Paparazzo respects Kidman's privacy - sort of

Paparazzi are usually in favour of freedom of the press, which is not surprising since taking candid photographs of celebrities is how they make their living. Australian celebrity photographer Jamie Fawcett certainly believes passionately in his freedom to take snaps of actress Nicole Kidman, who is now living back in her hometown of Sydney. This week Fawcett told the New South Wales Supreme Court that famous people deserved privacy in certain situations - such as their honeymoon. When asked why he travelled to Tahiti when Kidman and hubby Keith Urban were enjoying their post-wedding holiday, Fawcett replied that he had been very restrained. After all, he only took photos of them at the airport - which he said was an "arrival" rather than the honeymoon proper. And while he chartered a boat to travel within 1km of the part of the island where they were staying and took photographs with a long lens, he says he "never set foot on land". When asked if this was his version of leaving them alone, he replied "um, yeah", and when asked if he believed that the only time a celebrity had a right to privacy was within the confines of their own home, he agreed, saying "yes, broadly speaking". Yet despite his passionate defence of the freedom of the media and celebrities as fair game, it seems Fawcett actually has a rather thin skin. The reason for Fawcett's court appearance? He was suing Sydney-based Sunday tabloid The Sun Herald for defamation. The Fairfax-owned paper had dared to describe him as Sydney's "most disliked freelance photographer" and a "cowboy type" determined to "wreak havoc" on the private life of Kidman. You know what they say, Fawcett, if you can't take the heat...