Blue pix turn Amber red

Amber Frey, the former mistress of alleged wife-killer Scott Peterson, is finally baring all - but not on the witness stand.
Nude photos of the 29-year-old massage therapist have surfaced on a porn Web site, provoking Frey's lawyer, Gloria Allred, to threaten legal action.

"This is a disgusting attempt to exploit Amber," Allred told us yesterday. "She's been very brave in coming forth to testify, and this is the price she's been forced to pay."

David Hans Schmidt, who has brokered Playboy and Penthouse pictorials of Paula Jones, Tonya Harding, Darva Conger, Divine Brown and Suzen Johnson, yesterday posted 27 pictures of Frey on his site.

Frey posed for the shots several years ago after seeing an ad placed by a photographer in Fresno, Calif. Allred maintains that "Amber has never given anyone the right to sell, publish or give away" the photos.

Schmidt insists that he has a signed release, which he plans to post on the subscription-only site. He admits that the photos - which show orthodontics-wearing Frey striking some awkward poses - aren't the biggest turn-on.

"We offered to rip up the photos and cut Amber in on the money if she'd pose again," he says. "Her lawyer said no."

Schmidt had shopped the shots to Penthouse publisher Bob Guccione and Hustler's Larry Flynt, but says neither would pay his asking price: $500,000.

Instead, Schmidt turned to Marvad Corp., a Seattle-based Internet porn company. He says he closed the deal to set up the site at Dennis Hoff's Bunny Ranch brothel in Nevada last month.

EDITED TO ERASE THE WWW LINK TO THE WEBSITE WHICH IS SHOWING THE PICS- I'M PUBLISHING INFO, BUT I AM UNCOMFORTABLE GIVING OUT THE WEBSITE ADDRESS. IF YOU WANT IT, YOU'LL HAVE TO FIND IT YOURSELF.

http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/120612p-108585c.html

What is it with men who have beautiful wife's and trashy mistress's?

September 25, 2003
By JOHN COTÉ
BEE STAFF WRITER

A pornography broker has posted nude photos of Amber Frey on his Web site, and the Fresno massage therapist and her attorney have discussed suing the man.

The broker, David Hans Schmidt, said he purchased the photos and release rights from a Fresno photographer earlier this year. The Web site, where Schmidt charges $19.95 for use, came to light Wednesday.

Attorney Gloria Allred, who is representing Frey as she prepares to be a witness in the Scott Peterson double-murder case, said her client never has relinquished rights to the photos.

Allred said she is representing Frey to defend her from attacks on her credibility from Peterson's defense team and elsewhere.

Allred called the Web site "disgusting and an attempt to exploit Amber simply because she may be an important witness in a high-profile murder case."

Peterson could face the death penalty if convicted of killing his wife, Laci, and their unborn son.

"We have advised Amber of all of her legal rights against Mr. Schmidt and anyone who is involved in the sale and distribution of her images and she will seriously consider her legal options," Allred said in a written statement released Wednesday.

When reached by phone, Allred declined to say what those options were or whether Frey would sue Schmidt.

"I hope she sues," Schmidt said Wednesday while traveling in New York. "You can print that. I hope she sues me."

Allred contends that Schmidt never has produced an original document signed by Frey releasing her rights to the photos. Schmidt contends that he has a signed, legally binding release.

"Do you think I would enter into a contract without a model release?" Schmidt asked.
"I wouldn't touch something unless I had a signed release."

Bee staff writer John Coté can be reached at 578-2394 or jcote@modbee.com.
http://www.modbee.com/reports/laci/story/7497421p-8412902c.html

This is not a big deal. Everyone thinks that she signed some big release so that they would get circulated around and that really isn't the case. She used the photographer, signed the release prior to the pics being taken, as most photogs have you do... then when this case got hot, the photographer sold the pics on his own to make a few bucks.

I highly doubt that Amber ever thought those pics would see the light of day.

I called around to over 12 photographers, both private and ones such as those that specialize in Glamour type or modeling type photos, and all said that it is standard, whether it is a single female taking nudes or a family photo op, you sign a release, so that they may then use the photos to promote advertising their work, whether it is on their walls for people to view to get an idea of photos that they can take, or whether it is in a national campaign.

Most of the photographers also said that most customers, don't even bother to read the fine print before they sign.

I'm sure Amber never imagined for a moment that those pictures would come back to haunt her.....but here they are.

I do feel sorry for her....she's made some terrible choices. Many of us make terrible choices and are able to put those bad choices behind us without them ever coming up again....but imagine if every bad choice you've made would make a later, very public, appearance in your life......

Everyone is acting like this is such a sleazy thing to do. We don't know why she did them, she says it was because she was entertaining the idea of modeling and wanted a variety of shots. Maybe it was because she was single, had a child and wanted to feel sexy. Maybe she wanted the pics for a boyfriend, or just for herself... no one really knows why she did it, but the fact is, it doesn't matter. Even the most modest of housewives have had risque nudes or partial nudes done... I am not saying everyone does it, but some do and they shouldn't have to worry that someone is going to call them sluts for doing so.

I am not siding with Amber, but damn, I have to say that if posing semi nude in a crime, then there are thousands out there that are guilty.

What about Glamour shots? You know, the ones that you can be in a boa and they put glamourous makeup on you and show tons of cleavage? You have to sign a release for those too, what if your boyfriend commits a crime and they find photos of you in a shot that is an glamour shot, does that make you a slut?

She says she didn't know he was married. Why not give her the benefit of the doubt? She isn't on trial for the murder of Laci and Conner. And I am sorry, but to discredit her testimony or statements that she may or may not make during the course of all this just because she posed for some photos? That is ridiculous.

It has NOTHING to do with the TAPED conversations between her and Scott.

But of course, this is just MY opinion.

I agree with momof6- I believe her when she says she didn't know he was married. Scott, on the other hand, knew perfectly well he was married, and with a baby on the way, no less!

And what I'd like everyone to remember is this: let those without sin cast the first stone at Amber. Every person on this planet has made bad choices of one type or another- most of us are just lucky that our bad choices don't get printed in the media for public consumption.

It's infuriating that some sleazebag is making money off of her humiliation......

I don't see anyone tossing stones at Amber, only stating the fact that she had some pictures taken that apparently she isn't too proud of, and someone is posting on a website for profit.

It's my opinion that Amber has a not too nice past. I also am of the opinion that she was trying to change it. Change isn't easy and sometimes takes several years. Amber is a single mother, working everyday, and thought she found her "Mr. Nice-guy". Men typically do not cheat on their wife's with the same type of woman. Laci was from a well-to-do family, they owned a home, she drove a Land Rover, and was leading the American dream life. I don't believe Amber was the same type of woman that Laci was and that is what drew Scott to her.

All of the blowdryers in California will not erase the fact that Amber has a questionable past. Right or wrong she does not deserve to be used for someone elses profit.

If Amber truely wants left alone, my advise to her is to get rid of her media hogging attorney. I will venture to say that if she had not hired GA (who has kept Amber in the spotlight) these pics wouldn't be worth the paper that they are printed on and we would not be discussing them.

This is my opinion, and I'm sticking to it.

I just feel sorry for Amber because it must be extremely humiliating....and even more so because the pics aren't flattering.

Attorney Gloria Allred, who is representing Frey as a witness in Peterson's murder case, said she is not handling the lawsuit, because she is a potential witness. Who is, Allred ? Amber's not waiting, she's filed a law suit just as so many of us thought she would. Sideline, grab it where you can exploition of a horrific homicide, IMO.

Published: October 22, 2003, 07:05:55 AM PDT
LOCAL NEWS: Frey files suit over pictures

Amber Frey, a key figure in the Scott Peterson double murder case, is suing a pornography broker for $6 million for posting nude and seminude photos of her on his Web site.
http://www.modbee.com/local/story/7627691p-8534653c.html

I don't see anything wrong in her suing the jerk!

I just KNEW she would lay low until she could make some money from all of this. It is my opinion that this isn't the end of the
"Amber Frey" lawsuits.

Just for the record - I would have distanced myself from a person accused or suspected of murdering his wife... not spent several months playing "call him, call the police", AKA Phone tag...

But.. hey... that's just me. (I have know a murder. He is now on Ohio's death row) Unless the state requests that I testify, I will not have anything to say about him.

But... again... that is just my opinion...

If I thought that it could help, yes, I would make calls to him and the police. I don't fault her for trying to help the police.

I think that once she made the connection, she did the right thing by telling police and by allowing them to tap her phone.

Thinking that he may have killed his wife and unborn child, she still tried to help police, and that took a big risk. If he is guilty of this crime, he could have gone after Amber next.

He TRIED to sell them to Larry Flynt for a half mil, but Larry said they weren't flattering enough to be worth that. So when that didn't pan out, he set up a website for them and charges $25 to enter his site....

I think Amber has every right to sue him- he is making money off of HER, without her consent. HE is the one taking advantage of Laci's murder- if Amber hadn't been connected with Scott, those pictures would still be buried in a file somewhere.

And Amber has had to hire an attorney (yes, she chose badly!), but she also has had to hire bodyguards (no wonder with this neo-nazi stuff). So if suing this low-life scum will help her pay for all that, more power to her is what I say. If he weren't exploiting her, she would have NO reason to sue him.

As far as her choice of attorneys, well... a bad choice at that.

But I do NOT blame her for suing, nor do I think that she is trying to capitalize on Laci's murder.

I saw skin, no porn - and I think the photographer made her look pretty nice! I can see why he would want to publish the photos - good advertising!

I can understand why Amber is nothappy with the photos getting out but I think the photographer was not breaking the law - photographers do own their negatives, their work - and they can do what they want with them.

Maybe this will make people a bit more careful about doing those wild and crazy things - - - or hire the photographer and pay him to take the photos and hand over the film immediately after the shoot! May cost more but - - - oh it is much safer!

Reminds me of the parasites that had pictures of JonBenet and made money from them....and "pimped them up" as well (retouched to add lots of makeup to make her look exploited by her parents).....

Like Jams said- safer to pay extra money to have the negatives! Even safer still to not have pics like Amber's taken in the first place....

IMO

It was a gamble - she figured no one would ever care about the photos - - so she signed. He took a gamble that he might one day photograph someone who would be of public interest so he could make some money - he got those releases signed just in case.

Seems to me he won the gamble.

She should have considered the possibilities before posing and signing that release.

If you need a link to the removal software, just let me know and I will provide the link here in this thread.

(He couldn't make money from people to see her pics, so advertisers paid him to put adware on his site that attacks anyone that goes there.)

Here is the link for the spybot....

It is really good, it will take care of the spyware, the adware and so on. Very thorough and gives you a description of each file and what it does.

It is free.

Views on a website are only worth $25 a peek.... and we have no way of knowing how many people have looked at that site to see Amber.

Is Amber the ONLY woman's pics on that site? Are people going to that site to see those pics? I would be interested in knowing how many hits to that site were to see Amber's pictures.

And ONLY those pics.....

$6M a lot of money....

This jerk is making money off Amber, whether it is through her pictures or through her name.

DON'T GO TO THE SITE -- BE SAFE.

If I were Amber, I would sue for a lot more...

This photographer probably never would have gone public with her photos, had it not come out that she had the affair with Scott. He is the one that is trying to profit off Laci's murder, not Amber. Yes, she is suing for six million, but I agree with that, she has a child that can see this pics later in life. Yes, I know, she is the one that had the photos done, but she never expected for anyone to see these photos.

She trusted that they wouldn't go any further than the photographers when they were taken. Just as many do when they have glamour shots or sexy shots in nighties for your hubby or partners. This guy took full advantage of Laci's death.

If I were in Amber's situation, Yes, I would sue, I would sue for a lot more than that. I would make sure my child college was paid for and then I would probably donate a VERY LARGE portion to a charity or organization in Laci's name... Never know, that may be what Amber does.

By GARTH STAPLEY
BEE STAFF WRITER

Last Updated: December 18, 2003, 08:58:00 AM PST

Arianne Jordan, Frey's Los Angeles attorney handling the lawsuit against Schmidt, refused to comment or provide a copy of the draft order. An employee at her firm said Jordan planned Wednesday to submit the draft for the judge to sign.
Schmidt said: "There is a distinct possibility that we will be reaching settlement of this entire issue very soon. I can't elaborate."

Reading from notes she took at Monday's hearing in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, Allred said Judge George King ruled that Frey is likely to win the civil lawsuit.

King weighed Schmidt's First Amendment free-speech and free-press rights against Frey's constitutional right to privacy. Frey's lack of consent to distribution of the photos tipped the balance, Allred said.

Lawsuit likely to succeed

"The hardship is sharply in favor of Ms. Frey," Allred quoted King as saying. "In addition to (Frey's) likelihood of success, there is a likelihood of irreparable injury if the preliminary injunction is not granted."

The judge said such injury "could not be adequately compensated by (money) damages" if Frey prevails, according to Allred.

for rest of article see
http://www.modbee.com/reports/peterson/relatedstories/story/7912561p-8789558c.html