OK, so you have Nicole Kidman allegedly carrying a child. I don't think it ever moved, and frankly unless it threw up a pair of devil fingers or Nicole didn't screw on the doll's head right and it fell to the ground we just may never know.
Here is my question that perhaps you can answer. The parents don't want to sell photos of the baby. Got it. I understand and agree with them. No problem. However, on a morning show program, Nicole had this to say,
"Keith and I are both appealing to the press and stuff just to give us a little space so we can walk around Sydney and show the baby our town. She's tiny. She's like a doll, she's like a little, little thing. Just [don't photograph] right in her face or in our faces because it's scary for her."
Then Keith added this part, "I get it. I get the interest there is. But at the same time it's our little girl. Sometimes when people come right up in your face and you think: 'Good God, would you do that to anybody else's child?' That's all."
OK, so since the price now for the actual first photo of the kid where you can see that it is alive and not a doll is now approaching $5M don't you think it would make some sense to take a photo of the kid and release it. Do it for free, or charity or whatever, but it would seem to me that if you are really that concerned about your child or photographers getting too close or scaring your child, the easiest way to get rid of them would be to release a photo. Otherwise it is going to be a mad scramble for guys trying to get that $5M photo. For $5M I think most of us would do what it takes to get that photo and we are nice people. So, to me, Nicole and Keith's statements are not consistent with their actions.
Nicole also said in the interview that she was really surprised how easy her labor was. Uh huh.