Lady Gaga’s former PA says she has no right to privacy

Lady Gaga Lady Gaga's former personal assistant insists the star has "no right to privacy." Jennifer O'Neill is suing the 'Bad Romance' singer for $380,000 in unpaid overtime from the $75,000-a-year job, alleging she was on call at all times and has issued a subpoena demanding some unpublished photos of Gaga, which she says support her claims. However, the pop star is fighting the request for the photos - which were taken by Terry Richardson for the Lady Gaga x Terry Richardson book - calling them "private and personal" in court papers, prompting her former employee to argue against her "ludicrous" claim to privacy because of Gaga's outlandish behavior. Ms. O'Neill's lawyers wrote in papers filed in Manhattan federal court on Friday (21.09.12): "[Gaga] is probably the last person in the world to care about her 'privacy,' exposing herself in all manner of bizarre and intimate ways for the world to see every day." In the book, Gaga - whose real name is Stefani Germanotta - is pictured topless with her hands covering her breasts, lying with her legs spread to expose a hole in the crotch of her stockings and another exposing her breasts while dressing. Jennifer - who does not appear in the book - is seeking access to the unpublished pictures as she says they show her toiling for the star at all hours of the day. According to the New York Post newspaper, she said in the court papers: "I was frequently at Ms. Germanotta's side, often ready with coffee and/or water, from dawn to dawn. I was glued to Ms. Germanotta to such an extent that at one point I was asked ... to step back so that I would not be in the way during photo shoots." She also said she served as Gaga's alarm clock, helped in "ensuring the promptness of a towel following a shower" and accompanied the musician everywhere, including her New York home, "stadiums, private jets, fine hotel suites, yachts, ferries, trains and tour buses." Gaga denied O'Neill was on call at all times or helped with costume changes, and has dismissed the request for the photos as "irrelevant."

Share this article:

Comments & Discussion

  1. Troy • September 25, 2012 @ 1:54 PM

    She’s right. No celebrity has the right to privacy. They give that up the day they sign on. It’s like it’s in the fine print or something.

  2. Sarah • September 25, 2012 @ 1:55 PM

    Just beacuse she shows off her body, it does NOT mean that she’s not entitled to a private life. She’s still human. Geez what’s wrong with you people!

  3. jeff • September 25, 2012 @ 2:02 PM

    Everyone has the right to privacy whether you’re famous or not. If a celebrity is out in public people can ask to say hello take a picture and what not and they should be courteous enough to do so (to a point). But in their homes or anywhere that it is not for the public to see or to know, leave them alone. The public has no right to know everything that celebrities do and say, and really should not have any interest in the lives of them. Listen to their music, see the concerts, see the movies, watch the talkshows. Why people care what they eat, where they were on friday night, or who they kissed i have never and will never understand.

Join The Conversation:

Similar Articles

Tags:

Trending Articles

Current Poll

  • Harvey Weinstein was stripped of his Academy membership. Who should be next?

    View Results

    Loading ... Loading ...

You Might Also Like


Close Menu