently gave wasn't backed by the logistics. At least that's one of the theories I've seen out there since this whole thing began.

But I agree this "investigation" makes it look as though this wasn't the "momentary indiscretion" that Kristen claimed it was. It looks like something they'd done before, maybe even on a regular basis, which also coincides with how familiar they looked with one another in those photos. I think the thing between them -- whatever it was -- started in Australia on that promo trip for SWATH in June, and continued when they got back to LA.