Don’t call her Lindsay Marsh ever again. After filing for divorce in April 2021, Lindsay Taylor won her case. However, the judge in charge of the case decided to respond favorably to the request of the ex-husband of this resident of the US state of Utahwho demanded a nude photo album of Lindsay be returned to him.
At the time of the verdict last month, the Davis County judge in charge of the proceedings ruled that the woman’s ex-husband, Chris Marsh, 45, should return it with nude photos of Lindsay. And this before the end of November. The judge only authorized the main interested party to edit the photos to hide her nudity. A judicial decision considered unacceptable by the person concerned for the daily mail Thursday.
The “Misogyny of the Utah Justice System”
Commenting on the ruling in an interview with CNN, Lindsay Taylor said: “It’s a violation of my privacy, and it’s incredibly embarrassing and humiliating.” Recalling that the photos in question expose “her body in her nudity,” she lambasted “the misogyny of the Utah justice system,” adding:
“The women’s bodies are not at the disposal of others, in this case these three men – my ex-husband, his lawyer and the judge – to decide what should be done with them or to decide who can see them.”
Lindsay Taylor went back to the genesis of these photos. Originally, she hoped that these drinks would rekindle the flame of an already faltering union. The cure was not enough, but it obviously impressed the husband who claimed possession of the album, arguing in a statement: “I appreciate those beautiful memories we have made over the years (…) and I intend to remember the side positive even after our divorce.
Judge Michael Edwards sided with him, ruling: “The court orders the parties to send these photos to their author. That person must use every means at his or her disposal to modify the photos so that all images depicting the litigant in lingerie, or even nude, are obscured and suppressed”.
cannot be edited
This is where the second problem arises. Because the photographer behind these recordings has already refused to retouch them, believing that an artistic work cannot be corrected.
If Judge Michael Edwards later advised Lindsay Taylor to turn to another professional, the latter does not see how that initiative would alleviate her situation: “Let’s be clear. The judge orders me to entrust my nude photos to a third person, who I don’t know , and without me having anything to say?
In his press release, Chris Marsh, however, assured that it was not so much the photos of his ex-wife’s body that interested him as the words of love that she had then written to accompany them. “I only seek to preserve the handwritten love letters contained in the album,” she wrote.
The interested party intends to burn the photos
A desire to save that Lindsay Taylor welcomed with a certain irony, addressing her ex-partner from a distance: “If what I wrote meant so much to you, why didn’t you save the birthday cards or my words for Valentine’s Day? No I have kept nothing of what I have written to you all these years, but those texts would be particularly important.
She answered him again on another level: “These are sensual and affectionate words written for the attention of the husband I loved. You are now my ex-husband.”
But Lindsay Taylor’s rebuttals may not weigh against the res judicata authority. Will she, tired of the war, have to return the weapons and photos of her to Chris Marsh? No, she told CNN. In case she cannot make herself heard, she will burn the photos before releasing the album.
Source: BFM TV
